Page 148 - Merchants and Mandarins China Trade Era

134.

the depression in the United States made merchants in foreign

commerce even more dependent on credit. They had generally

overextended themselves and hoped to recoup their losses

through more trade. As a result, at Canton Russell experienced
57
problems in procuring teas to fill the ships to Providence.

Shortly thereafter, E. Carrington & Co. decided to disengage

from the Canton trade. In May 1823 they dissolved their

58
connection with the Hoppins and Russell. Both of the latter

wished to remain in the trade. But Carrington and Butler had
supplied most of the vessels and the capital in the venture.

To remain at Canton, Russell formed a co-partnership

with Phillip Anu�idon, the agent for Brown & Ives, the largest

Providence mercantile house in the China trade. Russell and

Anunidon agreed to this connection on the advice of John Perkins

Cushing of Perkins & Co. at Canton. Cushing for a long time had

been the most respected and most successful American merchant

at Canton. Since Perkins & Co. did no commission business,

Cushing offered to give them his contacts for trade in India.

A large number of India merchants profited in the Canton trade

of Indian cotton and Indian opium. Many of them preferred to

consign their commerce to American agents instead of Parsee or
59
British agents. Cushing therefore opened the door to a vast

potential trade for Russell and Ammidon. He also advanced them

57
Letter, s. Russell to E. Carrington, Dec. 7, 1821,
Russell & Co ,. MSS.
58
Letter, B. & T.C. Hoppin to S. Russell, May 1823,
Russell & Co. MSS.

59
Letter, W.H. Low to S. Russell, May 1831, Russell
& Co. MSS.