a misapplication of language, and leads to, or fosters, a confusion of ideas which it is absolutely necessary to clear away if we would fairly and impartially set the case in its true light.

If, keeping this in mind, we turn to Mr. Allen's statement, we shall find, that although all the disadvantages on which he dwells do undoubtedly exist, yet, as a matter of fact, Indian Cotton has been, can be, and perhaps is grown, and laid down at its distant port of shipment, at a price which it is notorious the American planter could not make a profit by, or, in other words, the Indian cotton-grower has successfully competed with the American planter, in the only thing in which competition can in any sense be asserted to exist, namely, cheapness.

The condition of the Indian Cotton Trade has powerfully discouraged the cultivator from entering on a competition in regard to quality: for reasons on which it would be irrelevant here to enter, it has been customary to assume that the Indian villager stood, in regard to his Cotton crop, in a position identical with that held by the American planter in regard to his; this assumption granted, it is no wonder that the skill, energy and perseverance of the latter should have been so long and loudly contrasted with the inertness of the former. The assumption is however gratuitous, there is, I believe, ample evidence to prove that the position of the two producers, so far from being identical, or even similar, is not even analogous.

--

So far then as the evidence goes, it certainly warrants the assertion that past defeat need not be numbered among the discouragements to the hopes of the Indian Cotton Trade as to the possibility of competing with America in quality. On the other side, some encouragement may no doubt be derived from what we have on record as to the former success of Indian Cotton growers, when their efforts were directed to the production of certain fine varieties then in demand, and also from the praise which has been awarded to them, by some

of those best qualified to form an opinion on the merits of their methods of agriculture. And there is no doubt that the balance of this evidence will be pretty correctly estimated by those interested in the question:—the question, namely, whether Indian Cotton, indigenous or exotic, grown in large quantities, can be so far improved in quality within the necessary limits of price, as to compete successfully with the American, or whether the cost incurred in raising the standard of quality, will be found to exceed the corresponding advance in the value of the produce?

Reverting to Mr. Allen's estimate of the advantages of the American planter, it should not be forgotten, that although he has virgin soil for which he pays little or nothing, yet before his first crop is picked, a very large outlay must be made: his ground must be cleared, his slaves and farm cattle bought, expensive agricultural implements, costly buildings and machinery provided interest on this money, wear and tear, food of his stock and of his slaves, and pay of his overseers, would seem so to enhance the cost of production, that the best calculations* have fixed at a minimum of 34d. per lb. the actual value of the average crop before it leaves the farm, profits and cost of transport not included—a sum which in all Cotton-producing districts throughout

* Parliamentary Returns, 1857.

Just before the outbreak of the present American war, the highest English authorities on the Cotton Trade asserted that the general conditions of American Cotton cultivation were such as to warrant the belief that the limits of cheapness had been reached, and that an increase in price was the only change which could be reasonably expected. It should however be remembered by any one who makes the past prices of American Cotton an element in his calculations for India, that political changes may materially alter those conditions: that for instance a separation between the North and the Cotton-growing States would open the markets of Europe to the latter, and thus by relieving the planter of 30, or even 40 per cent. on the cost of all machinery, clothes and food, &c., for slaves, and many other things, which he now pays in the shape of protective duties to the States of the North, greatly reduce his outlay, and possibly enable him to reduce his prices.

India, would unquestionably leave a fair margin for an increased outlay on the amelioration of the quality of the present crop.

Lastly, Mr. Allen mentions the great facilities of transport enjoyed by the American planter: but it may be remarked that these facilities did not exist in anticipation of the Cotton Trade of the United States, but that on the contrary steamers multiplied as a result of that trade.

The natural advantages of the American Cotton fields are no doubt great, but those of many of the best Cotton-producing districts of the Bengal Provinces are by no means contemptible, nor is it unreasonable to conjecture that, should a demand for cheap carriage ever arise here, similar to that which has produced the American river steamers, it might perhaps be as successfully met, allowance being made for special conditions in each case. The skill, energy, and hardy perseverance to which Mr. Allen so justly lays claim for the American, are not unknown among the British settlers in the East.

Mr. Landon states, that using the American saw gin, and purchasing the Cotton in seed, from the cultivators, without bestowing any care on the culture, his ginned Cotton commanded a higher price both in the Bombay and in the English market than its competitors.

There is then a course open to the Cotton trader which leads to definite results, however small these may now be: this course has been entered on; in proportion as it is intelligently pursued, its natural results will be developed; the causes which have hitherto had so baneful an effect will be replaced by other and antagonistic causes, whose necessary effects will be amelioration; in direct proportion to the activity of the causes will be the extent of the results produced, and it is not perhaps unwarranted by a fair review of all the evidence on record to assert that the prospect is hopeful.

* Parliamentary Committee of 1858, anti. cit. Question 8339.

We are thus naturally led to consider

3rd.-SOME OF THE DIFFICULTIES WHICH HAVE BEEN SUPPOSED TO IMPEDE THE PROFITABLE CULTIVATION OF COTTON, AND ITS COMMERCE IN INDIA.

Intimately mixed up with almost every portion of the records of which this volume professes to offer a summary, there exist complaints against various difficulties and obstacles, mostly accompanied by confident assertions, to the effect that the removal of what was in each case animadverted upon, would certainly be followed by sudden and striking results.

The impression which must be strongest on the mind of any one studying this subject in the light of subsequent experience is, that these predictions have been almost invariably falsified by the event.

The extent to which this statement might be illustrated by example is embarrassing. The Ganges Canal, however, may furnish a fair instance. Many assertions were made to the effect that as soon as this canal should have been opened to any considerable length, Cotton would be obtainable along its banks to an unlimited extent. This increase of Cotton cultivation was to have been one of the most prominent results, if not the most prominent result, of the increased facilities of irrigation. I have no means of ascertaining accurately how the relation between the different crops within the influence of the Ganges Canal has been affected by the advent of its water supply: but this at all events is certain; namely, that the promised results as to Cotton have not even remotely been realized, if indeed any relative increase of the crops has been effected: in presence of a fact of this kind, it is not easy to form a fair estimate of the value of complaints now made, alleging that the want of irrigating power elsewhere forms an obstacle to the spread of Cotton cultivation, as for instance has lately occurred in the case of the Jullundur Doab, and, indeed, of many other parts of India. When the

E

subject of the irrigation of Cotton is theoretically discussed, the form which the question generally assumes is, whether or not the crop can pay the expenses of irrigation? When a practical solution presents itself, it comes in a different form, as thus :-given the water supply, will Cotton pay better than any thing else to which the new advantage can be turned? and obviously as long as other crops do pay better, it cannot be for the general good that Cotton should be grown.

The possibility of growing, by the aid of irrigation, Cotton of an improved quality, affects the latter question in a way almost too palpable to need mention:-thus, it is certainly good husbandry to grow sugar on an acre of irrigable land, which would yield, if sown with Cotton, 100 lbs., worth 14d. per lb. ; but the question would be radically altered if the acre yielded 400 lbs., worth 23d. or 3d. per lb.

Again, there can be no more doubt that improved means of transport would be a great gain to the country, than that a great extension of canals of irrigation would be desirable; the question for us is, whether we are at liberty to conclude that were any given road constructed, Cotton, rather than something else, would be carried along it? because, if this cannot be rendered fairly probable, the absence of this road ought not to be set down as an obstacle to the increased cultivation of Cotton, so long as other branches of agriculture flourish in spite of the want. On the other hand, even although it be not admissible to conclude that certainly any new canal, or any new road, will materially increase the available supply of Cotton, yet there is always room to hope that such may be the case, and it is certain that the bulky nature of Cotton renders it far more dependent on cheap transport than many other kinds of agricultural produce.

Precisely similar observations apply to the question of land tenure, which was long asserted by many, to be an obstacle of the most fatal kind to any increase in the cultivation of Cotton: here as