September, 1909.] 



215 



Fibres. 



length of staple 24 to 36 inches ; for com- 

 parison it may be stated that a standard 

 sample of China grass had a maximum 

 length of 42 inches. A somewhat pro- 

 longed treatment ot the ribbons with 

 dilute alkali resulted in the production 

 of a clean lustrous fibre. 



The commercial value of ramie ribbons 

 of the quality of this sample would pro- 

 bably be about £25 per ton in London, 

 with haud-scraped China grass at from 

 £25 to £30 per ton. It was pointed out, 

 however, that the demand for ramie is 

 somewhat limited, and that it would 

 therefore appear advisable to proceed 

 very cautiously with the development of 

 the industry. 



The sample of "filasse" consisted of 

 very lustrous fibre, which was of even 

 pale cream colour. When tested for 

 strength and elongation in comparison 

 with standard samples, it was found to 

 be somewhat inferior, as is shown by 

 the following table :— 



Strength. Elongation. 

 Grams, Per cent 

 Standard sample (a)... 36-10 280 

 (&)... 42-70 3'00 

 Ramiefrom Fiji ... 29'67 2-34 



The ultimate fibre had a maximum 

 length of 10 inches and a diameter of 

 0*0010 to 0*0025 inch, with an average of 

 00162 inch. Microscopical examination 

 showed that the material had the 

 characteristic structure of ramie. 



The sample was not in a state suitable 

 for the market, as manufacturers usually 

 prefer to buy the scraped ribbons and 

 to "degum" the material and prepare 

 the filasse themselves. 



AMERICAN COTTON TRADE. 

 Cost op Producing Cotton. 



(Prom the Indian Trade Journal, Vol. 

 XIII., No. 165, May, 27, 1909.) 

 The Farm and Ranch, a paper pub- 

 lished at Dallas, Texas, has been print- 

 ing a voluminous correspondence on 

 " What it costs to produce cotton," con- 

 tributed by farmers, who have given 

 actual figures or estimates based on their 

 own experience. Such estimates are, 

 of course, likely to err, if at all, on the 

 high side, and indeed some of the figures 

 given have been so obviously exaggerat- 

 ed as to draw protests from other 

 farmers. The whole correspondence in 

 nine issues of the paper has been care- 

 fully analysed by Messrs. A. Norden & 

 Co. ol New York, and excluding only 

 a few letters which contained insuffi- 

 cient details, they have tabulated and 



averaged the figures contained in 

 the remaining 45 letters, written by 37 

 farmers in Texas, four in Arkansas, 

 three in Oklahoma, and one in Louisiana. 

 The size of the plantations dealt with 

 ranged from 1 to 100 acres, and the 

 aggregate area was 1,153 acres. The 

 results of this analysis are so interesting 

 that no apology need be made for repro- 

 ducing them in detail, Messrs. Norden 

 say :— 



We have taken everything exactly as 

 given, correcting only some obvious 

 errors, and wherever some one detail 

 was missing we have made full allow- 

 ance, giving the producer the benefit of 

 the doubt. To take up the items in 

 detail, — preparation of the soil, planting 

 and seed, and cultivation, are exactly as 

 given, the only feature to be noted in 

 these items is the fact that in most of 

 the examples practically none of this 

 expense is really an actual cash outlay, 

 but only au allowance of suppositious 

 wages that the farmer makes to himself 

 for the work done by himself at rates 

 varying from $1 to $3 per day, and 

 averaging about f 1*75 per day. "Rent' 

 in most cases is figured at $4 per acre, 

 some paying only $3, while others rent 

 on shares of the produce, in which case 

 it is considerably higher, contingent on 

 the outturn of the crop. Where rent is 

 not mentioned, the farmer owning his 

 own land, we have charged it at $4 per 

 acre. " Wear and tear" on stock and 

 implements is only included by a few, 

 but from those few we gather that 75c. 

 per acre would be a full allowauce. To 

 be sure.one man includes a three hundred 

 dollar pair of mules and several hunched 

 dollars worth of implements in his esti- 

 mate of the cost of one crop of 50 acres, 

 but such figuring is manifestly absurd, 

 as the outfit would serve for at least five 

 crops, possibly ten. We have figured 

 on only five years ' life on such property 

 or 20 per cent, annual deterioration. 

 Many have omitted to account for the 

 seed, or have given the seed to the 

 ginner to pay for ginning. In these 

 cases we have figured the seed at only 

 ¥11 per ton, charging in the ginning 

 column and crediting in the seed column. 

 To arrive at the item "yield of lint 

 cotton per acre," whenever exact figures 

 have not been given, or where the result 

 has been stated only in bales or in seed 

 cotton, we have taken a most unfavour- 

 able basis, viz., one bale to three acres, 

 which is rather less than the average, 

 500 lb. per bale, though Texas cotton 

 averages considerably higher, and the 

 seed cotton to third itself (1,500 lb. seed 

 cotton equals 1,000 lb. seed and 500 lb. 

 lint), though it will probably run 37 to 

 38 per cent. lint. The estimated net cost 



