34 



THE INDIA RUBBER WORLD 



[November r, 1907. 



It ma}- he said, by the way, that quinine is h:irdly a 

 necessity in the sense that cotton and rubber are, because 

 substitutes for it can be more readily named, in any 

 event no one is apt to use quinine who can avoid it, 

 whereas milhons of people are anxious to acquire or use 

 more cotton and rubber than they can now obtain, or pay 

 for. This fact alone should be a sufficient guarantee to 

 the doubtful that overproduction of rubber is not likely 

 to occur. And so long as rubber — or any other commodity 

 — is a real necessitv of life, it is going to pay somebody to 

 produce it. 



Still, it may be argued that it must be possible to plant 

 too much rubber, and that it is only wise to stop planting 

 this side the danger line. To this it may be answered 

 that, while surprising yields have been gained on some 

 plantations, and while the same trees seem to yield more 

 and more rubber every year, the number of cultivated 

 trees now yielding is insignificant compared with the 

 actual consumption of rubber. There are, it is true, some 

 millions of younger trees, planted some years later than 

 the trees now producing rubber, so that they will not be 

 tappable for some time to come, wdien without doubt the 

 total demand for rubber will have been greatly increased, 

 while the native supplies will have been lessened. Any 

 trees which mav be planted herafter will be still longer 

 in coming to maturity, so that overproduction at least 

 does not seem to us imminent. 



A point of more immediate interest is th^.t the in- 

 tending investor in existing plantations should convince 

 himself ( 1 ) that the trees he is asked to pay for can be 

 accounted for anr! ( 2 ) that he does net pay too much 

 for them. 



THE COTTON SITUATION. 



THERE has been at no other time, perhaps, such a 

 widespread interest in the cotton situation, from so 

 many viewpoints, as at present. The attempt to ex- 

 tend cotton growing to new localities is more general 

 than ever before, and is being conducted more exten- 

 sively, on more practical lines, and with greater promises 

 of success. While there is nothing in prospect to suggest 

 the loss of American supremacy in cotton production, 

 enough has happened to point out to .\merican growers 

 the wisdom of becoming prepared for competition in 

 some important respects. 



The activity in extending cotton areas has been 

 prompted by the higher price level for cotton which has 

 prevailed for several years and still shows no tendency 

 to decline. Manufacturers are clamoring for lower priced 

 fiber, and the prices available encourage the investment 

 of capital in new planting enterprises, while the more 

 intelligent colonial administrations of modern times are 

 anxious to develop cotton growing as a feature of the 

 development of the regions under their control. Ulti- 

 mately some of these undertakings are bound to prove 

 profitable, especially as the situation on the whole is one 



to develop more economical methods of production than 

 have been practised in the southern United States in the 

 absence of competition abroad. 



At this moment the growers in these States are busy 

 forming organizations for mutual benefit, but their chief 

 motive appears to be the forcing of consumers to pay 

 more for cotton. Xo one can complain of the growers 

 for seeking the highest possible prices for their produce. 

 lUit in the end prices are regulated by the general law of 

 supply and demand, which prevents an artificial level 

 from being long maintained. But now that the import- 

 ance of concerted action is becoming recognized by the 

 cotton growers, they may ultimately conclude to use the 

 power of organization to so improve their methods that 

 their labor will produce relatively larger returns than 

 now, even at a lower price per pound of cotton. 



To hold cotton out of the market, as is now attempted, 

 will only stimulate production elsewhere, and hasten an 

 era of lower prices for cotton generally. The inter- 

 national cotton conferences which have been held lately 

 are likely to be of general benefit in bringing about the 

 discussion of other features of the cotton situation than 

 the sole matter of prices, with the result that the grower 

 may get more money per unit of labor employed, and at 

 the same time give the consumer more cotton for each 

 dollar expended, regardless of where the cotton is grown. 



WHY NOT A SPECIAL PATENT COURT? 



THE keynote of a report made to the American Bar 

 Association recently by a committee of its members 

 was thus stated : "A United States patent ought 

 to have the same legal force and meaning everywhere 

 within its borders. But it has not at the present time,'' 

 It happens that diroughout the United States there are 

 judges having primary jurisdiction, in the federal judi- 

 ciary system, before whom may be brought actions at 

 law relating to alleged infringement of patents. De- 

 cisions by these judges may be appealed from to district 

 appellate courts, of which there are several, while the 

 court of last resort — which may be reached only after a 

 case has been carried through the two grades here noted 

 — is the United .States supreme court. 



It has happened that the same patent has been held 

 valid in some of these courts of "'first instance" and in- 

 valid in others, a court of this rank not being influenced 

 even by the decision of an appellate court in another dis- 

 trict, and as a patent case cannot as a rule reach the 

 supreme court without several years' delay, it will be 

 seen tliat not a little confusion may exist as to the valid- 

 ity — and the commercial value — of any patent which may 

 have been infringed. It is true, we believe, that a single 

 decision, in one of the smaller jurisdictions, usually suf- 

 fices to determine the validity of a patent, but this is not 

 always the case. 



The recommendation of the Bar Association's com- 

 mittee is in favor of one United States court of patent 



