Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

66

STOCKS AT THE CLOSE OF THE YEARS 1848 AND 1849.

Pounds. Total unconsumed January 1, 1850, .

240,325,000 January 1, 1849, .

220,198,000 STOCKS IN PORTS, &c. Stock in the ports 1st Jan., 1849,

498,600 Dealers and Spinners' hands, England,

93,000 Scotland,

7,000

100,000 Import in 1849,

1,905,400

[ocr errors]

.

2,204,000 EXPORTS AND CONSUMPTION IN 1849. Export to the continent and Ireland—152,300 American;

16,800 Brazil and West India; 84,600 East India; 500 Egyptian,

254,200 Taken for consumption of England and Scotland from the ports,

1,590,400 Consuined in England, 1,494,100, or 28,694 bags per week. Consumed in Scotland, 96,300, or 1,852 bags per week. Remaining on hand in ports Jan. 1, 1850,

559,400 In dealers and spinners' hands, England, .

90,000 Scotland,

10,000

100,000

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

.

2,504,000

QUOTATIONS OF COTTON IN LIVERPOOL.

[ocr errors]

66 20

At the close of the week, ending January 26, 1849, the prices were as follows: Upland fair, 4 d. to 4 d. | Maranham,

4¢d. to 5 d. N. 0. fair, 4À 41 Egyptian,

8 Sea Island,

7
Surat,

21

4 Pernambuco, 47 6 West India,

4

6 For the week ending December 20th, 1849, the prices were as follows: Upland fair, 6 d. to 6 d. / Maranham,

5dd. to 6 d. N. O. fair,

63
64 Egyptian,

6

9 Sea Island, “ 20 Surat,

37 5 Pernambuco, .63

West India,

5

7 We also notice a statement of the extreme prices in each year, from 1806 to 1849. We quote a single kind, “upland,” for a few years :

66

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

UPLAND “GOOD." 1806, 15d. to 212d. | 1821,

10d. to 11įd. 1811,

12 “ 16
1829,

7 1817,

20
• 231 1836,

10ị “ 12

64 65

SOUTHERN MANUFACTURES. We find in the Telegraph, published at Columbià, S. C., an interesting arti. cle setting forth in a forcible manner a great many facts and figures to show that the true policy of the South is to enter, to some extent, into manufacturing. The article is ably written, and its facts are as interesting at the North as at the South. The writer says:

"If we trace the cause of the depression of the price of the Southern staple, we will find that it is principally owing to an over-production; this over-production originates from too much labour being thrown into one particolar channel. Diversify labour, by manufacturing a portion of that surplus staple at home, and the benefit will be two-fold-first, by rendering thai portion of the labour thrown off from the old channel more productive, and next by being enabled to realize a better price for the remaining part which we have for exportation.

* Experience has long proven that a crop of cotton of 1,800,000 bales will bring, under ordinary circumstances, quite as much money to the planter as a crop of 2,500,000 bales. The reason of it is very apparent. If we raise but 1,300,000 bales, after taking out half a million of bales, which is required at present for domestic consumption, we have but 1,800,000 bales for exportation. This amount is barely enough to supply the wants of the foreign manufacturer -the consequence is, that, according iọ the laws of supply and demand, he has to pay more for it than if the quantity were larger. But the crop of late years has averaged very near 2,500,000 bales, and we are compelled to throw iwo millions of bales on the market of the world, which, being more than the demand calls for, has the effect of causing the price of it almost entirely to be regulated by foreign manufacturers and speculators.

“But the culture of cotton has been pushed of late years to such an extent that, without a failure, 2,500,000 bales is likely to be an average crop for the future; and the question arises, how is the price to be raised, and the welfare of the South to be permanently effected? The answer is at hand. Let the South manufacture a portion of her cotton herself, and the object in view will be accomplished.

“ To explain this matter, let us assume that the South would adopt this policy, and each of the cotton-growing States, ten in number, would manufacture but 50,000 bales yearly, this would give us a consumption of 500,000 bales in the South; add to this the amount consumed in the Northern States, say 500,000 bales more, and it will give us a home consumption of 1,000,000 bales.

“Now let us see the result of it. In the place of exporting now, with a full сгор, about two millions of bales, we would then export but one and a half millions. The effect of thus diminishing our export one half million bales yearly would be, that we would no longer be compelled to cast ourselves at ihe mercy of foreigners to beg a purchaser; we could, in fact, regulate the price of it ourselves; and in the place of six to seven cents, being now the exient we can obtain, nine to ten cents would then be the average price.

“It must be admitted that there is perhaps no portion of the face of the earth which abounds so much with all the elements of greatness, and no peo. ple possess more means at their command to become wealthy and independent than the people of the South; yet how little have they taken advantage of it?

" It must be likewise admitted that the cotton planter, under present cir. cumstances, has to work harder, and receive less remuneration for the amount of capital which he has invested, than any other class of men; and, while the very staple which he produces enriches almost every one, he himself is the least benefited by it.

"The reason of this is very obvious. Every bale of cotton he sells more than triples in value from the time it leaves him till he buys it back again, if it be even cotton shirting. If he receives $25 per bale, the manufacturer, with not half as great an outlay of capital as it takes to raise a bale of cotton, receives at least $50 to manufacture it into goods; he creates, therefore, more than twice as much wealth, with not half as much capital as the cotton planter.

"To fortify this position it is only necessary to refer to statistics whose authority is indisputable. McCulloch, in his Encyclopedia of Commerce, published in London in 1847, estimates the amount of American cotton consumed by British manufacturers at about 500,000,000 pounds. The present average value of cotton in England is about nine cents per pound, and the aggregate cost of this cotton to the British manufacturer is, therefore, about $15,000,000. At this rate, the highest amount the American cotton planters can receive, would be, (after taking the expenses off,) say seven cents per pound, the sum of $35,000,000.

“According to the estimate of the same author, the value of British cotton manufactures in 1847 was about £42,000,000, or nearly $186,000,000. It is estimated that the amount of capital invested in the business is about the same as the value of the product per annum.

As the American cotton con. stitutes about four-fifths of the entire cotton consumed by the manufacturers in England, the capital required to manufaciure the same will be about $150,000,000, and the product about the same. It will thus be seen that, through the combination of British capital and skill, $150,000,000 is produced out of the cotton for which the American planter receives but $35,000,000; and that, after taking off the raw material, the amount of wealth thus created by the British cotton mills is the net sum of $115,000,000,

“Now, let us estimate the amount of capital the American cotton planter will have to invest to produce the same cotton. Allowing about 200 pounds to be the product of an acre, it would require about 2,500,000 acres to produce it, which we will estimate at an average cost of $15 per acre, making about $37,500,000. To produce this, it will take at the rate of 2,000 per hand, about 250,000 slaves, at $500 each, making the value of the slaves about $125,000,000. Thus the land and slaves, together with necessary items, such as farm. ing utensils, mules, horses, cotton-gins, buildings, &c., would exceed the sum of $170,000,000. In making a comparison in the matter, the case stands thus: the planter invests $170,000,000 to produce about $35,000,000 worth of cotton; the British manufacturers employ a capital of $150,000,000, and produce about $115,000,000 worth of goods, after having paid for the raw material.

“So much for the productiveness of British capital in manufacturing American cotton, and American capital in producing it.

“Again: the British manufacturers employ about 540,000 operatives. To work up the American cotton, it will take about four-fifths of that number, say 432,000 hands; divide the above $115,000,000 among them, and they will have $266 as the value of production per hand; divide the net receipts of $35,000,000 among 250,000 hands, you will have $140 per hand for producing; less by $122 per annum for each hand in the production of the article than is realized by manufacturing it.

“If we come nearer home, we will find the case to be precisely the same. In five of the New England States–New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maine, Rhode Island, and Connecticut-the capital employed in the business is estimated to be about $50,000,000, and the product about $45,000,000 per annum. Deduct 33} per cent. for the cost of the raw material, labour excepted, say 815,000,000, and you have as the net product of industry $30,000,000, being the actual creation of wealth, in the five States, by the manufacturing of cotton.

“The total cotton crop in the United States for 1848 is estimated at about

1,000,000,000 pounds. If it average six cents per pound, it will bring $60,800,000. To produce this, it requires, according to the basis assumed, a capital of $340,000,000.

“In order that the Southern planter should create wealth as fast as the Northern manufacturer, in proportion to the amount of capital employed, the crop of 1848 should have brought $200,000,000 in the place of sixty million of dollars.

“I have said at the outset, that the Southern States possess the capacity to manufacture at least 500,000 bales of the raw material. This would be consumed in the manufacture of coarse fabrics, with which the South could defy competition. I will now examine what effect this policy would have. I have already shown that a permanent advance in cotton would be bound to follow, say from two to three cents; to be very limited, let us say at two cents per pound; it would give the south 2,000,000 of bales, allowing four hundred pounds to the average weight per bale, at least an increase of 16,000,000

“The 500,000 bales which we would manufacture ourselves would be worth, at $25 per bale, about $12,500,000. As the raw material usually costs about one-third of the manufactured goods, the product of it would be about $37,000,000, leaving $25,000,000 for the labour and profit to the manufacturer; and' if we add to this the $16,000,000, the South would become $41,000,000 richer every year.”

yearly.

WASHINGTON NATIONAL MONUMENT. Condensed statement of the receipts and expenditures of J. B. H. Smith, Treasurer of the Washington National Monument Society, from 1st January, 1849, to 31st December, 1849, inclusive, to wit:

RECEIPTS.

Received from Hon. E. Whittlesey, the general agent,

Do. interest on stocks,
Do. sale of stocks,
Do. George Watterston, collector for city of Washington,
Do. Mrs. Anna M. Thornton, her subscription,
Do.

E. W. Fletcher, through Thomas Ritchie, Esq.,
Do. exchange on Virginia paper,

$9,486 15

2,193 65 48,734 65 295 15 20 00

1 00 75 00

60,805 60 Add balance in bank of Washington, on settlement, the 31st December, 1818,

420 88

$61,226 48 EXPENDITURES. Paid during said period, per resolutions of the board of managers, and

on drafts of the building committee, for expenses of materials, and

construction of the monument, per vouchers numbered 1 to 210, $60,628 82 Paid discount on uncurrent money,

4 06 Paid bank of Washington expenses of collection,

42 38 Balance to credit of treasurer in the bank of Washington the 31st December, 1849

551 2:2

January 1, 1850.

$61,226 48 J. B. H. SMITH, Treasurer.

1849.]

Statistics.The Declaration of Independence.

411

66

66

66

THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. A list of the signers of the declaration, with the times of their birth and death, the

State represented by each, and their several ages when they executed the instrument.* Name.

State.

Born.
Age.

Died. Samuel Adams,

Mass.
1722

54

1803 Robert Treat Paine,

1731

45

1814 John Adams,

1735

41

1826 John Hancock,

1737

39

1793 Elbridge Gerry,

1744

32

1814 Stephen Hopkins,

R. I.
1707

69

1785 William Ellery,

1727

49

1829 Josiah Bartlett,

N. H.
1729

47

1790 Matt. Thornton,

1714

62

1803 William Whipple,

1730

46

1785 Oliver Wolcott,

Conn.
1726

50

1797 Roger Sherman,

1721

55

1793 Sam. Huntington,

1732

41

1796 Wm. Williams,

1731

45

1811 Ph. Livingston,

N. Y.

1716

60

1788 William Floyd,

1734

42

1821 Lewis Morris,

1726

50

1798 Francis Lewis,

1713

63

1802 Fran. Hopkinson,

N. J.
1737

39

1790 John Hart,

1715

66

1780 Abraham Clark,

1726

50

1794 Richard Stockton,

1730

46

1781 John Witherspoon,

1722

54

1794 Benj. Franklin,

Penn.
1706

70

1790 James Smith,

1718

58

1806 Benjamin Rush,

1745

31

1813 George Clymer,

1739

37

1813 Robert Morris,

1733

43

1806 George Ross,

1710

46

1799 George Taylor,

1716

60

1781 John Morton,

1724

52

1777 James Wilson,

1743

38

1798 George Reid,

Del.
1734

42

1798 Cæsar Rodney,

- 1730

46

1783 Thomas M.Kean,

1734

42

1817 Charles Carroll,

Md.
1737

39

1832 Thomas Stone,

1743

33

1787 William Paca,

1740

36

1800 Samuel Chase,

1741

35

1811 Thomas Jefferson,

Va.
1743

36

1816 Benj. Harrison,

1745

31

1799 Francis L. Lee,

1734

1794

66

42

* The first motion to declare the colonies independent was made by Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, on the 7th June, 1776, and the resolution to that effect was debated with great ability. The committee appointed to prepare the declaration which consisted of Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Sherman, and Livingston, reported on the 1st July, and on the 4th July, 1776, the paper received the assent of all the delegates.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »