Evening star., 1935-01-27
SOUTH RAPIDLY LOSING
WORLD COTTON MARTS
Government Warned to Adopt New
Program Lest Other Nations
Seize Markets.

Recognizing the Importance Of get
ting hold of this valuable body OF
water, the British government under
took in 1902 to obtain a concession
from King Menelik of Ethiopia, but
that willy monarch refused to grant
more than a promise not to let any
other power have the right to dam
the lake and develop an irrigation
project without the consent of Great
Britain.
Today it is King Ras Tafarri who
occupies the throne of Ethiopia and
who refuses to part with Lake Tsana.
Literally in the hollow of his hand
rests the future production of cotton
in the Sudan. So far he has proven
adamant to British diplomacy, but II
and when the Sudan should ever get
control of Lake Tsana, there will be
another story to tell of king cotton.
Returning to the question of British
urge to diSplace America in cotton
production, there is King Edwards
speech at the opening of the British
Parliament in 1904, in which he
boasted the British growers Sudan
plans, saying: 1.-The insufficiency Of
the raw material upon which the cot
ton industry of this country depends
has inspired me with great concern.
1 trust that the efforts which are
being made in the various parts of
my empire to increase the acres under
cultivation may be attended with q
large measure of success"
Notwithstanding this declaration
from the throne, the real drive in
Sudan did not come until 1910, after
the Khedivial Agricultural Society re-
ported a decrease of 26 per cent in
the average yield of Egyptian cotton
in the preceding 10 years. Then,
stimulated by subsidies, loans and
partnership agreements between the
government and private industries,
more planting companies Sprang into
existence.
Profits Are Extensive.
Examples Of profits made from Su-
dan growing are not wanting. Here
is a report of Sudan Plantations, Ltd,
company which had a government
loan of 100000 and concession to
run to June 80, 1850, limited only by
the governments reservation of a
right to take over the undertaking
on June 80, 1889, or June 80, 1914,
with indemnification to the syndicate
for loss of prospective profits.
For the year ending June 80, 1926,
Sudan Plantations distributed share
for-share bonus to its stockholders and
showed net profit of f488,394 for the
year after transferring $4,000 to the
Ghezira reserve. This was against a
profit of fI62 1886 in the preceding year
and f112,934 in 1923-24. But should
it be argued that this profit Of 1926
was based on an average price of 1876
cents for cotton, here is the report Of
the same syndicate for 1933-34:
THE whole of last seasons crop
and the greater part of 1933-34 crop
has been sold. After deducting all
expenses, amounts written of and
placing 100000 to the credit Of the
Ghezira reserve, there Is net profit
of f137,584." The meeting thereupon
voted the usual stock bonus, declared
6 per cent dividend and unan-
imously approved the planting this
year of an additional 10000 acres Of
cotton in the Ghezira district alone.
And all this was accomplished in the
face of a cotton price reduced to 81
cents per pound, less than half the
price of the preceding year. Contrast
this with the condition of American
cotton growers during the same period.
Slump Dethroned King.
In 1908 President Alderman Of the
University of Virginia called the cot
n-growing industry of the United
States "stupendous God-made
monopoly" And certainly it seemed
so during the % years following his
assertion, but in 1880 his royal high
ness, King Cotton, received a blow
that nearly rocked his throne. It was
in that year that sales of American
cotton at Liverpool took a nose dive
to 100000 bales. as compared with
996,77O bales in the year 1929, a de-
crease of 1919 per cent. Had other
countries suffered a proportionate
slump or even remained stationary
there would be little reason for critical
comment, but during that same period
spot sales of Empire cotton increased
20 per cent. These figures are from
the British publication, Near East,
which remarked that never before
had sales of American cotton been ex-
ceeded by those of other growths. !"
What, then, became of the monopoly?
The Near East's comment was:
1.-The increase of Empire and mis-
cellaneous growths is most gratifying
in view of the depressed state Of trade
during the year, and is proof that our
cotton is superior in quality and value
in comparison with American"
The weight of the evidence can
leave little doubt about Great Britain's
determination to divorce herself from
American cotton. Fear that the Sudan
might not be able to produce sufficient
cotton to free British markets of
American cotton was freely expressed
in 1914 just before war was declared,
but the International Congress of
Tropical Agriculture soon dispelled all
doubts by asserting, ''The British En-
pire can produce all the cotton Lam
cashire requires"
Crop Gains in India.
Furthermore, increased paintings are
also being made In India, according to
w. j. Jenkins, chief agriculture officer
of the India province Of Sind, whose
annual report for this year records
great strides in the development of
cotton cultivation" and points to the
potential cotton area under his direc-
ton, 100000 acres in Sind.
1t should be understood that the re-
ports and statistics cited above are
not intended as a revelation Of an
alarmingly large cotton cultivation
that might destroy American cotton
export trade tomorrow, or the next
day, or this year, but are plain mile
stones marking activity in Egypt, Su-
dan and India, and the tramp, tramp,
tramp Of progress as new acreage is
brought under cultivation and in
creased production is sent to British
mills, while our cotton growers are
urged to curtail cultivation. And when
at last rid Of American cotton will
Great Britain finally get Lake Tsana
and endeavor to put Empire cotton on
the throne?
Another angle to the question Is
that Great Britain is not the only en-
trant in the worlds greatest cotton