The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1920-02-13

\ THE OPINION OF OTHERS. \
\\\\\\\\ \\\A\ ~ =
THOSE COTTON REIMPORTS.

It is best to discuss in a low key the statement
of the Liverpool correspondent of The London
Times that 5000 bales Of American cotton have
been sent back to this country to turn them into
dollars. 1t is suggested that like policy may
be adopted for other American goods, which have
heen bought but not paid for, and daily more
difficult to pay for dollars rise in price. The two
cases are not just alike. The British proposal is
to diminish their stock of consumable goods in
crGef to reduce the liabilities against them. To an
extent that is cooperation with the effort of the
Federal Reserve to bring demand below supply here
by such financial methods shall bring to market
goods kept out of consumption by speculation. Both
plans may be commended under reserve as to the
possibility of too much of good thing.
The cotton reimports stand on different basis.
There is no novelty about returning cotton to
when spectators have made it more profit
able to sell it back to us, even over the costs of
such procedure than to sell the goods from the
fibre. The "corner," if it may be called such is
British arrived at in a natural manner,
above criticism While Germany attempting to
starve England that stalwart country providing
itself with everything in more than usual abund
land in recent years as in the war years, and the
British stocks of cotton such that they can
we'll afford to pay freights back to US and charge
the costs against the profit in dollars under present
conditions of exchange they could undo
the sale by repurchases at their wish. There are no
signs in British practice that the British think they
have more cotton than they can use. Total imports
of cotton into England last week were 208,000
bales against 165 900 bales the preceding week and
81 900 bales last year. For the week ending Sat-
urday our exports of cotton were 173,643 bales,
against s5612 bales last year and 164,64a bales for
the last week of January. Liverpool stocks of cot
ton now are over a million bales-more than double
those of last year. The reimport of 5000 bales
would not make much impression such figures,
and they would not be convincing if they were
800, 900 bales
The reason is that England never made such
profits from cotton as now. In the middle OF
January British trade reports were that the goods
markets bare; "practically all the world ap-
pears to be knocking at Lancashire's door for cot
ton goods" Any price is paid on assurance of de-
liveries, ''passing wartime levels by pence per
pound and shi!lings pe- piece" The margin be-
tween our cotton price and the British goods price
is 35s. per pound, $50 that buyers pay only pass
ing attention to them and sellers at ALL" The
boom in mill shares is to match. What do British
spinners weavers for the cost of cotton
which their customers pay? How can England take
a chance of her competitors buying cotton she de-
clines and taking such trade from her? What as
surance is there in the present crop outlook, after
five successive insufficient crops, that England can
get back the cotton she returns to US? How would
England like to buy back in the form of goods the
fibre which she speaks of returning to US? How
can England venture to substitute for profits of
hundreds per cent. the losses and dangers of un-
employment by hundreds of thousands?
There is no harm in the making of such sug-
gestion, in acting it, if that is British judg-
ment. But, on reconsideration it may be thought
more likely lnat England will prefer the profits of
production to the profits of either finance or specu
lation. That would be oo-much like Hooking for
q substitute for work." according to Irving T.
Bush's observation of events in England. 1t applies
we'll enough the British operatives who have sub
sttuted the 4S-hour week for the 55-hour week.
and raised the cost of living for themselves and ev