The state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1883-1893, 1889-06-14
COTTON BAGGING.
AN ADD ESS TO THE FARMERS
OF THE SOUTH.
The Committee Appointed at Birming-
ham Plead With all Farmers to Use
Cotton Bagsing in Place of Jute.

II
ham Plead With all Farmers to Us
Cotton Bagging in Place of Jute.
Two weeks ago the CHRONICLE gave it
! readers the proceedings of the Birmingham
Convention of the Farmers Alliance i,
regard to the appointment of a committee
to enquire into the advsability of using
cotton bagging in place of iute The com
mlttee was appointed and to-day we Civ,
our farmer friends their address to the
farmers of the South
| To THE MEMBERS OF THE ALLIANCE, THT
| WHEEL AND THE UNION:
The undersigned were appointed a com
| inittee at the meeting recently held al
birmingham, Ala, to present the advan-
| tages and necessity of using cotton bag
glng by cotton producers, and the same
convention, composed of delegates repre-
sentlng the organizations above mention
ed, adopted the following resolutions and
urged their endorsement by every one in
terested:
RESOLVED, That we, from all the lights
before us, recommend to this body the
permanent use OF cotton bagging as a coy
ering for cotton.
We further recommend the appointment
of committee of three, their actual ex-
penses to be paid by the organizations here
represented, whose duty it shall be to Sc
cure from purchasers and manufacturers
OF cotton covered in cotton bagging, an al
lowance of at least eight pounds on each
bale, to be settled for at market price
wnen sold.
And We still further recommend that
in the event of any cotton buyer refusing
to grant said premium on such cotton,
then we advise the members of the ALI
| ance, Wheel and Union, not to sell until
such concession is made''
This may be thought by many to be not
only bold step, but one of doubtful ex-
pediency. Your committee are aware of
the serious difficulty in presenting these
determinations of the National Alliance
to people used altogether to q different
covering for cotton, ard !. very different
method IN the securing Of that covering
Not only SO, but we apprehend that an
earnest effort Will be made by those whose
interests lie in a different direction, to
persuade our people that this ''much ado, -
about cotton bagging is simply senti-
ment grounded in opposition to an 'imag-
nary bagging trust" and as sensible men
they should ''stick to business methods and
the most economic covering for their cotton,
lute bagging." If no bagging combine ex-
listed and lute bagging could be bought at
one-hait the present price, the same rea-
sons would exist then as now, for tho ex-
elusive and permanent use of cotton bag
ging. 1t is a saying ''that Il is an i'll wind
that blows no one s(:I4e good, ard ''that
all is well tina. ends we'll" SO the bag
glng combine of 1888, may ye. prove a
'"3oa send to cotton producers. The
abuse OF power or privilege always works
its own cure. II those controlling lutte
bagging and its manufacture had displayed
The least wisdom or tact in 1888, they
could have gradually increased the price
of the same for series of years, and not
one single effort, perhaps, would have
been made to supply & substitute, but such
al uncalled-for and determined effort to
force upon the cotton producer jute bag
glng, al an increase of from six ts eight
| cents per yard IN one season, and thai III
the face of an organization that was in
oreasing rapidly, with tbs open and ayow-
ed purpose Of resisting such monopOiies,
was simply suicidal on their part and has
worked. IA our opinion, vastly to the heue-
fl OF those whom they Intended 10 oppress.
This is but az additional demonstration
that over all .len and their actions there
| is O1>E that is just and doeth His viii III
tn armies of Heaven aud among men. It
Is expected Of the committee, doubtless,
that we present ihe economic question in
yolved IL this revolution as to hagginC fO1
cotton.
| Seven yards Of jute 5aggiug weighing
| I lbs, per yard Will cost at factory 9 cts
| per yard, making IS cts Seven yards ot
. cotton bagging weighing three fourths o1
| a pound will cost 12a cts. per yard at fac
| tory, making 37s cts, or "a cts. more fol
! tho covering than lute. Ia addition to
/ this there Is loss OF difference of weight
| between cotton covered III cotton and jute
| per bale, OF seven pounds, and this at
nine cents per pound would be 63 cents
| Now this added to the difference in
| cost-244, makes 871 cts. per baie APpAR
ENT loss. Under the determinations OF
the National Alliance, and justly so, the
producer WILL GET an allowance of eight
| pounds per bale on cotton covered bags
| this, at nine cts. per pound, is Y cts This
taken from the loss of o7t cts. by the use
of cotton, leaves only 151 cts. yet to be
| overcome. Now no sane man will dare
deny that if 1875, 900 bales of the lowest
| grade cotton-iust the cotton that al
| manufacturers do not want, and is Away
/ accounted for as comparatively worthless
| in the fixing of the price for a given sea
| son-is consumed in the manufacture Of
/ bagging, that the price will not be in
| creased on the remainder of the crop anC
| IOT lNO IctSOuS. TlISt, UEt ucudlu IOl
| the better classes of cotton is constantly
increasing and that number of bales, 1875,
| 900, will lessen the supply, for the reason
| that it takes the same labor and expense
| to produce the lower grades that it doe:
| the better grades; or, in other words, a.
| the lower grades increase in given crop
| the better grades decrease. The loves
estimate possible for this diversion of 1875,
| 900 bales of cotton, is an increase of one
| fourth of a cent per pound, or $1.25 PEI
| bale. Take the loss of 15i cents from thi
and we have gain of 81 094 in favor O
cotton bagging as compared with jute a
present prices. But still there is another
source Of gain in favor of cotton bagging
| We are assured by those who control the
| insurance of cotton that they will no
charge more than e-half present rate
of insurance on cotton covered IN cOttOl
basging, such as is manufactured by tn
| Lane Mills Of New Orleans. This give
cotton hagging % cents per bale increase
which added to IL 694, makes 41.311 TO
TAI ACTUAL GAIN TO THE INyIDUAL PRO
DCCER.
But suppose we throw this all aside an
admit the loss of 15a cents per bale by tn
use Of cotton bagging; then your commit
tees assert that it is far better to max
this individual sacrifice for the reason tina
if we use jute bagging, the five million
dollars that will be required to purchas
iute for the crop of 1889 will all go Mort
or East-quite good sum of it to Europe
and in case we spend the five million wit
the addition of fifteen cents per bale 70