Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1893-04-05
WEDNESDAY. APRIL 3. 1893
Is Cotton Acreage to Be Reduced?

Is Cotton Acreage 20 be keuuceu
So long as human nature shall continue
20 be what it has hitherto been, and men
shall persist IN being selfish, such schemes
rs the proposition to reduce the acreage IN
cotton as o means Of keeping up the pnce
of that article will prove - be visionary.
impracticable. and short-lived. The re-
cent demonstration in the papers and else
where IN favor Of that proposition has
already come TO naught, or given abundant
indications thai it VIII come TO naught.
And vet United States Senator GEORGE.
OF Mississippi. is OF was one OF the adVO-
Gates Of that scheme Certainly he is fine
LAWYER. He was once the president OF the
highest court in Mississippi, and has Tor
years represented his State in the Senate.
Perhaps his studies have been of such
nature as to disqualify him for solving
such problems as tboone now under con-
sideration-n namely. how 10 induce MIL
lions Of men to act together IN the pro-
motion of plans for raising less cotton and
getting higher prices for 1t. 10 state such
"A scheme Is 10 discredit its practlcablpty.
Men cannot be induced thus to trust their
fellow.men. They must have some better
guarantee Of good faith on the part OF
these hundreds of thousands OF cotton
.alsers than they can possibly obtain even
from one IN ten Of them before they can
lie induced to plant smaller crop than
the LARGEST they can easily cultivate. No
body can Judge for his ncighbor, and so
nobody will be permitted 20 Judge Tor ms
ncicbbor. Or TO use the words of q New
York contemporary:
"Who is 70 guarantee the unselnshncss OF oil
cotton-rrowers Who is 20 ASCERTAIN and be
sure that all cotton-p planters. NJ iniivdnnls' VIII
reduce their cotton acreage and increase their
n~rpage of corn, ole? VINO can assume 70 say
that some cotton-planters, ~ view OF expected
decrease in cotton acreage, viii not plant a
hcavIv-incrcased acreage 70 have u larger SUP
p,v Of the stgple to sell az the enhanced prices
which the generally decreased output is expect
ed Co. truEf
q" As there is no monopoly Of human nature by
one SIT o. planters, 10 is not unlikely they Incy
very generally plant more than last year in or
d,rto take advantage OF the small-crop prices
winch u IS presumed are 10 prevail
The iutcrrogatorles above quoted will
meet no response. The planters are few
mn tar between who intend TO permit
other planters to nut large acreage in
cotton whilst they themselves are re-
ducing their acreage as means of ell
hancing the price, Now. can any reason
able man cen>ure the cOtton-planters for
looking each man OF them 10 his own in
terest IN this matter; IF self the waver-
ing balance shake, 'tIs rarely right adj
justod that X, IN the opinion OF the
other selfish men. We do not for one mo-
mett doubt that 10 reduce the cotton
acreage by one fourth might for time
prove to be highly profitable. The re-
manning three fourths would produce
crop that would for few years sell for
more than would the product of the en-
TIRE present acreage. and at great saving
70 the planter in the form of work dis
pensed with and of other agricultural pro-
ductious which might be and would be
cultivated in the time saved by reducing
the acreage of cotton.
But American cOtton-planters will have
10 monopoize tho embarrassing OF the
world before they can count upon con-
tlnuing 10 command high price for cot
ton by reducing the cotton acreage in this
country. All mankind are interested in
cotton. We in this country have not yet
recovered from the injury inflicted upon
US by the war between TIE States IN the
matter of causing other countries to COM
pete with US in the production of cotton.
IL we reduce the acreage IN cotton now
foreign nations will not follow our eX-
omple. Ia O word, this cotton problem IS
one that must be allowed to work out Its
own solution.