6d4 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 



[February i, 1884. 



various forms of dissolved bones, bone dust, raw bones, 

 &c., will last two or more seasons, according to the quant- 

 ities usad and their respective solubility. Lastly, the pre- 

 sence of lime is essential to the economical use of ii*anui"es." 

 • — Mark Lane Express. 



THE INDIAN TOBACCO MANUFACTURE. 



India supplies herself with cheroots as well as with tea, 

 but no one will venture to say that her cheroots are at 

 all equal to her tea, though the latter is just as much a 

 manufactured article as the former, and much more difficult 

 to produce in approved merchantable form. The tea in- 

 dustry is much more recent in this country than the che- 

 root industry, and we would naturally expect to be able 

 to get better cheroots than tea. But the fact is other- 

 wise. And strangely enough, while the price of teas of 

 every quality is being lowered, the price of cheroots is 

 steadily increasing. Again, while the quahty of all teas 

 is improving, the quality of all cheroots is, if not de- 

 generating, certainly not improving. The only conclusion 

 we can come to from these facts is, that the tea industry 

 is in the hands of a more intelligent class than the cheroot 

 industry. The cheroot manufacturer seems to understand 

 how to fix the price of his produce on the political econ- 

 omy law of supply and demand, but he fails to appreciate 

 the pecuniary advantages to be derived from an improved 

 quality of production. In this respect he appears to be 

 in the last degree conservative, and to take for the rule 

 of his Ufe the motto, "As it was in the beginning, is 

 now, and ever shall be;" and so the quality of the Indian 

 cheroots of 1883 is no better than those of 1833. While 

 Manilla competed with India in cheroots of the higher 

 qualities, it was not to be expected that the miuiufacture 

 of cheroots in this country would improve very much, if 

 at all. Up to the middle of the present century, and for 

 ten or fifteen years thereafter, Manilla supplied the Indian 

 market to a considerable extent with cheroots of the higher 

 qualities, and Southern India, of which Trichinopoly was 

 the chief mauufactm-ing town, was content to supply the 

 cheaper and lower quality of article. The price of the 

 best quality of the Manilla manufacture was about sLx 

 times greater than that of the Trichinopoly manufacture. 

 This being the case, it seemed hopeless to expect any part 

 of Southern India, Lower Bengal, or even Trichinopoly 

 it'^elf to make an attempt to compete with Manilla. It 

 was said that the best quality of Indian tobacco was far 

 inferior to the medium quality of the best Manilla tobacco, 

 and that the best quality of Manilla tobacco could not 

 be grown in India at all. Under this view of the in- 

 dustry we can well understand why no efforts were made 

 to improve the best qualities of Indian tobacco. But for 

 the last fifteen or twenty years the Manilla cheroot sup- 

 ply has been lost to India, and the quality of the present 

 importations from that country are probably inferior to 

 that of the best Indian cheroots. Practically, the Manilla 

 supply has gone, and the Indian cheroot manufacturer 

 has virtually a monopoly of the trade in this country. 

 But, as we have said, he has done nothing to improve 

 the manufacture, while he has advanced the price of his 

 produce at least 100 per cent. At first sight, this con- 

 dition of a rapidly-growing and a well-paying industry 

 appears difficult to understand. It seems either that the 

 whole class of cheroot manufacturers in this country are in- 

 capable of discerning their own pecuniary interests, or 

 that it is impossible to improve the quahty of the Indian 

 tobacco or quahty of the cheroot offered for sale in the 

 Indian Markets. When we consider the variety of climate 

 and the various qualities of the soil in this country, 

 there appears to be no good reason why the best qualities 

 of tobacco at least cannot be improved. The qualities 



of tea, coffee, cotton, and wheat have been vastly im- 

 proved, and tobacco, we think, is capable of some, if not 

 of equal, improvement. Tea growing and manufacture have 

 been studied in China by Indian planters; why should not 

 tobacco planters and cheroot manufacturers go and study 

 ihe growth of tobacco and the manufacture of cheroots 

 hi Manilla? The result would pay, we feel assured. "WTiat- 

 ever may be the difficulties in the way of improving the 

 quality of the cheroots supplied by India to her own 

 markets, if there are any real difficulties at all, the fact 

 stands out clearly and lamentably that the Indian cheroot 

 jnanufacture is not a thriving, but probably a decUning, 



industry— certainly for the higher qualities. It maybe 

 said that tne manufacturer is quite satisfied so long as 

 he can sell the whole of his produce at a paying rate, 

 and that he has no inducement to improve the manu- 

 facture. This view is both commercially unsound and 

 dangerous, and is calculated to raise competition once more 

 from without, or to make the consumer seek tobacco of other 

 quahties, such as are used in the ciggarette and the pipe. 

 Apart from the question of improving the present quality 

 of Indian tobacco, there is sufficient cau.se of complaint in 

 regard to Indian cheroots as no\v manufactured. The chief 

 object which the manufacturer seeks to accompHsh is 

 apparently to product- quantity, especially in the high-priced 

 cheroots. Thus we find ourselves provided with cheroots 

 of inconvenient length and thickness, dimensions such as 

 smokers do not want. The dimensions are wrought out by 

 the unpardonable sin of packing the interior of the cheroot 

 with tobacco stalks. This packing with stalks should be 

 made a felony at the least, and be punishable under the 

 Penal Code. The smoker does not want the stalks in 

 his cheroot; nay, he totally objects to them, inasmuch as 

 they destroy the flavour of the tobacco and cause many 

 a cheroot, which might otherwise be smoked, to be thrown 

 away unconsumed. If stuffing cheroots with tobacco stalks 

 is httle less than a swindle, what shall be said for the 

 other vexatious proceeding of the manufacturer, viz., that 

 of mixing tobaccos of various qualities in one cheroot, 

 and cheroots made of different quahties of tobacco in 

 the same box? This diversity of produce is a sore evil. 

 The purchaser is first deluded in the purchase of his 

 cheroots, and afterwards disappointed when using them. 

 It is the wide experience of the users of Indian cheroots that 

 the quahties even of the best and most highly-priced cheroots 

 are seldom or never similar. Various qualities are to be found 

 even in small boxes of 100 and in bundles of 25, while it is 

 difficult to procure the same quahty of tobacco twice over 

 when similar boxes are purchased from the same dealer. 

 How often is the smoker constrained to throw away about 

 haf a box of cheroots because of the dift'erence in the 

 quahty of the tobacco. This waste doubles the price of 

 the cheroot to the consumer. Years go on, and these 

 villainous practices of packing cheroots with tocacco stalks, 

 of mixing tobaccos of different quahties in single cheroots, 

 of packing cheroots manufactured of different qualities of 

 tobacco in the same box, and supplying cheroots of differ- 

 ent qualities of tobacco under the same name and brand, 

 continue with unabating regularity, causing the user to 

 believe that the manufacturer does not distress himself 

 in the least about the claims of conscience. The user of 

 the Indian cheroot, who paysK25 per 1,000 for his purchase, 

 really expends K50 per 1.000 in the article, because of the 

 variety in the cheroots he buys. It was never so with the 

 higher brands of Manilla cheroots, for all were equal in 

 quahty, and none were thrown away unconsumed. For 

 many years some of the long established Bombay European 

 firms imported the higlier-priced cheroots from Manilla 

 for their friends. The tiuality was always good, and the 

 price fair. Subsequently John Treacher engaged in the 

 business, and the supply was always reliable and satisfac- 

 tory. The price for No. 1 cheroots ranged from R80 to 

 RlOO per 1000, which m;ty be considered high in compar- 

 ison to the price of " trichys" and other similar manu- 

 factures, but the Manillas were always of equaV quality, 

 and practically the purchaser of l,0(iO obtained that num- 

 ber of usable cheroots. The manufacturers supplied what 

 the mark on the box declared the contents to be, and the 

 purchaser was never disappointed. Now that there is no 

 hope of a supply of the quality of cheroots from Manilla, 

 the Indian manufacturer should wake up to his own interest, 

 and improve his produce in the way we have indicated. 

 The public have borne the existing imposition long and 

 patiently enough ; it is now time we .should have a little 

 reform. Bombay has a large number of cheroot dealers; 

 many of these dealers seem to be able to secure a living 

 by dealing in cheroots alone. Surely, some of these dealers 

 can influence the mauufacturer sufficiently to put a stop to 

 the unreasonable practices which check the growth of what 

 ought to be a great Indian manufacturer. Let the Indian 

 chroot manufacture be brought up to the im pro\-ing level of 

 the tea manufacture, and the public will be satisfied. It is sad 

 to see a thriving industry degenerating in the days of its pro- 

 sperity, at the risk of commercial suicide. — Bombay Gazetts. 



