Cotton is king, and pro-slavery arguments : $b comprising the writings of Hammond, Harper, Christy, Stringfellow, Hodge, Bledsoe, and Cartwright, on this important subject
History
Cotton is king, and pro-slavery arguments : $b comprising the writings of Hammond, Harper, Christy, Stringfellow, Hodge, Bledsoe, and Cartwright, on this important subject
Scott, Dred, 1809-1858; Slavery -- Justification; Slavery -- United States; United States -- Fugitive slave law (1850)
"The decline in the quantity of cotton imported is notoriously the
consequence of the smallness of last year's crops in the United
States. . . . . It is remarkable that the additional supply which has
made up partly for the shortness of the American crop comes from the
Brazils, Egypt, and other parts. From British India the supply is
relatively shorter than from the United States. It fails us more than
that of the States, and the fact is rather unfavorable to the
speculations of those who wish to make us independent of the States, and
dependent chiefly on our own possessions. The high freights that have
prevailed, and are likely to prevail with a profitable trade, would
obviously make it extremely dangerous for our manufacturers to increase
their dependence on India for a supply of cotton. In 1855, when we have
a short supply from other quarters, India has sent us one-third less
than in 1853."
The _Economist_ of February 23, 1856, contains the Annual Statement of
Imports for 1855, ending December 31, from which it appears that the
supplies of cotton from India, for the whole year, were only 145,218,976
lbs., or 35,212,520 lbs. less than the imports for 1853. Of these
imports 66,210,704 lbs. were re-exported; thus leaving the British
manufacturers but 79,008,272 lbs. of the free labor cotton of India,
upon which to employ their looms.[35]
This increasing demand for cotton beyond the present supplies, if not
met by the cotton growers of the United States, must encourage its
cultivation in countries which now send but little to market. To prevent
such a result, and to retain in their own hands the monopoly of the
cotton market, will require the utmost vigilance on the part of our
planters. That vigilance will not be wanting.
FOOTNOTES:
[32] Benton's Thirty Year's View.
[33] The Tariff of 1846, under which our imports are now made,
approximates the Free Trade principles very closely.
[34] These figures are taken from a part of the _Economist's_ article
not copied. For the difference between the imports from India, in the
whole of the years 1850 to 1855, see Table I.
[35] The commercial year is five days shorter for 1855 than in former
years.
CHAPTER XII.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account