[60 



THE INDIA RULBER WORLD 



[February i. 1910. 



State.- is now so regulated and so understood that it no 

 longer alarms the public mind as threatening "restraint 

 of trade" — a term which for a time suggested the evil 

 to which the term "monopoly" used to be applied in 

 English law. 



THE START OF RUBBER PLANTING. 



THE appearance on another page of this issue of the 

 first of a series of articles on rubber culture in 

 Mexico, by a scientific gentleman of repute, recalls the 

 priority of that republic in the matter of planting rubber 

 as a commercial proposition. There is little merit in the 

 contention as to who first suggested rubber plantations. 

 As early as 1850 London had its Caoutchouc Joint Stock 

 1 o., for operating in India, due probably to something 

 written by Forbes, the botanist, but we believe that it 

 never progressed beyond the formality of incorporation. 



Mr. Clements R. Markham has told The India 

 Rubber World that as early as 1870 — when connected 

 with the government of India — he reached the conclusion 

 that the culture of rubber should be undertaken. But 

 by that time he had introduced the cinchona plant from 

 the new to the old world, and had become experienced in 

 such matters. Collins's "Report on Caoutchouc" came 

 out in 1872, as a government document ; Wickham ar- 

 rived at Kew in June, 1876, with seeds of Hcvca from 

 Brazil; and a few months later (as Dr. Willis told in the 

 last India Rubber World) 70 plants of this species 

 were established successfully in Ceylon, by scientists, in 

 publicly maintained gardens. This was the beginning of 

 rubber planting in the Far Last. 



But in 1872, the late Senor Don Matias Romero, before 

 and later Mexico's diplomatic representative at Wash- 

 ington — without other scientific education than falls to 

 the lot of the Mexican gentleman, and with no knowledge 

 that any book on rubber existed in any language — while 

 enjoying a respite from public life, was "very much 

 struck with the great future of the india-rubber culture, 

 and became satisfied that it was the most lucrative branch 

 of agriculture that could then possibly be undertaken." 



With Romero to think was to act, and within a year 

 he had chosen a location, bought land, and planted one 

 hundred thousand rubber trees. A private citizen now, 

 on his own initiative, spending his own capital — and 

 especially with no idea that any similar undertaking" was 

 in prospect elsewhere — this progressive Mexican based 

 hi- plantation upon a careful study of the inevitable de- 

 cline of forest rubber supplies. The details of that study 

 he contributed to the public through the medium of the 

 bulletin of the Mexican agricultural society, in a paper 

 dated December 12, 1872. 



The Romero plantation, due to the recall to public life 

 of its proprietor, and lacking his attention, was not a 

 distinct success, but a rereading of his essay — then purely 

 speculative' — shows that if still alive he would have little 

 to learn from the practical experience of his successors 



in planting rubber of the species with which he had to 

 deal, and in the region which was his home. 



It happens that the .-.cene of Romero's activity in rubber 

 — and he knew his Mexico well — was in the same depart- 

 ment of Soconusco, in the state of Chiapas, to which our 

 present contributor has devoted his interesting descrip- 

 tion. And it may be added that whatever good results 

 may be attained by Romero's latter day successors 

 in rubber planting will be due in no small degree to his 

 studies and to his constant and unselfish encouragement 

 of this new interest until the day of his death. 



THE STORY OF THE FIGURES. 



THE growth of the india-rubber industry, to a greater 

 extent than almost any other, can be gauged by 

 means of statistics which are dependable. For instance, 

 it is plain that if more rubber is imported into the United 

 States in one year than in another, it means a larger 

 consumption and an increased sale of goods. A raw 

 material costing the manufacturer $4,000 a ton or more 

 is not likely to lie in the stock room long without being 

 used, nor is the importer likely to store such material 

 in warehouses much in excess of the current demand for 

 the material. Such figures as we print, therefore, relative 

 to the yearly importations of rubber, whether into the 

 United States or other countries, are a guide to the 

 growth of consumption of this material — more nearly 

 accurate perhaps than is true of any other commodity in 

 industrial use. 



Among the many statistical details regarding rubber 

 in the present issue of The India Rubber World not 

 the least interesting is the fact that during December 

 the New York customs authorities took account of more 

 rubber than in any other month in the history of the 

 service — i e., 10,274,128 pounds. What is notable in 

 respect of these figures is that imports at New York are 

 almost exclusively for consumption in the United States 

 (and Canada), only a very small percentage of such 

 imports finding their way across the Atlantic, and then 

 only in exceptional circumstances. These figures do not 

 embrace balata, gutta-percha, Pontianak, and other gums 

 not officially recognized here as "india-rubber." Nor do 

 they include waste rubber. This distinction is pointed 

 out here for the reason that in some other countries 

 everything that in any sense relates to rubber is grouped 

 under one heading, which explains why Russia figures 

 so largerly as a source of the rubber imported into Great 

 Britain. 



The New York customs statistics for December also 

 shows that the import value of rubber entered during 

 the month of all grades — Para, African, guayule, Borneo, 

 and the like — averaged a fraction over $1.10 per pound. 

 This does not cover the cost of transportation, the loss 

 from shrinkage, or the importer's profit. These figures 

 are commended to the attention of those students of 

 economics who are trying to figure out why the cost of 

 living is higher than in those good old times when the 



