"The

Coffee

Copper ore and regulus.
Copper bars, ingots, etc.
Cork, wood or bark.
Cotton, raw....
Cotton waste or flocks.
Fertilizers

Fiber, Tampico...
Jute and jute butts.

619.954 17,838 36,152,585

323,517 7,262,100 .64,157,664

8,695,780 ..13,051,159 1,925,254 .10,801,166 602,998 2,536,380

739,075

4,957,547

is not

The reasoning of Secretary Root in his Boston speech regarding the grave consequences to the finances and industries of the country from tinkering a Tariff under which the country is enjoying an unexampled era of prosperity, is peculiarly apt and cogent. question," said Secretary Root, whether under some other law we might or might not have become prosperous, or whether under some other law we may or may not in the future attain prosperity. It is that the prosperity we have now to-day is the prosperity of productive enterprises which has adjusted itself to the conditions that this Dingley law has created, and the stability of those conditions in substance is essential to the continuance of this present period of prosperity." That is an unusually luminous, concise and, in the judgment of practical men, conclusive statement of the Tariff situation. other words, "let well enough alone." The moment tinkering begins conditions will become unsettled and manufacturers will begin to worry and curtail their enterprises.-Rochester "Democrat and

Chronicle."

As to Cummins.

In

Others

The Iowa idea," advocated by Governor Cummins and his followers, if put into practice, will knock things endwise in that State. If Governor Cummins thinks for one moment that the Republican party is to be frightened into adopting a Free-Trade policy by his ranting he is greatly mistaken. have snarled and tried to flag the moon on this same line, but where are those fellows to-day? A little cheap notoriety for the sake of coming into the light will result to Cummins as that of the moth that hovers near the gas burner. He will soon disappear from the horizon as an enemy to his State and to this nation. No man can urge FreeTrade for the United States and be a good citizen at the same time.-Pueblo (Col.) "Opinion."

Fruits, other free..
Cocoanuts

Furs, undressed..
Grease and oils.

Hair, unmanufactured.

Goat skins....

Other skins (not fur skins) Hide cuttings..

96,287

472,269 849,373 9,571,960 619,939 2,383,327 .24,171,569 .16,689,172 786,396

Here we have $408,000,000 of free imports, out of a total import of $969,000,000, or over 42 per cent. Yet Governor Cummins, Abe Babcock and the other "Tariff reformers " (Republicans, too; worse luck), want to enter the free list unreasonably. The idea is absurd, and is only Free-Trade in disguise.

A free list of $408,000,000, 42 per cent. in only one year, is alarming in itself, and would be more so were it not that, under Republicanism, about one-half of

it consists of materials for manufacturing. But, even so, instead of the Protective Tariff needing weakening, this gigantic free list needs pruning, particularly in the interest of our tropical possessions. For instance, why let in $2,426,138 of mahogany, and pay out the money for it to foreign countries, while the Philippines abound in mahogany which can be delivered at one-half the cost of the South American wood? same argument applies to cocoa, $7,262,100; to coffee, $64,157,664; bananas, $7,950,978; spices, $4,036,570; sisal grass, $13,299,754, and several other items. We must also consider Porto Rico, with its coffee and wide range of other tropical products. Further, why should the product of Hawaii be mainly confined to sugar?

The

Our interests, both at home and in our tropical possessions, demand, not a cutting down of the Tariff, but a cutting down of this too heavy free list. That is the kind, and the only kind, of Tariff revision we need.

WALTER J. BALLARD. SCHENECTADY, N. Y., April 22, 1902.

A Great Bunco Game. Once more we may suggest that some one ought to explain, the Cuban treaty having been confirmed by the Senate, what benefit has been conferred on the Cubans? Before it can go into operation it must be approved with enabling legislation passed by both houses of Congress. As Congress will not meet in regular session, unless by special call, until the end of the year, it will be 1904 at earliest before the Tariff reductions are made, or more than five years after the end of the Spanish War and the time when the Cubans were due to starve to death because this nation dishonored its sacred obligations to the race which it liberated from tyranny and oppression. Meanwhile, we suppose, the Cubans will continue to prosper vastly during the rest of this year, as they have prospered for the last several years, the prophets of Cuban calamity, disorder and revolution to the contrary notwithstanding. And, meanwhile, we also suppose the Sugar Trust and the other American syndicate which count themselves the real beneficiaries of the treaty will continue to lick their greedy chops in anticipation of their deferred feast. The American people now have an opportunity to sit down in cold blood and deliberate upon the greatest "bunco game" that has ever been worked on the nation. Next!-New York "Press."

The Republicans of Michigan seem to be standing together all right, and G. O. P. gains are reported in Ohio. These straws would indicate a rather chilly wind for democracy in the campaigns of the near future.-Sioux City "Journal."

DEMOCRATIC ISSUES.

Divided Counsels as to the Manner in Which Protection Shall Be

Attacked.

Democratic leaders are agreed upon a single proposition. They must have an "issue" for the campaign of 1904. They have been groping for that issue since the second popular rejection of Bryanism in 1900. As to what the new issue shall be, Democratic leaders are divided. But they simultaneously recognize that their only hope for victory lies in the discovery of some doctrine upon whose advocacy they can unite.

To this end there was much speechifying last night, nominally in honor of the memory of Thomas Jefferson, but really in an effort to vivify the moribund Democracy. Amid all the wilderness of words there stands most conspicuous the proclamation of David B. Hill. He was addressing a partisan gathering of Democratic editors. He was speaking to the party organization in the State whose electoral vote is essential to Democratic success. His speech is naturally interpreted as an announcement of his own candidacy. Here is the Hill issue, in his own words: Immediate Tariff revision versus definite continuance of Tariff exactions.

an in

The Republican party will be quite ready to accept that issue, without admitting the truth of the charge that the present Protective customs duties are exactions." A Republican majority in Congress enacted the Dingley law. A Republican President signed that act. Under the McKinley administration the country emerged from the slough of despond into the firm and upward path of prosperity. For all that the Republican party is responsible. It accepts with gladness that responsibility. If Mr. Hill thinks that he has found in this a basis of successful political appeal, Republican leadership will promptly take him at his word and go to the electorate upon that issue.

Just a month ago another distinguished New York Democrat, Edward M. Shepard, uttered quite a different opinion upon the policy of a general revision of the Tariff. Mr. Shepard, after frankly recognizing "the widespread popular belief, faulty as I believe it to be, of great masses of American business and laboring men in the Protective Tariff," offered this advice:

Instead of dealing with the whole problem of Free-Trade and Protection, instead of introducing doubt into almost every business, the Democratic party may well deal with the few schedules in which, through practical monopoly, vast fortunes have been made by taxation upon the masses of the people.

These Democratic doctrinaires disagree. Mr. Hill is for an immediate revision of the Tariff, regardless of its

Mr.

disturbing effect upon business. Shepard would tinker the Tariff cautiously, striving not to alarm business or excite the resentment of labor, but striking at a few Protected manufacturers whose enterprise and energy have proved profitable.

In contrast to this, the Republican position is that the framers of the present Tariff may be trusted to change schedules when the need or justice of change shall be demonstrated, holding fast to the theory of Protection which in practice has produced our marvelous industrial prosperity. The intelligent voter, be he wage earner or capitalist, will not hesitate in his choice between those policies.-New York 'Mail and Express."

46

That "Iowa Idea."

It is to be hoped that Governor Cummins of Iowa in entirely satisfied. He is one of the chief exponents among Republicans of Tariff revision. There

are a few persons out his way who believe in tearing things up and who are followers of what has come to be known as the "Iowa idea." They have been received with open arms by Brother Bryan.

"Let us encourage Governor Cummins," said Mr. Bryan at a Jeffersonian banquet in Des Moines on Thursday night. (Fancy Bryan looking to Jefferson for comfort!) "Let us encourage him, for every word that he speaks in favor of Tariff reform or anti-trust legislation will have an educational influence."

While Bryan was speaking in Iowa Senator Lodge and Secretary Root were making addresses in Boston and taking the ground that Protection had made the country great, and that to abandon it or to permit it to be ripped up by "tariff reformers" or "Tariff revisionists" would result in a general upheaval of business.

Governor Cummins found no indorsement for his course among these Republican thinkers, but from Mr. Bryan he received praise. From which it would appear that the "Iowa idea" is exceedingly comforting to the Democrats.

Praise from Bryan! Certainly Governor Cummins ought to be ready to retire on his laurels now.-Philadelphia Inquirer."

66

The farmers of Iowa do not take kindly to the suggestion of free admission of agricultural products from Canada in return for free admission of American agricultural implements into Canada. The farmers do not believe that their interests ought to be traded off for the benefit of the implement dealer and manufacturer. In this particular direction they are not in favor of "reciprocity in competitive products."-Des Moines "Capital."

Correspondents and editors of Tariff reform" organs are complaining with bitterness that the Democrats in the next Congress will be " muzzled," and that nothing can be done in the direction of anti-trust legislation or the revision of the Tariff until after the next Presidential election.

When their complaints are further analyzed, it appears that they are aggrieved because President Roosevelt, in his Western speeches—in the very section where Tariff revision was supposed to be popular-has portrayed the folly of disturbing existing prosperity, and in particular has exploded the fallacy that the short way to smash the trusts is to smash the Tariff. The enthusiasm with which the President's speeches are being received only adds to the poignant distress of the Tariff-smashers.

The President's critics are further disturbed because they know that when he insists first, that there ought to be no precipitate and sweeping revision of the Tariff, and second, that when it is revised, it should be by those who believe in the fundamental principle of Protection, he is in full accord with Republican leaders in both houses of Congress. In other words, it is not merely a Roosevelt idea," though Roosevelt ideas are pretty good, but the Republican idea which is being expounded in the President's speeches; and it is an idea which the party, with its substantial majority in Senate and House, is in a position to carry out.

66

The Republican idea is to devote the extra session of Congress to the resolution regarding the Cuban treaty, without opening the way to any general Tariff debate; and then, to give the regular session to ordinary legislation. This is disappointing to the Democrats, who had hoped for a chance to keep a Tariff debate running until midsummer. But it is a good thing for the business and industries of the country, for wage earners and capitalists alike, not to have their interests made a football of reckless party politics on the eve of a Presidential election.-Boston "Journal."

In spite of somber prophecies the foreign trade of the United States continues to grow, a regular boom having been experienced since the first of the year, which dissipates the doubts occasioned by last year's falling off. The exports during February were far greater than those of any previous February in our national history and the imports were also unusually large. As yet there is no cloud on the industrial horizon. The sun of prosperity still shines.-Terre Haute "Tribune."

PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY

THE AMERICAN

PROTECTIVE TARIFF LEAGUE

ican Protective Tariff League.

ARTICLE II.

OBJECT.

The Object of this League shall be to Protect American Labor by a Tarift on imports which shall adequately secure American industrial products against the competition of foreign labor.

For the ends and aims above set forth THE AMERICAN PROTECTIVE TARIFF LEAGUE stands first, last and all the time. Toward the fulfillment of these ends and aims its efforts are unceasing. THE LEAGUE never rests. It has no periods of between-elections inactivity. It is always at work, and the scope and extent of that work is limited only by the means at its disposal. Until Article II of its Constitution shall be amended THE LEAGUE will continue to work for the Protection of all Labor and all Industry.

Resolved, That reciprocity in competitive products by treaty is unsound in principle, pernicious in practice and condemned by all experience. It is contrary alike to the principle of Protection, to the fair treatment of domestic producers, and to friendly relations with foreign countries. It is neither ethical nor economic, since it seeks to benefit some industries by the sacrifice of others, which is the essence of injustice. As at present advocated, reciIt procity is the policy of favoritism. would tend to array industry against industry and section against section at home, and foment industrial retaliation and political antagonism abroad. Such a policy would open the door to the grossest favoritism in legislation, promote the growth of a corrupting lobby, and increase the power of debasing bossism. Such a policy has no justification in economics, statesmanship, ethics or good politics. True American policy is Protection of all the opportunities and possibilities of the American market for American enterprises and fair, equal treatment for all other countries-namely, the equal right to compete for American business in the American market by the payment of the full equivalent of American wages. This alone is honest Protection, good Republicanism and the true American policy.-Adopted unanimously at the eighteenth annual meeting of THE AMERICAN PROTECTIVE TARIFF LEAGUE, January 15, 1903.

More Protection Needed. During the twelve months ending March 31 our imports exceeded $1,000,000,000 in value, the largest in our history. Fully 80 per cent. of this we could make and produce ourselves if we had adequate Protection insured for a number of years. There is just as much reason for a revision of the Tariff up as down, and yet we are satisfied to let

How to Make a Test.

66

Let-well enoughReferring to the alone" doctrine advocated by Secretary Root in his Boston speech, the Minneapolis "Journal" says:

But if times continue good the doctrine of leaving things to themselves will be just as good in 1905 as now, and that sort of postponement cannot be kept up very long if the Tariff is to be revised by its friends.

There is probably not one man in a thousand in the United States that does not expect to see a business and industrial reaction in this country sometime within the next ten years, and many expect it within the next five. When that reaction comes it will be too late to talk about having the Tariff altered by its friends. The people are more likely to be in a mood to have it altered with a broadax by its enemies.

This question can be tested-and it will very likely be so tested-in a simple and direct manner. Thus: Let the National Republican convention next year resolve that

Tariff stability is a vital need of all business, industry, trade and commerce. Therefore, as the country is now in a highly prosperous condition, any revision of the Tariff at this time is uncalled for, unwise and unwarranted.

Then let the National Democratic convention next year assert in its platform that

The existing Protective Tariff is a robbery and a tax; it obstructs business; it shelters monopoly; it permits combinations of producers to plunder the consumers; it makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. Therefore the Tariff should be immediately repealed and in its place a Tariff for revenue only should be enacted.

Going before the country upon the Tariff issue thus sharply and clearly defined, which party would carry the Presidential election of 1904? From present indications that issue is likely to be presented. In such an event watch the Republican mugwumps fall over each other in their hurry to get back into the Republican ranks! A few of them might rush in the opposite direction, but for every such deserter a score of business Democrats who are making money and want the Tariff let alone would be found quietly voting the Republican ticket. The country is in no hurry to be torn up again by Tariff experiments.

The "Iowa idea " fellows are whipped to a standstill, and they know it. They are now begging for harmony.-Iowa City "Republican."

The fact that the Executive opposes Tariff tinkering will cause those Republicans who believe in revision to pause, particularly as they will appreciate that the wisest, most conservative and most experienced men of their party in Congress believe Tariff tinkering would be disastrous and that the Democrats are planning to divide their opponents on this question. Another factor that will be important against any revision of the Tariff is the attitude of Representative Cannon, Speaker-to-be. He believes in letting well enough alone, and his appointments to the Ways and Means Committee of the House will be calculated to throttle any attempt at Tariff meddling by Republicans.

special laws or special trade arrangements you make several enemies for every friend gained. Relatively considered, German indignation over the South African preferential is a tempest in a teapot. If a bigger country were in question-for example, the United States, with its eighty millions of liberal consumers the rumpus would be quite likely to assume the dimensions of a first-class atmospheric disturbance. The wise nation is the one that treats everybody alike and does not venture upon any Tariff discrimination risks.

Of Course.

It is a curious fact, and one worth keeping in mind, that the same Free

It is earnestly to be hoped that this prediction will be realized, and that Speaker Cannon will have the courage and the nerve to purge the Ways and Means ComImittee of all Tariffripping elements in the Republican majority. The Demo cratic section of that committee will be made up wholly of Tariff rippers, so that the minority party will have its proper representation without being reinforced from the Republican membership. Let the Democrats do all the Tariff meddling that shall be done in the Fiftyeighth Congress, and let every man appointed of the Republican majority be a "stand

patter" pure and

ALPHONSE AND GASTON.

"WHAT ARE YOU

DARN FOOLS TRYING TO DO?"

simple. It will be an excellent opportunity for Speaker Cannon to 66 stand pat."

A Tariff Discrimination Experiment.

It will be interesting to watch the outcome of the Tariff discrimination experiment of Great Britain's South African colonies. Cape Colony, Natal, the Transvaal, Orange River Colony and Southern Rhodesia recently decided at their conference, held at Bloemfontein, to give imports from the United Kingdom a reduction of 25 per cent. in Tariff rates, with special rates on mining and other machinery. At the same time they decided to give the same rates to any British colony which made a like reduction in favor of the products of the South African colonies. Germany objects to all this, and threatens to adopt measures of Tariff retaliation against the products of the offending colonies. It may seem a small matter to make a row about, but it illustrates the truth of Andrew Carnegie's saying that when you go into Tariff discrimination by

COMPETITIVE RECIPROCITY

DEMOCRATIC FREE TRADE SENATOR"PERMIT ME, DEAR BROTHER TO FIRE THE FIRST SHOT"

Trade papers that so cordially approved the sentiments expressed in the speech of Governor Cummins in Des Moines at the Republican County Convention, are greatly disgruntled at the speech of President Roosevelt in Minneapolis three weeks later. Governor Cummins declared that the Tariff ought to be immediately torn up both by direct legislation and by reciprocity in competing products; while President Roosevelt declared that for at least two years to come, or until after the election of 1904, the Tariff should be left entirely alone. Ergo, the Free-Trade papers were delighted with Governor Cummins and displeased with President Roosevelt. course they were.

Of

Neither the advocates nor the opponents of "the Iowa idea" will be in doubt as to what President Roosevelt was referring to when he said, in his Minneapolis speech: "We cannot afford by any freak of folly to forfeit the position to which we have triumphantly attained."-Manchester (Ia.) "Press."

offices in Iowa who cannot subscribe to such a programme. The country is full of Republican writers, thinkers and voters who do not want to see the policy of reciprocity in competing products given recognition in our trade relations abroad; who deny that any changes in the Tariff schedules are now or are in the near future likely to be warranted by the changing conditions of business, and who want progressive" theorists to keep their hands off the Tariff altogether; who do not for a moment admit that Tariff changes should be now or at any time fearlessly made because of anybody's attempt to monopolize the market.

No, no; the Director of the Mint will have to try again. He is not on the same platform with President Roosevelt, with Secretary Root, with Secretary Shaw, and with the general body and brain of the Republican party. It is, of course, a trifle hard for Mr. Roberts to "get together" after the many foolish breaks he has made away from orthodox Republicanism and sound Protectionism. Governor Cummins after reading the various administration speeches lost no time in professing his readiness to harmonize. He has even gone so far as to say that he is willing that Senator Allison should write the next Iowa Republican platform. Astonishing concession! With Director of the Mint Roberts the case is different. He was the first one to go wrong, and he will naturally be one of the last to come around right. But we will come around, we think. Let him try again. "While the lamp holds out to burn," etc.

Our Non-Protected Labor-II.

In further consideration of Mr. Edward Atkinson's contention in his recent article in the "Journal of Economics," that only 600,000 of our 29,074,117 people engaged in gainful occupations would be adversely affected if all import duties were removed, we wish to give him full benefit of his argument that the 600,000, only, are subject, or would be subject, to foreign competition.

Had Mr. Atkinson stopped there our task might be somewhat harder, but he says he has found it impossible to set apart 1,000,000 persons whose present work would be affected in an adverse way, even if Free-Trade were suddenly adopted," while he really can find only 600,000, but is willing to concede a million lest he "be charged with a personal bias due to his own point of view." Then, again, he says that "only 3,000,000 or 4,000,000 are or can be directly affected by Tariff legislation, either by the obstruction of exports or imports in consequence of the duties on imports." Well, be it 600,000 or 4,000,000, out of the 29,074,117 he contends that 25,000,000 or more of our laborers are not affected by the Tariff.

The census divides those engaged in gainful occupations into five great classes as follows:

Agriculture

Professional services..

Domestic and personal services..

worth, not one-half would be seriously affected by an abatement of duties.

Tobacco must be taken out, because it will always be a prime source of revenue both by excise and customs taxes.

Domestic wool has always been in quickest demand, and has brought the highest relative price, when duties have been lessened or wholly abated after a short period of adjustment to new conditions, the reason being that the manufacturers must have free wool in order to compete with foreign manufacturers on even terins.

No hand-cultivated rice can compete with the rice of Louisiana and Texas, where the rice grounds harden in the harvest season so as to permit the use of harvesting machinery.

No hops can compete with the hops of the Northwest.

Dealing with persons occupied in agriculture, in the proportion of one-half the valuation which may be subjected to foreign competition, we get 200,000 persons only out of 10,000,000 subject to competition, leaving 9.800,000 free of foreign competition and in large measure dependent upon exports.

Mr. Atkinson drops 181,765 from his last two sets of figures, but they do not affect the result. As he grants that some of our growers of rice, flaxseed, tobacco, hops, sugar, wool, mohair, hides and skins, fruits and nuts may be exposed to the competition of an import of like kind-a very obtuse statement at bestwe will simply give some idea of our total present agricultural imports and also an idea of what they would be under Free-Trade.

During the fiscal year 1902 we imported agricultural products valued as follows:

10,381,765

1,258,739

5,580,657

Waste or flocks.

It is to those engaged in agriculture that we will devote this article. Mr. Atkinson says that only 200,000 of the 10,381,765 would be adversely affected if we had Free-Trade, and he gets his 200,000 as follows:

In the census of agriculture the total value of all farm products at the farms is computed at $4,739,118,752, divided among 5,739,657 farms, at an average of $826 per farm. Reasons are given why this is a slight underestimate, and that the value of all farm products exceeds $5,000,000,000. The number of farm products which may be exposed to the competition of an import of like kind is very small. The special crops are: Flaxseed, valuation.. Rice,

Tobacco,

$19,624,901 7,891,613

56,993,003

7,271,230

24,584,459

45,723,739 267,864

$162,356,809

To these may be added hides and skins, a few fruits and nuts, and some other small items. A small quantity of cotton is imported from Egypt, but it is for special use, and supplements rather than competes with⚫ American cotton.

Adding these items, we reach about $200,000,000 worth, subject to foreign competition, or only 4 per cent. of the whole valuation, while $4,800,000 worth rests upon the export of the surplus to fix the price of the whole. But, even in respect to this $200,000,000

Eggs

Fibers

$4,624,531 2,080,295 1,035,980 11,712,170 496,061 37,432 31,545,962 21,480,525 9,787,013 381,417 696,439 58,006,618 56,383 833,702

Fruits and nuts.

Furs and fur skins, undressed. Hay

Hide cuttings, etc.. Hides and skins. Honey

Hops

Plants, trees, etc.

1,172,560

Here are over three hundred million dollars' worth of products which come in competition now with our farm products, and this sum is increased by at least $100,000,000 more when we consider allied products. Some of the above articles come in free and some are dutiable.

Fortunately for our argument, however, although unfortunately for our farmers, we had a few years since an experience in free wool, so that we can see just what might happen if all farm products came in free of duty.

Our average imports of wool under

Protection have for the past dozen years been a little over 116,000,000 pounds. During the free wool years of 1895, 1896, 1897 our imports of wool averaged 262,000,000 pounds, and as much more American wool was displaced in those three years as would have ordinarily been imported, with the result that our wool growers got less than twenty cents a pound instead of over thirty cents. And yet Mr. Atkinson says: "Domestic wool has always brought the highest relative price when duties have been lessened after a short period of adjustment to new conditions."

We do not need to go through the whole list of our farm products and animals, which, according to the American Agriculturist," are worth $2,000,000,000 more a year now than they were in 1896. Our sheep were worth $65,000,000 in 1896; in 1902 they were worth $140,000,000.

"No rice can compete with the rice of Louisiana," says Mr. Atkinson, and yet we imported last year $1,596,210 worth. 'No hops can compete with the hops of the Northwest," says Mr. Atkinson, and yet last year we imported $803,702 worth. We raise little or nothing that does not come into competition, or would come, under Free-Trade.

But our 10,000,000 farmers not only benefit from duties on their own products, but most materially because of the duties on the products of their consumers outside of themselves. Ninety per cent. of their products are sold at home, and when the other 20,000,000 people engaged in gainful occupations are engaged at full time and high wages, the farmer not only disposes of all he can raise, but at good prices. That is why he is getting $2,000,000,000 more a year now than he did under Free-Trade and low duties in 1896. This enables him to free his property from debt, increase his stock and implements, and live in comfort and luxury, adding to the general consumption and enriching his own customers. There is not one of the 10,381,765 farmers who does not benefit from our Tariff, and who would not be adversely affected by a lessening of the Tariff or Free-Trade. Even our cotton growers who are not, as yet, seriously affected by free cotton, derive a most substantial benefit from our Tariff in the demand for their product, which is being consumed, in increasingly larger quantities yearly, in the very States where it is grown, while at the same time there is no diminution of the quantity consumed by Northern mills. In 1894 only 711,000 bales were consumed by Southern mills, while in 1902 2,017,000 bales were consumed by those mills, against 2,066,000 by Northern mills. More than 40 per cent. of the total crop is now taken by United States mills. It's a very simple little matter of cause and effect that the more cotton