190 COTTOlf TN THE MADEAS PEESIDENCT. [cHAP. T. 



283 Eecommends, that as the Farms had proved inju- 

 rious, and that as the Agency was no longer neces- 

 sary, — all Government intervention should be with- 

 drawn. — Sir Henry Pottinger drew special attention 

 to two admissions made by Dr. Wight : — 1st, That so 

 long as the Grovernment Farms were in full operation, 

 no amount of inducement that he could hold out 

 seemed to have any effect in stimulating the Eyots to 

 engage in the cultivation of American Cotton, beyond 

 a very limited extent ; 2nd, That nothing more was 

 wanted to secure the rapid extension of the American 

 plant but a steady market, and moderate competition 



among merchants, to convince Indian grow- 

 Fara. 218. ^^^ ^j^^^ ^-j^^ Cotton was really in demand. 

 The Madras Government inferred from the first ad- 

 Minutes of mission, that the further existence of Gro- 

 Consuita- vemment Agency was injurious ; and from 

 July, 1852. the second admission that it was unne- 

 Part'Betura cessary. Accordingly the Grovernor iu 

 ''^' ' Council recommended that Government 

 should abstain from aU further intervention in the 

 matter. 



284 Dr. Wight's protest againtet the conclusions of 

 Dr. Wight's the Madras Government. — Dr. Wight 

 vemment?"' protested against the inferences which 

 lOthAug.', the Madras Government had drawn from 

 Return ^^ his two admissions on the following 

 ,(1859), p. 243. grounds. 



285 1st, The Government Farms had not proved injuri- 

 ous, but the groundless suspicions of the Ryots. — The 

 true reason why the Eyota had refused to cultivate 

 American Cotton, was not because they were alarmed 

 at the expenditure, but because they believed that it 

 was incurred with the view of raising the rent of the 

 land, so soon as it was ascertained that they could 

 successfully cultivate the Kew Cotton. This belief 

 was not stated in so many words as here set down ; but 

 it was expressed in terms sufficiently clear not to be 

 misunderstood. The Eyots certainly never had any 

 ground for distrusting the honour and uprightness of 

 oar intentions; but still the correctness of the inter- 



