‘G02 REPORT—1883. 
These tables show several things :— 
1. That the production of the world’s crop has steadily increased from the first 
development of the trade, except during or immediately succeeding the period 
of the American war. 
2. That the absolute quantity consumed in Great Britain has steadily increased 
in like manner and with the like exception. 
3. That the absolute quantity used in the three other positions has also 
increased in like manner. 
4, That the ratio of increase has been greatly in favour of all the positions 
except that of Great Britain. 
Thus, if we have regard to the first three indications, the matter appears 
wholly a subject for congratulation. . If we have regard to the last indication, the 
appearance is that the cotton trade of Great Britain does not flourish so well as 
that of other countries. ° 
The growth of the trade in other countries has been assisted by the following 
causes: The increased facilities of transit and communication have rendered it 
possible for cotton to reach the point of manufacture, almost wherever that point 
may be, at about the same cost; thus the raw material, which formerly (so far as 
it was used upon the continent of Europe) was landed in Liverpool, goes direct 
from the cotton-growing States to the Continent, and our competitors there have not 
now to bear double port charges, double freights, double or treble profits zm 
transitu. 
The British goodwill of the business is being narrowed by the diffusion of the 
trade, consequent upon its being made easy to all. 
Under the second head the tariffs imposed by foreign nations upon British 
manufactures, and the restrictions upon our own labour imposed by our Factory 
Acts, press adversely upon the trade in Great Britain. Under the Act of 1848 
the hours of labour in cotton mills were reduced from 69 to 60, and by the Act of 
1870 to 563. The hours worked on the Continent are generally from 68 to 72, a 
difference of about 30 per cent. 
The cost incident to the spinning of cotton may be roughly divided into five 
elements—viz., (1) cost of raw material, (2) cost of mills and machinery, (3) cost 
of power, (4) cost of labour, (5) cost of reaching the consumer. 
In the first-named element we have lost the advantage we had, as before 
‘explained. 
In the second we might have a distinct advantage, for the mills im working 
condition erected in England represent a value. of about 1/. per spindle and 20. per 
loom, while the mills of the Continent and the United States represent a value ~ 
of about three times that amount; but this advantage is in great part, if not 
entirely, oyerbalanced by the number of hours worked by our competitors being — 
much greater, thus reducing the charge per pound of production, represented under | 
the head of rent, depreciation, and interest. 
In the third we have if anything some little advantage, for coal is nowhere 
cheaper than in Lancashire, although, by the great economy of fuel now possible — 
in consequence of the improvements in engines, boilers, and machinery, the relative 
importance of this element of costis much smaller than formerly, and our advantage 
is a lessened one. 
In the fourth element, labour, we are under’a distinct disadvantage. 
In the fifth element of cost we have no appreciable advantage in neutral markets, 
while within their own boundaries our competitors have an advantage in a saving 
of carriage. 
Of these five principal elements of cost three may be regarded as rigid, and not 
within the control of the spinners, the two others being elastic and variable at the 
will of the workers. They are—(1) rent, interest and depreciation which follow 
the number of hours worked, and (2) the cost of labour. 
The competition to which we are parties is not between labour and capital 
within our own boundaries, but between labour at home and labour abroad, and 
not wholly between English and foreign labour, but,in a great measure, between 
Lancashire labour at home and Lancashire labour abroad; for not only are we 
