By A. M. Agelasto, Specialist in Cotton Classing, Bureau of Agricul¬ 
 tural Economies; C. B. Doyle, Botanist, Bureau of Plant Industry; 
 G. S. Meloy, Investigator in Cotton Marketing; and O. C. Stine, 
 Agricultural Economist, Bureau of Agricultural Economics. 
 
 Cotton the Great Crop of the South. 
 
 5 HE greatest commercial crop of the United 
 States is cotton. The corn crop exceeds 
 it in total value (Fig. 1), but much the 
 greater part of that crop is consumed 
 on the farms where grown, whereas all 
 of the lint and most of the seed of the 
 cotton crop is sold off the farms. In 
 comparing crop values often only the value of the lint of 
 the cotton is considered. The hay crops and the wheat crop 
 are usually about equal to and sometimes greater in value 
 than the lint of the cotton crop, but, including the value of 
 the cotton seed, the cotton crop stands second only to corn. 
 Although American mills consume about half the crop, the 
 value of the exports of raw cotton usually exceeds that of 
 the exports of any other crop. 
 
 Cotton is the great crop of the South. It is the chief and 
 often almost the only source of income to a large proportion 
 
 323 
 
324 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, 1921. 
 
 Fig. 1.—Note that cotton holds first place in exports hut not in total value of 
 the crop. Only the lint of the cotton is here included in the value of the 
 crop. Adding the value of the seed, cotton would stand second to corn 
 only in total value. 
 
 of the farmers in the Southern States. It is so important 
 that low prices or any other factor which greatly reduces 
 the profitableness of the crop greatly disturbs the economic 
 life of the Southern States. When the cotton crop is good 
 and brings good prices the South is prosperous. 
 
 There is a division of labor between the States of the North 
 and those of the South by which the North depends upon the 
 South for cotton clothing or the raw materials out of which 
 to manufacture the clothing and for products of the cotton 
 seed, and the South in turn buys many of the products of 
 farms of the North. It follows, therefore, that when the 
 South is prosperous it furnishes a good market for corn, 
 flour, meat, and dairy products, and that a prosperous North 
 makes a good demand for cotton and cotton products. 
 
 World Production. 
 
 Such a large part of the cotton crop is marketed abroad 
 that the prosperity of the South also depends to a consider¬ 
 able extent upon the conditions of the foreign markets for 
 cotton. It is important, therefore, to consider the world’s 
 supply of and demand for cotton. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 325 
 
 The United States has been for many years the world’s 
 greatest cotton producer. India, China, Egypt, and Brazil 
 are the most important competitive producers. Many other 
 countries produce small amounts of cotton. (See Figs. 2 
 and 3.) 
 
 India. 
 
 Some cotton is grown in nearly all parts of India, but most 
 of it grows in the western half of the country. As in the 
 United States, there is a high degree of specialization in cot- 
 
 Fig. 2.—From 1891 to 1914 the cotton crops of Egypt, India, and the United 
 States nearly doubled. The total crop of 1914 was the largest ever produced. 
 Last year the crops in Egypt and the United States were the smallest in 
 many years. 
 
 ton growing in some districts. The area devoted to cotton in 
 India equals about two-thirds of the area planted in the 
 United States, but the low yields per acre return a total crop 
 about one-third as large. The production of India varies con¬ 
 siderably from year to year, with a tendency to increase. The 
 crop of 1919 was the largest yet produced. (See Fig. 2.) 
 
 Egypt. 
 
 The cultivable land in Egypt is limited to the Delta and 
 a narrow strip along the Nile, of which nearly one-third is in 
 cotton. The acreage is only about one-twentieth that of the 
 United States, but large yields return a crop about one-tenth 
 as large. The production of Egypt haa declined since 1914 
 and in 1921 was the lowest in many years. 
 
326 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19 6 <ll 
 
 Fig. 3. —The United States produces over half of the world’s cotton crop. The total crop of China is placed second by various esti¬ 
 mates. In commercial production India is second. Cotton is grown in many parts of Africa and South America, but only in small 
 quantities. Australia also grows a small quantity. Cotton requires a long season of w’arm weather for growth, and proper maturity. 
 Its latitudinal limits north and south fall between 35 and 45°, depending upon elevation and other conditions affecting the length 
 of the frostless season. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 327 
 
 South America. 
 
 Cotton grows as far south in South America as the t wenty - 
 eighth parallel, which includes the northern part of Argen¬ 
 tina. Within the zone in which the plant thrives the area 
 suitable for growing it is limited. In a large part of the 
 zone the altitude offsets the effects of latitude and tempers 
 the tropical climate so much as to exclude this crop. In 
 other parts the rainfall is too heavy. Very little cotton is 
 found in the Tropics, where the annual rainfall amounts to 
 more than 60 inches. The chief cotton-producing regions 
 are the drier eastern sections of Brazil and the coastal zone 
 of Peru. 
 
 Some authorities believe that Brazil has an extensive po¬ 
 tential area for cotton production. Quite recently production 
 has developed rapidly in Sao Paulo, southeastern Brazil. In 
 this region cotton must compete with the growing of coffee. 
 Likewise an increase has occurred in the production of 
 Argentina in recent years, but the total production of Argen¬ 
 tina is still rather small. 
 
 China. 
 
 There are no authoritative statistics of production in China. 
 Cotton production has developed rapidly in recent years, 
 replacing the opium poppy in many regions. The known 
 commercial crop exceeds 1 million bales. Since the domes¬ 
 tic consumption is large, the total crop has been estimated to 
 be about 4 million bales. 
 
 Principal Commercial Types of Cotton. 
 
 Wild species of cotton (Gossypium) are found in tropical 
 regions of both hemispheres, and there are hundreds of cul¬ 
 tivated varieties, differing in plant characters, as well as 
 in the length, strength, and fineness of fiber. Thirty-eight 
 principal commercial types are recognized at Liverpool, the 
 chief cotton market of the world. A broad grouping into 
 five general classes according to uses and commercial values 
 is as follows: 
 
 (1) Sea Island cotton ('Gossypium barbadense) is a native of 
 tropical America. It has yellow flowers with purple spots, bolls 
 mostly 3-locked, black seeds, fuzzy only at the ends, and very long, 
 silky fiber. “ Fancy Sea Island,” grown on the islands and mainland 
 along the coast of South Carolina, has a fiber 2 inches long, sometimes 
 
328 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 Fig. 4.—Principal commercial types of cotton. Combed lint of five important 
 types: (1) Sea Island; (2) Egyptian; (3) upland long-staple; (4) upland 
 short-staple; (5) Asiatic. (Natural size.) 
 
The Cotton Situation* 329. 
 
 even longer, and is the most valuable of the world’s cottons, sur¬ 
 passing all other types in length, strength, and fineness. Most of the 
 Sea Island crop, with a staple of 11 to If inches, is grown farther 
 inland in Georgia and Florida and is known commercially as “ Flori- 
 das ” and “Georgias.” Before the coming of the boll weevil the 
 average yearly production of Sea Island cotton in the United States 
 was about 90,000 running bales, of which the fancy grades represented 
 about one-tenth. Since the invasion of the boll weevil the production 
 of Sea Island cotton has rapidly declined, and in the last few years 
 the crop of the United States has been a failure. In 1920 production ) 
 practically ceased, the crop amounting to less than 2,000 bales, whereas ; 
 in 1916 the production was about 116,000 bales. The fenjainder of 
 the Sea Island crop of the world, probably amounting to 10,000 bales, 
 is produced mostly in the West Indies, principally St. Vincent, Bar¬ 
 bados, and St. Kitts, and in Peru. (See staple No. 1, Fig, 4.) 
 
 (2) Egyptian cotton ( Gossypium barbadense ) is similar to Sea 
 
 Island in the general appearance of the plants, and has a fine, silky, j 
 strong fiber. The staple is from lie to If inches long, and is second j 
 in value only to the Sea Island. Egypt furnishes the hulk of the j 
 annual crop, averaging about 1,250,000 bales of 500 pounds each, of i 
 which from 150,000 to 350,000 bales have been exported to the United ; 
 States. Egyptian cotton is also produced in the irrigated valleys j 
 of Arizona and California, the first commercial planting being made I 
 in 1912, although it was experimentally grown in thi&;country many j 
 years before that time. The American industry has rapidly grown j 
 from a production of 7,000 bales in 1916 in the Salt Rrvier Valley of j 
 Arizona to a total in both Arizona and Californa of about 100,000 \ 
 bales in 1920. (See staple No. 2, Fig. 4.) i 
 
 (3) Upland long-staple cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum ), grown chiefly • 
 in the United States, occupies a commercial position between the 
 Egyptian and the Upland short staples. The plants resemble those 
 of the short-staple type, having unspotted white flowers, bolls 4 or • 
 5-locked, and seeds usually well covered with white, brown, or i 
 green fuzz, in addition to the lint. The staple ranges in length from ; 
 li to If inches, and for some purposes competes with Egyptian. 
 Most of the Upland long-staple crop of the United States is pro¬ 
 duced in the delta lands of Mississippi, in the Pecos and Red River 
 Valleys of Texas, in Oklahoma, Arkansas, California, and South 
 Carolina. The annual production is about 1,500,000 bales." (See j. 
 staple No. 3, Fig. 4.) 
 
 (4) Upland short-staple ( Gossypium hirsutum) constitutes about 
 92 per cent of the cotton crop of the United States and about 50 per 
 cent of the world’s crop of 20,000,000 bales. “ American Middling,” - 
 the standard short-staple grade, is the basis of price quotations for ! 
 all short-staple cottons. The staple varies in length from five- 
 eighths to 1 inch, with some varieties exceeding an inch when grown 
 under the most favorable conditions. Hundreds of varieties are 
 cultivated in the American Cotton Belt, differing in habits of growth, 
 size of bolls, earliness of opening, abundance, length, and uniformity 
 of staple. American Upland varieties have been introduced into 
 
330 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 Russian Turkestan and Transcaucasia, and now constitute the major 
 portion of the crop in those regions. They are also being grown 
 in India, China, Chosen, Africa, Asia Minor, and Brazil. (See staple 
 No. 4, Fig. 4.) 
 
 (5) Asiatic cottons include Gossypium herbaceum and several re¬ 
 lated botanical species, indicum, neglectum, and arboreum. The 
 staple is short, often only three-eighths to three-fourths of an inch, 
 but strong and rather rough. Asiatic cotton is grown in India, 
 China, Asia Minor, Persia, Indo-China, and Japan, but in several 
 districts is giving place to the American Upland type. The total 
 volume of the crop is large but unknown, most 'of it being applied 
 to domestic or local uses. (See staple No. 5, Fig. 4.) 
 
 Shifts in Cotton Production. 
 
 In the development of the United States the cotton crop 
 has moved across the Cotton Belt from east to west. Areas 
 have been tried out north of the areas in which cotton is now 
 grown. Practically all possible available area for produc¬ 
 tion in the United States has had a trial. Within the limits 
 of suitable climatic conditions, production expands or con¬ 
 tracts with changes in prices or in the profitableness of grow¬ 
 ing the crop. Shifts and changes in the distribution of the 
 crop from 1839 to date are shown by Figures 5 to 9, inclu¬ 
 sive. 
 
 In 1839 the cotton crop occupied only about half the area 
 that it now occupies. Texas and the Indian territory west 
 of Arkansas were not producing cotton. East of Texas all 
 of the territory of the Cotton Belt had been opened to occupa¬ 
 tion by cotton planters and was being rapidly developed. 
 The addition of large areas of new land that was well suited 
 to the cultivation of cotton increased production so rapidly 
 in the decade 1839-1849 that prices fell to a very low point. 
 Notwithstanding low prices, production increased 50 per cent. 
 Prices were better during the decade 1849-1859, and produc¬ 
 tion continued to increase in all parts of the Cotton Belt, 
 the greatest gains being made in the Southwestern States. 
 In this decade Texas and Arkansas began to contribute to 
 the annual crops of the United States. In this and the pre¬ 
 ceding decade, railroads were constructed from the coast to 
 the interior in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and 
 Alabama, increasing the transportation facilities and thereby 
 encouraging the further development of cotton production 
 in the interior of these States. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 331 
 
 The blockade during the Civil War temporarily ruined the 
 cotton industry of the South. During the war some cotton 
 
 Fig. 5.—More than three-fourths of the cotton crop of 1839 was grown east 
 of the Mississippi River. Mississippi was the leading State and Georgia 
 next. Several counties in Illinois and Missouri reported cotton. 
 
 Fig. 6. —There was a great shift in area and a great increase in production 
 between 1839 and 1859. The black prairie of Alabama and Mississippi 
 and the alluvial lands along the Mississippi contributed largely to the 
 increase in production. New territory was added in eastern Texas; 
 
 was produced, but for the most part agricultural activities 
 were diverted to the production of food. In 1865 the South 
 
332 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, 1921. 
 
 was again free to return to a high degree of specialization in 
 cotton. The recovery of production was necessarily slow. 
 
 FIG. 7.—By 1879 production had practically recovered from the effects of the 
 Civil War. It had shifted farther westward in Texas and Indian Terri¬ 
 tory. In the Bast the effects of the use of fertilizers on the upper Coastal 
 Plain and Piedmont began to show in increased production. 
 
 Fig. 8.— Texas trebled her crop between 1879 and 1899. In the East produc¬ 
 tion continued to increase with the use of more fertilizer. At this date 
 the boll weevil had begun to operate in Texas but had covered very little 
 ground. (See Fig. 23.) 
 
 A 
 
The Cotton Situation . 333 
 
334 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 The crop of 1866 was less than 2 million bales, which was less 
 than half that of 1859 and a little greater than the crop of 
 1839. High prices stimulated production by the farmers 
 along the northern border of the Cotton Belt and in Arkansas 
 and Texas. It was not so difficult to reorganize agricultural 
 activities where the farms were small and worked largely by 
 white labor as it was to reorganize the large plantations which 
 had been worked by slave labor. By 1879 conditions in the 
 South were fairly stable again, and the crop of that year was 
 the largest that had ever been produced. All the States, 
 except Alabama and Louisiana, produced more cotton in 1879 
 than in 1859. 
 
 Production doubled between 1879 and 1898. In the West 
 the increase in production was largely from new lands. The 
 expansion of railroads in Texas was followed by the rapid 
 development of cotton production in the Black Waxy Prairie 
 region, grazing and grain farming giving way to cotton. 
 Production in Arkansas and Oklahoma had also increased 
 greatly. In the East there was an increase in production, 
 largely as the result of the extensive use of fertilizer on sandy 
 soils and of improvements in methods of production. 
 
 The development of Oklahoma and western Texas added 
 a large acreage to the cotton-producing area between 1899 
 and 1909. The total acreage increased 32 per cent in the 
 decade and continued to increase up to 1914. This period 
 is marked by the spread of the boll weevil, by the intensi¬ 
 fication of efforts to produce higher yields and better quali¬ 
 ties, by the introduction of cotton into the irrigated districts 
 of southern California and Arizona, by the great increase in 
 the value of cotton seed, by the rapid development of cotton 
 manufacturing in the South, and by increased competition 
 from foreign countries. 
 
 Since 1914 production of cotton has been reduced con¬ 
 siderably by the ravages of the boll weevil. The crop of 
 1919 was only a little larger than the crop of 1909, which 
 was a short crop for that period. The crop of 1921 was 
 greatly reduced by the boll weevil and was the shortest 
 crop that has been produced since 1895. It may be noted 
 that the heaviest reductions were made in the regions most 
 recently infested by the boll weevil. (Compare Figs. 9 
 and 23.) 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 335 
 
 Fig. 10.—The acreage of cotton expanded rapidly from 1866 to 1913. The 
 trend since 1913 has been downward. The yield per acre varies greatly from 
 year to year, the trend was upward from 1890 to 1907 and has been down¬ 
 ward since the latter date, and last year was the lowest recorded. The crop 
 of last year was the smallest since 1895. 
 
 / 
 
336 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, 1921. 
 
 Acreage, Yield, and Production. 
 
 Beginning with the earliest date for which acreage data 
 are available, the area of cotton harvested has quadrupled. 
 The very rapid increase from 1866 to 1880 was a process of 
 recovering after the Civil War. The rapid expansion from 
 1893 to 1911 was for the most part an expansion westward 
 in Texas and Oklahoma. In recent years a tendency seems 
 to be developing to maintain a level or possibly to reduce 
 the area in cotton. The ravages of the boll weevil have 
 caused reductions in acreage in the worst infested areas. 
 These reductions have been offset by expansion of cultivated 
 areas in which the weevil has been less destructive. 
 
 Yields per acre fluctuate greatly from year to year. The 
 average for 1921 was the lowest of which there is a record. 
 The trend of yields was downward to 1890, after which it 
 was upward for 16 years, and is again downward. Three 
 major factors in the trend of yields are shifts in area, fer¬ 
 tilizers, and boll weevil. The downward trend in the first 
 period noted was due largely to expanding low-yielding 
 areas, the upward tendency, developed later, was due largely 
 to increased use of fertilizers in some States, and the later 
 downward tendency is caused primarily by the activities of 
 the, boll weevil. 
 
 Production fluctuates with yields and follows a composite 
 trend between acreage and yield. Unusually large areas 
 planted from 1910 to 1914 and good yields produced very 
 large crops, the crop of 1914 being the largest ever produced. 
 Since 1914 the crops have averaged about the same as for the 
 period 1904—1909, and last year’s crop was the smallest pro¬ 
 duced since 1895. 
 
 Diversification of Crops in the South. 
 
 The averages of crops in the South as reported by the 
 censuses of 1880-1921, inclusive, show no decided tendency 
 toward diversification until the lart decade. Several new 
 crops have come into the South in this period and now occupy 
 considerable areas. The area sown to rice has increased over 
 50 per cent but is still a small percentage of the total cul¬ 
 tivated area. In recent years peanut growing has developed 
 some importance. Soy beans and cowpeas are comparatively 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 337 
 
 new crops in the South. Kafir and milo are new crops in 
 Oklahoma and Texas. The total acreage of all these new 
 crops compared with the total acreage of cotton or corn is not 
 very great, but together with all other crops they now make 
 up about one-third of the total crop area. 
 
 Changes in acreages of selected crops in the cotton-growing States , 
 
 1879-1919. 
 
 - 
 
 Number of acres, 
 
 000 omitted. 
 
 Per cent of total acreage of principal 
 crops. 
 
 1919 
 
 1909 
 
 1899 
 
 1889 
 
 1879 
 
 1919 
 
 1909 
 
 1899 
 
 1889 
 
 1879 
 
 Rice. 
 
 779 
 
 610 
 
 342 
 
 161 
 
 174 
 
 0.8 
 
 0.7 
 
 0.5 
 
 0.3 
 
 0.4 
 
 Kafir, milo, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 \ 
 
 
 maize, etc. 
 
 2,635 
 
 1,108 
 
 86 
 
 
 
 2.7 
 
 1.4 
 
 .1 
 
 
 
 Hay—tame or 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 wild grasses.... 
 
 4,360 
 
 3,518 
 
 1,950 
 
 1,543 
 
 454 
 
 4.5 
 
 4.4 
 
 3.0 
 
 3.2 
 
 1.1 
 
 Annual legumes— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 hay.. 
 
 1,339 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.4 
 
 
 
 
 
 Sorghum kafir— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 forage. .. 
 
 2,566 
 
 1,148 
 
 749 
 
 
 
 2.7 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.1 
 
 
 
 Peanuts. 
 
 913 
 
 724 
 
 398 
 
 143 
 
 
 .9 
 
 .9 
 
 .6 
 
 .3 
 
 
 Total. 
 
 12,592 
 
 7,108 
 
 3,525 
 
 1,847 
 
 628 
 
 13.1 
 
 8.8 
 
 5.3 
 
 3.9 
 
 1.6 
 
 Locally marked changes have taken place in the relative 
 acreages of the different crops. The destructive activities 
 of the boll weevil have been an important factor in bring¬ 
 ing about these changes. The acreage of cotton in Georgia 
 in 1919 was con¬ 
 siderably below 
 the acreage of 
 1909. The reduc¬ 
 tion in cotton 
 acreage here was 
 offset largely by 
 an increase in the 
 acreage of corn. 
 
 There was a con¬ 
 siderable increase 
 
 in the acreage of FlG * 1:t -— From 1909 to 1919 the percentage of land 
 , .... cultivated in crops other than corn and cotton in 
 
 nay, especially the Southern States increased considerably. 
 
 5689°— 22-2 
 
 PERCENT OF TOTAL CROP ACREAGE 
 COTTON, CORN AND OTHER CROPS 
 
 COTTON GROWING STATES, 1879-1919 
 
 PER CT. 
 
 40 
 
 30 
 
 20 
 
 10 
 
 0 
 
 
 -inrrQltx' 
 
 - CORN 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 OT//£/i CffOA 
 
 ’£ - - -' 
 
 
 -5^ 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1879 
 
 IAAA 
 
 1899 
 
 1909 
 
 1919 
 
338 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 legume hay, otherwise there were no very significant changes. 
 Similar but even more striking changes have taken place in 
 Mississippi. In a few States cotton has increased in im¬ 
 portance, offsetting, in a measure, the decline in the relative 
 importance of cotton in the States which have been seriously 
 affected by the boll weevil. 
 
 In the last year, 1921, there seemed to be every reason for 
 reducing the acreage planted to cotton and increasing the 
 acreage planted to corn. According to the latest estimate, 
 
 the result was a 
 reduction of the 
 cotton crop for 
 1921 to approxi¬ 
 mately the acreage 
 for 1915, a total 
 reduction from 
 1920 of about 10 
 per cent. The 
 high freight rates 
 on corn from the 
 North encouraged 
 the increase in 
 corn production. 
 For a long time 
 we have had this 
 swinging from corn to cotton and from cotton to corn, main¬ 
 taining a relation of about 50 to 50 between them. 
 
 The number of live stock in the cotton-producing States 
 has increased in the last 50 years, but not as rapidly as has 
 the area planted to cotton. The number of cattle doubled 
 and the number of swine increased about 25 per cent. The 
 increase in live stock is supported by the increase in tame 
 grass and legume hay. It is difficult to compare exactly the 
 last two censuses. The change in number between the last 
 two decades seems disappointing to one who believes that 
 the South would profit by keeping more live stock. 
 
 The Cotton Belt. 
 
 The term “ Cotton Belt ” as it is generally used applies to 
 that area of specialized cotton production in the South ex¬ 
 tending from the Atlantic coast through North Carolina, 
 South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, 
 
 NUMBER OF CATTLE AND SWINE 
 TREND COMPARED WITH COTTON ACREAGE 
 COTTON GROWING STATES, 1680-1920 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Fig. 12.—Census returns of live stock are not 
 strictly comparable from date to date. The 
 figures available indicate that live stock has not 
 increased as rapidly as the acreage of cotton. 
 
The Cotton Situation . 
 
 339 
 
 Fig. 13. —Excepting in southern Florida, only cotton-growing counties of some importance are included. Compare Figures 13 and 9 and 
 note the distribution of cotton production in relation to soils. The most productive soils are the bottoms of the Mississippi and 
 tributary rivers, the black prairies of Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas. Fertilizer makes the upper Coastal Plain and the Piedmont 
 Plateau of Atlantic Coast States very productive. 
 
340 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19%1. 
 
 Arkansas, western Tennessee, and northern Louisiana, and 
 into Texas and Oklahoma. The densest production of cotton 
 is found on the soils most suitable for its production in the 
 center of this belt. (Figs. 9 and 13.) Both soil and climate 
 are very important factors in the determination of areas 
 suitable for cotton production. 
 
 About two-thirds of the Cotton Belt consists of a broad 
 coastal plain, composed principally of sedimentary materials, 
 bordering and largely derived from two ancient and much- 
 eroded mountain masses, the Appalachian Highlands (in¬ 
 cluding the Piedmont) in the east and the Ozark Highlands 
 in the west. From these highland areas rivers radiate across 
 the coastal plain, bordered, especially along their lower 
 courses, by swampy flood plains often several miles wide; and 
 in the broad depression between these two highlands the Mis¬ 
 sissippi River flows southward, dividing the Cotton Belt into 
 an eastern and western section approximately equal in area, 
 in acreage of improved land, and in production of cotton. 
 Beyond the boundary of the coastal plain the Cotton Belt 
 includes northern and western marginal regions, comprising 
 a portion of the Piedmont Plateau and of the valleys associ¬ 
 ated with the Cumberland Plateau and Blue Ridge Moun¬ 
 tains in the east, together with the valleys of the southern 
 Ozarks (Ouachita and Boston Mountains) and a portion of 
 the prairies and great plains of Texas and Oklahoma in the 
 west. 
 
 Soils of the Cotton Belt. 
 
 Cotton is grown on practically all well-drained types of 
 soil in the Cotton Belt, but a comparison of the map showing 
 distribution of production with the map showing soils brings 
 out the fact that certain types of soil seem to be much more 
 suitable for cotton production than other types. (See Figs. 
 9, 13.) The most productive soils in a normal season are the 
 dark-colored clay lands, particularlv those rich in lime, such 
 as the black prairies of Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas, and 
 the red, brown, and black well-drained river bottom land and 
 the second bottoms such as are found in the Mississippi, Ten¬ 
 nessee, and Arkansas. The sandy loams of the Coastal Plain 
 and the red subsoil Piedmont lands, when fertilized, also give 
 high yields of cotton. The use of fertilizer permits the 
 growing of cotton on light sandy land which would other 
 
The Cotton Situation . 
 
 341 
 
 wise give yields too low to be profitable. The red prairie of 
 Texas and Oklahoma east Oklahoma prairie and that part 
 of the Grand Prairie and Edwards Plateau of Texas are also 
 productive soils, but in western Oklahoma and Texas the 
 yields of the crops are frequently reduced by drought. (For 
 detailed description of the soils shown on the map on page 
 339, see Atlas of American Agriculture, cotton section.) 
 
 Climate of the Cotton Belt . 1 
 
 Although the most noticeable differences in the density 
 of cotton acreage and variations in yield per acre within the 
 Cotton Belt are due principally to soil conditions, the outer 
 boundaries of cotton production are determined almost en¬ 
 tirely by climatic factors. The Cotton Belt has an average 
 summer temperature of 77 degrees along the northern bound¬ 
 ary. This temperature appears to be the limit, beyond which 
 commercial production becomes unprofitable. In the south¬ 
 ern portion of the Cotton Belt the summer temperature is 80 
 to 85 degrees. Along the northern margin of the Cotton Belt 
 the last killing frost in spring occurs on an average about 
 April 10, and the first killing frost in fall about October 25, 
 so that the frostless season is about 200 days. In the southern 
 portion of the Cotton Belt the last killing frost in spring 
 occurs about March 10 on the average, and the first killing 
 frost in fall seldom before November 25, the frostless season 
 being 260 days or more in length. 
 
 The average annual precipitation in the Cotton Belt 
 ranges from 23 inches in western Oklahoma and Texas to 
 55 inches in eastern North Carolina and 60 inches in southern 
 Mississippi, but throughout much of the belt is between 30 
 and 50 inches. The spring rainfall ranges from 6 inches in 
 western Texas to 16 inches in Arkansas and southern Mis¬ 
 sissippi, being heavier in the Mississippi Valley States than 
 in Texas or the South Atlantic States. The summer rainfall 
 is somewhat greater than that of the other seasons, especially 
 in the southern and eastern portion of the belt, reaching a 
 maximum of 20 inches in southern Mississippi and in eastern 
 North and South Carolina, while in the black prairie region 
 of central Texas the amount received averages only 8 inches. 
 Autumn is the driest season of the year, practically all the 
 
 1 Taken from the “ Cotton ” section of the Atlas of American Agriculture, 
 page 9. 
 
342 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19%1. 
 
 Fig. 14. — In southern Texas planting begins about March 1, and the date 
 becomes later going north to the northern border of the Cotton Belt, where 
 it begins about April 21. The planting of cotton begins generally about 10 
 to 20 days after the last killing frost in spring. 
 
 Fig. 15.—Cotton picking begins early in July in southern Texas. Through the 
 center of the Cotton Belt it begins in the latter part of August and along 
 the northern border not until about September 11. The southern part of the 
 Cotton Belt has a long picking season, but along the northern border the 
 cotton must be picked as early as possible to escape the frost. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 343 
 
 important cotton regions receiving less than 10 inches of rain 
 during the fall months. February and November are the 
 wettest months in the Mississippi Valley States, in Alabama, 
 and in northern Georgia. August is the wettest month in 
 the Carolinas and May in Texas and Oklahoma. October 
 and November are the driest months throughout practically 
 the entire Cotton Belt. 
 
 Crop Combinations in the Cotton Belt. 
 
 The high degree of specialization in cotton production in 
 the Cotton Belt is in part explained by three things: First, 
 the world demand for cotton is great, and the areas having 
 especially favorable climate and other conditions are re¬ 
 stricted. Second, cotton provides rather steady employment 
 for labor from early in the spring to a little beyond the 
 middle of the summer and from early fall to early winter. 
 In fact, it provides so fully for the employment of labor 
 throughout the season that a cotton farmer usually chooses 
 his other crops more with a view to making the business and 
 home partly self-sufficing than he does with a view to pro¬ 
 viding profitable employment for labor at times when cotton 
 does not require attention. (See Fig. 18, seasonal distribu¬ 
 tion of labor.) Third, cotton is marketed direct—that is, it 
 is not disposed of through live stock. If it were a crop to be 
 fed, a farmer would in all probability need to give more 
 attention than he does to the production of other crops which 
 would be supplementary from the standpoint of caring for 
 live stock. As it is, he produces forage and grain crops 
 mainly for a few head of work stock. Considering these 
 things, it is not surprising that cotton farmers are not in¬ 
 clined to produce more corn, sorghum, oats, cowpeas, peanuts, 
 sweet potatoes, etc., than they themselves can make good use 
 of in the course of producing and marketing cotton. 
 
 The accompanying map (Fig. 16) shows the Cotton Belt 
 divided north and south and east and west on the basis of 
 certain differences in the choice of crops grown with cotton. 
 The line drawn north and south through Oklahoma and 
 Texas indicates where corn begins rather definitely to give 
 way to kafir and other grain sorghums. But for the dryness 
 of the climate to the west of this line, corn would hold its 
 place on cotton farms throughout the Cotton Belt. 
 
344 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 Fig. 16. —North of the line drawn through the Cotton Belt from Virginia on 
 the east down through the Southern States and extending to the Mexican 
 border on the west wheat and other small grains appear in the cropping 
 system. South of this line small grains do not appear, their place being 
 taken by leguminous crops. Another line drawn from the Kansas border 
 across Oklahoma and Texas separates the kaflr-producing area from the 
 corn-producing area. 
 
 COTTON ACREAGE W 
 
 70 % AND OVER 
 
 COTTON ACREAGE, AND PERCENTAGE 
 COTTON ACREAGE IS OF ACREACE OF ALL CROPS 
 
 STATE 
 
 COTTON 
 
 ACREAGE 
 
 PERCENT 
 OP ALL 
 CROPS 
 
 Tenn. . . 
 
 807,770 
 
 10.9 
 
 Ha_ 
 
 110,562 
 
 6.0 
 
 Mo ... . 
 
 110,027 
 
 .7 
 
 Ariz. . . . 
 
 106,283 
 
 22.5 
 
 Calif. . . 
 
 87,308 
 
 1.3 
 
 Va. 
 
 47,032 
 
 .8 
 
 N. Mex. . 
 
 10,666 
 
 .9 
 
 Other.. 
 
 5,355 
 
 
 u. s 
 
 33,740,106 
 
 9.0 
 
 Fig. 17.—Considering State totals, the greatest specialization in cotton is in 
 Texas, with South Carolina second and Mississippi third. In several areas 
 over 70 per cent of all the land in crops is in cotton. The largest area of 
 this kind is along the Mississippi River in Mississippi and Arkansas. 
 
The Cotton Situation . 
 
 345 
 
 North of the 
 line running 
 east and west 
 through the 
 Cotton Belt 
 the acreage of 
 small grains 
 (wheat, rye, 
 etc.) exceeds 
 the acreage of 
 large - seeded 
 annual leg- 
 umes (cow- 
 peas, peanuts, 
 velvet beans, 
 etc.). South 
 of the line the 
 acreage of 
 large - seeded 
 annual leg¬ 
 umes exceeds 
 the acreage of 
 small grains. 
 The choice of 
 the small 
 grains in the 
 northern divi¬ 
 sion of the Cot¬ 
 ton Belt tends 
 to be wheat to 
 the north and 
 oats to the 
 south. The 
 oats are sown 
 in the autumn 
 instead of the 
 spring as in 
 the North. In 
 the southern 
 division of the 
 belt, where 
 
 if) 
 
 CL 
 
 O 
 
 cc 
 
 o 
 
 cc -£ 
 o < 
 
 OQ CD 
 
 < < 
 _J -J 
 < 
 
 Z -J 
 
 < < 
 
 2 GC 
 
 H 
 
 u_ ^ 
 
 Ou 
 
 z o 
 
 2z 
 
 I— 
 
 3 CO 
 CD Lii 
 
 a: 
 
 H 
 
 if) 
 
 O 
 
 if) 
 
 < 
 
 id 
 
 CO 
 
 z 
 
 3 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 if > 
 
 N0llVHVd3He) N01A0D- 
 
 N0llVUVd3Sd NUOO-jgg 
 
 s a 
 
 crops like cowpeas, peanuts, and velvet beans are more 
 
 Fig. 18.—The periods of slack work come in midsummeir—July and August—and in midwinter—December and January. No crops are 
 grown on which labor can be utilized during these periods of slack work. Of course, in the farthest South winter vegetables can be 
 grown in the slack winter period. Some grass harvest comes in August, but it is not important. The picking season is the limiting 
 period for labor on cotton. At the same time corn should be snapped, oats should be seeded, sweet potatoes dug, and grass harvested. 
 It is not surprising, therefore, that where cotton is a very profitable crop these other crops may not receive much attention. 
 
346 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 important, oats are practically the only small grain grown. 
 This lower part of the Cotton Belt lies almost wholly within 
 the Coastal Plain, where climatic conditions generally are 
 less favorable to the production of small grains than they 
 are farther north. 
 
 The choice of the large-seeded annual legumes in the 
 southern division of the Cotton Belt tends to be cowpeas in 
 the Mississippi River bottoms and to the east along the up¬ 
 per part of the Coastal Plains, peanuts and velvet beans else¬ 
 where between eastern Texas and southeastern Georgia, and 
 peanuts alone in northeastern North Carolina and southeast¬ 
 ern Virginia. The share of land allotted to these crops in 
 the Coastal Plains of southern Texas is almost negligible. 
 In the northern division of the Cotton Belt, where the small 
 grains are more important, a little land is allotted to cow- 
 peas and peanuts, but very little to velvet beans. 
 
 General Farm Practices. 
 
 Time and method of preparing land, of planting, culti¬ 
 vating, picking the cotton, and the cost of preparing it for 
 market vary much in different parts of the South. Prob¬ 
 ably in most cases the causes of the differences are not to be 
 found only in the different customs; there are also physical 
 and economic reasons for the differences. 
 
 Fig. 19.—One-mule plow in Southeast. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 347 
 
 Wherever crab grass, Johnson grass, and other weeds 
 grow profusely in the fields the cultivation of cotton re¬ 
 quires from one to three hoeings per season. With one 
 mule a man can plow, chop, and hoe from 10 to 20 acres, 
 from which 5 to 10 bales of cotton are produced, and this 
 is ordinarily all one family can pick. Therefore, one-mule 
 implements are used over the greater portion of the east¬ 
 ern part of the Cotton Belt. In some sections the topog¬ 
 raphy of the land would make the use of larger implements 
 difficult. In the level, black lands of Texas, however, where, 
 
 Fig. 20. —Two-mule plow in Texas. 
 
 owing to the smaller amount or absence of crab grass, the 
 hoe work is comparatively small and where transient labor 
 can be obtained to pick the cotton, 4-mule implements are 
 frequently used in preparing the land and 2-mule imple¬ 
 ments in cultivating it. 
 
 The newest form of cotton cultivation in the United 
 States has developed in the irrigated districts of the South¬ 
 west. Here the essentially distinctive features are level¬ 
 ing the land so that the entire field may be irrigated uni- 
 
348 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 formly and regulating the water so as to produce the de¬ 
 sired results in producing the cotton. Another special kind 
 of culture is used in producing the sea-island cotton of 
 South Carolina and Georgia. 
 
 Fertilizers. 
 
 Commercial fertilizers are extensively used in the pro¬ 
 duction of cotton in the Southeastern States. (See Fig. 21.) 
 Comparing Figure 21 with Figure 13, the heaviest use of 
 fertilizers is seen to be on the soils of the Coastal Plains of 
 
 and Tiedmont of the Carolinas and Georgia. Very little is used west of 
 Alabama. Compare the distribution of expenditures for fertilizers with 
 distribution of cotton production (Fig. 9). 
 
 North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, and also to 
 a considerable extent upon the soils of the Piedmont of these 
 States. 
 
 The fertilizers most generally used consist of acid phos¬ 
 phate, kainit, muriate of potash, and nitrate of soda. In 
 many regions the greatest outlay of cash in producing the 
 crop is for the fertilizers. After labor, it is the most im¬ 
 portant factor in the cost of producing cotton in these 
 Eastern States. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 349 
 
 Cotton Pests. 
 
 The Boll Weevil. 
 
 The original home of the boll weevil appears to be the 
 plateau region of Mexico or Central America. Previous to 
 1892 the insect had spread through much of Mexico. Little 
 is known, however, concerning the extent or rapidity of 
 dispersion. About 1892 the weevil crossed the Rio Grande 
 near Brownsville, Tex. Whether it flew across or was trans¬ 
 ported in some way is not known. By 1894 it had spread to 
 
 Fig. 22. — Cotton Doll weevil puncturing young flower bud. (Natural size.) 
 
 half a dozen counties in southern Texas. Since 1894 it has 
 extended its range annually from 40 to 160 miles, although 
 in several instances the winter conditions have been such as 
 to cause a decrease in the infested area. (See Fig. 23.) 
 
 Outside of the United States the boll weevil is known to 
 occur throughout the larger portion of Mexico and southward 
 to Guatemala and Costa Rica. It is known to occur also 
 in the eastern half of Cuba. 
 
 In the newly invaded region of the Cotton Belt the loss 
 from boll-weevil damage may run as high as 50 per cent or 
 more of the crop and invariably creates a condition border¬ 
 ing on panic among cotton planters. Under such conditions 
 diversified farming and animal husbandry receive a powerful 
 impetus. As time passes, however, and the planters learn 
 the proper methods of raising cotton under boll-weevil con- 
 
350 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921 
 
 Fig. 23.—In 1892 the boll weevil crossed the Rio Grande from Mexico and occupied an insignificant area in the extreme southern tip of 
 Texas. Note this area, indicated by the short line and the figures 1892. The map shows the subsequent spread of the weevil year 
 by year. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 351 
 
 ditions, a considerable reduction of the loss incident to the 
 presence of the weevil is apparent. 
 
 The actual damage done by the boll weevil varies greatly 
 from year to year. A very mild winter is invariably fol¬ 
 lowed by a heavy weevil infestation during the following 
 summer. Excessive rainfall during the summer months is 
 also conducive to greater weevil activity. In prairie regions 
 where the insect obtains little or no protection through the 
 winter, it never becomes so numerous as in other quarters 
 where conditions favorable for hibernation are found. The 
 Bureau of Crop Estimates of this department in the fall of 
 1920 estimated the average annual loss for the last four years 
 to be about $300,000,000. 
 
 Hibernation takes place in the adult stage. After frost 
 in the fall the last surviving generation of adults seek such 
 shelter as may be found under old cotton stalks and dead 
 grass, or in near-by woods. In regions where Spanish moss 
 is abundant, this material provides a favorite place for the 
 weevil to pass the winter. An average of about 6 per cent 
 of the weevils entering hibernation in the fall survive the 
 winter. A very cold winter will reduce the number that will 
 survive, and a very mild winter will augment it. In the 
 spring the survivors emerge from hibernation, breed, and 
 thus start another generation. Several generations are pro¬ 
 duced each year, each much more numerous than the last 
 preceding. The period from generation to generation is 
 about 25 days. 
 
 The boll weevil can not be eradicated, but certain measures 
 may be taken which, under ordinary circumstances, will con¬ 
 trol it to the extent that a profitable crop of cotton may be 
 raised. 
 
 During comparatively recent years a system of boll-weevil 
 control by the use of calcium arsenate in dry-dust form has 
 been developed. It has been thoroughly tested for the last 
 seven years and has proved to be fairly successful. Special¬ 
 ized treatment of the plants with this arsenical is necessary 
 for successful control. Publications giving details of this 
 treatment are issued by the Bureau of Entomology. 
 
 In addition to the use of poison, certain other measures may 
 be taken to reduce weevil damage. Fall destruction of the 
 
352 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 cotton plants, either by burning or by plowing under, de¬ 
 stroys the possible hibernating places of the weevil in the 
 fields. If it ean be done before the first killing frost great 
 numbers of weevils will be destroyed. 
 
 The use of an early maturing variety of cotton is impor¬ 
 tant. Likewise the seed should be planted as early in the 
 spring as possible without risk of damage from frost. The 
 object of this is to get the crop well along before the weevils 
 
 have become nu¬ 
 merous enough to 
 be destructive. 
 
 The Pink Bollworm 
 
 Fig. 24.— Pink bollworm. Adult, larva, pupa, and 
 egg. (Enlarged.) 
 
 The pink boll¬ 
 worm has been 
 known in other 
 countries as a de¬ 
 structive cotton 
 pest since the year 
 1842, at which 
 time an English 
 entomo 1 ogist 
 called attention to 
 its depredations 
 in India. It was first noted in Egypt in 1911. In the same 
 year the pest was introduced into Mexico, evidently in two 
 importations of cotton seed from Egypt. The fact of its 
 establishment in Mexico did not become known to our au¬ 
 thorities until 1916. An embargo upon Mexican cotton seed 
 was declared immediately, but prior to this order large quan¬ 
 tities of seed were shipped to certain oil mills in Texas for 
 grinding. On September 10, 1917, the first infestation on 
 American soil was found in a cotton field at Hearne, Tex. 
 
 The Hearne district was then made a cotton-free zone— 
 that is, no cotton was grown in the district—and was so 
 maintained for three years. This district is now believed 
 to be entirely free from the pest, demonstrating what ma} T be 
 accomplished where adequate control is maintained for a 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 353 . 
 
 period of years. Other areas that have been found infested 
 are indicated on the map (Fig. 25). 
 
 The damage which might result from the uncontrolled 
 infestation of the Cotton Belt of the United States by the 
 pink bollworm can be estimated only by the damage done 
 elsewhere, as so far none of the outbreaks in this country 
 have been allowed to go entirely uncontrolled. In November, 
 1920, a commission organized by the Texas Chamber of 
 Commerce, after a careful investigation in the Laguna dis¬ 
 trict of Mexico, where the insect has been allowed to run its 
 natural course, submitted a report indicating a loss of at 
 
 Fig. 25.—The pink bollworm was discovered in certain very limited areas in 
 Texas in 1917 and in Louisiana during the winter of 1919-20. The pest 
 has apparently been stamped out in Louisiana, and the actual infestation 
 in Texas is greatly reduced. 
 
 least 50 per cent of the cotton crop of 1920 of that district 
 due to the pink bollworm. As a matter of fact the pink 
 bollworm is probably the most serious single cotton pest of 
 the world. Its potential danger is greatly enhanced by the 
 habit of the insect in the larval stage of entering the cotton 
 seed and remaining there for several months of the year. 
 By reason of this habit the pest is easily transported to any 
 part of the globe where cotton seed is carried. 
 
 The only chance of exterminating this pest is by the en¬ 
 forcement for a period of years of noncotton zones for the 
 
 5689°—22-3 
 
354 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 invaded areas, and any attempt at control which permits the 
 continuation of the growth of cotton in such areas will be 
 followed by the inevitable increase of the pest and its ulti¬ 
 mate spread throughout the South. Perhaps the most de¬ 
 termined fight which any nation has ever waged for the 
 eradication of a single insect species within its borders has 
 been carried on since the discovery of the pink bollworm in 
 Texas, and the end is not yet. 
 
 The Cotton Bollworm. 
 
 Some doubt exists whether the cotton bollworm is a native 
 species or came originally from some other country. At 
 any rate, long before the advent of the boll weevil, it was 
 one of the oldest, most widely distributed, and most de¬ 
 structive of injurious insects. It is a general feeder, at¬ 
 tacking a great many wild and cultivated plants other than 
 cotton. 
 
 A number of years ago the annual loss to the cotton crop 
 caused by this pest was estimated at $8,500,000. The dam¬ 
 age, however, is somewhat sporadic, being worse in some 
 years than in others, and is likely to be very uneven over 
 the Cotton Belt in any one year. 
 
 The insect passes the winter in the soil in one of the 
 immature stages. Fall or winter plowing is therefore ad¬ 
 vantageous in its control. In fact the same methods of 
 control advocated for the boll weevil are applicable to this 
 species. If calcium arsenate is used for the weevil, this 
 should be sufficient for the control of the bollworm. 
 
 The Cotton Leafworm. 
 
 The cotton leafworm has been known to cotton planters 
 in the United States since 1793. It is unique in that it 
 does not spend the winter in this country. It is a native 
 of tropical regions south of the United States, and in some 
 years does not appear here in destructive numbers. At 
 other times the adult moths fly northward, reaching our 
 Cotton Belt fairly early in the season, and there lay eggs 
 for another generation. This soon appears as the familiar 
 defoliating worm At the end of the season, when cold 
 weather sets in, all stages of the insect within our borders 
 succumb to climatic conditions. 
 
 The species is easily controlled by the application of cal¬ 
 cium arsenate as for the boll weevil. 
 
The Cotton Situation . 355 
 
 Cotton Diseases in the United States. 
 
 Several important diseases attack the cotton crop and 
 cause losses which in 1920 were estimated by the Plant Dis¬ 
 ease Survey of the United States Department of Agriculture 
 at over 13 per cent of the total production. 
 
 Cotton Wilt. 
 
 Cotton wilt is a disease which causes stunting, wilting, and 
 death of the entire plant. It is due to a fungus, Fusarium, 
 
 Fig. 26. — Four important diseases of cotton. A, An eelworm bores into 
 cotton roots and causes rootknot. B, The angular leaf spot produces dead 
 areas on the leaves and rotting of the bolls. £, The wilt disease stunts 
 the plants and causes blackening of the inside of the stalks. D, This boll 
 rot is due to anthracnose. 
 
356 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 which enters the roots and plugs the water vessels. This 
 parasite remains indefinitely in the soil, so that infested fields 
 cannot be planted to the ordinary kinds of cotton. Resistant 
 varieties bred by the Department of Agriculture have come 
 into general use, however, and constitute an effective remedy 
 for wilt. This trouble is widely distributed in the sandy 
 soils of the coastal plain, from southern Virginia and North 
 Carolina to Arkansas and eastern Texas, and is occasionally 
 met in the Piedmont and other districts. (See Fig. 26 .) 
 
 Texas Root-Rot. 
 
 Texas root-rot is due to another serious soil-infesting 
 fungus, which occurs from Texas and Arkansas westward, 
 principally on the black waxy or heavier types of soils. This 
 causes a wilting of cotton over large areas in midsummer and 
 constitutes a serious problem, as alfalfa, sweet potatoes, many 
 fruits, and other crops are also susceptible, and because no 
 thoroughly effective remedy is known. 
 
 Root-Knot. 
 
 Root-knot, a disease characterized by abnormal galls or 
 swellings of the roots, is due to a tiny eelworm or nematode. 
 The plants are dwarfed and the yield reduced. Root-knot 
 occurs commonly in association with wilt on the same types 
 of sandy soil. It attacks a very large number of other crops. 
 Its control is based on rotation with immune crops or varie¬ 
 ties, involving a readjustment of crop rotation. 
 
 Rust. 
 
 Rust is a name commonly used for a trouble marked by the 
 early defoliation and premature death of cotton on soils 
 lacking in vegetable matter and potash or poorly drained. 
 It occurs throughout the Cotton Belt and causes large losses 
 annually. The trouble is controllable by good farming 
 methods, particularly by the use of potash fertilizers, stable 
 manure, or green manuring, and by drainage. 
 
 Anthracnose 
 
 Anthracnose is a fungous disease of the cotton plant spread 
 through the use of infected seed. It may cause a damping- 
 off of the young seedlings and some injury to the plant, but 
 
The Cotton Situation. 357 
 
 is most harmful as a cause of boll rot in wet weather. An- 
 thracnose occurs to a greater or less extent over the entire 
 Cotton Belt. It may be controlled by crop rotation and the 
 use of disease-free seed. 
 
 Angular Leaf-Spot. 
 
 Angular leaf-spot, or bacterial blight, can be found in 
 nearly every cotton field throughout the Cotton Belt as a 
 leaf-spot, stem blight, and boll rot; but Upland cotton is 
 quite resistant to it, and the losses are therefore not as great 
 as in Egyptian cotton, which is very susceptible. The most 
 effective method of control combines the use of disease-free 
 seed with crop rotation. 
 
 All of these diseases are described more fully in Farmers’ 
 Bulletin 1187. 
 
 Cost of Production. 
 
 The problem of making ends meet has been especially 
 serious for cotton growers in 1920 and 1921. Expenses have 
 been high and prices low. Relief has been sought in efforts 
 to enhance the prices to producers by various methods 
 without marked success. Since the prices for each crop are 
 determined after production and without regard to costs, 
 farmers must attempt to forecast prices and to adjust op r 
 erations so as to produce at a cost which will return a profit 
 at the price for which the cotton will sell. Some farmers 
 may not find it possible to reduce their costs low enough 
 to meet prospective low prices for cotton, but may be able 
 to produce something else with profit. In any case a knowl¬ 
 edge of costs may be helpful to a farmer in determining 
 how much cotton he should try to produce and how much 
 he may profitably expend in producing it. 
 
 A grower who knows his own actual cost of production, 
 and has average or standard figures to compare with his 
 own, is in a fair way to stop small leaks in his expenses and 
 to reinforce those features of his practice in which he has 
 an advantage. 
 
 To assist cotton growers in establishing reasonable aver¬ 
 ages and working standards and to assemble cost informa¬ 
 tion, which individuals acquire only slowly, the Office of 
 Farm Management and Farm Economics undertook coihpre- 
 
358 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19*21. 
 
 hensive studies of the cost of producing cotton. (See Fig. 
 27.) The first of these was made for the crop of 1918, in 
 10 representative counties in 4 States, the actual cost of 
 producing cotton in 1918 being worked out for 842 farms. 
 (See Bulletin 896, U. S. Dept, of Agriculture.) A similar 
 study was made for the crop grown in 1919, the results of 
 which are summarized in the charts on pages following. 
 
 Fig. 27. —Location of surveys and cost of production studies in the Cotton Belt. 
 The first of these was made for the crop of 1918 in 10 representative counties 
 in 4 States. The results of the surveys made in 1919 are summarized in 
 charts that follow. 
 
 Variation in Cost of Production. 
 
 A farmer who is keeping his own records and comparing 
 with others must recognize the fact that costs necessarily 
 vary from farm to farm, as well as from one region to an¬ 
 other. This is due to variations in the character of pro¬ 
 ducers themselves, as well as in the character of the land 
 and of the methods employed in growing the crop. The 
 variation in the net cost of lint cotton per pound on 783 
 farms in 1919 (Fig. 28), illustrates the wide range of costs. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 359 
 
 cent, was produced at a cost up to 50 cents per pound. 
 
360 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19%1. 
 
 It costs more to produce cotton in some regions than in 
 others. The net cost per acre and the net cost per pound 
 of lint in 1919 are shown in Figure 29 for each of 11 typical 
 Cotton Belt counties. The average yields per acre reported 
 in each case are shown in a column to the right of the chart. 
 It will be noted that high cost per acre with good yields 
 may result in low cost per pound, and low cost per acre with 
 ordinary or poor yields in high cost per pound. In fact, 
 judicious expenditures for fertilizer, good seed, good care 
 of the crop, or a combination of them, pays. In any year 
 much depends upon the seasonal weather. The 1919 crop 
 was practically a failure in three of the counties surveyed. 
 
 Fig. 29. — Variations both in the cost per acre and in the yield per acre cause 
 variations in the net cost per pound of lint. The average acre in Anderson 
 County cultivated at the high^fet cost in 1919 produced the highest average 
 yield at the lowest cost per pound. It is not always the greater the cost 
 the higher the yield. Note Lee County, Ark. 
 
 The distribution of costs differs with the practice, as is 
 shown in Figure 30 for several of the more important factors. 
 Thus labor per acre is relatively low in Ellis County, Tex., 
 where the fields are large and level enough to permit the 
 use of two horses and riding cultivators instead of a man 
 to each mule. In the South Carolina and Georgia counties 
 the use of fertilizer was very general and liberal, while in 
 Ellis County, Tex., no fertilizer was used on cotton, and only 
 one of the farms in Lee County, Ark., reported use of fer¬ 
 tilizer. The value of the land, use cost, or rent of land is 
 
The Cotton Situation , 
 
 361 
 
 COTTON 
 
 COST OF PRODUCTION 
 
 TOGETHER WITH VALUES OF FARM PROPERTY AND FARM INCOMES, 1919 
 AS REPORTED BY 7B3 FARMERS IN 11 COUNTIES 
 ( THE AREAS ARE ARRANGED BY TOTAL COST PER ACRE. THE HIGHEST AT THE TOP ) 
 
 MAN LABOR 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO.. S.C. 
 MARSHALL CO- ALA. 
 BARNWELL CO, S.C. 
 GREENE CO, GA. 
 
 LEE CO, ARK. 
 LAUDERDALE CO, ALA 
 MITCHELL CO, GA 
 MONROE CO, MISS. 
 LAURENS CO, GA 
 ELLIS CO, TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO,TEA 
 
 HORSE AND MULE LABOR 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO, S.C. 
 MARSHALL CO, ALA. 
 BARNWELL CO, S.C 
 GREENE CO, GA. 
 
 LEE CO, ARK 
 LAUDERDALE CO, ALA 
 MITCHELL CO. GA 
 MONROE CO, MISS. 
 LAURENS CO, GA. 
 
 ELLIS CO, TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO, TEX. 
 
 HOURS PER ACRE 
 
 COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER USED 
 
 AVERAGE VALUE OF CROP LAND 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO, S.C. 
 MARSHALL CO, ALA 
 BARNWELL CO. S.C 
 GREENE CO, GA 
 LEE CO, ARK 
 LAUDERDALE CO. ALA 
 MITCHELL CO. GA 
 MONROE CO. MISS. 
 LAURENS CO. GA 
 ELLIS CO. TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO. TEX. 
 
 m 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO. S.C. 
 MARSHALL CO. ALA 
 BARNWELL C0„ S.C 
 GREENE CO. GA. 
 
 LEE CO, ARK. 
 LAUDERDALE CO. ALA. 
 MITCHELL CO. GA. 
 MONROE CO, MISS. 
 LAURENS CO. GA. 
 ELLIS CO. TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO. TEX. 
 
 DOLLARS PER ACRE 
 
 AVERAGE TOTAL INVESTMENT 
 
 FARM INCOMES 
 
 YIELD OF LINT COTTON 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO, S.C. 
 MARSHALL CO., ALA 
 BARNWELL CO, S.C 
 GREENE CO. GA 
 LEE CO, ARK. 
 LAUDERDALE CO., ALA. 
 MITCHELL CO, GA. 
 MONROE CO.. MISS. 
 LAURENS CO. GA. 
 ELLIS CO., TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO, TEX. 
 
 THOUSANDS or DOLLARS 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO. SC. 
 MARSHALL CO, ALA. 
 BARNWELL CO, S.C. 
 GREENE CO, GA. 
 
 LEE CO. ARK. 
 LAUDERDALE CO. ALA 
 MITCHELL CO. GA. 
 MONROE CO. MISS. 
 LAURENS CO. GA. 
 ELUS CO. TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO. TEX. 
 
 HUNDREOS OF DOLLARS 
 
 AREAS SURVEYED 
 ANDERSON CO. S.C. 
 MARSHALL CO. ALA. 
 BARNWELL CO, S.C 
 GREENE CO. GA. 
 
 LEE CO. ARK. 
 LAUDERDALE CO.. ALA. 
 MITCHELL CO. GA. 
 MONROE CO. MISS. 
 LAURENS CO. GA. 
 ELUS CO. TEX. 
 
 RUSH CO TEX. 
 
 Fig. 30.—Counties are arranged in the order of the total cost per acre, the 
 highest at the top. Note especially the contrast between Anderson County, 
 S. C., and Ellis County, Tex. Cost per acre and yield per acre in Anderson 
 County stands first among all the counties, is second in value of fertilizers 
 used, in value of crop land, and in farm income; whereas Ellis County had 
 next to the lowest yields produced with the smallest amount of iabor, no 
 fertilizer, and gave an average farm income on crop land averaging the 
 highest in value of any of the counties. 
 
362 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 another widely variable item, the lowest values being found 
 in Rush County, Tex., and the highest in Ellis County, 
 Tex. In addition to the average expense of labor, horse 
 labor, fertilizer, and value of land, the chart shows also the 
 value of the total farm capital, the farm income for 1919, 
 and the yield of lint cotton per acre. 
 
 An Example. 
 
 As a guide for the use of farmers who wish to determine 
 their actual costs for any season promptly and very closely, 
 
 Example for figuring costs per acre of cotton and per pound of lint. 
 
 Items. 
 
 Figures for Mitchell 
 County, Ga., crop 
 of 1919. 
 
 Your farm. 
 
 1921 
 
 1922 
 
 Amount. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Cost. 
 
 Amount. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Cost. 
 
 Amount. 
 
 Price. 
 
 Cost. 
 
 Labor: 
 
 Man. 
 
 100 hours.. 
 
 48 do.... 
 
 1 bushel. 
 
 $0.30 
 
 .25 
 
 1.35 
 
 1.021 
 
 $30.00 
 
 12.00 
 
 1.35 
 
 6.13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mule. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Seed (bushel= 30 
 pounds).. 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Fertilizer. 
 
 292 pounds.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total of foregoing 
 items (84.4 per 
 cent of operating 
 cost) 1 2 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 49.48 
 
 58.63 
 
 12.00 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total operating 
 cost(100 percent) 
 Credit seed 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 300 pounds.. 
 
 3.04 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Net operating cost 
 per acre. 
 
 
 
 1. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 46.63 
 
 .29 
 
 4.02 
 
 50.65 
 
 .32 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Net operating cost 
 per pound 
 ($46.63= 159 
 pounds). 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Rent of land or in¬ 
 terest on invest¬ 
 ment, per acre.. 
 
 Total net cost per 
 acre (including 
 rent)._ _ 
 
 $67.00 
 
 6% 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total net cost per 
 pound (includ¬ 
 ing rentl_ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 Price, $42 per ton. 
 
 2 Operating costs represent all costs except interest on land. The remaining 15.6 per cent 
 of operating costs is made up of manure, equipment, taxes, insurance, ginning, and overhead. 
 
 8 $80 per ton. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 363 
 
 an example is worked out, using the figures for Mitchell 
 County, Ga., and space is provided for setting down the 
 figures for any individual farm. It is best to use the actual 
 figures, if possible, but even in case no attention has been paid 
 to the time and materials used one can not go very far astray 
 if careful estimates are made by means of comparisons with 
 average or standard figures. In each case the yield of cotton 
 should be estimated as closely as possible, because errors in 
 the yield will make considerable differences in the computa¬ 
 tions of cost per pound. 
 
 Costs and Prices. 
 
 Though producers are more or less at the mercy of con¬ 
 sumers with respect to price, they can exercise considerable 
 
 FARM PRICE OF COTTON AND THE PRICE OF FERTILIZER 
 GEORGIA 1913 1918 AND 1921 
 
 Fig. 31.—The cost of fertilizers is a very important item in the cost of produc¬ 
 tion in the South Atlantic States. The data represented here for 1913, 1918, 
 are taken from surveys of Sumter County, Ga. For 1921 prices represent 
 
 Georgia. 
 
364 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 control over the cost of their product. When prices were 
 going up and the prospects for higher prices were still good 
 costs were voluntarily increased, because it was good judg^ 
 ment to pay higher prices for labor, fertilizer, land, and 
 machinery, if it were necessary in order to produce the 
 cotton. The average cost of the 1918 crop was approxi¬ 
 mately 22 cents a pound, while the average farm price was 
 
 Fig. 32.—The price of cotton fell to a low point in 1914, rose to high points 
 1916—1919, and fell to a low point in 1920. Wages and prices of articles 
 farmers huy rose less rapidly in the period of inflation and fell more slowly 
 with deflation. 
 
 28.76 cents a pound, or enough to cover the cost of 85 per 
 cent of the crop. Prices were still rising in 1919 and costs 
 averaged 35 cents a pound, which was just about the farm 
 price of 35.36 cents a pound, and half the growers failed to 
 make costs. When the crop of 1920 was planted cotton prices 
 were still high and no particular effort was made to cut 
 expenses. While the crop was growing the price was 
 falling, with the result that the crop produced at a high 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 365 
 
 cost had to be sold at a low price. Some retrenchment was 
 made in 1921, as evidenced by the lower wages paid and the 
 lower prices for materials, but' not enough to offset the 
 combined effect of a good crop, a large hold over, and a 
 stagnant market. The relative changes in the cost of pro¬ 
 duction for the years 1910 to 1921 are indicated in Figure 
 32, farm wages and the prices of things farmers buy being 
 used as an index of the movement of the cost of producing 
 cotton. 
 
 Organization for Profitable Production. 
 
 The cost of producing farm products, the farm income, and 
 the welfare of the farm family and the community are 
 strongly influenced by the enterprises selected and their rela¬ 
 tive magnitudes in the organization of the farm. 
 
 It has been found that those cotton farmers who in plan¬ 
 ning their cropping systems provide first for sufficient acre¬ 
 ages of corn, small grains, hay, and other feed crops (includ¬ 
 ing among these cowpeas, peanuts, velvet beans, and similar 
 crops planted by themselves and interplanted among rows 
 of other crops), not only to feed pigs, chickens, the farm 
 work stock, and the family cows, but also to build up and 
 maintain soil fertility, are able to produce cotton at low 
 cost, and they get the best returns for land used and capital 
 and labor expended. These farmers usually plan for as 
 many acres of cotton as they can care for properly and har¬ 
 vest early with the available farm equipment and such out¬ 
 side assistance as may be relied upon. 
 
 Proper care of the crop involves thorough preparatory till¬ 
 age, proper application of fertilizers and manures, thorough 
 cultivation, and thorough and persistent combative measures 
 against the boll weevil and other destructive insects. 
 
 After providing for farm needs, including fertility, and 
 for such acreages of cotton as can be well cared for, other 
 enterprises may be selected in order to make use of unutilized 
 land and labor. Such enterprises may increase food and feed 
 for sale or for some productive live stock enterprise, but care 
 must be taken that these added enterprises do not seriously 
 compete with cotton in its labor requirements or tend to 
 diminish the fertility of the soil. 
 
 The choice of crops and groupings will vary according to 
 conditions. For example, in Figure 33 are given the average 
 
366 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19*21. 
 
 relative sizes of the crop enterprises on some of the more 
 profitable 1-mule to 6-mule farms in communities in Sumter 
 and Brooks Counties, Ga., in 1913 and 1914. A marked dif¬ 
 ference will be noted in the organization of the two com¬ 
 munities. In the Sumter County community, after making 
 fair provision for the farm needs, the remainder of the land 
 was devoted largely to cotton, the most important commercial 
 enterprise. In the Brooks County community the soil was 
 thinner and it was necessary to pay particular attention to 
 the maintenance of soil fertility, so a system was developed 
 which gave a smaller acreage to cotton and paid particular 
 attention to corn, legumes, feed crops, and hogs. Besides the 
 
 COTTON 
 
 PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL CROP LAND IN CERTAIN CROPS 
 
 AVERAGES OF THE MORE PROFITABLE 1 TO 6 MULE FARMS 
 SUMTER AND BROOKS COUNTIES. GEORGIA 
 PRE-WAR PERIOD 
 
 IstcROPS 
 
 COTTON 
 
 CORN 
 
 OATS & RYE 
 PEANUTS 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 2 ND CR0PS 
 COW PEAS 
 INTERPLANTED 
 
 BROOKS COUNTY. 1914 
 
 AVERAGES FOR 30 OF THE MORE PROFITABLE FARMS 
 
 29.6 ACRES OF CROP LAND TO EACH MULE 
 2 COWS TO EVERY 5 MULES 
 1 BROOD SOW TO EACH 2 MULES 
 34 CHICKENS TO EACH FARM 
 
 33 ACRES OF CROP LAND TO EACH MULE 
 4 COWS TO EVERY 3 MULES 
 2 BROOD SOWS TO EACH MULE 
 80 CHICKENS TO EACH FARM 
 
 Fig. 33.—In Sumter County there is much greater specialization in cotton than 
 in Brooks County. In the latter more attention is being given to the growing 
 of crops that will maintain or improve soil fertility, consequently more live 
 stock are kept and more leguminous crops are grown. 
 
 regular peanut crop, peanuts were planted between the corn 
 rows on about one-third of the corn area. The Sumter 
 County farms carried 2 cows to each 5 mules, while the 
 Brooks County farms carried 4 cows to each 3 mules. The 
 Sumter County farms carried 1 brood sow to each 2 mules, 
 while the Brooks County farms carried 2 brood sows to each 
 mule. Among the important miscellaneous crops on these 
 farms were watermelons, sweet and Irish potatoes, sugar cane, 
 and garden vegetables. 
 
 It is not intimated that these systems of cropping were 
 the best that these farmers could have devised for their farms 
 or for the communities represented, but they were evidently 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 367 
 
 better than the average in that they yielded comparatively 
 high returns for the use of land, working capital, and labor. 
 
 Systems of cropping change as conditions change. Figure 
 34 gives the organization of crop enterprises on the more 
 profitable 1-mule to 6-mule farms in Sumter County five 
 years later, in 1918. The main difference between the 1918 
 and 1913 systems was a reduction in the percentage of land 
 devoted to cotton in 1918 to better meet boll-weevil invasion 
 and the high cost of fertilizers. The actual and relative 
 number of cows and brood sows was increased. The 30 more 
 profitable Sumter County farms in 1913 spent $1,057 for 
 feed, while the 1918 
 group spent only 
 $298 for this pur¬ 
 pose. The 1918 
 system shows a 
 larger planting of 
 legume feed crops 
 to reduce the cost 
 of maintaining the 
 live stock, to utilize 
 land and labor not 
 required by cotton, 
 and also to main¬ 
 tain fertility better. 
 
 Financing the 
 Cotton Grower. 
 
 COTTON 
 
 PERCENTAGES OF TOTAL. CROP LAND IN CERTAIN CROPS 
 
 AVERAGES OF THE MORE PROFITABLE Ito 6 MULE FARMS 
 SUMTER COUNTY. GEORGIA 
 
 1918 
 
 15T CROPS 
 COTTON 
 CORN 
 
 OATS, RYE ANO WHEAT 
 PEANUTS 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 2ND CROPS 
 
 COWPEAS ANO PEANUTS 
 
 INTERPLANTEO 
 
 COWPEAS, PEANUTS AND 
 VELVET BEANS 
 
 PER CENT 
 
 20 30 
 
 40. 
 
 AVERAGES 
 
 31 ACRES OF CROP LAND TO EACH MULE 
 1 COW TO EACH 2 MULES 
 I BROOD SOW TO EACH MULE 
 31 CHICKENS TO EACH FARM 
 
 Fig. 34.—In 1918 cotton and corn held equal areas 
 in Sumter County. Cowpeias, peanuts, and vel- 
 The production vet beans were planted extensively after the 
 Of cotton in the other crops or interplanted with them. 
 
 United States rests upon credit to a rather unusual extent 
 compared with most other agricultural products. The chief 
 agencies from which this credit is obtained by the cotton 
 farmer are the bank, the merchant, and in the case of tenants 
 the landowner. In this credit extension the merchant, of 
 course, is essentially an intermediary between the banker 
 and the farmer, while in the case of the tenant the land- 
 owner, by guaranteeing the repayment of the credit ad¬ 
 vanced, also acts as an intermediary, either between the bank 
 and the tenant or the merchant and the tenant,, 
 
368 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19%1. 
 
 Merchant credit as a rule is a particularly expensive arid 
 unsatisfactory form of credit, whether extended by the store¬ 
 keeper, the implement dealer, or the cotton factor. The 
 difference between cash prices and time prices usually far 
 exceeds the cost of bank credit needed for the purchase of 
 corresponding amounts of goods. The substitution of direct 
 bank credit for merchant credit is therefore to be recom¬ 
 mended wherever possible. The consolidation of numerous 
 small loans into fewer and larger ones by means of credit 
 associations would result in further economy. It is also 
 to be hoped that the cotton farmer will, to an increasing 
 extent, acquire and maintain his own operating capital and 
 thus reduce the need for production credit and strengthen 
 the security for such credit as is needed. Only in this way 
 can be brought about a credit situation in which an ample 
 supply of capital will be available on terms favorable to the 
 borrower. 
 
 According to a study made by the Department of Agricul¬ 
 ture in the spring of 1921, the- average prevailing rate of 
 interest on personal and collateral loans to farmers for each 
 of the 10 leading cotton-producing States was as follows: 
 
 Per cen]t 
 
 North Carolina___— 6. 23 
 
 Tennessee_7. 88 
 
 South Carolina_■--— 8. 06 
 
 Mississippi____8.11 
 
 Louisiana_8. 34 
 
 Alabama_8. 46 
 
 Georgia_^-8. 94 
 
 Texas___9.68 
 
 Oklahoma_9. 84 
 
 Arkansas-9. 70 
 
 In all of these States the actual average interest cost, how¬ 
 ever, was considerably higher than shown by the above 
 figures, because of the prevalent practice among the banks 
 in these States of collecting interest in advance, and of a 
 common but less frequent practice of requiring borrowers to 
 maintain a minimum deposit at the bank while the loan is 
 outstanding. 
 
 Because of the relatively high percentage of tenancy in 
 the cotton-producing States, the question of security for loans 
 is especially significant. The following table shows the pre¬ 
 vailing forms of security for personal and collateral loans 
 to farmers in the so-called Cotton States. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 369 
 
 Form of security given for personal and collateral bank, loans to 
 farmers in 10 leading Cotton States; per cent of loans secured by 
 various forms of security. 
 
 State. 
 
 Note 
 
 without 
 
 indorse¬ 
 
 ment. 
 
 Note 
 with one 
 or more 
 indorse¬ 
 ments . 
 
 Mort¬ 
 gage on 
 live 
 stock. 
 
 Crop lien. 
 
 Ware¬ 
 
 house 
 
 receipt. 
 
 Stocks 
 
 and 
 
 bonds. 
 
 Other 
 
 ways. 
 
 North Carolina.... 
 
 10.5 
 
 68.6 
 
 1.7 
 
 5.2 
 
 2.1 
 
 7.5 
 
 4.4 
 
 South Carolina.... 
 
 9.1 
 
 41.0 
 
 13.6 
 
 20.2 
 
 9.7 
 
 4.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 Georgia. 
 
 12.5 
 
 50.1 
 
 14.5 
 
 4.9 
 
 10.0 
 
 3.5 
 
 4.5 
 
 Tennessee. 
 
 18.1 
 
 67.2 
 
 5.0 
 
 1.5 
 
 .8 
 
 5.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 Alabama. 
 
 10.4 
 
 20.1 
 
 31.5 
 
 26.1 
 
 7.5 
 
 2.4 
 
 2.0 
 
 Mississippi. 
 
 12.7 
 
 27.0 
 
 20.2 
 
 15.1 
 
 8.0 
 
 9.1 
 
 7.9 
 
 Arkansas. 
 
 12.1 
 
 37.9 
 
 22.7 
 
 19.9 
 
 3.0 
 
 2.2 
 
 2.2 
 
 Louisiana. 
 
 15.5 
 
 52.7 
 
 12.4 
 
 5.2 
 
 2.7 
 
 9.0 
 
 2.5 
 
 Oklahoma. 
 
 17.2 
 
 12.9 
 
 49.3 
 
 18.1 
 
 .7 
 
 1.2 
 
 .6 
 
 Texas. 
 
 21.9 
 
 18.0 
 
 38.1 
 
 18.3 
 
 1.6 
 
 1.1 
 
 • 0 
 
 Personal notes with one or more indorsements are the 
 prevailing form of security in a large majority of these 
 States. Mortgages on live stock and crop liens come next 
 in importance. Warehouse receipts are as yet seldom used 
 by the farmer, but will no doubt increase in popularity as 
 adequate warehouse systems are established. 
 
 One of the most common complaints heard with reference 
 to bank loans to farmers from these States, as well as from 
 those in other sections of the country, is that the term is 
 frequently too short to meet the farmer’s credit needs. The 
 prevailing term of such loans may be seen from the follow¬ 
 ing table, based on the study to which reference has already 
 been made: 
 
 Average term of personal and collateral loans to farmers: Per cent 
 of banks reporting various average terms, March, 1921. 
 
 State. 
 
 One to 
 thirty 
 days. 
 
 One to 
 three 
 months. 
 
 Three to 
 six 
 
 months. 
 
 Six to 
 nine 
 months. 
 
 Nine to 
 twelve 
 months. 
 
 More 
 than one 
 year. 
 
 North Carolina. 
 
 
 28.0 
 
 53.7 
 
 15.9 
 
 2.4 
 
 
 South Carolina .. 
 
 
 12. 5 
 
 40.1 
 
 40. 8 
 
 6.6 
 
 
 Georgia. 
 
 
 3.9 
 
 50.3 
 
 38.5 
 
 7.3 
 
 
 Tennessee. 
 
 
 28.5 
 
 45.0 
 
 14.6 
 
 11.9 
 
 
 Alabama. 
 
 
 4.2 
 
 30.5 
 
 39.9 
 
 25.4 
 
 
 Mississippi. 
 
 
 9. 2_ 
 
 31.2 
 
 38. 5 
 
 19.3 
 
 1.8 
 
 Arkansas. 
 
 
 7.2 
 
 36. 7 
 
 45. 9 
 
 10. 2 
 
 
 Louisiana. 
 
 
 9.3 
 
 37.2 
 
 37. 2 
 
 16.3 
 
 
 Oklahoma. 
 
 0.4 
 
 11. 6 
 
 49. 6 
 
 31. 9 
 
 6. 5 
 
 
 Texas. 
 
 
 7.9 
 
 52.1 
 
 33.0 
 
 6.7 
 
 .3 
 
 5689°—22-4 
 
370 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 Cotton Handling and Marketing. 
 
 The days of the American homespun are past, and now 
 the entire American cotton crop is produced for the market. 
 The course of the cotton from the producer to the mills de¬ 
 pends on the point of origin, the location of the mills for 
 which it is destined, the means of transportation, and the 
 methods of trading. The price that the producer receives 
 depends not only upon the supply and demand at the con¬ 
 suming points, but also upon the cost or handling from the 
 producer to the mills, the middlemen’s profits, and the ability 
 of the producer to take advantage of the most economical 
 methods of marketing his crop. 
 
 The process of separating the lint from the seed is known 
 as ginning. This the producer usually has done before he 
 sells, which enables him to dispose of both the seed and the 
 fiber to the best advantage. The producer may sell his cot¬ 
 ton at once or hold it until some future date. He may sell 
 directly to a mill buyer or to some one of the numerous 
 grades of dealers in cotton. 
 
 Southern cotton mills consume about one-fourth of the 
 American crop, the bulk of which is produced locally in the 
 South Atlantic States. The rest of the crop must be trans¬ 
 ported by rail or water either to northern mills or abroad. 
 The movement of the great American cotton crop therefore 
 necessitates an extensive system of transportation as well 
 as of markets. 
 
 Short Staple and Long Staple Cottons. 
 
 The length and the character of the fiber or staple are 
 the most important of the factors that determine the value 
 of cotton. Cottons differing in length and character of 
 fiber require special methods in handling and marketing. 
 Commercially all cotton is divided into two classes—short 
 staple, that of inches and under in length, and long sta¬ 
 ple, cotton 1J inches and over in length of fibers. Cottons, 
 however, having a staple length of 1 T V inches usually com¬ 
 mand a premium over short-staple cottons of J to 1 inch in 
 length of staple. The length and strength of fiber produced 
 in any locality depend on the variety planted, the soil, 
 climatic conditions, and cultural methods. 
 
 Short staple. —Short-staple cotton is grown in all parts 
 of the Cotton Belt and constitutes the bulk of the American 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 371 
 
 crop, or an average of 92 per cent. The length of the fiber 
 of this cotton varies from three-fourths to 1inches. In 
 parts of the Piedmont region and on the better types of soils 
 the length is often more than an inch, while on the sandy 
 and other poorer soils it may be less than seven-eighths of 
 an inch. On the rich river bottoms and on the black prairie 
 lands of Texas and Oklahoma the cotton grown is usually 
 1 T V inches in length and has a characteristic strong, hard 
 staple. 
 
 Long staple .—Upland varieties with fiber to 1J inches 
 long are grown in many parts of the South, the production 
 of some sections being recognized by characteristic differ¬ 
 ences in quality and strength of staple. The bulk of the 
 long-staple upland cotton is produced in the Yazoo-Missis- 
 sippi Delta, the north central section of South Carolina, 
 and the bottom lands of Texas and Arkansas. (See table 
 following:) 
 
 Comparison of production of long-staple cotton ( 1 £ inches and above 
 in length) with production of short-staple cotton (under 1 £ inches 
 in length) in the United States; estimates 1919 and 1920. 
 
 State. 
 
 Bales, thousands, i 
 
 . e. 000 omitted. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Under If 
 inches. 
 
 1J to 1* 
 inches, 
 inclusive. 
 
 Over 1£ 
 inches. 1 
 
 Under 1| 
 inches. 
 
 lit to li 
 inches, 
 inclusive. 
 
 Over 1£ 
 inches. 1 
 
 1919 
 
 1920 
 
 1919 
 
 1920 
 
 1919 
 
 1920 
 
 1919 
 
 1920 
 
 1919 
 
 1920 
 
 1919 
 
 1920 
 
 Alabama. 
 
 711 
 
 662 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 99.7 
 
 99.9 
 
 0.3 
 
 0.1 
 
 
 
 Arkansas. 
 
 718 
 
 947 
 
 136 
 
 225 
 
 30 
 
 37 
 
 81.2 
 
 78.3 
 
 15.4 
 
 18.6 
 
 3.4 
 
 3.1 
 
 Arizona. .. 
 
 21 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 82 
 
 35.0 
 
 20.6 
 
 
 
 65.0 
 
 79.4 
 
 California. 
 
 45 
 
 64 
 
 10 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 80.3 
 
 85.3 
 
 17.9 
 
 4.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 10.7 
 
 Florida. 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 l 
 
 87.5 
 
 82.8 
 
 
 11.1 
 
 12.5 
 
 6.1 
 
 Georgia. 
 
 1,639 
 
 1,384 
 
 18 
 
 27 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 98.7 
 
 97.8 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.9 
 
 .2 
 
 .3 
 
 Louisiana. 
 
 290 
 
 375 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 97.3 
 
 96.9 
 
 2.4 
 
 2.6 
 
 .3 
 
 .5 
 
 Mississippi. 
 
 619 
 
 612 
 
 300 
 
 252 
 
 42 
 
 29 
 
 64.4 
 
 68.5 
 
 31.2 
 
 28.2 
 
 4.4 
 
 3.2 
 
 Missouri. 
 
 60 
 
 71 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 
 1 
 
 94.4 
 
 92.3 
 
 5.6 
 
 6.4 
 
 
 1.3 
 
 North Carolina.. 
 
 817 
 
 900 
 
 12 
 
 10 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 98.5 
 
 98.7 
 
 1.4 
 
 1.1 
 
 .1 
 
 .2 
 
 Oklahoma. 
 
 937 
 
 1,125 
 
 77 
 
 192 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 92.2 
 
 85.2 
 
 7.6 
 
 14.5 
 
 .2 
 
 .3 
 
 South Carolina.. 
 
 1,309 
 
 1,437 
 
 93 
 
 144 
 
 24 
 
 29 
 
 91.8 
 
 89.3 
 
 6.5 
 
 8.9 
 
 1.7 
 
 1.8 
 
 Tennessee. 
 
 293 
 
 312 
 
 15 
 
 11 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 94.5 
 
 96.2 
 
 4.9 
 
 3.5 
 
 .6 
 
 .3 
 
 Texas. 
 
 2,916 
 
 4,091 
 
 177 
 
 230 
 
 6 
 
 5 
 
 94.1 
 
 94.6 
 
 5.7 
 
 5.3 
 
 .2 
 
 .1 
 
 All others. 
 
 28 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 
 
 100.4) 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 United States. 
 
 10,417 
 
 12,049 
 
 851 
 
 1,112 
 
 153 
 
 205 
 
 91.2 
 
 90.2 
 
 7.5 
 
 8.3 
 
 1.3 
 
 1.5 
 
 1 Including 91,965 running bales of American-Egyptian and 1,725 bales of Sea Island cotton 
 for 1920, reduced to 500-pound bales. 
 
372 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 Sea island. —Sea island is a distinct type of cotton, noted 
 for its length of staple, 1J to 2£ inches, and its strong, very 
 fine, and silky fibers. The sea-island cotton produced on the 
 islands off the coast of South Carolina has the longest and 
 finest staple of any cotton. That grown on the coastal plain 
 of Georgia and north Florida is somewhat shorter and 
 coarser. At present the boll weevil has practically stopped 
 the growing of sea-island cotton in the United States, the 
 crop of 1920 amounting to less than 2,000 bales of 500 pounds 
 each. Recently, however, a new upland variety called Meade 
 has been developed in this section and is replacing the sea- 
 island cotton. Meade cotton has a very fine strong staple 
 If to If inches in length, comparable with sea island. 
 
 American Egyptian. —The American-Egyptian cotton crop 
 is produced chiefly in the valleys of the Salt, Gila, and Colo¬ 
 rado Rivers of Arizona, and in the Palo Verde, Imperial, 
 and San Joaquin Valleys of California. Practically the en¬ 
 tire crop is of a single variety, known as Pima, which pro¬ 
 duces a staple of from 1J to If inches in length. 
 
 Ginning. 
 
 Two types of machines are now in use for separating cotton 
 fibers from the seed on which they grow. They are known as 
 roller and saw gins. The roller gin is the older type. In 
 the roller gin the fibers are caught between a leather-covered 
 roll and a fixed steel bar or blade, while a movable bar knocks 
 the seed loose. The roller gin is especially adapted for use in 
 ginning varieties having slick or smooth seed and long fibers 
 that are easily detached from the seed coat, such as sea 
 island, American Egyptian, and Meade. The output of the 
 roller gin is smaller per day than that of the other type, 
 known as the saw gin. In the saw gin the fibers are caught 
 in the teeth of circular saws and pulled through a slot 
 between metal ribs. The slot is adjusted so as to permit 
 the passage of the fibers but to prevent the passage of the 
 seed, so that the cotton is stripped from the seed, which fall 
 back and out of the way. The saw gin is especially adapted 
 for the ginning of short staples with fuzzy seed and fibers 
 that are tightly attached to the seed coat. 
 
 While the ginning of cotton is done primarily in order to 
 bale the farmer’s product so that it may be sold, it is the first 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 373 
 
 step in the preparation of the fiber for spinning, and there¬ 
 fore the condition in which the lint comes from the gin has 
 a most important bearing on its future value and is the 
 primary basis for grades on which purchases are made. 
 Some of the factors influencing the grade of cotton as it 
 comes from the gin are the care with which it has been har¬ 
 vested and prepared for ginning, i. e., whether ripe, clean, 
 and dry; second, the condition of the ginning mechanism and 
 the skill of operation, i. e., clean machinery in prime condi¬ 
 tion, operated both as to the feeding and speed with care, 
 taking into consideration the type of the cotton being ginned 
 and its physical condition. 
 
 Fig. 35.—Cotton gin in Texas. Each wagon holds enough seed cotton to 
 make a bale of lint weighing about 500 pounds. 
 
 Baling .—As the lint or fiber (or raw cotton) comes from 
 the gin it is put up in packages of different sizes and shapes. 
 The bulk of the American crop, however, is packed into a 
 press box 54 inches long and 27 inches wide and to a depth 
 of about 45 inches. This makes the standard “ flat ” or 
 “ square ” bale, which weighs about 500 pounds. It is cov¬ 
 ered on two sides and on the ends with bagging and is tied 
 with six iron bands. In the western part of the Cotton Belt 
 there are some gins which make bales cylindrical in shape 
 but known as “ round ” bales. These are approximately 35 
 inches long and 22 inches in diameter, are completely covered 
 with bagging, and weigh about 250 pounds. The sea- 
 
374 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 island cotton produced in South Carolina is put up in 
 bags 7 i feet long and feet in diameter and weigh ap¬ 
 proximately 350 pounds. 
 
 Compressing. —With the exception of the round bale and 
 the recently devised gin-compressed bale, which is a small 
 square bale and, like the round bale, built up under pressure 
 automatically as the ginning is done, the American cotton 
 bale is of comparatively low density and is not only un¬ 
 wieldy but does not fit into either freight cars or ship holds 
 economically. In order that the maximum number of pounds 
 of cotton may be packed for shipment, square bales are sub¬ 
 jected to a recompression by which the cotton is compacted 
 to a high density and the bale reduced to approximately one- 
 half its original size. At the same time patches are added 
 to cover all sample holes and to make up the usual tare allow¬ 
 ance. Plants for recompressing the bales are usually lo¬ 
 cated at interior markets and railroad concentration points 
 and are known as 66 compresses.” 
 
 The standard 500-pound square bale as it comes from the 
 gin has a density of only 12 to 15 pounds per cubic foot, and 
 from 30 to 35 of them fill a 36-foot box car. When they are 
 compressed at the ordinary or standard compresses to a 
 density of 22 to 24 pounds per cubic foot, from 65 to 75 
 bales may be loaded into a car. The u round ” gin-com¬ 
 pressed bale, weighing about 250 pounds, has a density of 32 
 to 37 pounds per cubic foot, and approximately 200 of them 
 may be packed in a car, equivalent to 100 standard bales. 
 The square gin-compressed bale has a density of about 35 
 pounds to the cubic foot. 
 
 At some of the concentration points and ports, such as 
 Houston, Galveston, New Orleans, Mobile, Augusta, and 
 Savannah, there are “ high-density ” compresses, which give 
 the bale a density of 35 pounds or more per cubic foot, which 
 results in a still greater saving of car and cargo space. 
 
 Custom ginning. —In the early days of the cotton industry 
 the larger plantations owned and operated gins, but with the 
 extension of the industry and the growth of the number of 
 small farms came the establishment of public gins. The 
 efficiency of the public gins has led to the abandonment of 
 practically all of the old plantation gins. Even where plan¬ 
 tation gins still operate they also, as a rule, do custom 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 375 
 
 ginning. Public ginneries are now established in practically 
 every locality where the production of cotton is sufficient to 
 support one. During the season of 1920-21 there were in 
 actual operation 18,440 ginneries, which ginned on an average 
 of 720 bales each. 
 
 The modern public gin is equipped with pneumatic ele¬ 
 vators and distributors, by which the seed cotton brought in 
 by the growers is sucked up from the wagons through pipes 
 and, after passing through cleaning apparatus, is distributed 
 to the different ginning machines or gin stands, as they are 
 called. (See Fig. 35.) The lint, after it is taken from the 
 seed by the saws, is again caught in a blast of air and con¬ 
 veyed through flues to the condenser and baling press. The 
 seed fall into a trough, through which they are carried either 
 by a screw conveyor or by an air blast to a seed chute or to 
 bins in a seed house. If the grower desires the return of his 
 seed he drives his wagon under the seed chute and receives 
 them as they come from the gin. If, however, he sells the 
 seed to the ginner or to some other agent of the cotton-oil 
 mills, they are delivered to the bins in the seed house and 
 from there transferred in car lots to the oil mills. Public 
 ginners usually make a charge for ginning by the hundred 
 pounds of seed cotton, and an extra charge for the bagging 
 and ties applied to the bales. These charges or tolls vary 
 in the different sections according to the costs involved. They 
 are regulated also to some extent by agreement and by local 
 laws. 
 
 Selling cotton in the seed .—In a few sections of the Cotton 
 Belt some farmers sell their cotton before it is ginned, or 
 “ in the seed,” as it is known. The practice of selling cotton 
 in the seed is most prevalent in those sections where the 
 cotton-growing industry has only recently developed or 
 where cotton is not very extensively grown. The ginners buy 
 the cotton seed as it is brought in and gin it whenever enough 
 has accumulated for a run. In settling with the producer 
 the average outturn or lint percentage of the community is 
 usually taken as a basis. The ratio of seed to lint is ap¬ 
 proximately 2 to 1, though some of the improved varieties 
 turn out from 35 to 40 per cent of lint. The application of 
 averages therefore often results in not giving the individual 
 farmer the price he deserves. From every angle the practice 
 
376 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 of selling cotton in the seed is most unfortunate, since the 
 producer has no incentive for growing better varieties or for 
 making any effort to improve his grade and is prevented from 
 maintaining the purity of his seed supply. 
 
 Handling Cotton Seed. 
 
 As indicated above, about two-thirds of the weight of the 
 cotton, as it is picked and hauled to the gin, is seed. With the 
 exception of such seed as is required for planting, practically 
 all cotton seed now reaches the oil mills, where it is crushed 
 and the oil extracted. The seed is now a valuable part of the 
 cotton crop and is becoming still more valuable as the demand 
 for its products increases. 
 
 Oil mills .—Cotton seed being bulky, the cost of transporta¬ 
 tion makes long-distance shipments unprofitable; conse¬ 
 quently oil mills have been located in the producing region, 
 generally at points at which the seed can be collected con¬ 
 veniently from the ginneries. In 1920 there were 675 seed¬ 
 crushing oil mills well distributed throughout the Cotton 
 Belt. The four primary products from crushing cotton seed 
 are linters, hulls, cake, and oil. The process of crushing, 
 briefly described, is as follows: 
 
 The seed first are cleaned of dirt and trash, then passed 
 through a delinting machine, which removes the short lint 
 or fuzz, making what are known as “ linters ”; it is then 
 passed through machines which crush or cut the seed in fine 
 pieces and separate the hulls from the kernels; and finally 
 the oil is expressed from the kernels in hydraulic presses, 
 leaving a residue which is called “ cake ” and which when 
 ground becomes cottonseed meal. In the “ cold-press ” mills 
 the whole seed is crushed and no effort is made to separate 
 hulls from kernels. 
 
 Warehousing. 
 
 The warehousing of cotton after ginning is very important 
 economically. Leaving the baled cotton exposed to the 
 weather results in large losses annually from the rotting of 
 the fiber. Such damage is commonly known as “country 
 damage.” The cotton warehouse is a place of shelter and 
 protection from fire and theft; a place for classing and as¬ 
 sorting to meet mill requirements; and finally it is a place 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 377 
 
 Fig. 36.—There are warehouses at many local markets, as well as at the larger concentration points throughout the South, 
 ton is customarily marketed as soon as it is ginned there are comparatively few warehouses, except at concentration 
 
378 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 where cotton may be deposited under conditions which en¬ 
 able the owner to obtain money advance upon it until such 
 time as he may desire to sell. Receipts of responsible ware¬ 
 houses are considered among the best kinds of security. The 
 Federal warehouse act of August, 1916, facilitates the use 
 of warehouse receipts by holders of cotton in financing them¬ 
 selves while holding for favorable market conditions. 
 
 Warehouses .—Warehouses for storing cotton have been 
 built at many local markets, as well as at the larger con¬ 
 centration points throughout the South. (See Fig. 36.) In 
 Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, where much of the cotton is 
 customarily marketed as soon as it is ginned, and is shipped 
 
 Fro. 37.—A modern concentration and export warehouse of semislow-burning 
 construction. The wide courts are for receiving from cars and for delivery 
 to the compress in the background. The hose houses are located between 
 the buildings. 
 
 directly to the mills or exported, there are comparatively few 
 warehouses, except at concentration points where the cotton 
 is held by merchants. The same statement applies generally 
 to Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana. In the Eastern 
 States warehouses are usually accessible to the farmers. 
 
 Grading Cotton. 
 
 The value of cotton to the consuming mills is measured 
 not only by the length, strength, and uniformity of the staple 
 but also by its color and by the amount of foreign material 
 that it contains. While in the wild state species of cotton 
 are found with fibers of a variety of colors, the principal 
 varieties of commerce, with the exception of a few, such as 
 the brown Egyptians, are of a creamy or pure white color. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 379 
 
 
 Seasonal conditions, such as frosts or excessively damp or 
 rainy weather, stain and discolor cotton. In some sections 
 cotton unduly exposed to the weather after maturing re¬ 
 ceives a bluish cast or becomes mildewed. This condition 
 so frequently occurs in some sections as to lead to the belief 
 that the damage is connected with certain types of soil. 
 The fibers of “blue cotton” are usually weakened. Dirt, 
 sand, broken leaves, and stems become lodged in cotton fibers 
 during storms and 
 long exposure in the 
 field, and when picked 
 and ginned with the 
 cotton reduce its value 
 in proportion to the 
 quantity of such for¬ 
 eign matter present. 
 
 Standards for grad¬ 
 ing .—There has always 
 been considerable con¬ 
 fusion in the market¬ 
 ing of cotton, due to 
 the fact that nearly 
 every market had its 
 own grades, and these 
 were frequently 
 changed to meet spe¬ 
 cial crop conditions. 
 
 In order to simplify 
 cotton marketing by 
 making a single set of 
 standard grades, on 
 which quotations and 
 purchases and sales could be based, the United States Depart¬ 
 ment of Agriculture was authorized in the appropriation bill 
 for the fiscal year 1909 to prepare grade standards. Subse¬ 
 quent legislation enlarged these powers and authorized the 
 sale of copies of the Official Cotton Standards to all who de¬ 
 sired them. The United States Official Cotton Standards for 
 grade have now been adopted by the exchanges of practi¬ 
 cally all the leading cotton markets of this country. Ap¬ 
 proximately 2,500 full and fractional copies of the standards 
 have been sold to the American cotton trade. Copies have 
 
 Fig. 38.—Grading by standards. A full set 
 of white standards consists of 9 boxes, 
 each containing 12 samples of the same 
 grade of cotton. The 12 samples indi¬ 
 cate the range of diversity allowed within 
 the grade. 
 
380 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 19*21 
 
 Fig. 39.—A photographic representation of the official cotton standards of 
 the United States of those lengths of staple for which types are available 
 for distribution, each respective length as shown being obtained from the 
 original type bale. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 381 
 
 also been sold into practically all the foreign markets. (See 
 Fig. 38.) 
 
 Bolly ootton .—In the- western and northwestern sections 
 of the Cotton Belt large quantities of bolls, more or less 
 matured, are frequently caught by early frosts which kill 
 the plants and arrest the further development of the fibers. 
 Such of these bolls as are not too severely damaged crack 
 open and produce a cotton of poor character, fluffy and soft, 
 and filled with shale, or the finely divided smooth inner 
 surface of the carpel, which adheres closely to the fibers and 
 causes waste during spinning. So much of such cotton has 
 been caught by frosts in recent years that steps have been 
 taken to salvage as much as possible. These frost-opened 
 bolls are gathered and put through machinery which first 
 picks the cotton from the bolls and then gins the cotton. 
 The lint thus obtained is known as “bolly cotton” and 
 brings only a fractional part of the price of well-matured 
 white cotton. 
 
 Snaps .—Recently still another type of cotton has appeared 
 in the West. It is known as “ snaps,” and its name is sig : 
 nificant of its character. Owing to labor shortages, fields of 
 mature cotton are sometimes left unpicked until late fall or 
 winter. It is then much easier, especially if the weather be 
 cold, to snap the bolls off of the plants than to pick the cotton. 
 The “ picking ” is done later by machinery, and the cotton is 
 then ginned and baled in the usual manner. While this 
 cotton is fully matured, it is likely to be discolored and 
 trashy. Snaps or snapped cotton also brings a lower price 
 than regular cotton, but its spinning value is above that of 
 bolly cotton. 
 
 Linters. 
 
 All cultivated varieties of cotton, with the exception of 
 Sea Islands and some Egyptians, produce two types of fibers 
 on their seed coats—a long fiber suitable for spinning and a 
 short, somewhat weaker, fiber usually called fuzz. The long 
 fibers are removed and baled at the gins and constitute the 
 cotton of commerce, while the short fibers, or fuzz, are re¬ 
 moved in a second and more intense ginning known as 
 “ delinting ” or “ cutting ” and constitute what are known as 
 linters. Delinting is generally done at cotton-oil mills as a 
 step in the preparation of the seed for crushing. Linters also 
 contain varying amounts of the long fibers that have escaped 
 
382 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 through the gins without being removed. Linters are packed 
 in bales similar to the ordinary cotton bale and weigh on an 
 average about 500 pounds to the bale. The production of 
 linters has increased from 114,000 bales in 1899-1900 to 
 440,000 bales in 1920-21. In 1916-17, during the World War, 
 1,331,000 bales of linters were cut, to be used chiefly in the 
 production of explosives. The annual production of linters 
 during the last 20 years, together with the ratio of linter pro¬ 
 duction to cotton production, is shown in the accompanying 
 table: 
 
 Annual production of linters. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Bales of 
 linters. 
 
 Per cent 
 of cotton 
 crop. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Bales of 
 linters. 
 
 Per cent 
 of cotton 
 crop. 
 
 1899-1900.... 
 
 114,000 
 143,000 
 166,000 
 196,000 
 
 1.2 
 
 1910-11. 
 
 398,000 
 
 556,000 
 
 602,000 
 
 629,000 
 
 3.2 
 
 1900-1901 . 
 
 1.4 
 
 1911-12. 
 
 3.4 
 
 1901-2. 
 
 1.5 
 
 1912-13. 
 
 4.2 
 
 1902-3. 
 
 1.8 
 
 1913-14. 
 
 4.2 
 
 5.3 
 
 1903-4. 
 
 195,000 
 245,000 
 230,000 
 322,000 
 268,000 
 346,000 
 313,000 
 
 1.9 
 
 1914-15. 
 
 856,000 
 
 931,000 
 
 1,331,000 
 
 1,126,000 
 
 929,000 
 
 608,000 
 
 1904-5. 
 
 1.7 
 
 1915-16. 
 
 8.3 
 
 1905-6. 
 
 2.0 
 
 1916-17. 
 
 10.9 
 
 1906-7. 
 
 2.3 
 
 1917-18. 
 
 10.0 
 
 1907-8. 
 
 2.3 
 
 1918-19. 
 
 7.7 
 
 1908-9 
 
 2.5 
 
 1919-20 .. 
 
 5.4 
 
 1909-10. 
 
 2.9 
 
 1920-21. 
 
 440,000 
 
 3.3 
 
 
 
 Uses of linters .—During war time linters are used chiefly 
 in the manufacture of explosives, but during peace time the 
 felting quality of linters and the chemical composition of 
 the fibers are utilized in the manufacture of a variety of 
 articles, as shown in the following list: 
 
 Batting. 
 
 Wadding. 
 
 Stuffing material for : 
 
 Pads. 
 
 Cushions. 
 
 Comforts. 
 
 Horse collars. 
 
 Mattresses. 
 
 Upholstery. 
 
 Absorbent cotton. 
 
 Mixing with shoddy. 
 
 Mixing with wool in hat making. 
 Mixing with lamb’s wool for fleece- 
 lined underwear. 
 
 Felt. 
 
 Low grade yarns : 
 
 Lamp and candle wicks. 
 
 Twine. 
 
 Rope. 
 
 Low grade yarns—Continued. 
 
 Carpets. 
 
 Cellulose : 
 
 Writing paper. 
 
 Guncotton, nitro-cellulose. 
 Pyrocellulose. 
 
 Smokeless powder. 
 
 Pyroxylin. 
 
 Varnishes— 
 
 Coating for metals. 
 Artificial leather. 
 Weatherproofing. 
 Plastics— 
 
 Celluloid. 
 
 Collodion. 
 
 Varnishes. 
 
 Artificial silks. 
 Photographic films. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 383 
 
 Cotton Markets. 
 
 A cotton market may be defined as a place where a number 
 of men meet to buy and sell cotton. The system begins with 
 the village or town where dealer meets producer and ends 
 with the point where dealer delivers to spinner. The trad¬ 
 ing may be in actual cotton or in contracts for future de¬ 
 livery. The term “ spot cotton ” is used to designate actual 
 cotton on the market, and a “ spot market ” is one dealing 
 
 Fig. 40.—A large proportion of the cotton crop is annually marketed Sep¬ 
 tember to January, inclusive. This heavy marketing ordinarily depresses 
 the farm price, which rises slowly as the marketing diminishes. Last year 
 (1920-21) deflation, business depression, and a large carry-over of stocks 
 caused the farm price to fall almost continuously from August to May of 
 the following year. 
 
 in spot or actual cotton. In the future markets the trading 
 is done in contracts to deliver at some future date. A future 
 contract usually calls for 100 bales or approximately 50,000 
 pounds of cotton to be delivered during a specified future 
 month. 
 
 Spot markets .—The spot markets are classified, according 
 to their location and their functions in cotton trading, as 
 primary and interior markets. 
 
 Primary markets are villages and towns where baled cotton 
 is first put on the market and sold by the producer. Cotton 
 buyers go into almost every village and town where a ginnery 
 is to be found. 
 
384 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 385 
 
 Interior markets are large towns and cities where cotton 
 from primary markets is received and sold by primary buy¬ 
 ers to merchants or mill agents. Such markets are usually 
 the points of concentration for grading, compressing, as¬ 
 sembling in commercial lots, and consigning to destination 
 for consumption. 
 
 Export markets .—The cities along the Atlantic and Gulf 
 coasts where cotton is sold and from which it is exported are 
 called export markets. About one-half of the American 
 cotton crop is exported for consumption in foreign mills. 
 
 Consuming markets .—Cities or towns in which cotton is 
 purchased for manufacturing are called consuming markets. 
 Boston, New York, and Philadelphia are both export and 
 important consuming markets. 
 
 Future markets .—There are future cotton markets or ex¬ 
 changes in New Orleans and New York. The importance of 
 these markets is not indicated by their receipts or exports of 
 cotton, as much of the cotton dealt in never reaches these 
 points. New Orleans is both a spot market and a future 
 market, while New York is primarily a future market. 
 Liverpool is the most important foreign future market deal¬ 
 ing in American cotton. There are future exchanges also at 
 Bremen and Havre which deal in American cotton. The 
 classification of all cotton delivered on the New York and 
 New Orleans future exchanges is now done by the United 
 States Department of Agriculture. 
 
 Marketing and Prices. 
 
 All of the markets are closely connected through the opera¬ 
 tions of dealers, and the future exchanges stand at the apex 
 of the system, the prices quoted in all the other markets gen¬ 
 erally being based on the future quotations. (See Fig. 42.) 
 When the harvest season begins, contracts covering a large 
 part of the cotton crop have already been made and are being 
 dealt in daily upon the future exchanges. While dealing 
 in futures may be used for speculation, under normal condi¬ 
 tions its chief use is for hedging, a means of insurance against 
 loss and also for the stabilization of prices. The spinner 
 who has made a contract to deliver cotton goods sometime 
 in the future orders cotton from a responsible dealer, who 
 “ hedges ” against a rise in the price of cotton, generally by 
 buying a contract for it upon a future exchange. 
 
 5689°—22-5 
 
386 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921 
 
 1921, the futures were generally above the cash. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 387 
 
 On the other hand, the dealer who is buying or expects to 
 buy cotton on the primary or other markets may “ hedge ” 
 against a fall in prices by selling a contract for it upon a 
 future exchange at a price sufficient to insure him against loss 
 or even to make a profit. The purchase of cotton in quan¬ 
 tity for any purpose without hedging would be considered 
 such speculation that banks would not finance the deal. 
 Dealers on the future cotton exchanges keep daily watch on 
 the demand for cotton in all the important consuming mar¬ 
 kets and upon the conditions as to production and movement 
 of cotton for the purpose of forecasting prices as far ahead 
 as possible. Their forecasts guide them in their activities 
 in buying and selling contracts for future delivery and the 
 quotations of sales as they are made followed closely by 
 dealers in the actual cotton on all spot markets. 
 
 Marketing cotton .—Buyers become active in the primary 
 markets as soon as ginning begins. Some cotton is grown 
 under mortgage and is sold promptly in order to meet press¬ 
 ing financial obligations. Where only small quantities of 
 cotton are grown, it is usually sold to the ginner or local 
 merchant in the nearest town or village. Through the center 
 of the Cotton Belt the tenants on plantations, usually having 
 pledged their crops in advance, sell at once to the owners 
 of the plantations, or, subject to the lien, to merchants or 
 buyers. With many producers, however, the time of selling 
 is largely a matter of choice. 
 
 When cotton is bought in greater quantities than can be 
 moved or consumed at once, the purchaser must bear the 
 expense of storage and risk of loss, and he, therefore, pays 
 the producer a lower price for it. On the other hand, the 
 producer who can hold his crop must consider the expenses 
 of storage, insurance, and interest on money involved in 
 estimating the advantages of holding. It may be that in 
 some cases the buyer can hold at less expense than the farmer 
 and can afford to pay such a price that the farmer would lose 
 by holding. Many successful farmers have adopted the 
 fixed policy of selling a portion of their crop promptly and 
 holding the remainder for sale as conditions and circum¬ 
 stances seem to warrant. The cotton sold under stress and 
 of free choice soon after ginning forms a large percentage 
 of the total crop. (See Fig. 40.) 
 
388 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture, 1921. 
 
 It requires some time to assemble the cotton at the large 
 primary and interior markets and to ship it to points of 
 export and of consumption. Dealers move some of it as 
 rapidly as possible, but hold some in storage at interior 
 markets and concentration points so that they may deliver 
 to spinners throughout the year. Spinners, as a rule, do 
 not carry a very large supply of cotton on hand. The op¬ 
 erations of the future exchanges enable dealers through 
 hedging to buy and hold the cotton many months or to ship 
 it a long distance without undue hazard from changes in 
 prices. 
 
 Prices. —The basis for price quotations upon all the mar¬ 
 kets is the quotation for Middling on the nearest active 
 future month upon the future exchanges. (See Fig. 43.) 
 At each primary market a deduction from the price quota¬ 
 tions must be made to cover expenses of handling and trans¬ 
 portation. If there are many buyers on the market, grad¬ 
 ing may be fairly close and the prices paid close to the limit 
 that will allow a reasonable profit to the buyer. 
 
 Prices in the large primary and interior markets are de¬ 
 termined as in the smaller primary markets. However, grad¬ 
 ing has become standardized in these markets, and at each 
 market the grades above and below Middling are settled for 
 according to the differences prevailing in that market. The 
 differences in price between Middling and the other grades 
 and the premiums for the longer staples vary from time to 
 time because of special demands or the effects of the season 
 upon the supply of the different grades and lengths of staple. 
 
 The basis grade in future contracts is Middling and the 
 price stated in the contracts is for that grade. When grades 
 other than Middling are delivered the receiver pays for these 
 grades so much above or below the contract price as the 
 grades delivered are worth. Under the United States cotton 
 futures act certain bona fide spot markets, designated by the 
 Secretary of Agriculture, report daily to the future ex¬ 
 changes in the United States and to the Secretary of Agri¬ 
 culture the prevailing prices for Middling and the other 
 grades “on” and “off” Middling (above or below Mid¬ 
 dling). New Orleans being also a spot market the differences 
 in prices between Middling and the other grades of spot 
 cotton in that market are used in determining the prices of 
 cotton other than Middling when they are delivered on a 
 
The Cotton Situation . 
 
 389 
 
 Fig. 43.—In the period of the recent war the price did not rise as high as in the Civil War period. One reason being that pro¬ 
 duction continued and there was always available a good supply, whereas in the earlier period very little was produced and 
 almost no cotton was available. 
 
390 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 future contract in that market, whereas under the cotton 
 futures act the New York cotton exchange uses the average 
 differences “ on ” or “ off ” Middling as reported by the bona 
 fide spot markets designated by the Secretary of Agriculture. 
 
 Transportation. 
 
 On the primary markets the miscellaneous assortments of 
 grades and lengths of staple produced by the growers of cot¬ 
 ton are purchased and forwarded to the interior markets, 
 where they are assorted and assembled into lots, even run¬ 
 ning as to grade and other character, and offered to the pur¬ 
 chasing agencies of the mills. Before forwarding to the 
 mills, however, the cotton is compressed so as to conserve 
 freight and mill storage space and to economize on freight 
 charges. 
 
 APPROXIMATE DIVISION OF THE LIVERPOOL VALUE OF A BALE OF COTTON 
 ON JULY I. 1913, 1918, 1920, AND 1921. 
 
 1913 1918 1920 1921 
 
 VALUE AT LIVERPOOL VALUE AT LIVERPOOL VALUE AT LIVERPOOL VALUE AT LIVERPOOL 
 
 $64.25 $200.50 $199.25 $58.90 
 
 Fig. 44.—The farmer’s share of the final market value of a bale of cotton 
 varied greatly from time to time through the late war period. The cost of 
 ocean transportation was large during the war but has shrunken nearly to 
 the prewar share, whereas the rail transportation share has largely increased 
 since the war. 
 
 Where there are no facilities for compressing the cotton at 
 point of origin railroads accept it and have it compressed 
 in transit. The charge for compressing averages about 12 
 cents per hundred weight. Additional charges are made 
 for patching. These charges are added to the freight charges 
 and collected by the railroad company. To secure through 
 shipping rates all cotton is shipped to concentration points 
 with reshipment privileges. When the cotton is to be re¬ 
 shipped the owner surrenders his receipts and it is forwarded 
 to destination on the rate quoted from point of origin. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 391 
 
 The Consumption of the Cotton Crop. 
 
 Approximately half of the crop is consumed in this coun¬ 
 try and the remainder is exported. In recent years mills in 
 the cotton-growing States have taken more than half of the 
 total quantity remaining in this country for consumption. 
 Linters are mostly consumed at home. The tendencies are 
 to expand the cotton manufacturing industries of the South 
 and to manufacture more and more of the cotton near where 
 it is grown. 
 
 Statistics and charts showing the annual distribution of 
 the cotton crop of the United States follow. 
 
 Consumption of cotton in the United States, 1896-97 to 1920-21. 
 
 [Bales.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 United 
 
 States. 
 
 All other 
 States. 
 
 Cotton¬ 
 growing 
 States. 1 
 
 Year. 
 
 United 
 
 States. 
 
 All other 
 States. 
 
 Cotton¬ 
 growing 
 States. 
 
 1896-97_ 
 
 3,472,398 
 
 
 
 1909-10_ 
 
 4,621,742 
 
 2,388,236 
 
 2,233,506 
 
 1897 98... 
 
 3,672,097 
 
 
 
 1910-11_ 
 
 4,498,417 
 
 2,249,282 
 
 2,249,135 
 
 1898-99_ 
 
 3,687,253 
 
 
 
 1911-12_ 
 
 5,129,346 
 
 2,493,468 
 
 2,635,878 
 
 1899-1900. . 
 
 3,873,165 
 
 2,349,997 
 
 1,523,168 
 
 1912-13_ 
 
 5,483,321 
 
 2,621,578 
 
 2,861,743 
 
 1900-1901.. 
 
 4,080,287 
 
 
 
 1913-14_ 
 
 5,577,408 
 
 2,652,114 
 
 2,925,294 
 
 1901-02_ 
 
 4,187,076 
 
 
 . 
 
 1914-15.. .. 
 
 5,597,362 
 
 3,026,969 
 
 2,570,393 
 
 1902-03_ 
 
 3,980,567 
 
 
 
 1915-16_ 
 
 6,397,613 
 
 2,870,085 
 
 3,527,528 
 
 1903-04_ 
 
 4,523,208 
 
 
 
 ; 1916-17_ 
 
 6,788,505 
 
 2,900,157 
 
 3,888,348 
 
 1904_05_ 
 
 4,877,465 
 
 
 
 1917-18_ 
 
 6,566,489 
 
 2,869,391 
 
 3,697,098 
 
 1905-06_ 
 
 4,909,279 
 
 2,535,702 
 
 2,373,577 
 
 1918-19_ 
 
 5, 765,936 
 
 2,566,909 
 
 3,199,027 
 
 1908-07_ 
 
 4,984,936 
 
 2,573,943 
 
 2,410,993 
 
 1919-20_ 
 
 6,419,734 
 
 2,836,815 
 
 3,582,919 
 
 1907-08_ 
 
 4,539,090 
 
 2,351,994 
 
 2,187,096 
 
 1920-21_ 
 
 4,892,672 
 
 1,895,201 
 
 2,997,471 
 
 1908-09_ 
 
 5,091,534 
 
 2,581,321 
 
 2,510,213 
 
 
 
 
 
 The statistics given in the above table were compiled from 
 reports of the Bureau of the Census. Those for the period 
 1896-97 to 1913-14, inclusive, are for the 12 months ending 
 August 31. Those for the period 1914-15 to 1920-21, in¬ 
 clusive, are for the 12 months ending July 31. Those for the 
 years 1896-97 to 1904-5, inclusive, except the year 1899- 
 1900, are for equivalent 500-pound bales. Those for the year 
 1899-1900 and for the period 1905-6 to 1920-21, inclusive, 
 are for running bales, except that round bales are counted as 
 half bales and foreign cotton in equivalent 500-pound bales. 
 Linters are included for the years 1896-97 to 1907-8, in¬ 
 clusive, but are excluded for the years 1908-9 to 1920-21, 
 inclusive. 
 
TAKEN BY UNITED STATES MILLS 
 
 392 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Z.061 
 
 8681 
 
 Z.681 
 
 9681 
 
 8681 
 
 *681 
 
 8681 
 
 » 
 
 
 HZZLII 
 
 
 0681 
 
 6881 
 
 WttM 8881 
 j— Z.881 
 pHH 9881 
 ^■1 8881 
 *881 
 SSSffl 8881 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 « 
 
 < d 
 
 in 
 
 co 
 
 cv 
 
 ce. 
 
 < 
 
 UJ 
 
 >- 
 
 Fio. 45. — The consumption of raw cotton by the mills of the United States increased constantly from 1876 to 1916. The business depres¬ 
 sion last year caused a great reduction in mill consumption. The southern mills now use more than half the amount consumed in 
 the United States. 
 
The Cotton Situation . 
 
 393 
 
 The consumption of linters in the United States, by 
 seasons, for the seasons 1908-9 to 1920-21 is given below. 
 The figures for the seasons 1908-9 to 1913-14, inclusive, 
 are for the 12 months ending August 31. Those for the 
 seasons 1914-15 to 1920-21, inclusive, are for the 12 months 
 ending July 31. 
 
 Linters consumed. 
 
 [Bales.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 United 
 
 States. 
 
 Cotton¬ 
 
 growing 
 
 States. 
 
 All other 
 States. 
 
 Year. 
 
 United 
 
 States. 
 
 Cotton¬ 
 
 growing 
 
 States. 
 
 All other 
 
 States. 
 
 1908-9. 
 
 149,185 
 
 43,584 
 
 105,601 
 
 1915-16_ 
 
 880,916 
 
 449,602 
 
 431,314 
 
 1909-10_ 
 
 177,211 
 
 58,827 
 
 118,384 
 
 1915-17_ 
 
 869,702 
 
 446,659 
 
 423,043 
 
 1910-11_ 
 
 206,561 
 
 79,352 
 
 127,209 
 
 1917-18_ 
 
 1,118,840 
 
 716,954 
 
 401,886 
 
 1911-12_ 
 
 238,237 
 
 76,345 
 
 161,892 
 
 1918-19_ 
 
 457,901 
 
 291,981 
 
 165,920 
 
 1912-13_ 
 
 303,009 
 
 98,775 
 
 204,234 
 
 1919-20. ... 
 
 342,473 
 
 131,484 
 
 210,989 
 
 1913-14_ 
 
 307,325 
 
 98,121 
 
 209,204 
 
 1920-21_ 
 
 516,307 
 
 154,483 
 
 361,824 
 
 1914-15_ 
 
 411,845 
 
 166,384 
 
 245,461 
 
 
 
 
 
 Supply and distrbution of cotton in the United States. 
 
 [Linters are included for the years 1905-6 to 1912-13, inclusive, but are excluded for the years 
 
 1913-14 to 1920-21.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Supply. 
 
 Distribution. 
 
 Produc¬ 
 tion, run¬ 
 ning bales, 
 except 
 round bales 
 counted 
 as half 
 bales. 
 
 Carry over 
 from 
 previous 
 year. 
 
 Imports, 
 
 equivalent 
 
 500-pound 
 
 bales. 
 
 Exports, 
 running 
 bales, 
 except 
 round bales 
 counted 
 as half 
 bales. 
 
 Consump¬ 
 tion, run¬ 
 ning bales, 
 except 
 round bales 
 counted 
 as half 
 bales. 
 
 Stocks 
 on hand 
 at end 
 of year. 
 
 1905-6. 
 
 10,656,498 
 
 1,934,548 
 
 133,464 
 
 6,763,041 
 
 4,909,279 
 
 1,349,139 
 
 1906-7. 
 
 13,097,992 
 
 1,349,139 
 
 202,733 
 
 8,503,265 
 
 4,984,936 
 
 1,514,567 
 
 1907-8. 
 
 11,527,833 
 
 1,514,567 
 
 140,869 
 
 7,573,349 
 
 4,539,090 
 
 1,236,058 
 
 1908-9. 
 
 13,418,144 
 
 1,236,058 
 
 165,451 
 
 8,574,024 
 
 5,240,719 
 
 1,483,585 
 
 1909-10. 
 
 10,350,978 
 
 1,483,585 
 
 151,395 
 
 6,339,028 
 
 4,798,953 
 
 1,040,040 
 
 1910-11. 
 
 12,384,248 
 
 1,040,040 
 
 231,191 
 
 7,781,414 
 
 4,704,978 
 
 1,375,031 
 
 1911-12. 
 
 16,068,936 
 
 1,375,031 
 
 229,268 
 
 10,681,758 
 
 5,367,583 
 
 1,776,885 
 
 1912-13. 
 
 14,159,078 
 
 1,776,885 
 
 225,460 
 
 8,800,966 
 
 5,786,330 
 
 1,648,438 
 
 1913-14. 
 
 13,659,167 
 
 1,510,606 
 
 265,646 
 
 8,654,958 
 
 5,577,408 
 
 1,447,817 
 
 1914-15. 
 
 15,905,840 
 
 1,365,864 
 
 363,595 
 
 8.322,688 
 
 5,597,362 
 
 3,936,104 
 
 1915-16. 
 
 11,068,173 
 
 3,936,104 
 
 420,995 
 
 5,895,672 
 
 . 6,397,613 
 
 3,139,709 
 
 1916-17. 
 
 11,363,915 
 
 3,139,709 
 
 288,486 
 
 5,302,848 
 
 6,788,505 
 
 2,720,173 
 
 1917-18. 
 
 11,248,242 
 
 2,720,173 
 
 217,381 
 
 4,288,420 
 
 6,566,489 
 
 3,450,188 
 
 1918-19. 
 
 11,906,480 
 
 3,450,188 
 
 197,201 
 
 5,592,386 
 
 5,765,936 
 
 4,286,785 
 
 1919-20. 
 
 11,325,532 
 
 4,286,785 
 
 682,911 
 
 6,545,326 
 
 6,419, 734 
 
 3,563,162 
 
 1920-21. 
 
 13,270,970 
 
 3,563,162 
 
 226,321 
 
 5,673,452 
 
 4,892,672 
 
 6,590,359 
 
394 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 ANNUAL SUPPLY OF COTTON 
 
 (including linters) 
 
 UNITED STATES. CROP YEARS. 1905-1920 
 
 BAL'iS <0 |n 00 Cl O — (MCO^iniO^OOOl 
 MILLIONS 0)0)0>o>0)0)0)o5o)0)0>aC>0) 
 
 ANNUAL DISTRIBUTION OF COTTON 
 
 (including linters) 
 
 UNITED STATES. CROP YEARS. 1905-1920 
 
 in 
 
 (0 
 
 
 00 
 
 0) 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 (0 
 
 
 in 
 
 (0 
 
 
 00 
 
 0) 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0) 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 0) 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 01 
 
 Fig. 46.—In recent years the carry-over from one crop season to another has 
 been large. The total amount available for the year 1920—21 was greater 
 than for any previous year except 1914-15. Before the war the United 
 States annually exported more cotton than was consumed, but since 1914 
 exports have been less than home consumption. 
 
The Cotton Situation . 
 
 395 
 
 Supply and distribution of linters in the United States. 
 
 [Figures for each season are for the 12 months ending Aug. 31, during the season 1905-6 to 
 1913-14, inclusive, and for the 12 months ending July 31, during the season 1914-15 to 
 1920-21.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Supply. 
 
 Distribution. 
 
 Produc¬ 
 tion, run¬ 
 ning bales, 
 except 
 round bales 
 counted 
 as half 
 bales. 
 
 Carry over 
 from 
 previous 
 year. 
 
 Imports, 
 
 equivalent 
 
 500-pound 
 
 bales. 
 
 Exports, 
 running 
 bales, 
 except 
 round bales 
 counted 
 as half 
 bales. 
 
 Consump¬ 
 tion, run¬ 
 ning bales, 
 except 
 round bales 
 counted 
 as half 
 bales. 
 
 • Stocks 
 on hand 
 at end 
 of year. 
 
 1905-6 . 
 
 230,497 
 322,064 
 268,060 
 346,126 
 313,478 
 397,628 
 556,276 
 602,324 
 631,153 
 832,401 
 944,640 
 1,300,163 
 1,096,422 
 910,236 
 595,093 
 439,637 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1906-7 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1907-8. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1908-9. 
 
 
 
 
 149,185 
 177,211 
 206,561 
 238,237 
 303,009 
 307,325 
 411,845 
 880,916 
 869, 702 
 1.118.840 
 
 
 1909-10 
 
 
 
 
 
 1910-11. 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 1911-12. 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 1912-13. 
 
 
 
 
 137,832 
 181,584 
 388,786 
 263,547 
 453,659 
 439.917 
 
 1913-14. 
 
 137,832 
 181,584 
 388,786 
 263,547 
 453,659 
 439,917 
 868,897 
 1,009,650 
 
 
 . 
 
 259,881 
 221,875 
 295,438 
 436,161 
 187,704 
 71,534 
 53,021 
 51,132 
 
 1914-15 . 
 
 
 1915-16. 
 
 1 . 
 
 1916-17. 
 
 
 1917-18. 
 
 . 
 
 1918-19 . 
 
 
 457,901 868,897 
 
 342,473 1,009,650 
 
 516,307 684,298 
 
 1 
 
 1919-20. 
 
 
 1920-211. 
 
 
 
 
 i Subject to possible correction. 
 
 Fig. 47. — Noon hour at a modern southern cotton mill. 
 
396 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 COTTON CONSUMPTION 
 
 FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC 
 AUG.. 1920-JULY. 1921 
 
 COTTON 
 CONSUMPTION 
 (EXCLUDING LINTERS) 
 
 STATE 
 
 DOMESTIC 
 
 FOREIGN 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 N.C. 
 
 914,377 
 
 12,007 
 
 926484 
 
 Mass 
 
 823,400 
 
 99,082 
 
 922.482 
 
 S. C. 
 
 766,784 
 
 4,776 
 
 771460 
 
 Ga.. 
 
 605,817 
 
 8462 
 
 614,079 
 
 Ala. . 
 
 309,646 
 
 
 309,646 
 
 N. H. 
 
 206,012 
 
 14429 
 
 220.241 
 
 R. I.. 
 
 170,826 
 
 41,373 
 
 212,199 
 
 Me.. 
 
 146,498 
 
 6.667 
 
 153,165 
 
 N. Y. 
 
 129,527 
 
 1466 
 
 130,793 
 
 Va.. 
 
 105452 
 
 
 105452 
 
 Conn. 
 
 83,398 
 
 12,009 
 
 95,407 
 
 Tenn. 
 
 74,565 
 
 124 
 
 74,689 
 
 Tei. . 
 
 62,617 
 
 
 62,617 
 
 Md.. 
 
 40421 
 
 ' ' 496' 
 
 41417 
 
 La . . 
 
 39427 
 
 
 39.327 
 
 N. J. 
 
 19,419 
 
 11,945 
 
 31464 
 
 Miss. 
 
 31408 
 
 
 31408 
 
 Pa . . 
 
 22,579 
 
 1450 
 
 24,429 
 
 K,.. 
 
 21,303 
 
 
 21403 
 
 Ind.. 
 
 14,200 
 
 12 
 
 14412 
 
 III. . . 
 
 10,555 
 
 199 
 
 10,754 
 
 VI... 
 
 9,762 
 
 341 
 
 10,103 
 
 Other 
 
 68,898 
 
 1,143 
 
 70,041 
 
 U.S. 
 
 4,676,891 
 
 215,781 
 
 4,892,672 
 
 Fig. 48. —The mills in the cotton-growing States took 61 per cent of the total 
 taken by the United States mills. Massachusetts, North Carolina, South 
 Carolina, and Georgia are the leading States. Most of the foreign cotton was 
 taken by the mills of New England. w 
 
 Cotton Exports. 
 
 The average annual exports of cotton previous to the late 
 Avar were about 60 per cent of the crop. During the war 
 period the United States consumed the larger proportion 
 of the crop produced. In some years more than one-half 
 the crop was consumed by the mills in this country. The 
 economic depression of last year resulted in a reduction of 
 the mill consumption at home. Exports were also reduced, 
 leaving an unusually large carry over, 6,590,000 bales, or 
 one-half of the production. 
 
 The movements of cotton through ports and to foreign 
 countries are indicated by the accompanying charts. The 
 
The Cotton Situation* 
 
 397 
 
 Fig. 49.—The predominant position of the United States in the international cotton trade is graphically shown in this ch^rt. 
 
398 Yearhook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921 
 
 Note the changes in movements between the pre-war period and last year. Austria-Hungary and Russia were out of the 
 market last year. Only Japan shows enlarged imports. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 399 
 
 war disturbed cotton movements by making transportation 
 expensive and shutting out from our markets some of the 
 foreign countries that were taking cotton. On the other 
 hand, in Japan there has been a great increase in the manu¬ 
 facture of cotton, and Japan has become one of the most 
 important markets for the raw cotton of the United States. 
 
 Pig. 51.—The United Kingdom is the best customer of the United States; 
 Germany was second. Japan is becoming one of the principal importers of 
 American cotton. In recent years there has been a very rapid expansion of 
 manufacturing in Japan. 
 
 Utilization of Cotton Seed. 
 
 The utilization of the cotton seed has become an important 
 economic factor in the production of cotton. At first plant¬ 
 ers commonly considered all of the seed as waste material, 
 except that used for planting, but as soon as they began to 
 give some attention to maintaining the fertility of their 
 soils they found the seed valuable fertilizing material. Be- 
 for the Civil War experiments were being made in heeding 
 the seed to live stock and crushing it for oil. In 1859 there 
 were seven establishments in the United States engaged in 
 the manufacture of cottonseed products. After the Civil 
 War there was a great demand for fertilizers in the eastern 
 States, of the Cotton Belt, and the cotton seed was almost 
 universally used for this purpose. In 1875 refined cotton¬ 
 seed oil was put on the New Orleans market, and since then 
 
400 Yearbook of the Department , of Agriculture , 19*21. 
 
 Fig. 52.—The amount of cotton seed produced, of course, varies with the cotton 
 crop. Recently developed valuable uses for the seed products and high prices 
 for the seed have caused an increasing proportion of the Droduction to he 
 crushed. 
 
 the cottonseed oil industry has developed with remarkable 
 rapidity. Increased demand for the various products of 
 the crushed seed has greatly increased the A’alue of the seed. 
 
 Deterioration in Quality of the American Cotton Crop. 
 
 According to the testimony of the cotton trade in Europe 
 as well as in the United States, the quality of the American 
 cotton crop has deteriorated in recent decades. This can be 
 understood when account is taken of the general custom 
 among the American growers of planting many different 
 varieties in the same locality, the crossing of these varieties 
 in the field, mixing the seed at the public gins, and the 
 general use of this ordinary “ gin-run ” seed for planting. 
 
 The extent of mixing of seed at gins has not been appre¬ 
 ciated. Recent experiments have shown that modern ginning 
 machinery retains a large amount of seed from each customer 
 and passes it on to the next. No less than 26 per cent' of the 
 seed delivered to the farmer at public gins, as ordinarily 
 operated, may be seed of another variety ginned for the 
 previous customer. It is apparent that if such seed is planted 
 there must be a vast amount of mixing in the field, and de¬ 
 terioration begins. 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 401 
 
 The degeneration that results from crossing in the field 
 no doubt is the basis for the popular idea that cotton varieties 
 “ run out ” in a few years and that “ fresh seed ” must be 
 brought in from other districts. The fact is, however, that 
 locally selected seed of good varieties has proved better than 
 the new stock and some of the best-known varieties have 
 been grown continuously in the same districts for many years, 
 with no indication of “ running out ” as long as isolation, 
 selection, and clean ginning are maintained. 
 
 Lack of discrimination on the part of buyers in the primary 
 markets is also a serious factor in the deterioration in quality 
 of the American cotton crop, and failure on the part of buyers 
 to recognize superior quality when dealing with the growers 
 has had the natural effect of leading farmers to believe that 
 the most desirable character that a cotton variety can have 
 is that of ghfing a high percentage of lint or “ large out¬ 
 turn at the gin.” Most of the varieties with high lint per¬ 
 centages produce short and inferior fiber and have small 
 seeds, yielding a low percentage of oil, but such varieties are 
 likely to be planted so long as the farmer receives as much 
 for three-quarter or seven-eighths inch cotton as he does for 
 1-inch cotton. 
 
 Danger from Foreign Competition. 
 
 Very active efforts are already being made to establish or 
 to extend the production of cotton in many foreign coun¬ 
 tries. Though such efforts in the past have not resulted in 
 serious injury to the cotton industry of the United States, 
 every season of high prices stimulates greater activity in. 
 other countries. Disturbed conditions during the war period 
 resulted in the suspension of some of these efforts, but there 
 is every possibility that important centers of cotton produc¬ 
 tion will be developed in other parts of the world within the 
 next few years. 
 
 Many representatives of foreign governments have come 
 to the United States in the last few years to study the Ameri¬ 
 can cotton industry. They have come from Russia, China, 
 ' Japan, India, the British colonies in Africa, Brazil, Argen¬ 
 tina, Peru, and other countries. Foreign governments are 
 also employing American experts and are purchasing large 
 supplies of seed of improved American varieties. 
 
 5689°—22-G 
 
402 Yearbook of the Depa/rtment of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 The effect of such competition abroad will be felt first 
 by the American producers of low-quality, short-staple cot¬ 
 ton. Manufacturers in the United States had begun to im¬ 
 port inferior cotton from India and China before the war, 
 and though such importations may not become a regular 
 custom, in any event they call attention to the fact that 
 fiber of inferior quality is already being produced in foreign 
 countries more cheaply than in the United States. 
 
 Since a large part of the American cotton crop is ex¬ 
 ported to other countries, the only adequate protection 
 against foreign competition is to improve our own industry 
 by growing better cotton and by growing it more cheaply 
 than other countries are able to do, notwithstanding lower 
 wages of farm labor. 
 
 Improvement Through Utilization of Better Varieties. 
 
 Fortunately the American cotton farmer is not limited 
 to the production of inferior fiber, even under boll weevil 
 conditions. Instead of preventing the use of better varieties 
 of cotton, the presence of the boll weevil makes the im¬ 
 provement of varieties still more important than ever before. 
 In fact, the better methods of preparing and cultivating the 
 land made necessary by the boll weevil provide more favor¬ 
 able conditions for the production of superior fiber. 
 
 There is available a series of early and prolific Upland 
 varieties of cotton-producing fiber from 1 to If inches long, 
 which are adapted to a wide range of conditions in the 
 American Cotton Belt. With such varieties available, there 
 are no agricultural reasons for continuing to produce cotton 
 of less than 1-inch staple in the United States, and there 
 does not appear to be any industrial or economic reason for 
 continuing to produce the short and inferior fiber that now 
 forms a large proportion of the American cotton crop. 
 
 Importance of One-Variety Communities. 
 
 Full utilization of improved varieties of cotton is possible 
 only in communities devoted to the production of a single 
 variety. Where communities are united upon a single su¬ 
 perior variety of cotton and supplies of pure seed are main¬ 
 tained many of the farming problems are simplified. Cot- 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 403 
 
 ton growing is discussed with interest and profit at farmers’ 
 meetings because everybody has had experience with the 
 same variety of cotton. With a full understanding of the 
 behavior of one variety, methods are adjusted more closely 
 to differences in soil, season, and time of planting, as well 
 as to the control of insect pests and diseases, labor supplies, 
 ginning, handling, warehousing, financing, and marketing 
 of the crop. 
 
 The most rapid progress in American cotton culture has 
 been made the last few years in the Salt River Valley of 
 Arizona, where only the Pima variety of Egyptian cotton 
 is grown. Single-variety communities are also developing 
 rapidly in Texas, Oklahoma, California, and other States 
 where millions of dollars in premiums have already been 
 paid to farmers for superior cotton. Such progress is not 
 possible in communities growing different kinds of cotton, 
 where farmers usually ascribe their success or failure to the 
 quality of the seed. 
 
 The essential feature is that the community should agreee 
 upon the planting of one variety of cotton and take measures 
 for maintaining the purity and uniformity of the stock by 
 continued selection under the local conditions. This would 
 mean larger crops, better fiber, and higher prices, not only 
 because of the improved quality, but also because each com¬ 
 munity would be able to produce a commercial quantity, a 
 hundred bales or upward, of the same uniform type of 
 cotton. 
 
 Cooperative Warehousing and One-Variety Communities. 
 
 Realization of the enormous benefits to be derived from 
 cooperative warehousing of cotton has led to the rapid organ¬ 
 ization in all of the principal cotton-growing States of farm¬ 
 ers’ associations to finance the building of centralized, fire¬ 
 proof warehouses for the proper storage and handling of 
 their crop. Through such associations the farmer secures 
 protection for his fiber from damage by fire or weather, his 
 crop is marketed in an orderly manner, and a fair price is 
 assured for the quality of cotton he produces. 
 
 Full benefits of such associations can not be realized, how¬ 
 ever, in communities growing many different varieties of 
 cotton. Though the progressive farmer producing a superior 
 
404 Yearbook of the Department of Agriculture , 1921. 
 
 staple from selected seed may receive a premium for his 
 cotton the first year of two, there would be no possibility 
 of maintaining the high standard of his crop so long as his 
 neighbors persisted in growing inferior cotton and ginning 
 their crops on the same gin. Nor is it possible to receive a 
 full price unless the superior fiber is available in the large 
 commercial quantities that manufacturers require, and only 
 one-variety communities can produce. 
 
 It is only in communities devoted to the growing of a 
 single, superior variety and maintaining its quality and uni¬ 
 formity by persistent selection that full benefits may be 
 realized from cooperative warehousing and a real improve¬ 
 ment in the quality of the American cotton crop assured. 
 
 Summary of the Situation and Outlook. 
 
 The short crop of 1921 plus the large carry-over from 1920 
 gave the world a sufficient supply of cotton for the year 
 1921-22. Had there not been a very large carry-over from 
 the crop of 1920 the low production of 1921 would have re¬ 
 sulted in very high prices for cotton. Ordinarily a short 
 crop in the United States should result in high prices, which 
 would in some measure offset low yields. But the extraor¬ 
 dinarily large carry-over from the crop of 1920 resulted in 
 low prices to farmers with a very small crop. The situation 
 was made worse by the industrial depression, which greatly 
 reduced the demand for cotton by the mills of the United 
 States as well as by manufacturers in foreign countries. In 
 addition to these difficulties the South was further oppressed 
 by high prices for fertilizers and high prices for almost 
 everything else that the southern farmer had to buy. Not¬ 
 withstanding that corn and other farm products in the North 
 were very cheap southern farmers had to pay good prices for 
 these products in the South because of the increased trans¬ 
 portation costs. Taken together all of these factors pro¬ 
 duced a severe economic depression in the South. 
 
 Of course it is not expected that these conditions will con¬ 
 tinue long. The revival of the cotton-manufacturing in¬ 
 dustry in this country is strengthening the demand for cot¬ 
 ton. There is reason to hope that the economic condition of 
 foreign countries will also improve, so that the cotton-manu- 
 
The Cotton Situation. 
 
 405 
 
 COTTON 
 
 MOVEMENTS 
 
 PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL CROP GINNED, 
 
 IN STORAGE, EXPORTED AND CONSUMED, BY MONTHS 
 
 1913-14 COMPARED WITH 1920-21 
 
 GINNED 
 
 PERCENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 CROP 
 
 55 
 
 50 
 
 45 
 
 40 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 EXPORTS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 <// 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 — 
 
 f/ 
 
 w 
 
 1/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i>- 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 '.If. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Q ticLl 
 
 Qon-'ZL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1^; 
 
 
 
 
 
 AUG. 
 
 SEPT. 
 
 OCT. 
 
 NOV. 
 
 DEC. 
 
 JAN. 
 
 FEB. 
 
 MAR. 
 
 APR. 
 
 MAY 
 
 JUNE 
 
 JUI.Y 
 
 X 
 
 o 
 
 z 
 
 X 
 
 CO 
 
 AUG. 
 
 SEPT. 
 
 OCT. 
 
 NOV. 
 
 DEC. 
 
 JAN. 
 
 FEB. 
 
 MAR. 
 
 APR. 
 
 MAY 
 
 JUNE 
 
 JULY 
 
 IN STORAGE 
 
 PERCENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 CROP 
 
 55 
 
 50 
 
 45 
 
 40 
 
 35 
 
 30 
 
 25 
 
 20 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 CONSUMPTION 
 
 IN UNITED STATES MILLS 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 ft. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 '?/ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 s, 
 
 X 
 
 I?* 
 
 !\. * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 $ 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 v. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Y\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ’ V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Si! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 
 TZuM/NG ES>ABUSHM£NTS, 
 
 
 
 
 
 «3/9 
 
 , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ", ,/v 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 AUG. 
 
 SEPT. 
 
 OCT. 
 
 NOV. 
 
 DEC. 
 
 JAN. 
 
 FEB. 
 
 MAR. 
 
 APR. 
 
 MAY 
 
 JUNE 
 
 JULY 
 
 X 
 
 § 
 
 i 
 
 AUG. 
 
 SEPT. 
 
 OCT. 
 
 NOV. 
 
 DEC. 
 
 JAN. 
 
 FEB. 
 
 MAR. 
 
 APR. 
 
 MAY 
 
 JUNE 
 
 JULY 
 
 Fig. 53.—Ginning begins in July and ends in February; the amount in storage 
 increases from August to December, inclusive; exports increase August to 
 October or November; consumption in the United States mills is quite regular 
 throughout the year. Movements last year differed from the pre-war average 
 principally in the stocks in storage, which was largely owing to the unusually 
 large carry-over from the previous year. 
 
 facturing industries will revive and the demand for goods 
 manufactured in this country will increase. The burden 
 upon the farmer of the South in making his purchases in 
 the North has been somewhat lessened by a slight reduction 
 in freight rates. Seductions in wages and in prices of things 
 the farmer buys to produce the crop will result in a reduc¬ 
 tion in the cost of the crop. The carry-over of cotton from 
 1921-22 is much less than in previous years, so that unless 
 there is a very large new crop of cotton to add to this carry¬ 
 over the supply at the beginning of the year will be con¬ 
 siderably less than the supply last year. Already the pros¬ 
 pect for a reduction in supply and an increase in demand 
 has resulted in better prices. The boll weevil continues 
 
406 Yearbook of the I)ej>art 
 
 111 
 
 to be a very destructive pest, which there is as yet no pros¬ 
 pect of eliminating. Farmers who have been in contact 
 with it for some time have learned to reduce somewhat its 
 destructiveness. Until more adequate measures of control 
 or destruction of the pest have been developed it may be 
 expected that the boll weevil will continue to do enormous 
 damage to the crop from year to year, varying in destructive¬ 
 ness with the character of the season. 
 
 ADDITIONAL COPIES 
 
 OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM 
 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. 
 
 AT 
 
 15 CENTS PER COPY 
 
 V