HD 90704 U5 »83> fco o o (L> ci .2 o exico and S. America, ex- cept Brazil. CD • Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. 1825 _ 255 1826 _ 350 1827 - 270 1828 _ 325 1829 _ 365 1830 - 350 1831 820 385 38 9 18 36 180 115 35 4 1832 _ 390 1833 _ 445 1834 900 460 30 8 25^ 34 185 110 35 13 1835 [12] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [1.] It will be seen by the phraseology adopted, that the crop given against each year is that grown, and not that brought to market in the year, and that the year meant in the table is the calendar, and not the fiscal year. This course has been pursued as more appropriate when applied to the raising of a crop ; but in selling it, " the crop of 1835," for example, is often spoken of by others, when that which grew in 1834 is the crop alluded to. This explanation will enable all to make their comparisons in the mode most convenient to them, and will remove some apparent contradictions between certain authors. [2.] In forming an estimate of the whole crop of cotton grown in the world in any particular year, I have found no precedent to aid me except for the single year of 1834, when evidence was given before the Chamber of Peers, in France, that it probably amounted to about 460 millions of pounds. But this computation was so deficient, assigning none to Mexico, and none to South America or Africa, except to Brazil 24 millions of pounds, and to Egypt 20 millions of pounds, and only 6Q millions of pounds . 14 to India, and 350 millions of pounds to the United States, and the balance of 6 millions of pounds to the West Indies, that no safe reliance could be placed on it as correct for the whole known world. My own course has been to ascertain from all attainable sources the exports in raw cotton of each country ; to add to those the probable amount consumed at home and not exported, look- ing to the climate of the place, the habits of its population, and the scattered facts on this point found in respectable authors, and then to compute therefrom the whole quantity grown. Another general test of the correctness of one of my conclusions, viz.,. that the whole crop in the world has quite doubled in the last half century, and now equals 900 millions of pounds, though the estimate before named is only 460 millions of pounds, exists in the fact, that a greater increase than this has happened in the crop of the United States alone ; and though, in some other countries, a diminution has occurred in the exports of cotton from various caUvSes, which need not here be detailed, yet the use of it has probably been reduced in no country; and in many, within that period, it has, from greater cheapness, by improvements in machinery and steam, with its healthfulness, compared with other clothing, largely increased, and in some been for the first time introduced. Supposing that in warm climates, and in a popula- tion not highly civilized, as in Turkey, two pounds of cotton per head for each person are yearly consumed, (see Urquhart on Turkey, page 150,) and in the south of China and India, not over one and a half pounds to each person, and in the places near or under the equator, still less; and that, in more civilized countries where cotton is used, as in England, France, and the United States, from eight to twelve pounds per head are consumed ; and supposing that only a little more than half the population of the globe, estimated at four hundred and fifty millions, use cotton, the consumption would, on an average at only two pounds per head, be quite equal to the estimated crop for the whole world. For some years past it is supposed that the consumption of cotton has been greater than the crop, and hence, that the old stocks on hands have been more exhausted, and a larger portion of the new crop called for early. (See table I.) This has sustained the price, and required an augmented crop of at least 20 millions of pounds per annum. See post, and evidence before the French Chambers, February, 1835. [3.] The crop as well as the export of cotton of the United States, from 1809 to 1815, was sensibly diminished by means of our commercial restrictions and war, and the crop of other coun- Jt5 tries was increased to supply the place of ours in foreign con- sumption. Our crop has been computed with more care and from better data, than the crop of other portions of the world. From 1821 to 1834 it has been estimated by others much lower than in the table, and as follows : Years. Mill' s of lbs. Years. Mill' s of lbs. 1821 - - Ill 1828 - - 213i 1822 - - 12U 1829 - _ 2551 1823 . - 136 1830 - - 292 1824 - -_ 152f 1831 - - 311f 1825 - - 1691 1832 - - 296i 1826 - «- 211f 1833 - - 360 1827 - - 285 1834 - -. 320i The above is from Marshall's tables on the trade, manufac- tures, &c. of England, page 110. In McCulloch's Commercial Dictionary, page 434, Reuss's tables, page 270, and Baines's History of Cotton, page 303, similar statements are made, but they are manifestly too low, as being often less in quantity than our exports ; and they may differ occasionally from being founded on the exports of a particular year, as 1825, and which were chiefly made up of the smaller crop grown in a previous year, as in 1824. They are incorrect even then, as our crop for many calendar years has been from 50 to 90 millions of pounds more than the exports of each succeeding fiscal year ; this last being composed of the growth of the previous calendar year, with a small portion of it brought to market from the 1st of Au- gust to the first of October omitted, and a like portion of the sub- sequent calendar year included. The 50 to 90 millions of pounds are the quantity consumed at home, and which quantity lessens in amount as we go back to the periods when our manufactures were fewer, and when we consumed in them some cotton of foreign growth. See another estimate in the 3d volume of the Parliamentary Reports, (1833,) page 89. Another difference may arise from the bale made up here being abroad computed often at only 300 pounds, ( see on this ante and post. ) The crop in the United States in 1834 was injured in the northern parts of the cotton-growing States ; but so much new land was put into cultivation, that the whole exports were a little larger, and the home consumption is presumed also to have been more. The crop for the year 1835 has likewise been more seriously injured in the same quarters; but the exports of it since Sep- tember, have, from early ripening, high prices, &c., been larger than either of the two previous years, and some think the whole 16 crop was larger, while it is believed by a few that the whole crop will turn out to be somewhat less, though not so much as apprehended, the increase of lands in cultivation has been so great. February 17, 1836, the exports ascertained, on the At- lantic, had been 377,420 bags; but to same time in 1835, only 340,379 ; and in 1834, only 309,976. For a view of our power in the United States to grow more cotton, see table B, note [2.] [4.] The crop of Brazil is computed on its ascertained ex- ports at different periods to England and elsewhere, and a home consumption in a small ratio to its population. (See table on exports.) It has been diminished of late years by importing cotton manufactures for home consumption, as in 1833 and '4, from England largely. See tables N and 0, and notes, and Pitkin, 384 and '5, where are more details. Cotton was first planted or cultivated in Brazil in 1781, for exportation. Smith- ers' History of Liverpool. [5.] The crop of the West Indies is estimated in a similar manner ; after deducting from their exports the probable portion of cotton brought there from the Spanish Main, and thence re- exported. In 1812, it is said that the crop of all the West Indies did not exceed 5i millions, (Colquhoun 378;) and chiefly in Barbadoes, Bahama islands, Dominico, and Granada ; 4 Hum- boldt's Per. Nar. 123 to '5, and notes. But this is believed to have been underrated. England now exports there largely of cotton manufactures. See 1833 and 1834, table N, and notes; and the United States export there some of them yearly, as well as France. All this tends to diminish the crop raised for home consumption, and probably that for export. See exports of Mfts. table O. Cotton was grown first in 1776, at St. Domingo, for export. 2 V. Hist, of Colom. But earlier in other islands, and they furnished a large part of English wants before 1785; Edin. Cyclop. Art. ''Cotton." In 1789, Hayti, alone, exported over 7 millions of pounds; about 2i millions of pounds in 1801, and since that, less than 1 million of pounds yearly. See a table in McCulloch, 926. In 1824, a little over 1 million of pounds, and in 1832 about H million. See McCulloch, 927. [6.] The supposed crop of Egypt, in former'years, is predi- cated on the authority of the Dictionary of Spanish Commerce and Finance, vol. 3, page 29. On her exports, (see exports,) and for 1834, the New Monthly Magazine for September, 1835. She imported cotton from Smyrna and Greece till within twenty 17 years. See below, note 9th. By the last advices her crop grown in 1835 is said to be short, not exceeding 18 or 20 mil- lions of pounds. [7.] The crop of the rest of Africa is computed from her ex- ports from Morocco, Gambia, &c., and the habits and number of her population, and her soil and climate, where cotton is indige- nous, and has always been grown in many sections since first discovered. McGuUoch, Die. 436. Of late she imports on the eastern side fewer cotton goods from India, and more there and on the western side from England and the United States. See for 1833 and '4, from Eng. table N, and notes. See exports from the United States, table O. In the island of Mauritius, in 1806, nearly two millions of pounds of cotton were raised, but it fell off gradually till, in 1831, little or none was produced. 4 Mont- gomery's Hist, of British Col., page 209. See table N, note [10.] [8.] In India, the estimate rests on her exports and vast pop- ulation, long clothed chiefly in cotton of her own growth. Mc- Culloch, Die. 437. The Isle of Bourbon produced it of a quality almost equal to the Sea-island. London Encyclop. Art. " Cot- ton." See her exports, table D. But of late years her exports of manufactured goods have declined, and her importations of them from England alone exceed ^10,000,000 yearly. See exports of manufactures from England and the United States, table N and O, and evidence on the East India Company, 1832, appendix, page 287 ; and on the growth and use of cotton in the islands of the Indian archipelago, see 1 Crawford, History, 177, 207, and 449 ; 2 Crawford, 360. It is believed that the culti- vation of cotton for export is on the increase ; labor is so low, and the trade of India having become more free. The estimates for the crop in India are probably not high enough, rather than being too large. See exports, table E and F, and supplement to Cyclop. Brit. " Cotton." [9.] The rest of Asia, including China, Japan, Persia, Arabia, and Turkey, from the mildness of its climate, great population, and customary clothing, is supposed not to be computed too high. In 1766, it was grown much about Smyrna. See Postlethwait's Dictionary, " Cotton." Only about six millions of pounds in 1834, near Smyrna, and most of that was shipped to Marseilles and Trieste. McCuUoch, page 1069. The cultivation of cotton, in China, began about the 13th century, for purposes of manufacture; though before raised in 3 18 gardens for ornament. The crop increased rapidly, and was very large, probably much beyond the amount assigned in this column, till 1785 to 1790, when it began to be considerably dis- continued for the purpose of raising grain, during and in conse- quence of famine. Much has since been imported from India, though now in the small statistical knowledge attainable on this point as to China, she may raise more cotton than the large amount computed for her, in connexion with Japan, Cochin-China, &c. Supplement to Cyclop. Brit. " Cotton." See exports of raw cotton, table D. Travellers and merchants see but little of Chi- na usually, except the south parts and the seaboard ; and if in the great use of silk, furs, &c. in the colder portions, it is con- sidered that 100 millions of her population use cotton, and from their poverty only li pounds each, the whole amount- would be 160 millions of pounds yearly in China alone. [10.] This crop in South America and Mexico rests on simi- lar principles, as the chief clothing was cotton when the country was first discovered by the Spaniards. It is now often of su- perior quality. (See Humboldt's Per. Nar. page 202.) The exports since have been considerable. (See exports.) But of late years the crop must be less, as Mexico, as well as Peru and Chili imports now from England yearly many cottons, besides what they get from the United States and elsewhere. ( See ex- ports of manufactures.) Cotton began to be cultivated for ex- port in Caraccas in 1782. The saw gin is not yet used, but wooden rollers. 2 Hist, of Colomb. The plant is found indi- genous, (Mollier's travels in Colombia, page 121 ; 4 Humb. Per. Nar. 123.) In Hall's Colombia, page 27, it is said only about four millions of pounds are grown in that Government yearly. This is too small an amount. Cultivated in Surinam since 1735. Smithers' Hist, of Liverpool, page 131. [11.] This column includes some remote islands, and the south of Spain, Italy, and Greece, and their islands, with the Ca- naries, where cotton was formerly more raised, and still is con- siderably. See as to Spain and Italy, 2 Chaptal on French in- dustry, page 6. From Italy and Egypt, in 1825, when cotton was very high, over 231 millions of pounds were exported. McCuUoch, 949. Some has been raised in New South Wales. McCulloeh, Diet, of Com. 436 ; Smithers' Hist, of Liverpool, page 126 ; and the cultivation is said to be resumed in Italy. Though some exports were formerly described as from Portugal, little or no cotton grew there ; and the exports of it thence came chiefly from Brazil. 19 [12.] Some confusion has arisen from the different use or ap- plication of the word " cotton." It is said to be a word of Arabic origin (Smithers' History of Liv. 115;) but the application sometimes of the word " linen," and at others of the word " wool- len," to the vegetable of three or four general varieties, and which produces the wool or down now called " cotton," has led to some mistakes about its growth and use formerly in certain countries, which it is now difficult to correct. McCulloch's Diet, of Com. 436 and '8. Baines, 287 and '96, note 66. But it was probably grown and used largely in ancient times in Arabia, as well as India, America, and Africa, except perhaps in Egypt, where linen, it is supposed, chiefly superseded it, and can now be detected, but no cotton, in the clothing of the mummies, by the joints in the fibres of the stalk of the flax, being visible with a microscope, whereas the fibres of cotton from the pod have no joints. See Thompson's paper in Baines's appendix. London Encyclop. article " Cotton," contra. The kind of cotton chiefly cultivated now, and especially in the United States, is not the tree or shrub, but the annual and herbaceous varieties. London Encyclop. art. " Cotton." 20 B. COTTON— RAW. Crop grown in— [1]— [2] 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 c4 ei C 'o "c • •> t- w c e« .3 O U d d S CO c C OS c o 3 r :2 c C .S2 > ^ cn O &^ < h lbs. lbs. lbs. Mill's. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. - - 1^ •^ 5 4 20 10 - - 1 8 7 40 20 - - 3 2 12 10 50 45 - 20 20 10 10 lbs. Mill'n. 21 B.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. Crop grown in — [1] — [2] e4 !* c C 2 ■£ s 1 t 4 C en a c .2 '3 > :zi en O p^ < H S ^ < s lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. >^ Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Miirn. 1826 25 18 70 75 2 45 45 30 38 i 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 13 10 73 88 15 65 50 70 55 i 1834 10 9^ 651 75 20 85 45 85 62 i 1835 [4] [3] [1.] I have not been able to find any official returns of either the General or the State Governments, which give the crops of cotton in each State. The present table has, therefore, been compiled from the best data in my power: such as the foreign exports of cotton from each State, the exports coastwise, the quantity supposed to be exported from each not grown within its limits, and the amount yearly consumed within its limits. Many mistakes are made abroad, and some at home, by consid- ering all the exports of each State as its own crop, or by com- puting the whole foreign exports as the whole crop, or by esti- mating all the bales in the United States alike, and only at 300 pounds on an average. See such mistakes in Reuss's Tables on American Trade, 270, and Parliamentary Evidence on Man- ufactures, A. D. 1833. But it is well known in this country, that the exports from New Orleans, both foreign and domestic, are composed in part of the crops of Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Alabama. Part of the crops in each of those States is con- sumed at home, part is exported coastwise to the Northern States, and the crops of the southwestern portion of Mississippi, and 22 the southern portion of Alabama, are chiefly exported from Mo- bile. In addition to some of the above remarks, applicable to the other cotton-growing States, it is proper to add, that part of the crop of Georgia is exported from Florida, and part from South Carolina ; part of Florida from Alabama ; and part of North Carolina from Virginia. For an explanation of some of the fluctuations in our exports in certain years, see table A, note [3]. [2.] From data given under the head of " Capital," in table C, note [3], it will be seen that, in producing the whole cotton crop of the United States, only about two millions of acres of land are cultivated. In table D it appears that all the foreign exports of cotton in the world do not probably exceed 535 mil- lions of pounds, and of which the United States now export about 384 millions of pounds ; a large portion of the residue is from the remotest parts of Asia, very little of it now coming to Europe. But if necessary or profitable, we could raise the whole of the other 150 millions, by putting into cultivation only about 500,000 acres more cotton land, and employing less than 100,000 more field hands in this branch of industry. But supposing that Asia, from her distance and habits, con- tinues to use chiefly her own raw cotton, that the increase of population in j;he United States should continue much as hereto- fore, and that the countries in Europe and elsewhere, now sup- plied with cotton manufactures made chiefly from our crops, should increase in population, or in the use of cotton, as fast as the United States does in population alone, and there would be required to supply the increased annual demand only about 21 millions of pounds more of raw cotton, or the product in the United States of less than 70,000 acres more each year. This has been nearly our average increase of crops in the last ten years. See table and note in extract from annual Treasury re- port. It has required about 1 1 ,000 more field laborers a year, or only Ath the annual increase of our whole population. But we probably have now, not in cultivation, more acres of land suitable for cotton, than would be sufiicient to raise all the cotton now grown in the world ; as that would require only three to five millions of acres. Hence, it must be obvious that there is good cotton land enough in the United States, and at low prices, easily to grow, not only all the cotton wanted for foreign export in the worlds but to supply the increased demand for it, proba- bly, for ages. The only preventive, of which there is much likelihood, 23 seems to be in the augmented price of such labor as is usually devoted to this culture ; so that it may not be possible to raise the crop at so low a rate as to keep possession of the European market against all competition. In getting possession of that market so fully and rapidly here- tofore, (as shown in the extracts from the last annual report,) the United States have been much aided by the good quality of their cotton, the low price of land, and the great improvements in cleaning cotton by Whitney's cotton gin since 1793. One per- son is able to perform with it in a day the work of 1,000 without it. Cox's Digest of Manufactures, page 667 ; Gales and Seaton's documents, 2d volume. Besides these advantages, the unusual industry and enterprise of our population, and its freedom from taxation compared with the people of most other countries, and the wide extent of our commerce, have promoted our unprece- dented progress. Raines's History, 301 ; 5 Malte Brun, page 193. The old mode of cleaning it by wooden rollers, and with the bow by hand, is still used in India and Colombia, and it is there sown broad-cast instead of in drills, and much neglected after- wards. Baines 64 : see 3 Crawford's history, 350. The great vibrations in the prices per pound of raw cotton grown in the United States, are very striking, as exhibited in table C. The influence of these on the sales of public land and our revenue, from both them and the imports of foreign merchandise, has been briefly examined in the last annual re- port, extracts from which are annexed. The further influence of these on the prosperity of the South, on the rise in the value of their slave property, and on the great profits yielded by all their capital invested in growing cotton, must be very apparent to every careful observer. The single fact, that in no year has the price been but a fraction below 10 cents per pound, or a rate sufficient to yield a fair profit, while it has, at times, been as high as 29, 34, and even 44, and been on an average over 16 cents per pound since 1802, and over 21 since 1790, is probably without a parallel, in showing a large and continued profit. Fur- ther details on these and similar considerations must be left to other persons and other occasions. [See table C, note 3.] [3.] In South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, the Sea-island cotton (supposed to have come originally from Persia, and in 1786 from Bahama to the United States) succeeds; but grows there to perfection only in certain districts near the seacoast. During the last 30 years the average annual crop has been be- 24 tween 9 and 1 1 million pounds. See exports and prices, and a table in Seybert, 152-3: Sinithers, 132. But the quality of a part of it is inferior. McCulloch, 436. It has taken the place in Europe of the fine cotton from the isle of Bourbon. London Encyclopedia, article " cotton ;" and is superior to that. Sup- plement to Cyclop. Brit. " cotton." [4.] The growth of cotton in the United States began as early as 1787, even of the Sea-island, and of other kinds earlier still, in small quantities. McCulloch, 440, says it began soon after the close of the war of the Revolution, though not exported till 1790. T. Cox, cited in Rees's Cyclopedia, in article " United States," says cotton was raised here in gardens before 1786, but not by planters as a crop, and before 1787 we never exported a bale. [He means of our own growth, it is presumed. See table F, note 6.] We exported a little before 1787, viz : 1785, five bags ; and in 1786 six bags ; which Smithers' history of Liv- erpool, page 129, supposes was grown here, but see table F, note 9. 26 C. COTTON— RAW. Prices per lb. [1] Capital employed Persons employed Value of in connexion with in growing, and whole crop in growing. [3] dependent. t a; 1 •2! C ho a. *N Ti ii 9^ •T3 Si c c "c bo t. c tn c c/l aS p W tJ H m t) 5 p M i Cents. Pence. Dolls. Dolls. Dolls. Dolls. Dolb. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill'ns. Mill'ns, Mill's. Mill's. 1789 _ 12 to 22 1790 14J 12 to 21 1791 26 13 to 30 ^ _ 33 '^ u 1 ~k 40^ 1792 29 20 to 30 1793 32 13 to 22 1794 33 12 to 18 1795 36^ 15 to 27 1796 36^ 12 to 29 1797 34 12 to 37 1798 39 22 to 45 1799 44 17 to 60 1800 28 16 to 36 1801 44 17 to 38 80 _ 50 . X. 1 u i 8 39^ 1802 19 12 to 38 1803 19 8 to 15 1804 20 10 to 18 1805 23 14 to 19 1806 22 12 to 15 1807 21^ 10 to 14 1808 19 9 to 30 1809 16 10 to 18 1810 16 10 to 19 1811 I5i 7 to 14 134 -1.. 1 58 } I 12^ 37 1812 10^ 11 to 14 1813 12 16 to 26 1814 15 28 aver. 1815 21 20i " 1816 29^ 18i «« 1817 26i 20 '« 1818 34 20 *« 1819 24 13i " 1820 17 11^ - 1821 16 9| *• 300 ^ . 83 i i 29| 37 1822 16^ 8i «* 1823 10&12 8} " 1824 15 8| ** 27 C— COTTON— RAW— Continued. Prices per lb. [1] Capital employed Persons employed Value of in connexion with in growing, and whole crop in growing. [3] dependent. lA tA to en B ii OJ O) rt rf rt aj 5 i lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Dollars. > Mill's. Millions. Millions. Millions. Millions. Millions. MilPns. 1789 1790 3 - - - - - 48,285 1791 — — — - — - - 52,000 1792 — - — - - - - 51,470 1793 — - — — — - — 160,000 Millions. 1794 — — — — — — — 1 1795 — — — - — - — 2t 1796 _ _ _ _ _ _ _- 2A- 1797 — — _ — — _ _ u 1798 — — _ — — — — 3i 1799 — — _ — — — — 4A 1800 _ 10 _ 3 _ 5 _ 6 1801 — - — — — - — 9 1 o" 1802 _ — _ — _ _ _ 5i 1803 — — _ — — — _ 7f 1804 — — _ — _ _ _ 7f 1805 — — — — — — — 9i 1806 — — — — — — — 8t 1807 — — _ _ __ __ _ 14i 1808 — — __ _ _ _ _ 2i 1809 _- — — — _ _ _ Si 1810 5 40 -_ 20 10 15 4 151 1811 - — — — _- — 9J 1812 — _ ^% _ ^ _ 3 1813 — _ — _ -^ _ __ 2i 1814 — ~ _ _ _ _ _ 2i 1815 - - - - - - - ni 43 E.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. Exports of Cotton from — c J S 1 (4 o 4) a3 >• 1 o «3 < o ^ ^ 1^ w lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Dollars. >> Millions. Millions. Millions. Mill's. Millions. Millions. Mill'ns. 1816 — — _ — _ _ _ 241 1817 -- — — _ _ __ _ 22i 1818 — _ _ _ _ _ _ 31i 1819 ■ — — — _ _ _ _ 21 1820 30 37 8 25 28 6 3 22i 1821 — — _ _ _ _ _ 20i 1822 — — _ _ _ _ _ 24 1823 _ _ — _ — _ _. 23i 1824 — _ _ _ _ _ _ 2H 1825 — — _ _ _ _ 38f 1826 _ _ — _ _ _ — 25 1827 _ — — _ _ _ _ 29i 1828 — _ — _ _ __ _ 22i 1829 — — — _ _ __ _ 26i 1830 120^ 55i 24 49 37ft nt 2 29f 1831 — — - _ — 25i 1832 — — — — _ — — 311 1833 — _ _ _ _ _ _ 36 1834 164 67t 5U 56i 30f in 3 AH 1835 — -. _ _ _ _ _ 6H ni [2] [3] [1 .] The exports from each State are the foreign ones, and for 1830 and 1834, from official data; but prior to that they are es- timates from the crop, consumption at home, &c. See table F, note [9] , as to some exports before the Revolution. The first cotton supposed to be of -American growth, ^brought to New York city, for foreign export, it is said, came from Sa- vannah in 1792, and consisted of only two bags. The amount 44 of exports coastwise has not been ascertained, for reasons stated in the report. Those for foreign countries from any particular State often include more than the crop of that State, as from New York, which raises no cotton, and from Louisiana which raises b\it a small part of her exports. See table B, note 1. [2.] The portion exported of Sea-island cotton, was, in 1834, 8,085,935 pounds, and in 1835, was 7,752,736 ; and was chiefly from South Carolina and Georgia. See official returns. Its cultivation was, as remarked in a former table, introduced into South Carolina as early as 1787, from Bahama, and the ex- port of it during the last 20 years has been on an average not far from 8 millions of pounds. It may be cultivated more ex- tensively, it is supposed, in Florida. See prices in table C and notes, and B, and note 3. It is now exported chiefly to England, say seven-ninths, over one-ninth to France, and the rest elsewhere. See McCuUoch, page 440. It has taken the place of the fine cottons formerly from the i^e of Bourbon. See a table of exports of it from 1802 to 181 6, inclusive, going in some years to nearly 10 millions of pounds, and to others short of one milllion ; but, as before named, being generally about 8 millions of pounds. Seyb. Stat, page 152 and 4. [3.] The value has been computed from the quantity and av- erage price through each year, so far as obtainable from official data. In Seyb. Stat, page 147, is a table of the values from 1803 to 1817, inclusive. 45 < . I o H O O V en 'wQ 1 •put;[5ua o; X^^i-mx puB id.(Sa 1 Mill's. ■ - •aouBjj 0) saipui •puBiSua oj saipui ^s9AV J^ 6 •puB[Sua o; iizB.ia i 1 i-'i 5: •Bun|3 0) tJipui tn -Q 1 % 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •puBiSua Ai «!pui ;2 CO a 1 .2 111 ^i«- |w lo^hc^Hj'— i«-l» •SJ caA 46 pi •puBiSua oj iizejg o a. H •pu«{Sua Xa>[at\L puB ;dX5a •puB[Su3 oj Xa2l.ii5X puB ;cIXSa •30U«J J O) SSipUI •pu^iSua oj sdipiii ;saA\ •Buit|3 o\ Bipui •puBiSug oj Bipuj •aouB.ia ^ ui^jug IBaao UB^ saoBid '33UBJJ •puBiSua •sa«3A pc5 ■^ '-l«>-l'f-|«-lni»«l«»-^* Nl^-^'-t-'l"''!"* (- H :i. I I I I I i I I I I I .2 '-IM'^K* •9|^^|Mr-lKN|rt-<|M".!ff»t-Ie» I .2 I I t I i t i I t t I V3 .2 1 G^'^«0'«ti> l>^ He* «i* "i- r^i* ^* f-j* cc!^ ' ' i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Hc«H^ 1 CO t- QO r^ -Hcol^ f-M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r,|Me<.lM 1 t^ GO SO ^ 1 1« |«?- "^1" |«''|w'^jM K )>« H H^ ^l-t «K -M-lw-K^ '•ht^ i-OJ>COGO^J>COTt_• i I I i I I I I i I 1,1,11 , , ^|„ .Hc^H't _ H^ -l« -1^ ^|c»^ CO G0C5Tjii0C0O^O©*O©^C0^G» iO C* CO ^ O I IO»-^i0OO©^OG0r-w0t,fc,t-t^O5r7 »-i O--).-. G<)0>)©.l'iOCOi>oO i-i r', CO GO COCO I |iOi>^COi-'OGOT-HG'— i>»-H»OJ>t^CO©'1 TjievJ rjiiO»iO»00050>0'^CirJiGOi-«»OxOi-iO'^©^CO»C ^^ i-Ni-i©:»i-iT-i©;j©^©:i©^a0050"©?COTt» « ^ «>■> •e Qd ^ y—f •«* S § f^ ^ 0) ►i « °e>* 5* ej 1 ^ ^s 05 a •saor-id d3\\\o i\\' «M^K r"^ ^V-^l 1-- S^ SQ 05 r-< CO L- X O t- --N O i^ O! O OO l^ iO ^ ^ 1-- CD CO CD C5 ^- ^^ O^ GO^ G^^ CD^ 05^ ' co"l>"cD"io"vrf o" ^ O ^ GO O GO 1-1 Tt O S!^ VOlOCO'-OJ>'— CDCO'-* 3 '■*-' iOCDSGOCDiOOGClCD iOioa5i>F-icocoxo©^,-Mi>j>F-Hco Oi^GO^©^ iO O^CO^GO^CO^f-^-rJ^^O^GO^CD^t^ (^r©r ©f Go"Go'cD'Tdr©rTt'i-^cD'"©f CD CO C5 . 1> GO QO 5 GO «-< »> '-HTJfTtt-t^QOiCOGQT-* i-'OiCTfl>iOi»O^CD GO^ ©i^ GO^ SQ^ '^ GO^ t^ ^^^ go" go" o" ^"^ "^ ccT TjT t-T irT gtT GocoaDr-»-i>i^OO Tj* T-i a> o^cq^r^^cD^T-j^GO^oi^ rj^ ©'f ©^ i-T i-T go" TjT . CO TJ4 GO .§C5 CD . »0 ©©fiio" so" 1> -^ 11(111(111 ©^ -Sco^ o GO ^©1 ( » ( ( ( o 05- ( ( O QO ^ CD J> 05 »-- C5 i> »-N CO 1-* ©0 O^CO^©>7^C5^©3^ ©f ifT co" ccT ©f oT 00 ^ CO iO C5 t* lO ©^t* QO QO ©cT •inniS •pa pu« P««HOH •BISStlH oj. 'ej«3A CDCOQOCO^CiOC01>G005CDGOeQaO .050rtiOGO©}05COGOO:)COi>©}l^O><3a Ph F— Oi CD -rj^ '^ ^'-Ss*^"^^'^ "^^"^^-^ 005GO»0'^*^S^'-''--'COCDO'-*iO'^'-« .COCOJ>r}GOi00050 -rtCDt^COCD05©^»-^l:-COGOi>05'«*Tt05t-T-ii-HC0t^OTf oOT-HOOco»-*'«t''<*©^»— coGOTj* lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Millions. Millions. .Millions. Millions. Millions, Millions. Millions. 1701 HVo'-A 1710 7 T?) 1720 2 ' 1730 ^ ! 1741 h% 1751 3 . 1764 '^ro 3766 3 1780 5 1784 11 1787 22 - 21J If 6S 5? - 6 1789 32J 1790 31J Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. Ratio Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. 1791 28J ToVo J 4 - - i 1792 1793 35 19 ^5 — 4 _ 1 ^5 1 1794 1795 24^ 26^ t 1 ~ J J ~ ToU 1796 32 A 1 \ 1 - A- sV 1797 2^ A 1 4 - tV A 1798 1799 31| •gr i 4 f — ^i sy 1800 56' 1 1 — 1 s 1801 56 ■i ^ J T2 6" - A 1802 60^ 3 7 i 1 - To 135 1803 1804 53f 61i * J t 1- — s i 1805 1806 1807 1808 59| 58i 75 1 43J 1 1 1' ! \ - i ajr 53 G.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. Imports of Where from. i i 1 in 4> '5b 03 13 5 s^ 8 > B a js C e« ^ O. 1 O c 1 1 1— < to 1^ c o ^ lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Millions. -Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. Ratio. 1809 928 J ^ iV - A aV 1810 132| § J 4 A" - * 1811 91J 1 ^ i yd" - - 1812 63 i J I JL - - A 1813 51 ^ ^6 jy - - 3j^ 1814 73§ 1 f $ j3j - - jV 1815 96| \y J A - - »^ 1816 97^ U J T4 FJ - - A 1817 126i 1 4 A — - t': 1818 174 i T(J T2 — - 1819 137J 4 ^ A — - • 1820 U7i f I A tV 5^0 } 1 1821 1822 126J 141J 5 J S ¥ ITT 1823 183J i ^ ■h It 1824 1474 } 6" 4 tV 1 ^ 1825 244J T ■^ ? tV 1 t 1826 170J 1 i 1 \i 1 1827 264J f 1 i B" T6 T3 ^ 1828 222f _1 4 3 YT tV 1829 218^ 1 If* J To i 1830 259| 1 to f + «o'* ^ CT A YS 1831 280 f lo 1 * A TS 1832 270§ 1 tV - t'o 1 1833 288 1 iV - 1 I- 1834 320^ [303] tft'i tV ^ J lils * 1835 , 361^ [303i] [1] [2J «s* 1 i [4] 54 [1.] For the early imports of cotton into England, see more in Baines, 346 ; McCuUoch, 438 ; and Seyb. Stat. 92, note. In 1787 the imports set down as from Turkey and Egypt, were entirely from the former, Smyrna, Greece, &c. and none from the last until 1820 and 1823, and since that mostly from Egypt. The " other places" were chiefly French and Spanish colonies in 1787 ; but include India and Turkey where those columns are blank. See a table in Smithers' History, page 146. The early imports of raw cotton, after the manufacture increased much in England, were from the West Indies, Surinam, and isle of Bourbon. Smithers' History of Liverpool, 123. Those from Brazil, &c. in 1824. See Smithers, page 454. [2.] The proportions are given from the imports into Liver- pool alone ; but will not vary much for the whole kingdom. They are stated in the present form to aid in the comparison, at different periods in the same, and different countries. The fractions are very near the true proportion, but occasionally are the next highest or lowest to the exact sum, for convenience in calculation, as is the case in fractions often in all these tables. See Marshall, page 110; Smithers, 147. [3.] The whole imports into England, Scotland, and Ireland, are included in the above column ; as some of the writers dis- criminate between those into England alone, and some do not. See Porter's official tables, 125 ; McCulloch, 439. See a table in Smithers, page 146 ; making the imports into Ireland one to two millions of pounds yearly^ after from 1791 to 1817. In Baines, the quantities often differ a few millions, and are higher in most cases. See also Edinburgh Review, page 19, 1827. The usual quantity imported into Ireland and Scotland, as contradis- tinguished from England, has been, during the last ten years, about 10 to 15 millions of pounds per annum, it is believed. In 1834, it was about 20 millions of pounds ; in 1835, it was about 18 millions of pounds. Most of that used in Ireland is believed to be re-exported from England, or included in English imports ; and no separate tables have been kept of Irish imports since 1825, when those of cotton exceeded 6f millions of pounds. Baines's History, page 430. The largest amounts for 1834 and 1835 are taken from the Liverpool reports of January, 1836 ; and the smaller ones, in the second lines, from other sources of not so recent date. 55 [4.] Most of the above ratios from India, between 1793 and 1809, correspond with 1 Milbourne's Orient. Com. page 281, and may differ some from the tables as to Liverpool imports alone. [5.] The imports from the United States in 1792, 1793, &e. were said to be chiefly through the British West Indies. Smith- ers, 157. Our ratio, it will be seen by the sums in the second line for 1834 and 1835, will vary as the English accounts differ concerning the whole actual or estimated amount of her yearly imports. 56 H.— COTTON— RAW. Imports of. Where from. Im ports r. «'2 >» 3 S '6 ^ % ' £1, c t CA ^ xi CO „ (U m 4J 01 2 *-> (U >^1« 4) , ■s . O C 2 ft* o G •-< 5 en -0 0) •£ Is T3 ^ 1^ Into Saxon sia, Trie Russia. N en 1 en 1 .s '.2 o 4-> CO o 5 to tm 1 lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Mill»s. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mijl's. Mill's. 1789 1790 - - - - - - - - 97,357 Mill's. 1791 _ _ _ ^ _ „ _ _ i 1792 _ - _ _ _ _ . _ h 179S - - _ - _ _ _ _ 2| 1794 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2I 1795 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 1796 _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ 4i 1797 _ _ _ _ _ _ ^ _ Si 1798 ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 3| 1799 - « _ _ _ «. _ _ 3i 1800 _ ~ - _ _ „ _ 4* 1801 - i - - - _ _ _ 4i 1802 - 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ 3A 1803 _ 4 _ _ _ n • _ 3 1804 _ 6 _ _ _ _ _ 3i 1805 - ^ - - - _ • _ _ 2i 1806 21 7-10 7 - _ _ „ _ 25 2i 1807 _ 6 _ _ _ „ _ _ 3| 4i 1808 - 2 - - - - - - 1809 - _ - _ _ _ _ _ I 1810 >5 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ t 1811 ^ _ „ _ _ _ ^ _ 1 1812 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 1813 _ 10* - _ _ _ ^ _ ll 1814 _ 11 _ _ ™. _ _ _ 1815 _ 20 _ _ _ _ _ T 1816 _ 18 «. _ _ _ 3 1817 - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1818 - ~ - - _ _ _ ll' 1819 _ - _ _ _ _ _ 1820 44^ - _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 1821 47^ 27i - _ _ 6 _ _ 1 * 1822 61 2H _ « _ „ _ _ 1823 51 25 - - - - - - 57 H.— COTTON— RAW— Continued, Imports of. Where from. Imports < 3f. i ^^ Oh . c et 01 ».• ♦- 0) _ OJ ^ i I 1 ^1 Saxony, , Trieste issia. 0) N I i Is ll 2 ^ 2^ 5-i« 2 o o o c t3 U ffl C NX C c c i 1 lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. 1824 75i 40^ - - ~ - _ _ ^ 1825 6U 30 _ . "• - _ ^ 1 1826 96 62i _ » _ « 30? i 1827 sr 70h _ . _ - _ - j 1828 61^ 53i - - - - - - 1829 72i 67^ _ - - - - 1830 84| to 91 75 6 7 38 17i^ - _ X 1831 65^ to 61 46 to 50 7i H 39 18 4-5 - 38 to 68 i 1832 77 to 85 73 to 77^ 8i 2i 48 m - 60 i 1833 91 761 36 19 _ - ji 1834 83 to 94^ 78 to 81| 7 4 - 19i 2 45 ? i 1835 94i 91 _ — — _ - — ll [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [ 1 .] The value of the imports of raw cotton into each country, it has not been deemed necessary to give in detail, as the quan- tity, and the prices in the United States and Liverpool, with those in India, and some other places occasionally, are presented, and will enable any person easily to make a computation of the whole value of the imports into any particular country. [2.] The imports into any country during any particular year, sometimes fall short of the actual consumption in that year, if a large stock, from any particular cause, be on hand at the begin- ning, or a very small stock at the end of the year. The whole amount imported into any place, and the amount from each coun- try, differ a little occasionally, by mistakes in copying, or mis- prints probably. For imports of 1820 and 1821, into France, see Quarterly Review, (1824-5.) For those of 1834, see ta- bles of French Com, for '34 ; and for 1810, Edinburgh Review 8 58 page 61 , ( 1829,) which states those for 1828-9, at 80 or 90 mil^ lions of pounds; for 1806, see London Encyclop. article " Cot- ton." Baines, 515. From 1822 to 1832, see a table in McCul- loch's Diet., page 448, which is given below in bags. In 1819, in vol. 3, Diet, of Com. and Finance for Spain, page 244, the value of imports of raw cotton is estimated at only $2,000,000, into France, but it must be too low. Those for 1833, and the smallest for 1834 and for 1835, are from manuscript. Annexed are the quantities in bales, and the stocks on hand each year, from 1822 to 1835, inclusive, from another and similar source, as to the three last years ; the previous ones are from McCulloch. See table T, note [2,] as to stocks on hand in England. Statement of the general imports and stocks of cotton in France, in 1835, compared tvith those of the thirteen preceding years. Years. Imports. stocks, Dec. I 1822 baks 205,861 45,545 1823 (( 169,845 40,078 1824 u 251,074 47,194 1825 u 204,572 35,306 1826 li 320,174 74,479 1827 u 290,617 85,403 1828 a 206,132 51,812 1829 u 242,230 29,292 1830 u 282,752 61,260 1831 a 218,393 35,810 1832 u 259,159 22,506 1833 a 305,633 61,753 1834 u 274,307 24,407 1835 U c en ii S i . ;5 America and exico includ- ng: Brazil. I 1 2 2i i V U^ i.J o oi^-" O cc &i H s " <« ^ lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. MillV Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. irso 13 i in the three countries. 1784 lU 1789 1790 •30i - 5 1791 28 10 H 285 50 15 52 2 2 60 1792 33i 1793 171 1794 23 1795 25 1796 31 1797 22i 1798 31 18 1799 42 m 1800 51 6* 8 [A.] 1801 53^ 11 i 1510 9 280 45 22 50 3 5 50 1802 56i 1803 5H 15# ' _ _ _ _ ^ 3 1804 663 m 1805 58f 18^ lU*] 1806 57i 211 1807 7n 1808 41i 1809 87^ 1810 126 25 16 [3i] 1811 89^ 23 17 270 48 25 48 5 6 50 1812 59^ 21 1813 1814 52^ 1815 92 - 3U 1816 86^ 1817 116^ o0oi-26 1818 172 \ 1819 132| 1820 142 44 1821 114 47 50 260 42 50 45 R 7 45 1822 120^ 61 ' 1823 177 50i 65 I.— COTTONS-RAW— Continued. Quantity consumed and manufactured in — . Vnh c4 c t— 1 caai nclu zil. K 9. ns CO c . r— ? >> XO Englan 1 no S. Ame Mexico ing-Bi 1 1 i i lbs. Mill's. lbs. Mill's. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Milt's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. Mill's. 1824 131 75 _ _ - _ _ ^ 7 -,i- 1825- 206 60 »o 1826 150i 96 1827 250^ 87 1828 208i 61 60 1829 190| 7U 1830 255 874 . 1831 257 65^ 77^ 1832 260 78 1833 284i 87 80to85 242 35 36 42 10 20 40 1834 297 80 1835 320i - 100 [10] [9 [12] [1] [2] [3] 14] [11] [8] [S] [7] [6] [1.] It is important to bear in mind that this table does not showthe consumption of manufactured cotton, but only the con- sumption and manufacture of cotton in its raiv state ; hence it includes the quantity of raw cotton raised in any country and not exported, with the additional quantity imported and not re-ex- ported, allowing the quantities on hand at the commencement and termination of each year to be similar. Most of the quanti- ties include what is used in all ways, and made in families as ^ell as in manufactories. It also includes what is consumed in a raw state, which is calculated to be, in England, quite r^th. The whole consumption in Europe, in 1830, was about 387 mil- lions of pounds, (Pitk. Stat., 484;) or less iLan the present ex- ports of the United States. The consumption in manufactures, of raw cotton in all Europe, in 1803, was estimated at only 60 millions of pounds, Dictionary of Spanish Commerce ; and in London Encyclopedia, article " Cotton," computed at only 18 millions of pounds in all Europe, except England and France. Till 1773, the warp in the web of what was called cotton cloth 64 in Eng;land, was linen. McCulloch, 438. (See table A, note 9.) See below, note [12.] [2.] The above quantities for England are generally taken from Marshall's tables, which are copied and approved by Pit- kin. But Porter, in his tables, makes the quantity from 1820 to 1832, larger by 5 to 10 millions of pounds per annum. Part of the difference may arise from including Ireland, and part by sometimes looking only to the imports, and deducting the quan- tity re-exported ; when, in fact, the quantity on hand at the be- ginning and end of the year, or the actual quantity entered for home consumption, was essentially different. About 10 to 20 millions of pounds yearly, or often as little as A to /bth of what is imported is re-exported from England. See Baines, 347, and, in Marshall and Pitkin's schedules of it. An estimate for 1830, made in France, was only 241 millions of pounds; and in Cham- ber of Peers for 1834, was 320 millions of pounds; and by 1 Smith's Com. Dig., page 16, for 1832, was 288 millions of pounds ; while the Chancellor of the Exchequer in England, in his late speech, states the quantity for home consumption in 1834 was 320 millions of pounds, and in 1835, 320i millions of pounds. But by the annual Liverpool report in February, 1836, and other sources, the consumption in 1835 is estimated higher than 1834 by 13^ millions of pounds. Others put 1834 at 303 millions of pounds, and 1835 at 330 millions. In the Edinburgh Review, page 433, (1832,) a table is given from Freeman and Cook's Com. of Great Britain, from 1822 to 1831, inclusive, which is as follows: 1822, 144 A millions of pounds; 1823, 147, \; 1824, 174A; 1825, 169 A; 1826, 164f; 1827, 201 A; 1828, 217f; 1829, 221f ; 1830, 242 ; 1831, 257^. The consumption in Scot- land separately, and in part from English imports, exceeded, in 1835, 32 millions of pounds. Since 1823, when changes occurred in the duties, Ireland has made considerable cotton cloth : in 1825, quite 62 millions of yards. But it was chiefly from yarn spun in England, (McCulloch, 444,) or from raw cotton export- ed there from England; which, from 1821 to 1825, inclusive, was from I3 to 22 millions of pounds per annum. See tables on this in Smithers, 150 and 151. London Encyclopedia, article " Cotton." In same article see a table on imports and consump- tion, and stock on hand, same years: at the close of 1823, in England, it was 92 millions of pounds. See Liverpool annual report, where the stock on hand at the close of 1834 was 591 millions of pounds, and 1835 was 73^ millions of pounds. In 1833 it was about 60 millions of pounds, and had diminished 65 gradually since 1836, when it was 100 millions of pounds. (Baines, page 318.) See table H, note 2. [3.] See on France, Baines, page 525. But the quantity of imports is generally higher than consumption by 5 or 6 millions of pounds, (unless the stock on hand is very large, when the last is sometimes highest ; ) as, of late years especially, France re- exports to the neighboring countries, by land, 8 or 9 millions of pounds per annum, occasionally. ( French Tables of Commerce, page 156, for 1832-'3.) About i^o of these re-exports are to Switzerland, and the rest to Sardinia, Genoa, &c. As far back as 1789 France used but little cotton, except in household man- ufactures. Quar. Rev., (1824-'5,) page 394. For 1815, see Baines, page 515, and for 1806, see London Encyclopedia, arti- cle " Cotton." In the French Chamber of Peers it was testified, that the consumption in 1834 was 80 millions of pounds. In the Edinburgh Review, page 432, (1832,) is a table of raw cotton consumed yearly in France, from 1822 to 1831, in which the quantity is different from 1 to 10 or 12 millions in different years, some less and some more, e. g. Years. 1822 - 1823 - 1824 - 1825 - 1826 - M. lbs. Years. 64^ 1827 51f 1828 KSh 1829 65 1830 84^ 1831 M. lbs. - 84 - 72 - 79^ - 75i - 73A Those in the table from 1798 to 1*806, and 1817, are from Sup. to Ency. Brit. " Cotton." See table K, into what articles the cotton is made, comparative prices, &c. • [4.] The large estimates for 1790, 1800, and 1805, in the United States, were made by myself, and the small ones, with that for 1815, are from a report of a committee of the^ House of Representatives, February 13, 1816. That for 1810 is from Seybert's Statistics, page 92, and includes what cotton was used in household manufactures, as do my own. Mr. Gallatin made a similar one for 1810. Pitkin, 487. Some estimates of earlier date probably did not include what was used in dwelling-houses. Before 1825 we consumed often 2 millions of pounds a year, of raw cotton grown abroad, ( Seyb. 257 and 92;) an(J one-four- teenth of the imports and crop in the United States and England, is used or consumed in its raw state without being made into 9 66 either yarn or cloth. Table H. In Coxe's report on Manufac- tures for 1810, he gives the manufactures of cotton in families at five millions of dollars value, and number of yards 16^ millions ; which, at 50 cents, the worth of coarse cloth to each pound of cotton in it, would make 8 or 10 millions of pounds used. Coxe reports a few large manufactories, but without any data to show their consumption of raw cotton; but see table L, spindles, note. They probably used 6 to 8 millions of pounds more. In the French Chamber of Peers the estimate was only 36 millions of pounds consumed in the United States in 1834, (see below.) The whole manufacture of cotton in the United States must be as large as the estimate, though beyond the usual computation, if we look to the number of spindles, and to the great household manufacture of it in the families of the South and West, for all purposes. Again, it is to be deduced from the fact, that in the great cheapness and healthfulness of cotton manufactures, our popula- tion consume each five or six dollars worth of them yearly, for clothing, bedding, sails, &c. which, at a census of 14 millions, would be from 70 to 84 millions of dollars in value. In England the consumption is computed to be only a fraction less than that, and in France it is $4 dollars per head. In Belgium, Alexander computes it at 20 francs, or a little over g3f per head. As we import from England, France, and Germany, about 7 millions of dollars of cotton manufactures more than we export, and those articles are finer than our own, it is a fair estimate, that we man- ufacture in this country, from 50 to 70 millions of dollars worth of cotton manufactures ; which, at two pounds of raw cotton or near it per dollar of manufactured cloth, on an average, would, in all, equal about 100 millions of pounds or more of raw cotton manufactured here. Of this, about 5 to 20 millions of dollars worth are made in domestic form ; and 45 to 50 millions of dollars in factories, in A. D. 1835. In 1831, the convention in New York estimated that only 26 millions of dollars worth of yarn and cloth were made in manufac- tories ; and in 1834, Pitkin, page 484, estimated all manufactures of cotton in the United Statesat40millionsof dollars value yearly. This would require in 1831, as in the table, about 77 millions of pounds of raw cotton, as estimated in the convention at New York, for manufactories in 12 States. See McCulloch, 448, who supposes it was a committee of Congress. As our population is increasing from 1830 to 1840 at the rate of nearly 4 per cent, or quite 400,000 persons per annum, and as 10 to 12 pounds of raw cotton are required per head, and our 67 imports of cotton manufactures do not increase, we must add yearly to our manufactures about 4 to 5 millions more of raw cotton. This would make an addition from the estimate in 1830, so that the whole consumption would, in 1835, equal 100 millions of pounds of raw cotton. An intelligent merchant and manufac- turer of the North thinks the consumption now is 106 millions of pounds. The quantity manufactured here in 1817 is estimated by Reuss, in his tables on American trade, at only 31 millions of pounds, and in 1828 at 36 millions of pounds ; but they must be too low, as are the usual estimates for the last three or four years, at only 80 and 85 millions of pounds, or they must include only what was worked up in factories, and the former estimate not all of that. On the great consumption of cotton in household manu- factures in the United States, and the opinion entertained in 1791 on the importance and expectationsof success in the estab- lishment of manufactures by machinery, and its influence on the growth of cotton in the United States, see more in Hamilton's report, A. D. 1791. [5.] See Urquhart on Turkey, page 150 and 179, that two pounds per head is manufactured there ; and also that 50 millions of dollars worth of muslins alone were yearly consumed there and in Africa. There were not all, however, of domestic man- ufacture, it is presumed. In Egypt it has been estimated that from 8 to 9 millions of pounds of the crop of 1835 will be consumed in that country. See table A, note 9. [6.] This statement for Russia in 1824 is from Porter's tables, 545 ; see Baines, 406. In the southwestern parts of Russia, bor- dering on Germany, manufactories and machinery have been con- siderably introduced, and yarn from England is woven there, as in India and elsewhere, as well as raw cotton, imported chiefly from the United States, either direct or through the ports on the Baltic. See exports of raw cotton, table F, note. A few others have been established southeast of Moscow. See London En- cyclop, article " Cotton," and one cotton mill is in operation in St. Petersburg. [7.] Used up mostly into calicoes, tapes, and galloons. Spain in 1803. 1 Dictionary of Spanish Commerce, 63; 3 do. 148; made 5,640,810 yards of cotton cloth, 51,900 pair of cotton stockings, and 2,686,142 yards of tape. 68 [8.] In Puebla in Mexico, in 1803, were manufactured 1 2 mil- lions of pounds of raw cotton. (4 Dictionary of Spanish Com- merce, page 178.) In Campeachy the manufactures are most extensive. 2 History of Colombia. [9.] Among the other places is Switzerland, which, in 1831, consujned near 19 millions of pounds of raw cotton. Baines, 526 ; see imports. That country began to use machinery for cotton in 1798, but the progress has been slow, and the estab- lishments are small, though active. London Encyclop. article "cotton." Muslins have been made there, it is said, a century and a half. But beside England and France, the cotton spun in the rest of Europe in 1823 was estimated at only 18 millions of pounds. London Encyclop. article " cotton." See table K, note. In 1834, it was estimated by Mr. Alexander, that Belgium con- sumed 121 millions of pounds of raw cotton. See table, exports of manufactures and notes. [10.] The statements for 1833, 1821, 1811, 1801, and 1791, are generally computations made from other data as to the crops in the different countries named, which were grown and not ex- ported, and the qauntities of raw cotton imported into each : be- yond this, they are rather conjectures than estimates, founded on very satisfactory facts. [11.] The quantities computed to be manufactured in India and China are very large ; but, perhaps, they are below rather than above the truth. See supplement to Ency. Brit, article " Cotton," and tables A and F on growth of cotton and exports. In the In- dian islands the most of their raw cotton is made up, though a little is exported to China. 3 Crawford's History, 350. [12.] A table is annexed of the consumption of raw cotton in all Europe, from 1831 to 1835, inclusive, compiled by Lambert & Co. of Liverpool, and distinguishing the estimated portion of it from this country. Consumption of cotton in Europe^ reduced to hales of SOO pounds, 1831, - bags 1,272,176, - of which 928,520 American 1832, - " 1,372,079, - " 1,015,280 " 1833, - " 1,409,786, - " 1,066,240 " 1834, - " 1,502,559, - " 1,205,043 " 1835, - " 1,581,501, - " 1,254,586 (( 70 K. COTTON— MANUFACTURES OF. Whole value of, yearly. Capital employed in manufactur- ing by machinery. [6] In In In In In , In England. France. U. States. England. France. U. States. c« >i Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Millions. Millions Millions. Millions. Millions Millions. 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 > ' 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 - 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 95.? _ 24 _ 40 1816 1817 - 36 71 K.__COrrON— MANUFA.CTURES OF— Continued. Whole value of, yearly. Capital employed in manufactur- ing by machinery. [6] In In In In In In England. France. U. States. England. France. U. States. t 1 Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Dollars. Millions. Millions. Millions. Millions. Millions. Millions. 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 72 1823 155 1824 148 to 190 1825 1826 1827 171 — — 309.^ 1828 — 40 1829 1830 - - I (40) \ 325.^ - 40for62 1831 _ _ 216 1832 144 54 — 160 _ 44 1 1833 • ( 178 ) ni49)$ - - ( 360 ) } I 168^ 115 1834 160i 62 — 250 1835 — — 45 to 50 185 — 80 [4] [5] [2] [3] [7] [10] [8] [9] [5] [1.] The values in England, in the tables, are taken, for 1834, from McCulloch and Aiken, Edin. Rev. 472, ( 1835,) and Baines, 412; for 1833, in 1st line, from Pebrer on Eng. page 314; for 2d line, for 1827, from Edin. Rev. page 22, (1827.) The first edition of McCulloch agreed with Pebrer, but in the second edition he lowered the amount. Baines, 398, and note. That for 1823 was by Mr. Huskisson. Baines, 399. That for 1824 is from Supplement to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton." In McCulloch's Dict'y of Com. and Baines, 406, and Pitkin, 486, it is computed that the present value of the cotton manu- facture equals about twice the amount of it exported. It is said that only 37 per cent, is consumed of what is made. Aiken's Lectures. See exports. In 1766, England made about three times as much as she exported of cotton goods, though Edin. Rev. page 166, (1830,) says she then made only one million oi dollars worth. Do. page 18, (1827.) The estimate for 1815 is in Edinb. Encyclop. art. " Cotton." The items for computing the value of the annual manufacture, are given in Edin. Rev. (1827,) page 22, and in Edin. Rev. page 472, (1835,) and in Baines, 412. In Scotland alone, it is said the manufacture of cotton, in 1835, equalled in value IH millions of dollars; but, in 1832, it was estimated by Kennedy at 12^, though prices higher; and in Ire- land at 1^ millions of dollars. Baines, 409, thinks the exports are nearly that before named from Scotland, and the manufac- ture double. Page 410. [2.] The values in France for 1817 are too high, and that for 1828 too low, it is believed, but were extracted, the first from 2 Chaptal on French Industry, page 150, and Sup. to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton," and the last from some author not remembered. Estimated at 111 millions of dollars by Mimerel, but too high. Baines, 521. Those for 1832 and '34, are estimates made on the number of spindles, &c. [3.] The value for 1830, in the United States, is from N. Y. Conven. and includes but 12 States, and no household goods, otherwise it would equal 40 millions. Pitkin, 483. The whole value, in 1835, is my estimate from the quantity of cotton worked up, &c. Pitkin, 482. The value for 1815 is by a Committee of Congress, and is con- fined to goods made in factories. The whole value of cotton, woollen, and flax' manufactures, in 1810, was coitiputed at only 40 millions of dollars, the value of cotton alone in 1830. [4.] The value of manufactured cotton^, when the quantity of raw cotton in them is the same, differs greatly according to dif- ferent periods of time in the same country, and according to the quality of the raw material, and the machinery used, and the skill employed. See table M, note [2.] IS Thus, in England, in 20 years after Arkwriglit's invention in spinning, manufactured cottons fell nearly eight-ninths of their former price. Every ten years since, some have computed their fall in price as equal to 50 per cent. In the American Encyclo- pedia, article " Cotton," it is said that, from 1815 to 1829, the coarse cloths fell two-thirds. See in Pebrer's views of England, page 343, a table showing the fall there at different periods. See table M, note [3,] on official and real prices at different periods. In 1810, yarn, on an average, was worth $1 125 per pound. Report by Gallatin. See prices of other articles in his report. In 1814, it was estimated under ^1 per pound by Cox. In 1832 it was said that the cost of making most species of yarn had been reduced, since 1812, about a half, and that of weaving by power looms, &c., still more. See Edin. Rev. 427, (1832,) a list of prices. Some of the differences as to the whole value of manufactured goods, spring from not adverting to all the fall in prices, though the yarn and cloth have increased in quantity. See a table of reduction in prices of spinning. In 1786 it cost 105. per pound of No. 100, in 1824 only 8c?. or only 16 cents in- stead of 240 cents. Supplement to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton." [5.] Tlie best cotton goods are supposed to be made in Swit- zerland, where the skill and machinery are good, and the climate congenial. But the raw material being carried so far by land is expensive, and the manufacturer cannot compete with England, though 20 per cent, cheaper than in France. Baines, 524. In France many fine goods are made by skill and experience ; but the machinery is poorer, and costs more. Edinb. Rev. page 61, (1829.) Hence the prices in those two countries of the cloth made from a pound of raw cotton, exceed on an average, 50 cents, while in England they are about 50 cents, and in the United States are now somewhat less. In 1806 the cotton was made chiefly into velveteens, nankeens, crapes, muslins, &c. See at length London Encyclopedia, article " Cotton." But in 1810 our cotton- cloths made in houses and manufac- tories, on an average, were estimated at 33 cents^^er yard in Coxe's tables, page 10. The prices are now Itjwfei*, notwith- standing the introduction so extensively of finer cloths and of printing calicoes. We make more coarse and substantial cloths of cotton now than England, and they can be afforded cheaper by two or three cents per yard. They are in greater demand abroad. Ameri- can Quarterly Review, (1834,) page 256. 3 Parliamentary re- ports, (1833,) page 332. We put more staple into them, the 10 74 raw material being cheaper here. But the English laces, being made chiefly of Sea-island cotton, with a very little silk, enhance the value of each pound to over ^5 ; and the whole manufac- ture of it equals nine millions of dollars per annum, ( McCuI- loch, page 743,) and 30f millions of square yards. The coarse India cottons are made of the worst materials and less smooth, being chiefly spun by hand, and the raw material poorer. Baines. But the thread so spun is softer and the cloth more durable. Report on aff*airs of India, (1832,) appendix, page 310. But the power to spin a fine thread there has been carried almost as far as in England. See table L, note [5.] ON CAPITAL. [6.] Capital invested is computed on very different principles and data by different persons, and the price of machinery has of late fallen much per spindle. See notes on spindles. In the computation of capital in manufacturing cotton, there is gene- rally included only what is in factories. [7.] The real capital has doubtless increased in England since 1827, though in the table there is an apparent diminution. That and other differences often arise from the estimates being made by different persons, and on data somewhat unlike, as well as from changes in the value of machinery, and in its increase. The computation for 1827 is by the Edinburgh Review, page 22, 1827 ; that for 1830 is by some writer not noted ; that for 1831 in 1st edition of McCulloch's dictionary, Pitk. Stat. 486, for 1833, by Pebrer, page 315, in 1st line, and in 2d line by Baines, 415, and Edin. Rev. page 472, (1835,) and 2d edition of McCulloch; and for 1834 by Aiken, who places buildings and machinery, or the fixed capital at only about half the value of that in Edin. Rev. (1827) page 22, or at about 97 millions of dollars instead of 181 millions. The ratio adopted for 1827 was — for 1824 was — Capital in buying raw material £9 millions, £4 millions Capital in paying wages - 19 " 10 " Capital in mills, machinery, looms, shops, &c. - 37 " 20 " £65 " £34 So Kennedy in Baines, 413, differs again, making fixed capi- tal only about 15 million pounds, &c. The present value of 75 capital invested in buildings, water privileges, and machinery, is often less than their original cost, and is another source of difference. [8.] The capital in 1815, for the United States, is computed by a committee of Congress, and is not any too high. Report, February 13, 1816. That in 1830 is by the New York conven- tion, and is correct according to the number of spindles compared with England and her capital, and is in fact at 40 million dollars for fixtures alone, and about 22 million dollars for the rest. Not too high. That for 1832 is from Reuss on American Trade, page 274. The whole capital here, in proportion to each spin- dle, is more for mills and machinery together than in England, and more for wages. Here is sometimes higher for additional machinery and workmen for finer kinds of manufacture. The average value of her capital to each spindle, as computed by me for 1835, would be about ^20 to each; which would, on the same data, make our capital then equal to ^35 per spindle. But in the New York convention, in 1830, are given the details of their estimates, and the buildings and machinery alone cost here, on their computation, near 55^35 per spindle, and it requires to pay wages, furnish raw cotton and other materials, superintend- ence, &c. quite ^11 more per spindle, making the whole ^46 each, or now near 80 million dollars capital. In 1810, it was estimated that ^60 per spindle was necessary. See Coxe and Gallatin. It is now $60 in some factories at Lowell. This agrees nearly with the older computations in England ; and as goods become finer, and machinery still cheaper in the United States, the approximation will be still closer. See table L, note. But another striking cause of difference arises from the kind of goods made here compared with England, requiring there less capital for machinery, looms, &c. Besides, that the spindles there are cheaper, and less capital is needed for work- men, when the number of spindles is the same, to tend power looms, color and stamp dies, &c. in proportion, than in the United States. Because there, in 1833, only a little over one-half of the cotton spun was made into cloth in the factories, or only 76 J millions of pounds out of 145 millions of pounds. The rest was sold or exported as yarn and thread. See Baines, 607. And in another estimate, over one-half the exports are in yarn. See table M, note [1]. Baines, 409. While, in 1830 in the United States, the computation of yarn sold, compared with cloth made, was not one-tenth of the weight. In 1810 it exceeded one-half. Gallatin. Another cause of the difference is, pehraps, that much 76 of the fine weaving of ginghams, muslins, and mixed cloths there is done in hand looms not belonging to the factories. See Baines, 418. In the computation before stated, of the capital per spindle for 1830, in the United States, it may be useful to exhibit it in another form. According to Pitk. page 482. The capital in mills atid fixtures was - - $40i^o millions. Do. in other machinery, about - 4 r^o " Capital in mills and machinerj'' - - - $45 " juWhich, at li millions of spindles, is about $35 to each. Capital floating or circulating, in paying wages, was near - $12 millions. Capital circulating in buying stock, &c. -* Q li $14 About $11 more per spindle, or $46 for every spindle. The valuation placed on machinery should now be less, though most of that in use cost high. See spindles. The English pro- portion now is about $12 capital per spindle invested in mills, machinery, and all fixtures connected, or not much over one- third the proportion here. But it is about $8 to each spindle in the floating capital for w^ages, stock, &c. ; or over two-thirds the proportion here. More of their fine spinning is also done on the mule spindle, which costs but little over half what the throstle spindle does, and which last has been equally as much used here as the other, and of late years, it is believed, far more than the other. In 1831, in England, in Lancashire, the number of mule spindles was more than 12 times that of the throstle. Baines, 209 — note. Her capital in mills and machinery alone, is said not to exceed $4.16 to each spindle. See Baines, 414 and 368. But that must exclude water privileges and steam engines, prob- ably, and all looms, out-houses, shops, &c. and refer chiefly to the mule spindle. In 1824 it was considered in England that we employed too many persons and too much capital per spindle. Sup. to Ency- clop. Brit. art. " Cotton." [9,.] The advantages of different countries for the cotton man- ufacture, depend, in a great measure, on their natural condition 77 — long habits and laws. England is superior to most in the abundance and cheapness of iron for machinery ; in coal for warming buildings and moving steam power ; in suitable climate ; ingenuity, experience, and skill of mechanics from great division of labor, &c. ; in greater commerce to find best markets ; capital at low interest, and wages not high ; and property secure. But taxes there and raw material are high, and living is more ex- pensive than in some other places. Edinb. Rev. (1835) page 466. McCuUoch, 446, A-^reat increase is supposed to have taken place the past year in erecting cotton factories in England. The United States^ by numerous and cheap water falls, have a good substitute for steam, and will^ soon have coal as low for warming ; have equal ingenuity, and probably now superior merit in machinery ; but iron and coal are dearer, and raw ma- terial and living both lower, and property as secure ; wages and capital higher; much less taxation; and a protective tariff. It is sain in Amer. Encyclop. art. " Cotton," that the introduction of the power loom in 1815, has given great permanency and pros- perity to our cotton establishments. See table L, notes to spindles, and notes above, in this table, for something more on England and United States. As to France, Switzerland, India, &c. it is not necessary nor convenient here to enter into details beyond what is stated in other parts of these notes. But it may deserve notice, that the increase in the use of raw cotton has been at a much more rapid rate in England than in France. Edin. Rev. (1832) page 433. See Baines, 525 and '6, and 515, on these points. See table I — note. See below, note [11.] The value of cotton manufactures in England is, comparatively, equal to two-thirds of all her public revenue, and to nearly all her exports of other articles. Table M, note 3. In 1797, the cotton manufacture, it is said in Seybert, page 92, took the lead of any other in England. But in 1816 she consumed no more raw cotton than the United States do now. [10.] The capital of France invested in cotton manufactures, is given for only one year, and computed at a medium between J^20 per spindle, as in England, and ^46 per spindle in the United States. As I have no French estimates on this subject beyond the data given in Baines and other authors, as to the number of spindles merely, and their cost at different periods, the computation has not been extended to other years. Baines, 517 and 518, gives estimates showing that France requires 28 per c^t. more capital than England to produce the same manu- 78 factures, according to some persons, and according to others 75 per cent. But Doctor Bowring estimates the difference at about 30 to 40 per cent. Baines, 520. [11.] The subject of wages in the different kinds of manufac- ture, and in different countries, has not been discussed in detail. But see on it Wade's Hist, of Mid'g Classes, 570 to 576. It may be interesting to many to know that the average wages in 1832, in the United States, of all employed in a cotton factory, were about 14s. llrf. sterling per week; in England, about 10*., sometimes 12*.; in France, only 5s. Qd.; in Switzerland, 4s. 5d. ; in Austria, 3s. 9c?. ; in Saxony, 3s. Qd. ; and in India from Is. to 2s. per week. Ditto, page 576, and Westminster Review for April, 1833. In Niles's Register, November, 1817, page 156, it is said to be only two cents per day in India ; but that is probably too low. 80 L. COTTON— MANUFACTORIES OF. Persons employed, connected with fac- Spindles employed in factories— num- tories chiefly— number of. ber of. ri a s -2 «3 c c c ^ 00 S 00 -S . To 'V query. Millions. 1812 - - - 4i? _ 1 1813 - - - query. 1814 - - - 122,646 1815 - 100,000 - - 130,000 1816 - - - 61 1817 - - - 61 1818 1819 - - - - lA- 1820 - - - - 220,000 1821 - - - - 230,000 81 L.— COTTON— MANUFACTORIES OF— Continued. Persons employed, connected with fac- Spindles . employed in factories— num- tories chiefly — number of. ber jf. S c 1 ^ O) es en ba T3 o N ^ ? c ■M "5 U 3 *£ 1822 427,000 1823 1824 - - - 6 ? _ - 259,200 1825 - - - query. 800,000 1826 1827 1 705,100 to 1,000,000 . Millions. 1828 - - - - Utol 1829 _ - - 7 1833 - \ 179,000 I 1 175,146 S - ~ li 1831 - 200,000 200,000 7jt to 8i 1832 1,200,000 - - - - 3i 1833 1,500,000 1834 _ - 600,000 9^ 1835 - - _ - 1^ [1] [4] [3] [5] [6] [9] m [8] [2] [11] [12] [10] [1.] The early computations of the number of persons em- ployed are very loose and contradictory. That for 1750, is from Smithers' History of Liverpool, page 154; that for 1760 and 1770, by Edinburgh Review (1827;) for 1784, by Smith, and Baines, 218. The more recent estimates for 1809, are too high, and are by Seyb. page 92 ; and for 1827, in second line, are from Edin. Rev. page 13, (1827,) and page 427, (1835;) and IVIcCulloch, 443; and Baines, 431. The last make the actual laborers only 900,000. As the cloth made is finer, more per- sons are required to a given number of spindles. So if it is stamped or printed (see below.) It is computed that, in ten years after machinery was introduced into the manufacture of cotton, the number of persons employed in it was still augment- ed tenfold ; some have said forty times, which is too high. But if no machinery had been used in 1826, beyond what was used 11 82 in 1760, it would have required from 42 to 63 millions of per- sons to perform what was then done in the cotton manufacture. ( Quar. Review, 1 826, and Browning's Great Britain, pages 232. ) They say one man now' equals by machinery 120 in A. D. 1780, or 200 according to Kennedy, cited in Edinburgh Review, page 18, (1827;) Smithers, 127; or, in 1815, one equals from 40 to 60. Edinburgh Encyclop. " Cotton." In 1833, Pebrer, page 314, estimates that 80 millions of persons would be needed in the cotton manufactories without machinery. See on some of above, London Encyclopedia, article "cotton," printed 1829, and in Edinburgh Encyclopedia, article cotton, (1815,) where the number of persons employed is estimated at one million ; but too high. See below, note [11.] [2.] In Spain, in 1803, it was computed that 6,792 persons were employed in the manufacture of cotton goods, 1 Dictiona- ry of Spanish Com. 65; and, in Switzerland, in 1831, about 28,000 persons. West. Rev. for April, 1833. [3.] The number in France, for 1834, is from Baines, page 521 . Many there engage* in agriculture a part of the year, as in India. The number for 1806, is from data in London Encyclo- pedia, article " Cotton," and supplement to Ency. Brit. " Cot- ton," where, in twenty-two departments, the number of persons engaged in spinning is said tobe 28,460, and in weaving 31,107 persons, and the spindles 800,724. These must include most in France ; and the other persons incidentally engaged must be al- most double, to constitute the recent number of six or seven per- sons to a spindle in making fine and colored cloths. The num- ber for 1831, is from the West. Rev., April, 1833, page 397. [4.] In the United States, the estimate for 1815 was made by a committee of the House of Representatives, February 13, 1816. The number includes all engaged in the manufacture, or in making the mills, machinery, &c., and not those alone inside of the mills. These last, in 1832, were computed by Reuss, on Am. Trade, page 274, at only. 28,683, but by McCuUoch's Dic- tionary, page 448, at 67,466. In 1830, by New York Conven- tion, at 57,520, and dependants at 117,626 persons, or 175,146 in all, as in second line of the table. [5.] Spindles. The spindle is the most convenient article in the cotton manufacture, by which to calculate the extent of it. The power of any one establishment, its cost, the number of 83 persons employed, the quantity of raw cotton consumed, the yarn or cloth made, and most other important results can, by the help of a few general data, be very nearly deduced from the number of spindles. On the great gain in substituting for the distaft" and the spindle used by hand, the present machinery for spinning and other pro- cesses to complete the manufacture of cotton, whether moved by horse power, water or steam, some illustrations have already been given in the first note to this table, and in table K. With a view to furnish a few more details, which may pos- sess some usefulness and interest, it may be remarked, on the power of the spindle, that, by improvements in machinery, it is said that one now sometimes revolves 8,000 times in a minute, instead of only 50 times, as formerly, and that one will now spin on an average from one-sixth to one-third more than it did twen- ty years ago, (below, note 12.) Indeed, in 1834, it is said that one person can spin more than double the weight of yarn in a given time than he could in 1829. Senior's Outline of Political Econ. page 198. The quantity of raw cotton spun by one spin- dle depends, of course, on the fineness of the thread and quality of the machinery. In England, where a considerable portion of the yarn is finer, the jiverage is about 8^ ounces weekly, or from 27 to 281bs. yearly; (McCulloch, 441, note,) while the average in the United States is about 50 pounds yearly, of yarn number 20 and 25 in fineness, and about 26 pounds of number 35 and 40. In 1808 the average was computed at 45 pounds per spindle, of cotton yielding 38 pounds of yarn. (Report to Congress, 1810.) The difference in weight between the cotton and the yarn, by loss from dirt and waste, is usually estimated from one-twelfth to one-eighth. (Baines, 376.) At Lowell 100 pounds of cotton yield 89 pounds of cloth, (Lowell Statistics, 1836,) though the average here used to be estimated at only 85 pounds, (Niles's Register, 1827, page 211,) when cotton was not so well clean- ed and machinery less perfect. One spindle at Low ell produces through looms &c. on an average 1 i\ yards of cloth, daily ; but this result must differ greatly with the fineness of the thread, excellence of the looms, width of the cloth, &c. In 1830, it was computed that 37 spindles were necessary to supply one loom ; though in 1827, at Lowell, the actual propor- tion was only 26, at Exeter in 1831, it was 29, and now at Lowell it is 31 . The number of looms in England in 1832, was'only one to about 40 spindles, so much more yarn is made and not woven there, (McCulloch, 441,) and those were mostly hand looms. But in 1834, the number of them was about 100,000 power looms 84 and 250,000 hand looms, or in all, about I to 30. (Baines, page 237.) One loom formerly wove daily, about 20 yards of cloth of the ordinary seven-eighths width, more of the 26 inches in width used for calicoes, and less of the five-quarters wide. The average now is from 30 to 40 yards of No. 20. At Lowell, in 1835, it was 38 to 49 yards of No. 14, and 25 to 30 yards of No. 30. It requires from four to five yards of cloth of Nos. 20 to 25 yarn, to weigh one pound, and five to six yards of Nos. 35 and 40. The power of the spindle, as connected with the number of persons actually employed in factories, is, that in making plain cloth of ordinary width and fineness, one person is needed to conduct all the business from the raw cotton to the finishing of the cloth for every 20 spindles. If the cloth be colored and printed or stamped, one person will be wanted for every seven spindles. This would be about 250 persons for all purposes in a factory of 5,000 spindles, making plain brown cloth. One person can manage from two to three power looms. The proportion of spindles to a factory was formerly very small, both in England and this country. Before 1806, it was only one or two hundred sometimes, and seldom exceeded 1,000. Soon after that some mills were built, containing 4,000 spindles. The average in new mills is now from 5,000 to 6,000. In Low- ell, 1836, in 27 mills they have 129,828 spindles, or a little un- der 5,000 to each, though they print, &c. in some. A factory with 5,000 spindles must be about 155 feet long and 45 wide, four stories in height, and contain about 140 looms, with other suitable machinery for picking, warping, sizing, &c. Such a one, with a few shops and out-houses appurtenant, and land and water privilege, would cost from $140,000 to $220,000, according to the materials for building, whether wood, brick or stone, and the distance from navigable waters, so as to affect cost of privilege, freight, &c., with other circumstances too numerous for recital. If bleaching or printing cloths be added, more ex- pense will be necessary, and more persons than 250, the average for such an establishment including machinists. This would be a permanent investment of capital in buildings, water power, machinery, and all appurtenances, equal to $28 or $44 per spindle, independent of the temporary investment of capital to buy raw cotton, pay wages, &c. It would often reach, and even exceed the latter sum, than only the former. (See table K, on capital.) In 1810, it was computed that the capital actually invested in machinery and real estate, averaged $60 per spindle. (Report of 1810.) It is not proposed here to go into 85 any comparisons of this expense now with former periods, or with other countries, except in regard to the spindle alone, and the machinery as a whole. For the rest see table K. In 1806, when machinery could not by law be exported from England, and the machinists here were unskilful and few, the spindle and its appurtenances, from the picker to the loom inclu- sive, it is computed, cost $30 each ; or 300 to 400 per cent, higher than it cost at that time in England, and over double its present cost in the United States. The great fall in its cost and value since, with various im- provements in machinery, has been the cause of much loss to many capitalists employed in the manufacture. By A. D. 1820, the machinery cost only about double its then value in England. In 1826, the machinery was made here on an average, for about $14 per spindle, and though now lower, it still costs from 40 to 60 per cent, more than in England. The whole machinery there and the mill cost only $4.16 per spindle. (Baines 368, 414.) But that includes probably no looms, &c., and merely the build- ing, without the water or steam power, and the mule spindle, moved by hand, and costing less than half what the throstle spin- dle costs, and which is chiefly in use here. In France, in 1832, the spindle alone, which is about half the expense of all the ma- chinery, cost $8. It used to cost there $10. ( See Hocklin's Evid.) Now the spindle alone costs here about $41 if of the throstle kind, and $2^ if of the mule kind. In some places in the United States five per cent, higher. The former alone cost here, late as 1826, it is said, $8 each. The spindle used in the filling frame, quite extensively at this time, costs about $6. These may constitute useful and sufficient data for further computations. As a matter of some curious interest it may be added that one pound of cotton usually makes 8 yards of qoarse muslin, and is then increased in value from the raw^ cotton eight- fold. But if spun into the finest yarn, it is worth five guineas, and in 1780, if woven into muslin and tambored was worth £15. ( 5 Anderson's History of Commerce, 878. ) It may now be con- verted into a piece of lace worth 100 guineas. Senior's Outline of Political Economy, 162, 178. In" India, in 1786, they could spin cotton threads over 115 miles to the pound; in England they have since been spun 167 miles long from a single pound. Baines, page 59. Niles's Register, page 181, March 24, 1821. One pound of cotton spun into No. 100 yarn, extends about 84,000 yards in length. Smithers' History of Liverpool, page 127. The yarn spun yearly in England would reach round the globe 203,775 times, or over 600 times each day. Baines, p. 431 86 They use flour for sizing, &,c. in cotton manufactures, 42f pounds to each spindle per annum, or four pounds weekly to each loom. In this country but one pound weekly to each loom. McCuUoch, 448, as to report of 1832. But at Lowell, 3,800 barrels to 4,197 looms yearly, or near four pounds each per week. In England three times as many spindles and factories are moved by steam as by water. Edin. Rev. page 472 ( 1835.) In the United States not one in a hundred factories is moved by steam. The power to move all the cotton mills in England, equals that of 44,000 horses, of which only 11,000 is by the water wheel. Baines, 395. l'\ 1824, the whole power was es- timated at only 10,572 horses. Sup. to Encyclop. Brit. "Cot- ton." Each factory of common size and employment requires from 60 to 80 horse power here, or about Hi horse power to 1,000 spindles. [6.] For the number of spindles in England, in 1789, see Smithers' History of Liverpool, page 124. For 1812, Edin- burgh Encyclop. article " Cotton;" for 1817, Endinburgh Rev. (1827;) for the rest, 1811 and in 1824, Sup. to Encyclop. Brit. '' Cotton ;" and the others, Baines's Hist. 368, and McCulloch, 441, &c. The above numbers include Scotland. The first cotton mill built in Ireland was in 1780. London Encyclop. article " Cotton," and Sup. to Cyclop. Britan. " Cotton." In 1824, Ireland had 145,000 spindles. Sup, to Encyclop. Britan. '' Cotton." [7.] For 1812, in France, see Qu. Rev. page 397, ( 1824-'5) and French Industry, by Chaptal, page 15, who says they then spun only about 30 millions of pounds ; this was a large number for the cotton spun, as the spindles were poor and imperfect. For 1832, see Nicho. Koechlin's evidence before the Chamber of Peers ; that is from one-half to one million too high, as ground- ed on an English estimate, which was too large, too many for the quantity of cotton spun ; for 1818, from 2 Chaptal, page 145, who makes 220 factories. Very little spinning by machinery, in France, till after 1785. Quarterly .Review, 394, (1824-'5.) First in 1787, (Sup. to Cyclop. Brit: "Cotton,") though cot- ton had been spun on wheels since 1767. See 2 ChaptaPs In- dustry of France, page 4. And the cotton cloths were chiefly made from thread or yarn imported from England; Switzerland, and the Levant. There were large, numbers of cotton pocket handkerchiefs made at Rouen, Montpelier, ,:&^,. early as 1789. 2 ChaptaPs Industry of France, page 4. :""* "J "f 87 France had, in 1818, 70,000 looms for cloth, 10,500 for spin- ning hosiery. 2 Chaptal on French Industry, page 150. But his estimates on all these subjects are considered high. In 1806, her looms for cloth in twenty-two departments are stated at only 28,634. London Encyclop. art. " Cotton," In 1806, the esti- mate, as to the number of spindles, is from the London Ency- clop. art. " Cotton ;" it is increased a little, for the rest of France not included in the above article, and is about one spindle to 25 pounds of raw cotton spun that year, which is a fair proportion, when the goods made are fine, and the machinery is not of the best quality. See note above, and supplement to Encyclop. Brit. art. " Cotton." Power looms are not much used vet in France. West. Rev. Ap. '33. [8.] Some spindles and looms moved by machinery have been introduced into India ; but most of the cotton manufactured there is by women and in households : the men who aid in w eaving are also often laborers on the land. Report of the committee on the affairs of the East India Com. App. 310, 1832. Wade on Midd. Classes, page 576. Yarn is often imported from England, it is there spun so much cheaper by machinery. Smithers, 127. So in Saxony, Russia, &c. Suppleipent to Cycloped. Brit. " Cotton." In China, it is said, cotton mills with spindles, &c. have been forbidden. In Egypt they have been introduced, but do not succeed well from the dryness of the air, its impurities by fine sand, and want of skill ; (Hodgden,) but they are still used by the Government. In Spain, in 1802, were 3,705 work- shops for cotton or small manufactories, and 1,494 looms. 1 Diet, of Com. 65. 3 do. 198, larger. In Switzerland, the first mill with machinery, was built in 1798 ; London Encyclop. art. " Cotton," where is some notice of a few spindles in other parts of Europe, viz : Saxony, Russia, Prussia, &c. So in Sup. to En- cyclop. Brit. " Cotton." And in West. Rev. for Ap. 1833. The number in the table is from Sup. to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton." [9.] The number o^" spindles in the United States can be com- puted from the data before given. For those before 1835, see Pitk. Stat. 526, and McCulloch,'page 448, and Reuss. Am. Tr. 270. Those for 1809 and 1810, the last too high in his table- see Gallatin's>Peporf for the number in 1807 and 1811. Those at some other dates are frpni manuscript. Gales and Seaton's Documents, 2 Finance, page 432. Those for 1814, are from Cox's tables. Ditto, page 694, and Seybert Statistics, page 7, and were returned between 1810 and 1814, For 1820 and 1822, 88 Niles's Register, page 35, March 1823. Those for 1835, are es- timated by me on former data. In 1810, Cox in his tables re- turns 269 mills, but too many, if over one-eighth of them Were for cotton. Very few spindles were in each of those built before 1807 and '8. The spindles in 1830, are from the manufacturers' convention, and only 12 States, but included most of the manu- factories. Those had 33,506 looms, to about Ik million of spin- dles, or near 1 to 40. At Low^ell, 129,828 spindles exist to 4,197 looms, or 1 to 32. This is near one-thirteenth of all the spindles in the United States. Lowell Statistics, 1836. The first mill built there was in 1822, and in 1826 only 2,500 spin- dles. See Boot's letter to Carey. About 78,000 spindles a year should be added here to make cotton cloth sufficient to meet the demand of the present annual addition to our population. The spindles have increased somewhat faster than that ratio the last five years, and have increased beyond the exports of cotton goods. Of the number of spindles here at different periods in factories, those in 1790 or 1791 were in one mill at Providence, erected by Slater and Brown ; those in 1805 were mostly, if not all, in Rhode Island, and two in Massachusetts, and only eight or ten mills. One was begun at New Ipswich in New Hampshire, as early as 1803, it is believed, and one or two in Massachusetts, and one in Connecticut before 1808, one near Philadelphia before 1798, making in all, at that time, 15 mills. Of the spindles in 1815, about 118,000 were in the same State. Gallatin's Rep. 1810 ; New Hampshire Gazetteer, article " New Ipswich." The Waltham factory in Massachusetts was not erected till 1810 or 1814, and has since devoted much capital to making machinery. There was a great increase in 1806 and '7; again during the war of 1812 ; again from 1820 to 1825 ; and in 1831 and '2. If prices continue high as the past year, and the raw material falls, oris stationary, the new markets in Asia, and increased demands in Europe and America, by increased use of cotton, and increased population, will enlarge the number of factories here ; but it is very easy, with our extensive water poWer, and cotton lands, to overstock the market. It seems that two machines for spinning and carding were, with much difficulty, obtained in this country, at Philadelphia, early as 1788. One carded 40 pounds of cotton a day, and the other had 50 spindles ; and the growth of cotton was urged on the Southern States, and the use of these machines in families recommended. In 3 Carey's Museum see the description more at large. In 5 Carey's Museum, (A. D. 1790,) it is said, a model of a cotton mill and machinery, &c., as used in England, had 89 been obtained at Philadelphia, by the society for promoting man- ufactures and useful arts. It would seem that T. Cox, Esq., took an active part in urging the cultivation and manufacture of cotton on the country early as 1787. Rees's Encylop., art. "United States," and Gales and Seaton's Doc, page 676, vol. 2, of Finance. The English prohibited the export of the cotton machinery, as well as the emigration of their mechanics, under such penalties as delayed the introduction of it here, and caused the price of machinery for many years to be so high here as to retard, and almost defeat successful competition. See before. [10.] For a detailed account of the different kinds of machinery used in the cotton manufactories, the inventors of them, improve- ments in them, &c., see London Encyclop., art. " Cotton," and same article in the New Edinb. Encyclop. and supplement to Encyclop. Brit. "Cotton." [11.] The change of late years in some places in England, from the hand to the power loom, has caused some distress, and the employment of a larger portion of females and children; now about one-fifth there are men, one-third women, and the rest children. Wade's Hist, of the Middling Classes, pages 570 and 571 . The number of hand looms in England, in 1 820 and 1830, was about the same, viz., 240,000; but that of power looms had increased from 14,000 to 55,000. Each of the latter performs as much as three of the former. Wade, 261 . Parliamentary papers, in 1830. In 1834 the power looms had become 100,000. Baines, 237. [12.] The American throstle spindle revolved 7,500 times before 1833, though it used to run in England only 4,500, and afterwards only 5,400. West. Rev. for April, 1833, page 403. Machinery and skill, and the raw material, have ^o improved, that where some years ago the threads broke at the rate of 13 per cent., they break now only 3 per cent. Do. Many modern improvements in machinery in England are from America. West. Rev., Ap. 1833. 12 90 PL4 O H O < Em ;:? iz; I o H H O o i o P 1 i 3 CO i CO eS C 1 'o P t . « 1 Q 1 c a. en 1 1 l»o >» i C ;§ » 1 1 £ Q 1 ' ' s lib c 1 n fi3 •J 5a«aA OOt-H(2QGOTiHVOCOI^a0050i^©5GO COO>Oi05C5a505030505050000 91 1-1- i2 00 I I I I 1 I I i I ( I i -^ CO I i I i-HX«OQ0^G5OC0C0 n3«JiftCOr} CO QO Oi t^ Oi t-< xo ^ •<5t<»OCOt^C0050'-' r-1 ^^ 05 00 ©^ S<1 •sa B3A ©-■> GO GO GO CO CO GO , , oooooooocooo ao — 93 [1.] The exports of English manufactures in 1833 and '4, were about one-third in value in yarn. See Edinburgh Review, 427, (1835) Baines's and Official Reports. See table K, note on cap- ital. Some years yarn constitutes one-half in weight. From 1814 to 1823 inclusive, the viilue of yarn expor^d com- pared with the value of other cotton goods, increased slowjy, from being about one-seventh and one-sixth, to be about one- fifth. London Encyclopedia, article " Cotton." The propor- tional increase of yarn has been even greater since. See Par- ker's speech in Parliament, February, 1836. The yarn export- ed is understood to be generally coarse; between Nos. 18 and 40. From half to three-quarters of the lace made is exported chiefly to the continent. It is mostly made of Sea-island cotton, and equals near 9 millions of dollars in value yearly. McCul- loch, page 744. [2.] The difference between the official value on exportation, and the declared value, is given above. But the declared, or what is sometimes called the real value, in the 2d column, is still usually from 2^^ to 5 per cent, under the actual market value. ( Baines, page 403. ) The official value is founded on the quantity, computing the price as it was about the close of the 17th cen- tury, or A. D. 1689. The market value has changed more from the official in some articles than in others, e. g. In 1829, calicoes, plain, per yard, - - 1 u tc (t It tc _ - " ^ calicoes, printed, per yard, - - 1 C( * tc u tc ti _ » " cotton yarn and twist, per cwt. £10 (Baines, page 351.) See more on prices of manufactures, table K, note 1. The sum entered for 1835, is only for the year ending 5th Jan- uary, 1835, and not any subsequent; and the second sum for 1834, is for the year 1834 only to 5th January, while the first sum for 1834, is probably for the whole fiscal year. Some dis- crepancies occasionally arise by the statements being made with different terminations for the year, as some end in April, and some in January, &c. See returns. [3.] The exports of cotton manufactures from England are now, and for some years have been, nearly equal to one -half of her exports of every kind. The above sums for England are from Baines, page 350. The records for 1813 and before that, for Sd . official. 6 real. 6 official. 8t real. official. real. 94 the declared value were burned. Those sums do not include Ireland, amounting from one-tenth to three-tenths of a million yearly. Aikin says 63 per cent, of what is made in England is exported, and Edinburgh Review, page 472, says, in 1833, that the exports from England were about 18i million pounds ster- ling, and consumption about twelve and one-tenth million ster- ling. See for 1831, '2 and '3, McCulloch, 675. [4.] The exports from France in 1823 and '4, are from 2 Dic- tionary of Spanish Commerce, page 148. In 1829, from Edin- burgh Review, page 62, (1829.) In 1833, from Baines 525, note, and in 1831 and '2, from the French tables of commerce, with a slight addition or variation, it is believed, in some cases, in the value of the franc. In 1830 from Westminster Review, April, 1833, and Wade on working classes, 575, and that 7 mil- lions were printed goods. [5.] Those from Spain in 1803, were chiefly from her pos- sessions in India and America. Dictionary of Spanish Com- merce. Spain of late imports largely of cotton manufactures. See table O, note 1, and table N. The Moors introduced this manufacture into Spain, early as the 9th or 10th centuries. Baines, page 38. [6.] Those from India are estimates, and might be extended, from the following data. Her islands and she have long had a domestic trade in cotton goods. 3 Crawford's Hist, of Ind. Archip. 350. It then spread to other parts of Asia, to the east- ern coast of Africa, and next to Europe. India in 1813, exported to England alone 10 millions of dollars worth of her cotton goods, and now imports as much from Eng- land. Montgomery's Anglo. East. Emp. But she still exports certain kinds to England valued in 1831, at about 2 millions of dollars ; in 1832, at li millions ; and in 1833, at 1 million. Some of these are re-exported. McCulloch, page 672 and 676; Evid. on East Ind. Comp., page 310, App. In 1802, '3, and '4, the United States imported cotton goods of India origin, worth near- ly 3 million dollars per year. Seyb. page 218. Hence the ex- ports of cotton manufactures from India formerly were large. But they have fallen off greatly, and especially since 1816, to the United States. Pitk. Stat. 188 and '9. She often exports raw cotton of late years, instead of cotton manufactures. Supple- ment to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton." See Seyb. Stat, page 289, 95 on our whole imports thence in 1814, and chiefly cottons. See above. [7.] Those exports from the United States are from official tables. They doubtless would have increased much more rapid- ly, had the demand for them at home not been so great, by means of their good quality, cheapness, and our increasing population. [8.] The whole exports of cotton goods from China to Eng- land and her dependencies in 1832, were valued at about i mil- lion of dollars. McCuUoch, 237, article " Cotton," and page 240, where is given the pieces of nankeens so exported from 1793 to 1831, which alone at 50 cents each, would range from ^Jth to 1 million of dollars yearly. In page 813, he thinks the exports of nankeens have been on the increase to different quar- ters. From China the exports of cotton goods consist chiefly of chintses and nankeen, and the amount in the table are estimates. The former have greatly diminished of late years. Supplement to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton," She imports now both English and American cotton goods. ( See exports of them, tables N andO.) In 1802, '3, and '4, the United States alone, it is estimated, im- ported Chinese cotton goods valued from 1 million of dollars to 1^ million yearly. See official returns of all articles imported from China, Gales & Seaton's Doc, page 599 in 1 vol. on Com. and Nav. Formerly the United States imported largely of nan- keens, so as some years to export ^^^ million of dollars of them as in A. D. 1792, Gales Sc Seaton's Doc, page 144, vol. 1, Com. and Nav. But our official returns since, as well as before 1821, do not discriminate the cotton goods imported. From 1818 to 1827, they fell off' from about 1 million to ^ million. Pitk. Stat. 305, McCuUoch, page 242. [9.] The exports of cotton goods from Germany are chiefly by land and not extensive. This trade could not have existed at at all formerly, and the estimates are too uncertain for much re- liance. In and near Vienna are established considerable cotton man- ufactures by machinery. Supplement to Ency. Brit. " Cotton." According to McCuUoch Diet., page 448, the cotton exports from Austria are chiefly in yarn. They are on the increase. See Wade on Working Classes, page 576. 96 [10.] From Turkey, including the products of Smyrna and the neighborhood, as well as Barbary and Morocco, there have been frequently exported in former years, various articles of cot- ton manufacture ; but not of great value as a whole. This man- ufacture was introduced into Turkey in Europe, in the 14th cen- tury, by the Turks. Some cotton cloth was imported from the coast of Africa to England about the close of the 16th century. The growth and manufacture of cotton were diffused much by the Mahometan conquests. 2 McPherson's Com. 193 ; Baines32. [11.] The barrenness of this table is another illustration of the small extent in the foreign trade of cotton goods except by England, France, and the United States. It presents also a sin- gular illustration of the recent date of their progress in it, and of the difficulty in knowing much of the ancient or later business of India and China in this branch of their trade, with such accu- racy as to deserve reliance ; though more leisure might proba- bly have enabled me to present some more statistical facts on that subject, than I have yet met with. See the diffusion of this manufacture by the Mahometans from Arabia, &c. note (10) in this table, and (.5.) In 1825 the Dutch exports and imports at Japan are given (McCulloch,page 812,) and the former as well as the latter con- tained a few cotton goods, from 5,000 to 8,000 in value. 97 o W O < o H H O o •[izBaa o; i)UBiJSua 1 s o; saoBid snou«A t o •umds 0? sao^id siioKiBA CO C O 1 •1 •[izBjg ;daox3 *ooi mnog oj pu^jSug 1 C 1 Bipui o) puBiSug 1 en c .2 2 1 •spuBi i 1- tn C o i •S •XuBui -jao o) puqSug 1 i .2 •ZJ H H 33at!jj o; pu^iSua ^ Q c .2 J= • •saws psjiufx oi pu«iSua 2 P s o ;— 1 1 t 1 1 •8 w»A 0PO>O5O5OiO5O3CSOJO> IS 98 S3 a o O o H O , GOQOOOQOGOCOCOCOOdQOQOOOCOCO 99 GO CO CO J> CD CO CO CO I 1 III iO 1—1 co^ 1 ^ ^ 1> GO ' — 'CO CO 00 cor-cococococococoa5 o 1-N ©5 t • 1 1 1 1 o XO5'«1^COC0GOCOCOG0Q0COQ0a0 i— 1 Tt iO CO l^ cc O^ CO 00 CO CO QO QO CO ^©5GO'^10C01>COC50^©?GO ©Q (M ©Cl &-1 ©^ ©^ (M ©>! ©Q GO GO GO GO QOCOGOCOaOOOCOGOCOCOCOGOCO GO GO GO CO 1—^ t—l f— 1 (—1 1—4 iOO [1.] This table shows chiefly the exports of cotton goods from England to different places, and from 1820 to 1833 the values are mostly taken from ofl&cial documents. Porter's tables, 161- 7, page 300. The statements in different books sometimes dif- fer from referring to different terminations of the year. [2.] Since 1832 Belgium has taken, in that year and 1833, about 1^- millions of the amount of what is placed to the whole Netherlands from England. In 1834, it is said by Alexander, she imported of cotton goods, from all places, about 2\ millions of dollars, and smuggled twice as much more, that did not appear on the official returns. [3.] The exact consumption of manufactured cotton goods in each country is seldom attainable. But an approximation to the quantity, or value, can be easily made from the data given in the tables. Thus the quantity of cotton manufactured in each, and not exported, will, with the imports of cotton manufactures not afterwards re-exported, constitute nearly the true amount. Another general mode of computation might be, that in such countries as Turkey, it has been estimated that only two pounds of raw cotton per head, made into manufactures, is consumed. (Urquhart's Views, page 150.) In warmer, and still poorer countries, it would be less. In France, each person is estimated to consume $4 worth of cotton goods per year ; in England, ^5 ; and here, probably ^6. The exports to Germany and Netherlands are from one-third to one-half in twist and yarn, and are woven there. Porter's tables, page 300, and Baines 416. So in a great proportion to Russia. Sup. to Enclyp. Brit. "Cotton;" and some even to India. See table O. So chiefly to Prussia. Blackwood's Mag- azine, for January, 1836. [4.] The exports to France from 1789 to 1793, are computed at 5 millions of dollars yearly, in Quar. Review, 394-9, ( 1824-5. ) See ofl&cial returns for the table, and McCuUoch, page 644. But it must include all smuggled, and is then not too high. It equals the whole amount of all the regular imports of cotton goods into France at that time from all quarters. 2 Chaptal's Industry of France, page 9. The sums in the table for 1789, &c. are from Bowring's Report, page 52, who says that 10 mil- lions of dollars worth of English manufactures, and chiefly cot- ton, are of late years smuggled from England to France. See 101 also Baines, 517, note. The whole imports of such goods into France, in 1823, were 9 millions of dollars; in 1824, 12 millions of dollars. In 1806, about 14^ millions of dollars worth were smuggled. Sup. to Encyclop. Brit. " Cotton." See 2 Diction- ary of Spanish Commerce, page 214. In 1812, all the legal im- ports of cotton goods into France were less than a third of a mil- lion of dollars. 2 Chaptal, page 9. Of those smuggled, in late years, quite 2 millions of dollars worth were in bobinet laces. McCulloch, 1054. [5.] The exports to India include the islands, and for 1831 and 1832 are from McCulloch, page 446, and the others mostly from official tables. See more in McCulloch, 235, as to that part by the East India Company. The trade in cotton manufactures has increased greatly since the first opening of it, in 1814. Do. 533-4, and 539, another table. [6.] These exports to Spain were chiefly from England, France, and Italy, and some from Spanish America. (Diction- ary of Spanish Commerce.) Those direct to Spain from Eng- land, in 1833 and 1834, were only about Vb million of dollars. But England exported to Gibraltar, in those years, from 1 to la- millions of dollars in cotton goods, (see official tables,) and which found their way in part into Spain. McCulloch, Die. page 600. The sum for 1834 is a computation only on the above data, and the fact that France exports therefrom 2 to 2l millions of dollars yearly. See table O, note [1.] [7.] The imports into Russia, in 1832, were almost wholly from England. Porter's tables, 545; Baines, 416. In 1833, from England, 6 millions of dollars; and in 1834, only 5^ mil- lions of dollars. Some of them go to places in the Black sea, &c. McCulloch, 859. Russia excludes certain cotton cloths, but not yarn. Blackwood's Magazine, for February, 1836, page 62. On others, her tariff is high. 2 Smith's Com. Dig. [8.] Exports to Brazil, &c. See McCulloch, 446 ; Baines, 416; and Official Reports for 1834 and 1835. [9.] England exports largely cotton goods also to Italy and Italian islands: in 1833, 7 millions of dollars; and in 1834,10 millions. See more in McCulloch, page 814, and page 1212, some to Venice, now i^^ of a million. 102 The ratio of this kind of exports from England, in 1834, was as follows: 1. Germany; 2. Italy; 3 United States; 4. India and China; 5. Holland; 6. Brazil; 7. Russia; 8. Turkey and Greece, in 1833 and 1834, over 4 millions of dollars each year; 9. Portugal and islands, in some years 3 to 4^- millions of dol- lars; 10. British West Indies, ditto, 3 to 3f millions of dollars ; 11. Chili alone li to 3 millions of dollars; 12. States of Rio de la Plata alone li to 2i millions of dollars. See official re- turns, and Baines, 416. Those for Germany go largely to Trieste. McCulloch, 1186. The whole exports to Germany in 1833, were estimated to be so divided that from 10 to 11 millions of dollars were in cloths and laces, and the remainder in yarn, being 35 millions of pounds. Beside Trieste, part of these exports pass through the Hanse towns, and others through Rotterdam and Antwerp. Blackwood's Magazine, for January, 1836. [10.] Those exports to the United States are obtained chiefly from our own official returns of imports, though some, and es- pecially the earliest, are from English tables. 103 2 ' •saipui ;83AV am o) B3i«)s pav.un . •BUiqo 1 • o) s3jb;s pailun (S Cm O at V fl ^ o 1 •80IJJV pu« «>PUI 1 : ' O) o oj S3)«}s paiiun "o w 42 fi p:; &. D 1 H o o , <1 T •oDixaw puB 2 i 6 g g T?oiJ9ui V mnos s o .5: o^ssjBis P9l!«n is ^ 0) 1 1 •ssms ps^iun i i Z g 3in OJ XUBU1490 "o s o g* Q i^ w 1 « O •saiuopo § o jaij o; aouBJ^q; 1 ■l •pUBlSua o; 1 s 90UBJJ o Q i a5 w ^ 'B3;bis psvun 5 2 -'° aq) o; soubjj: "o 3 '" ■ ^ S . t- 05 O»-*©5«0T*t*t*t-t*t-t*l> 104 o O o cc; D o < I o H H O O •BUiqo •«oijjv pU8 «!pui o) saws pa^iun •oojxaiv P"« •ssms P3ll«n •puTS|3ua o; •saws p3V«n am 0^ aouBJj •M«»A s oooooooooo*^^:- QOQOXaOCOQOQOQOOOCOCOCOQO 105 ^oooooogoo S C) Cj (^ <^ ^^ ^^ ^> c^ cz^ f 1 ^ cTcD^co^art^i-rGo'ccrj'^ GO OCJCOTJH'.^'^TJ^IOGO©:) "■ 1 pOOOOOOOOO 5000000000 5 0^0^05^ 0^0^ 0^0^ 0^0 JSi^Oi^tOZOOiCOiOG^ 0—. T-HS^^iO^QOfHiO 5 ^^ jiOOOOOOOOO 5000000000 55 O^O^O^O^O^GJ^O^O^CD^ Orti— ieCJCOi>COGO<3CDC5O'-^©^G0'^>Jf:)<:0i:^C0C5OT--i(^7G0-«*i0 ^^^^^,-N,-M©5e^©>>. ©>'»«^'{©5'SQGQS<>e<)GOGOGOGOGOGO aoQDaoooaocDaoGOcoGOcoQOQOcoaoaoaOGOGoaoQOGOQO r— 1 14 106 [1.] Over half of the exports of France, in her cotton manu- factures, are to her own colonies, according to Baines, 525, note ; but this is too much for 1831 and '2. France exports, also, about ^1,000,000 of them per year to Holland and Belgium, one-half million to Germany, two and a half million to Spain, and one million to Sardinia. See Tables of French Commerce, for 1832. In 1831, the export was short of a million to Holland and Bel- gium, Sardinia and Germany, each, about two millions to Spain, over 1 1^6 to Mexico, and only about one million to her own colo- nies, with one-fourth of a million to Hayti. Her exports to Eng- land given in the table, are from her official tables for 1831 and 1832. Besides that some is smuggled. [2.] Those exports from the United States are compiled from official tables, as far as they go back, discriminating to what country. Those to the United States, from France and Germany, are from our own official returns. [3.] Tariff or duty on cotton manufactures. — The exports of cotton manufactures to any particular country, are often influ- enced by the rate of duty imposed on their importation. A de- tail of the several tariff's of all those countries, in respect to cotton goods, would be tedious, and might be supposed to bear on the question of protection, &c., in the United States, and which question, it is not proposed in these tables or notes, to agitate. It may be added, that the average duty imposed in France, at this time, on the imports of most cotton goods, is very high, amounting almost to a prohibition, except for re-export. So in Russia. Blackwood'sMagazine,for January, 1836. In England, it is considered to be about 20 per cent., though low as 10 on some articles. Before 1826, it w^as much higher — 50 and 67 per cent. See 1 Com. Digest, by Smith, page 98, and Huskisson's speeches, in 1825, in Parliamentary Debates. McCulloch, page 1117. In the United States, the duty, in 1790, was about 7^ per cent, on the value of most cotton goods: in 1794, raised to 12i per cent.; in 1816, to 25 percent, and a minimum; in 1824, the same, with a certain minimuyn valuation, making the duty larger; in 1828, increased still more by raising the minimum; in 1332, reduced again. See the diff"erent acts of Conscress on, the tariff*, and Pitk. Stat., page 188. This makes the average duty in 1833, on most cotton cloths, and as computed by some, about 42 per cent., and thus exposes it to a biennial reduction till 1842, when, by the existing laws, it will become only 20 per cent. Campbell on Tariff", page 120, 107 The duty on British cotton manufactures has lately been increased in Java, by the Dutch, from 6 per cent, to 25 per cent. Black- wood's Magazine, January, 1836, page 51. [4.] More could be given on the exports of cotton manufac- tures from a few of the above countries at other periods, but the amount and value of them were so small as to deserve very little notice, and the increases of late years, compared with their meager and blank condition, in this respect, a quarter and a third of a century ago, are striking indications of the revolution going on in Europe and the United States in the nianufacture of cotton, 108 P. COTTON. Dates of the most important changes in the cultivation^ manu- facture^ and trade of cotton^ chiefly within the period to which these tables generally extend. 1735 [2] 1738 [6] 1742 1750 1756 [3] [4] 1761 1763 1767 1768 1772 1T74 [7] 1779 1781 [5] 1782 1783 1785 1786 1787 1789 First cotton yarn spun in England by machinery, by Mr. Wyatt. Smithers, 153. Cotton first grown in Surinam by the Dutch, or perhaps first exported thence. A patent first taken out by Lewis Paul for an improved method in carding, and the fly shuttle invented by John Kay. Stock cards were first used for cotton by J. Hargrave in 1760, and cylinder cards were not invented till 1762, and were first used by Robert Peel. Carding not brought to perfec- tion till 1775. Baines, 170. First mill for spinning cotton built at Birmingham j moved by mules or horses , but not successful. The fly shuttle was brought into general use in England in weaving, though some postpone the date to 1760. Baines, 116. Cotton velvets and quiltings first made in England. Arkwright obtained his first patent for the spinning frame, though he made further improvements in 1768. Became free 1784. Baines says his first patent was in 1769. So does Wade, and that his second patent was m 1771. Two years after, Thomas Highs claims to have invented the spinning jenny, which J. Hargrave claims also in 1767. Smithers and McCuUoch, 436. Edinb. Encyclop. art. " Cotton;" or, according to Baines, in 1764. The stocking frame applied to make lace by Hammond. The feeder invented by Lees, and the crank and combs by Hargrave. A bill passed to prevent the export of machinery used in cotton factories. Smithers, 155. And still in force, though not strictly executed. Black- wood's Magazine for January, 1836. Mule spinning invented by Hargrave, or rather perfected by Crompton. Baines, page 199. First imports of raw cotton into England from Brazil ; poorly prepared ; and in three to nine years after, first from United States of their own growth ; and from India and Bourbon about. 1785. See table F — note, and Smithers, 156. . . ,\ :-■■:■-■■ ■;_ Watt took out his patent for the steam eftgine, though some say in 1769 the first one ; and got into general use to move machinery in 1790. He began his improvements, in- 1764, according to Wade's history of the mid- dling classes, page 82. A bounty granted in England on.the'eXp