Cotton Supply Research Articles

International Cotton Advisory Committee

The 21st plenary meeting of the International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC) took place in Washington from May 9 to May 23, 1962. In the Committee of the Whole, attention was given to the world supply and demand situation, government actions affecting cotton, and steps needed for the further advance of the world cotton economy. A statement, prepared by a working group headed by Mr. Edouard J. Senn (France), developed from the discussions of the committee, presented the following observations, among others: 1) The overall statistical situation in raw cotton remained strong. Acreage had risen to a new peak; cotton consumption was at a record high level; there had been a reasonable degree of price stability in world cotton markets; and most countries would probably dispose of the bulk of their exportable supplies. World stocks were likely to decline to their lowest level since 1953. The committee recognized, however, that the over-all reduction in cotton stocks in the period under review had been brought about mainly by reason of partial crop failures in certain countries and that, with normal yields in these countries, the relationship between supply and demand could well have been reversed. 2) Cotton consumption continued to break new records with each successive season, but undue optimism had to be tempered by an awareness of the intense competition from the manmade fibers which had brought about a decline in cotton's share of the total textile market. 3) The profit margins of cotton textile manufacturers, as well as of producers, were also limited by rising costs and by the highly competitive nature of the textile industry. 4) In the opinion of the committee there was no doubt that the restriction of acreage in the United States had been a major factor in the orderly liquidation of the cotton surplus and in the return to a better balance between world cotton supply and demand. 5) The committee noted with considerable interest the statement of the United States delegation that attention was currently being given to a number of plans to introduce a greater element of freedom in the manner of cotton production and to reduce or eliminate the differential between domestic and export prices in the United States. 6) The committee also welcomed the reassurance by the United States delegation that in formulating its cotton policy the United States would always have in mind the interests of other nations and seek to avoid any dislocation of the world cotton market.

Twelve Women in the First Days of the Confederacy

TWELVE WOMEN IN THE FIRST DAYS OF THE CONFEDERACY Isabel Quattfebaum Gbeat bejoicings swept through the South when the Southern states seceded from the Union. The rationale of the rejoicing may have been strained, but many people were extravagant in their praise of secession and of the Confederacy. Quickly did they turn against the Union flag, now termed"thatoldstripedrag," and as quickly did they give credence to fantastic accounts of the horrors of "Yankeedoodledum," as one diarist termed Northern territory. The optimism which prevailed in the South at the outbreak of the war is weU illustrated in the diaries of twelve Southern women. For example , Mrs. CorneUa McDonald wrote that, in I860, "the opinion was almost unanimous that separation was inevitable, but that it would be peaceful; that the importance of the supply of cotton was such that the North dared not go to extremities. And if it did, that'Europe and the rest of the world would interfere."1 To the young Southern women the outbreak of war was a time of gaiety. Sarah Morgan Was interested in the Louisiana regiment stationed in her native Baton Rouge and in the young officers who came to her parties. Even when Louisiana seceded from the Union on January 24, 1861, Sarah wrote: "We did not trouble ourselves with gloomy anticipation, for many strangers visited the town, and our parties, rides, and walks grew gayer and more frequent."2 Secession was the first serious problem which concerned the women. At first Sarah Morgan in Louisiana and EUza Frances Andrews and her father in Georgia did not want secession. Miss Andrews agreed with her father that it was "a pity to break up a great nation about a parcel of Born in Columbia, South Carolina, Miss Quattlebaum holds degrees from Wake Forest College and Emory University. She is at present a history instructor at Herschel V. Jenkins High School, Savannah, Georgia. 1 CorneUa Peake McDonald, A Diary with Reminiscences of the War and Refugee Life in the Shenandoah VaUey, 1860-1865, ed. Hunter McDonald (Nashville, 1934), p. 13. Hereafter cited as McDonald, Diary. 2 Sarah Morgan Dawson, A Confederate GirTs Diary, ed, James I. Robertson, Jr. (Bloomington, Ind., 1960), p. 5. Hereafter cited as Dawson, Diary. 370 Africai savages, if we had known any other way to protect our rights/* Mrs. Miry Boykin Chesnut dreaded "this break with so great a power as the United States."4 Kate Cumming was the only diarist who asserted that theSouth probably had no lawful right to secede, for she knew that the natbn was stronger when united, but she agreed to secession, since there \ws "no happiness in union without concord."5 Sarah Morgan prophesed that after the South had righted its wrongs it would re-enter the Unrai on more favorable terms. She did not think that the Confederacy couU standbyitself. "It is arope of sand, this Confederacy, founded onthedcctrineof Secession, andwill notlast many years—notfive."6 The women justified secession but wanted to leave the Union without war, îruelty, or bloodshed. They were puzzled that the North would not let tlem go in peace. To insure lasting peace and good wiU, the South and North must be separate nations. This is what Judith McGuire thought as she wrote on May 4, 1861: "Why cannot we part in peace?"7 Mrs. Chesnut said that the South separated from the North because of incompatibility of temper. "We are divorced, North from South, because we have hated each other so. If we could only separate poUtely, andnothaveja horridfight fordivorce." After Manassas hadbeen fought and war begsai in earnest, she added: "We would only be too grateful to be left alone. Only let us alone. We ask no more, of Gods or men."8 None of the women in the spring of 1861 realized the extent of the approaching war. Mrs. Chesnut and Mrs. McGuire thought war could be averted, since Fort Sumter had been won without a casualty. Mrs. Catherine Edmondston thought her husband, while coUecting troops anddrillingthem in North Carolina, was merelybeingprepared. "As the price of Liberty is eternal vigilance, perhaps he is only laying down his purchase moneyJ She visited Mount Pleasant early in 1861...

Lincoln and the Cotton Trade

LINCOLN AND THE COTTON TRADE! Thomas H. O'Connor It is habdly an overstatement of fact to say that with the opening of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln was a man who had problems . Not the least of the many and varied problems which were continually to plague him was one which had, long before the war, provided a constant source of antagonism between the North and the South—cotton. With the commencement of hostilities, raw cotton assumed enormous proportions as a definite factor in the war plans and strategy of the Commander in Chief. For one thing—and this point has received considerable attention from such historians as E. D. Adams and Frank L. Owsley—cotton was to be a frightening and continuing threat to the diplomatic stability and international security of the United States government. The fact of war, and the subsequent shutdown of cotton exports, drove nations like England and France into virtual hysteria as they threatened intervention, and even war, unless the North met their demands. And with good reason. Britain, the greatest industrial nation in the world, whose largest industry was cotton textiles, was importing from three-quarters to five-sixths of her cotton supply from the South, and depended upon this to keep over half a million workers employed.1 In England, at the opening of the war, a combination of stock-piled goods and an overlylarge cottonsurplus heldpanic and worry to a minimum . Many speculators and industrialists even welcomed the stoppage as a temporary relief to their financial log jam, for this "short war" in America would allow them to dispose of their surplus products at a A doctoral graduate of Boston College, Thomas H. O'Connor has been connected with the History Department of that institution since 1950. He is the author of Massachusetts in the Civil War. Volume I: The Call to Arms, a pamphlet recently published by the Massachusetts Civil War Centennial Commission. 1E. D. Adams, Great Britain and the American Civil War (New York, 1925), ?, 7. Hereafter cited as Adams, Civil War. Frank L. Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy (Chicago, 1931), p. 2. 20 profit within a few months; then it would be "business as usual" once again. But the theory of the short war proved to be wishful thinking. The prospect of four, five, or possibly even more years without a single pound of cotton being delivered caused Britain to give serious consideration to recognizing the Confederacy. Apparently the official warning of Secretary of State Seward—that Britain had the alternative of either not treating with the Confederacy or breaking off relations with the United States—was the main deterrent in 1861. But Lincoln must have wondered how long his government could maintain this position. Much more bitterly outspoken in her demands for Southern cotton, and much more direct in her threats of retaliation, was France. Close to 700,000 French workers depended upon the cotton industry for their livelihood. The court of Louis Napoleon was only too well aware of the restless and unpredictable character of these workers—especially at a time when wheat was notoriously scarce. To make matters worse, France, unlike England, had not stored up a surplus of cotton during 1860-61. As a result, her problem was immediate and acute. Time and time again the French attempted to persuade Britain to join with them to recognize the Southern Confederacy and, if necessary, to shoot thenway through the Union blockade. Once again it took a blast from Seward —this time a counterthreat of a wheat famine, as well as war—to deter France from violence. Any attempt at intervention, warned Seward , would be met by an American embargo on all breadstuffs; and what France "is likely to need most and soonest," he pointed out, "is supplies not of material, but of provisions."2 But how long Lincoln's government would hold off both England and France was a matter of serious speculation. How good a bluff could the President maintain when his blockade was little more than paper and his army little more than unseasoned recruits? Confident of eventual and inevitable recognition, the Confederacy tried in every way to demonstrate the power and influence...

King Cotton Diplomacy: Foreign Relations of the Confederate States of America (review)

436CIVIL WAR HISTORY The delightful bit of Confederate verse quoted by the author probably summarizes the Battle of NashviUe, as weU as Hood's chances for the big campaign , about as weU as any müitary analyst could ever hope to: So now we're going to leaveyou, Our hearts are full of woe; We're going back to Georgia To see our Uncle Joe. You maytalk aboutyour Beauregard And sing of General Lee, But the gallant Hood of Texas Played heU in Tennessee. WmLIAM E. HlGHSMTTH JacksonviUe, Florida. King Cotton Diplomacy: Foreign Relations of the Confederate States of America. By Frank Lawrence Owsley. 2nd edition. Revised by Harriet Chappell Owsley. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1959. Pp. xxiii, 614. $10.00.) SCHOLARS IMMEDIATELY ACCEPTED THE FIRST EDITION of this book as a basic study in the history of Civil War diplomacy when it appeared in 1931. It went out of print in 1954, but Mr. Owsley decided to write a diplomatic history of the United States during the Civil War rather than to republish King Cotton Diplomacy. He was laboring on this larger project at the time of his death in 1956. Always closely associated with her husband's work, Harriet ChappeU Owsley continued the research for the larger study, but the pressure of her duties in the Tennessee State Library and Archives forced her to suspend it in favor of revising the 1931 edition. William C. Binkley, a coUeague of Mr. Owsley at Vanderbüt, has contributed a memorial foreword to this revision . In eight pages Mr. Binkley has given us a sober and perceptive picture of one of the major historians of the last generation in his various roles of writer, southern sectionalist, and graduate adviser. As Mr. Binkley suggests, Mr. Owsley 's other books, State Rights in the Confederacy and Phin Folk of the Old South, made "significant contributions toward the restudy and rewriting of some important aspects of southern history." He could without exaggeration also have argued that the research summarized in Phin Folk had important implications for American agricultural history and liistorical method generaUy. Mrs. Owsley has not revised the major outlines of the book. In research in England, France, and Wasliington after her husband's death, she found the ideas of the first edition "completely sustained." Unmodified is the author's contention that Confederate foreign policy was based through the early years of the Civil War on the assumption that southern cotton supplies were essential to both England and France. Unchanged too are his minor theses: that Great Britain, waxing fat on war profits, faüed to intervene because of fear of war with the United States and from the conviction that the South would Book Reviews437 win independence anyway; that the action of the British government in halting the buüding of Confederate ships in British shipyards was unnecessary in light of international precedent and practice; that Confederate diplomacy should have been based from the beginning on emancipation; that the Union's blockpde was not effective and need not have been recognized by European countries; and that the Confederate government should have taken control of the supplies of southern cotton at an early stage of the conflict and used them to purchase the materials of war. In her revision, Mrs. Owsley has reduced the text by some twenty pages and eliminated one chapter heading. She has removed or compressed a number of iUustrative passages, reorganized some sections, sharpened the style somewhat and moderated the occasional inclination to unsopliisticated exuberance and high-flying metaphor which marked the first edition. Judah Benjamin is no longer "the Jew" and Isaac, CampbeU and Company are now "this firm," instead of "these Jews," although the tendency to make racial distinctions is stiU present to some degree. A quotation formerly credited to R. M. T. Hunter is now attributed to William M. Browne. OccasionaUy Mrs. Owsley has inserted new material but no major re-evaluation of men or events have resulted. Most extensively rewritten is the chapter entitled "The Troubled Waters of Mexico." Mrs. Owsley has brought the bibliography up to date, but she has not included the articles by EU Ginzberg and Martin P. Clausen on...

The Role of Voluntary Associations in West African Urbanization

T AKEN as a whole, the West African region was relatively unaffected by the modern world until the end of the 19th century. Modern development of the hinterland began with the British adoption of trusteeship as colonial policy and with the British and French realization that these territories constituted an expanding market for imported goods as well as important sources of mineral and raw materials needed by the metropolitan country. The French were also concerned with the question of military manpower. These factors were finally crystallized by World War II and the events following it. The British war effort demanded greatly increased supplies of palm kernels, cotton, cocoa, and other locally grown products as well as hides, tin, iron ore, etc., which the colonial governments concerned were required to stimulate (cf. Fortes 1945:205-219). Since the War there have been resettlement schemes, new industries and constructional projects have been instituted, and there has been a general improvement in communications by road, rail, and air. With the strategic implications of West Africa in the struggle against Communism also becoming manifest, political development has also gone on very rapidly, and there has been a corresponding expansion of education and the social services.

Cotton in the San Joaquin Valley: A Study of Government in Agriculture

R ECENT studies in agricultural geography hardly accentuate sufficiently the governmental factor in modern agriculture in highly organized states. Dunn's work,' for example an economist's analysis of the problems of agricultural economics, but valuable to the geographerpostulates the working of the market as a major factor in location; Weaver's studies of crop combinations in the Middle West,2 landmarks in the agricultural geography of the United States, are analyses of patterns at a series of points in time. Neither of these writers hints at the great changes and widespread repercussions that result from government intervention in agriculture. The most spectacular of such changes in the farming pattern of the United States occur when the Secretary of Agriculture is required, by law, to declare a national marketing quota for a given crop.3 In 1954 allotments in cotton planting had automatically to be applied, since the normal supply of cotton for the year had been overproduced in the growing season 1953-1954; in consequence, the national acreage of cotton under cultivation in July, 1954, was five and a half million acres less than in July, 1953. A report prepared in January, 1954, for the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics4 showed how states, and counties within the states, that had only recently increased their acreages of cotton would suffer disproportionately if the impending cuts were to be based on the average of a long period of years. It will be seen from Table I that the states of the West, where cotton is produced entirely under irrigation, did indeed experience generally a greater proportionate cut in acreage than the older-established states of the Cotton Belt, though production was not thereby reduced by as large a percentage as the average for the country.

International Cotton Advisory Committee

The International Cotton Advisory Committee held its fifteenth plenary meeting in Washington, D. C, from May 8 through 17, 1956, under the chairmanship of Mr. Marvin L. McLain (United States). Sixty-two governments were represented, 32 as members of the Committee and 30 as observers. The Committee received a report from the Standing Committee on the present world cotton situation and the Secretariat's annual review, heard statements by member countries and observers, and held an extensive discussion of the world cotton situation, in which it attributed the present imbalance between supply and demand and the consequent build-up of world cotton stocks to the 1) existence of relatively high cotton prices, 2) marked improvement in cotton production techniques, and 3) economic progress in a number of underdeveloped countries, bringing new areas into cotton production. The conference felt that changes in United States government policy would lead to an improvement in cotton's competitive position and would offer some disincentive to uneconomic cotton production. At the same time, the Committee warned against any sudden or substantial decline in cotton prices which would adversely affect the economies of both producing and consuming countries. Finally, the Committee stressed the unsettling effect on world markets of uncertainty regarding the future level of cotton prices. With respect to the price question, the Committee recommended reasonable short-term stability to facilitate orderly distribution of crops and longer-term price flexibility to permit adjustments in cotton supply and demand.

A Nineteenth Century Development Project in India: The Cotton Improvement Program

Previous articleNext article No AccessA Nineteenth Century Development Project in India: The Cotton Improvement ProgramSeth Leacock and David G. MandelbaumSeth Leacock Search for more articles by this author and David G. Mandelbaum Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Economic Development and Cultural Change Volume 3, Number 4Jul., 1955 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/449693 Views: 11Total views on this site Citations: 4Citations are reported from Crossref PDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Klas Rönnbäck, Dimitrios Theodoridis Cotton cultivation under colonial rule in India in the nineteenth century from a comparative perspective, The Economic History Review 75, no.22 (Aug 2021): 374–395.https://doi.org/10.1111/ehr.13094Sukanya Banerjee Ecologies of cotton, Nineteenth-Century Contexts 42, no.55 (Jan 2021): 493–507.https://doi.org/10.1080/08905495.2020.1816089Rhoads Murphey Traditionalism and Colonialism: Changing Urban Roles in Asia, The Journal of Asian Studies 29, no.11 (Mar 2011): 67–84.https://doi.org/10.2307/2942524Peter Harnetty The Imperialism of Free Trade: Lancashire, India, and the Cotton Supply Question, 1861-1865, Journal of British Studies 6, no.11 (Jan 2014): 70–96.https://doi.org/10.1086/385528

Cotton Competition. U. S. and Egypt, 1929-1948

Cotton production in Egypt has never been large relative to U. S. production. Egypt's ability to grow either a long-staple cotton suitable for the manufacture of very fine cotton goods or, alternatively, a medium-staple cotton which is a substitute for American cotton gives her production, however, a flexibility which statistics on total production do not indicate. In the absence of any appreciable American production of long-staple cotton, American manufacturers of cotton sewing thread and fine cotton goods must obtain their raw material largely from Egypt. By shifting acreage from the long-staple varieties to mediumlength staples, Egypt might significantly increase the world supply of the medium-staple cotton which the American farmer also sends to the world market.

International Cotton Advisory Committee

Twenty-seven governments having substantial interests in cotton, as exporters or importers, were represented at the fifth meeting of the International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC) in Washington, from May 7 to 14, 1946. ICAC was established by the International Cotton Meeting of 1939 for the purpose of recommending steps to achieve international agreement on the regulation of world cotton supplies in relation to demand, so as to eliminate problems and difficulties presented by a world surplus of cotton. Governments represented at the May meeting were Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Egypt, France, Greece, Great Britain, India, Iran, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru, Turkey, USSR, the United States, Venezuela, and Yugoslavia.

Can Italy Live at Home?

ITALY possesses scanty quantities of iron, coal, copper, and potash and must import from abroad her whole supply of petroleum, cotton, rubber, and phosphates. She is almost self-sufficient as regards chemicals and nitrates. But she is really self-sufficient only in sulphur, mercury and aluminum.1 She can reduce her imports of coal by turning her water power into elec tricity. But electric power is economically profitable only when the price of coal is high. As soon as coal drops in price it becomes pref erable to electricity. In the present state of technique, Italy is handicapped in comparison with those countries which can ob tain raw materials without paying heavy freight charges. She is and must remain first and foremost an agricultural country. Even so she cannot nourish her entire population. On a total area of only 120,000 square miles, she must support 42,500,000 inhabitants. Yet one-third of Italy's land is unfit for cultivation. Consequently she must import large amounts of foodstuffs, as is indicated by the following table: Cattle Frozen Meat Salted and smoked fish {number oj head) (tons) (value in lire) 1930 265,000 66,500 232,000,00

Natural Resources

American well-being on secure foundations.-In natural wealth this country is unrivaled. With one-twentieth of the world's area and population, we produce one-fourth to three-fourths of the world's annual supply of grain, cotton, coal, zinc, lead, copper, iron ore, and oil. Dependence of civilization on mineral resources increasing. -Since 1918 our mineral output has increased 40 per cent. Agriculture grows only as fast as population, but the demand for minerals changes with every discovery and invention. The "American secret" lies in mechanised energy. The American wageearner has more power at his elbow than any other worker in the world. Twenty years ago one family in ten bought electric current; now it is two out of three. River problems.-The Muscle Shoals and Colorado power projects have attracted more public attention than their economic importance warrants, but the problem of the Mississippi River floods is one calling for the best of American engineering. Mineral estate of the American people.-Nearly 200 million acres of public land is still unappropiated, and the mineral deposits in public ownership constitute a large share of our national wealth. The mineral-leasing law recognizes community of interest between private operator and public landlord.

Empire Cotton Supply and Needs

THE Lancashire cotton industry is, as is well known,in a somewhat parlous condition; and one important factor involved is that it has not control over its supplies of raw material. About one-third is grown in Egypt and south America, and two-thirds are from the uniated States; but the cotton of these two sections is so different that two separate industries deal with it in Lancashire. The first appears to be fairly prosperous; but the larger industry, dependent on the United States supply, is in trouble. This supply fluctuates enormously, and demands from elsewhere are increasing rapidly. During the past five years the crop has varied from 11 to 18 million bales; cotton mills are springing up in many countries, and those in America alone now require about half the crop. These figures indicate sufficiently how precarious is the position of the bulk of the Lancashire cotton mills.

Cotton Futures Markets in Europe

The price of American cotton tends to be a world price. It is made primarily in the futures markets of the world, which are based on American cotton, because the American crop is the most important and the futures contract is the most highly standardized and the most liquid. The futures markets are the clearing houses for all information which affects either the supply of cotton or the demand for it. This discussion will not be concerned with the problems and technique of handling and marketing spot cotton, for, while they are important and helpful, they are not essential to a fair understanding of the operation and functions of cotton futures markets. Moreover, accurate studies of prices for comparative purposes are more easily made in the futures than the spot cotton markets. There are in all the world only eight cotton futures markets. Three of these, New York, New Orleans, and Chicago, are in America; three of the others, Liverpool, Havre, and Bremen, are in Europe. The seventh one is in Alexandria, and the eighth in Bombay. The first six of these are based on and specify the delivery of cotton of the growth of the United States. The one in Alexandria is based on long staple Egyptian cotton and the one in Bombay on Indian cotton. This discussion will deal entirely with the three European futures markets except where it is advisable to make comparisons with American markets for illustrative purposes. Europe represents the biggest single source of demand for American cotton. Prior to the War, she took normally approximately 56 per cent of the crop. Since the war, the percentage taken by her has not averaged so high. In only one year, 1924-25, has she taken over 50 per cent. When normal conditions are restored, she will probably take about half the American crop. In order therefore to understand the world's price of American cotton and

Production and Use of Synthetic Nitrogenous Fertilisers

AMONG the factors that are shaping the course of nations to-day, few are more important than the possession or control of raw materials. Nature, in her perverse way, has not only made men very unequal in character, energy, and ability, but she has also distributed so capriciously their means of sustenance and development that no civilised country is, or can expect to be, entirely self-supporting in the economic sense. There are many signs that the question of raw materials for food and industry will profoundly affect, if not dominate, international relationships. The United States is crying aloud for sources of supply of rubber, potash, mercury, manganese, long-staple cotton, and sisal; Germany, by her loss of territories in Europe and overseas, has become more dependent than ever upon foreign countries for a host of basic raw materials; Italy, Belgium, and Japan are asking the League of Nations to appoint a committee to consider the subject.

The World's Cotton Supply

The World's Cotton Supply

Recent Industrial Research in Cotton

THE volume of memoirs before us includes eight summaries of the current literature on such properties of cotton and cotton materials as are studied in more detail in the majority of the twenty-three other original papers. Although the plant is the source of supply of raw cotton, it is strange that these memoirs contain only one summary of existing literature on the application of botanical knowledge to immediate cotton industrial needs. The reason is that little trustworthy literature on this important subject exists.

THE COTTON SUPPLY AND SOME OF ITS PROBLEMS

THE COTTON SUPPLY AND SOME OF ITS PROBLEMS

The New England Emigrant Aid Company and English Cotton Supply Associations: Letters of Frederick L. Olmsted, 1857

The New England Emigrant Aid Company and English Cotton Supply Associations: Letters of Frederick L. Olmsted, 1857

1. The New England Emigrant Aid Company and English Cotton Supply Associations: Letters of Frederick L. Olmsted, 1857

1. The New England Emigrant Aid Company and English Cotton Supply Associations: Letters of Frederick L. Olmsted, 1857