New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-06-25
Population. |
Year
Total per cent OF during century .....445

Total per cent OF Increase during centufy--.44o
A glance at the above will show that 50 lar as
population is concerned Manchester has seen her
pamiest days, and for the last thirty years. from
one cause and another is the decline. lndeed,lt
We take Manchester separately from Stafford, the
increase in her population from 1861 TO 1871 was
only 3 40 per cent while for the decade ending
In 1881 the city has actually decreased
in population $40 per cent, while the increase
in population for the last twenty years has been
only tenths of per cent. What would peo-
pIe IN the United States think if their great manu-
featuring centres increased in population less than
one per cent in twenty years In my table l give
Manchester the benefit of Stafford and then 1t will
be seen that during the last thirty the increase
has not on the average, reached one per cent year.
What has the American protective tariff had to
do with this migration of part OF the cotton trade
from. Manchester to New-England' l viii let
Enalish authorities tell the story. says writer IN
Tie London Quarterly Rerie'0
The competition of the United States is certainly
real lt has not only virtually deprived us OF Its
10 coo 900 OF people customers, but 1t threatens
us with permanent active rlyaly in outside
markets.
Again:
The American textile manufacturers have not
only been loud IN their demand Tor
protection. bat they have received It
m high degree. They have Increased
their consumption of cotton under its influence to
such an extent that their impor OF cotton goods
have steadily declined from 227,OOOOOOln lo6O To
%. 600 900 yards IN 1881.
On the other band, American exports of cotton
goods reached in 1881 nearly 100 900 900 yards. 1t
has been claimed in some quarters that the export
Of American cotton goods to Manchester was merely
made TO raise money!" but this is most explicitly
denied by Mr. James Thornley,, an Engllshman,
who visited the United States q few years ago for
the express purpose of investigating the matter,
and whose report seems impartial and exceed
ingly intelligent one Mr. Thornley, says: " In no
case have the Americans sent cloth here in order TO
raise money upon 1t, nor. as has been suggested,
have the experts been merely relief shipments on
which loss could be afforded IN consideration OF
the higher prices to bo obtained IN the protected
at such prices as left profit to their makers, and
the transactions have in every instance, been con-
Quoted upon purely mercantile basis.
Perhaps it is not generally known in the United
States outside OF the cotton goods trade that cer-
tam home-trade houses III England not only call
English cloth American but stamp it with the
names and trade marks of certain American mills.
At present American manufacturers have not
Thought it worth while to stop this fraud but when
foreign trade becomes an object they will uudOubt
cdIy take steps TO put an end to it. In summing
up tho result of this inquiry Mr. Thornley, says:
In the first instance, American pinners have a de-
cIded ad yantage in the cost of carrying their cotton
this amounting, as ! have said previously, IN
round figures to OF cent or SD. per ID. Another
advantage Is, that people IN America work longer
than in England aud they take fewer holidays.
From what / saw should say that they drink less,
hut even if this not the case, there is no doubt
that drunkenness Is less common TIA an in England.
Trades unions are almost unknown, and thus em-
ployers are able to make their calculations more
surely and the woTkpeOple can attend TO their work
better than IN Great Britain The earnings of the
working GLASSES spent in providing for their
wants and what they do not require tor this pur-
| mos ia InVagtpd.
| Their employment of The population, instead OF
beng frittered away in vain attempts TO raise wages
ricts of the world are nearer to the American than
to the English manufactures, and the necessaries
of life are therefore cheaper.
There can be no doubt that the cotton indus
try in England has reached its height and that
Manchester has seen her palmiest days. 1 have
already shown the decline in its popu-
lation The American Consul, Colonel Shaw,
close observer and careful statistican.
openly says that Manchester has touched tue
height of her fame and prosperity" He thinks the
day Is not far distant when her decay will become
apparent" The fact is, tho decay apparent now.
My next letter will De devoted 10 the cOndit ton of
the operatives IN the industrial quarters of Man.
chester ana will unfold a state of affairs that Col
onel Shaw himself did not know existed until he
accompanied me 20 the wretched homes of hundreds
of operatives. The explanation of the decay is
simple enough and unanswerabie. With protected
barriers to aid them, England's rivals have been
making greater progress than England. The con-
sumption of Englands goods no longer grows at It's
Old pace and the population OF the centre of the cot
ton trade remains stationary, while the condition
of it's operatives in Manche ter and Stafford grows
worse and worse. In 1912 Great Britain consumed
about 1375,000 bales OF cotton the continent of
Europe only $4,000 bales; and the United States
about 325, 900 bales. To-day Great Britain'A an
nual consumption does not greatly exceed 3,OOOOOO
bales the continent OF Europe has increased TO an
annual consumption OF 100000 bales; and the
UnltedStaes TO about 800 600 bales. Thus undera
protective policy the European continent and the
United States have increased their annual consump
tiOn of cotton from l,l4l 600 bales in lS42 20
Britain has increased from 100000 bales in 1872
90 900 900 bales at the present time increase
of 625, 900 bales against increase OF nearly
900 900 bales for the European continent and the
United States. Without gong into the question as
to whether or not protective policy benefited