469 



ditiou in 1874: iu North Carolina, Soutb Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, 

 and Texas. In August, a record of continued improvement was made iu 

 all the States except North Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, and Tennes- 

 see 5 deterioration being noticeable in the latter two. At this point in 

 the comparison with 1873, a decline commences in the condition of 

 cotton of the present season, though it is mainly seen in Arkansas and 

 Tennessee, very slightly in Georgia, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana, 

 while in South Carolina and Texas a higher condition is marked than, 

 in August last year. 



In September this slight difference is widened, especially by the low 

 returns of Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas, resulting from' 

 drought and drying winds and other causes, which would have made 

 still greater reduction of j^roduct but for the fact that losses from the 

 caterpillar were far less than in 1873. In October, there appears a 

 slight improvement iu Georgia, Florids, Texas, Arkansas, and Tennes- 

 see; small reduction in the Carolinas and Alabama; and in Mississippi 

 and Louisiana no change is indicated. The general average for this 

 mouth is 71. 



The pretense of misunderstanding the Department system of crop- 

 reports on the part of a small class of cotton-speculators, whose aim is 

 to deceive for mercenary ends, is palpably dishonest ; the mass of 

 planters, factors, and manufacturers find no difficult}^ in the iiremises^ 

 and express their appreciation of the fullness and honesty of the returns^ 



There are but three general inquiries each season: 1. The acreage,, 

 expressed as a percentage of the total area of the previous year in each 

 county. 2. Condition; normal vitality and growth being the unit of 

 comparison, or 100. 3. Product; or total quantity in each county as, 

 compared with the actual yield of the {trevious year. The first and last 

 of these are each given but once, but "condition" is reported monthly 

 through the season. 



Now, the moment the plant has germinated and emerged from its natal 

 bed, the report of its "condition," its appearance as to vigor and size,., 

 is seized upon by cotton-gamblers, and the figures for condition are in- 

 stantly transmuted into those of ultimate yield, and dishonestly pub- 

 lished as the "Bureau's" prediction of the crop. The next month cotton 

 may be submerged by rain or choked by grass, and the " average" con- 

 dition may be greatl^^ impaired, and be so reported, as it must be if re- 

 ported fairly. [It is only iu bear-gardens on Manhattan Island that 

 " cold, wet springs are usually favorable to cotton which has been pre- 

 viously planted."] Then the figures are produced again, and exhibited 

 as a prediction of half a crop, and the growl of the bears at " inconsistency 

 of the Bureau" in reporting the truth rises above Wall street. Stimulated 

 by the fear of utter failure and blessed with highly favorable weather, 

 planters succeed in cleaning the crop and giving it lease of life and pos- 

 sible vigor and fruitfulness, and the next report, truthful and accurate, 

 makes the condition higher. Perhaps in August or September worms 

 may devastate Avhole districts, and destroy cotton to the value of tens 

 of millions of dollars, reducing the average condition very materially. 

 Then comes an ursine howl from speculators, who growl that the report 

 is inconsistent with that of the previous month. So with all the vicis- 

 situdes and calamities to which the crop is subject, causing reports of 

 condition to vary from month to mouth with the changing circumstances 

 ■which affect present growth and aiiparent health of the plant. Men of 

 sense and judgment know that this cannot be otherwise, while another 

 class either stupidly or wickedly substitute ultimate yield for present 



