The patron of husbandry. (Columbus, Miss.) 1875-1883, 1881-07-09
Cost OF Raising COTTON.
REPLY TO G. H. GILMER.

| IN your issue OF une Is, IL is So
long and so much is irrelevant to
| the issue between US.
Nv position is that laborer or
farmer can not make money raising
cotton at present prices. that is, to
make cotton to purchase all the
farmer needs. / am well aware
that if the South would raise all the
meat, bread, horses, mules, etc, that
they use and make a good crop of
cotton, that they would then make
money. | am also we'll aware that
if a man can rent his land, with one
mule to every q acres, for SI347
per acre, that he is making money
and plenty of it, THAT is if he col
lects his rent. But | do say and
know that the man in the South, be
he white or black, is not making
money raising cotton.
In his first statement for 200
acre farm, it is for rental, he does
not say how many hands were re-
CURED to cultivate the 200 acres,
nor how much they produced per
hand, nor how much money they
had when their expenses were paid
SO it is no refutation of my assertion
that no money could be made in
planting cotton.
In his second calculation it is for
rent of land, and if both are correct
| can but notice the great difference
III profits to landlord between the
share system and rental. In the
first, he gets $3.50 for use of mule
and land; in the second, or rental
system, he gets 800 for use of mule
and rent of p acres of land or 81
per acre, difference of $o.4o per
acre 1t is true, he feeds the mule
in the first case. Then he does not
say how many hands were equired
to cultivate and save the crop from
the 25 acres. He makes the profits
at s cents for cotton and So cents
for corn. and cent per pound for
fodder to be 1927.
Now, how many hands did~it re-
quire to do this work? Give the
readers these facts, Bro. Gilmer. 1t
is facts they want, not theory. 1t
is the unanimous opinion of all of
the cotton planters of the South
that 'all cotton does not paw the
laborer-unless it is different in Bro.
Gilmer's neighborhood.
President Morehead, in his adj
dress to the Cotton Planters Asso-
citation at Memphis, stated that the
planters were only making I per
cent, on their invested capital
How much per year, Bro. Gilmer,
can you pay man to cultivate cot
ton when you sell it for 6 to s cents
per pound and purchase everything
that you use? What census reports
have you seen that says the South
is improving faster than the North !?
Now, Bro. Gilmer, there is no
country in the world that ever has
or ever will become very prosper
Gus or will keep pace with country
that mat>es all they use, or who de-
ponds on one crop to purchase all
they use. The plow, the loom and
the anvil must 60 side by side.
In regard to the article in the
Farmers Re0ie7v, it is no funeral of
mine. A Vicksburg man wrote it,
and some one sent it to me and |
sent it to you, and | see nothing in
it to get mad at. And if you would
travel through that country you
would see that the State of Misais-
slppi and nearly all the South are
behind; even Texas is going fan
ahead of Mississippi, and l have
my doubts if ever a country where
the negro is in the majority will
ever keep up with one where the
white race predominant
Let me assure you again, that ]
have no. nlalignity to the South.
am as proud of all that is good in
the South as you are. | doubt il
the world will ever see as good
noble and honest a people as the
''ante bellum" cotton planters.
But goodness don't make money
raising cotton at to cents. In a
part of your article in answer to
Barney Lillard, you speak of some
cotton that did not pay expenses.
| have a neighbor that hired the
picking of two bales of cotton in
February OF March, and the amount
the cotton sold for was 81 less than
the expense of picking, ginning and
shipping.
The South is as good or a bette
agricultural country than the North
more money can be made with the
same labor, but not by making all
cotton to purchase all the needs OF
the farm.
Raising mules, horses, cattle, hogs
and sheep will pay better; and bet
ter still, it will pay to have a little
cotton mixed up with them, but not
''all cotton" | asked the most sue
cesstul farmer of our county, why
it was that so little money was made
on the share system? He said, ''be-
cause the destruction on the planta
ton of mules, plows and tools, and
expenses are equal to the profits"
Fraternally, !. II. MOORE.
Oakley, Ark, July 4.