The Fairfield herald. [volume] (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1849-1876, 1876-04-05
The Mania for Cotton,

, selves alike to the farmer aMl to
those Of other pursuits who are in
torested in the progress and wo!fn; O
of our section. That there is no
money to be made i'll raising cotton
at tho present prices is u fact attest
cd by tho experience Of tho planter
and the condition Of II largo portion
Of our rcorlc. We venture tho as
scrtion that the farmers of South
Carolina are to day almost, if not
quite, as poor they were III 1865. II
may DC that there has boon advance
mcnt i'll some Of the sources of
wealth. Improved systems and i'm
proved implements Of agriculture
have been introduced much land
that babe fair to become permanent
ly useless has been reclaimed the
difficulties necessarily attendant
upon tho new system of labor have
to great extent been met and over.
como. Taking these facts into con
alderation, it must be admitted that
the past decade has not been entire.
ly mfruitful of good results. But
it must ho mono tho less patent to
all that in respect Of actual wcaltll-- :
tho abundance of ready moncy---wc
rc quit, Is p)orly OF AZ We were
in 1868. For this there arc mln,
causes not connected with the indus
trial methods adopted by the people.
1t is useless to go over tho story OF
radical misrulc, corruption and OK.
travnSanco it is terribly familiar
to every honest and intelligent man
III South Carolina. That these have
had II chief share in producing the
evils under which VIC now labor, nc
! fair minded man can deny. But
there is II special cause for the poy.
crty Of the Planters, and through
them OF olr entire people, to which
We would aSk attention. 1t is the
persistent continuance of Planting
cotton to the exclusion Of everything
olsc. Wo arc not prcsumpt,ous
enough to mLcrtalxat~rcad the
farmers of SaDiicld Msson on ug-
riculturc: Ne rurpoStnhmrly to
Wow the subject i'll tho light Of the
facts "p4t Axcs contained in the
article to @XiGh wo have referred.
That there is u constant oycrsiocli OF
| cotton both in American and in Eu
ropcnn markets, all tho current
commercial statistics con"lusivclv
show, and that this excessive supply
causes Il decline in prices is simply
sclf-ovidcnt. No argument save
that embodied i'll the figures given
i'll the article i'll question need be
employed to demonstrate the nccrs
sity OF reducing The col!un supply
III the South. Admitting; this fact,
tho question next arises us to the
mcthol OF correcting tho evil. 1t
IS simple enough there must be
less cotton planted. The expert
mcnt OF reducing the supply has
never been tried. The ncws,narcrs
have for Il long time tc"!ned with ar.
ticlos ON the subject; and the i'm
po:tancn Of grain growing and
rattle~rra,InG has always been Il
lavorito thcme with agricultural
Journals. These articles arc yer,
extensively read by farmers. but the
difficulty is that each individual
leaves IL to his nciyhbor to follow
the advice given. There have at
times been evidences of Il spnsmoli,
inclination to try II new departure
but with no positive results. Eaci
man expects somebody clsu thar
himself to inaunuratc the new plal
OF operations, and, in consequence
nothing is done. Even if meeting
of farmers wore now held, anu if {
resolution were unanimously adopt
rd, that the Acreage in cottoa be re-
ducol onc-thiru or ouo> half, wo yer,
much doubt if it would have tho de
sired effect on those by whom it was
passed. Some individual, assuming
that all his ncighhors would ruduc,
their crop OF cotton, would nt one,
conclude tlMt there would be Il short
supply with II consequent ris. il
price, Hnu he would at once rcSulv,
to plant cotton largely y--anl very
little clso. What is true Of the in
dividual * true TO II very Nrcat OK
tent OF The noiMhbnrhood, and tn,
Illustration may be cNtcndou in its
application from ucighborhood &c
county, from county to state
and thcurO to the cutir,