187 



iniivalent to those obtained l>y other provinces 

 in the shape of State railways and irriirat i'-;i works. 



He admitted that it might lie argued against the 

 scheme of tilt 1 State elevator thai in Tana'!:! and th<> 

 rnited States, where grain elevators are of in-alculaUe 

 service to the agriculture and eommerce of tin country, 

 their construction is not considered a duty of ihe State, 

 but eoutended tluit in this country we have not adopt- 

 ed the policy of leaving everything to the a<-uoii of pri- 

 'vate capital, witness tlie railways, health v/orks, eolle- 

 . mortgage and discount banks, hospitals, asylums, 

 etc., the construction and working of which are 

 undertaken bT the State. 



He stated that there were examples of the State gua- 

 ranteeing, by means of the construction of State ele- 

 vators, the negotiability of grain warrants in the man- 

 ner in which the circulation of the paper money is gua- 

 ranteed, and that in the country in question Russia, 

 the government had decided to carry out the work, 

 placing it in the hands of the directorate of the Impe- 

 rial Bank, beginning with a programme of 125 eleva- 

 tors in the principal railway stations, 29 in the ports, 

 and 24 in the central points of distribution, the work 

 being continued day and night in order to be termin- 

 ated at the earliest possible date. 



The Government of India, proceeding more warily, 

 had constructed one elevator to test, the system as ap- 

 plied to local requirements, which elevator in the short 

 time it had been working had given satisfactory re- 

 sults . 



He also argued that the functions whi- h elevators 

 were destined to exercise required a complete and se- 

 parate organisation, because of the various- economic 

 problems which would be solved by elevators, and that 

 supposing the elevators produced no effect on the ex- 

 tremely powerful Commercial organisation the Cereal 

 Trust and considering only the economy in bags, 

 handlings, risks, etc., which were estimated at $64,000,- 

 OOO m'n. annually, the State was justified in construct- 

 ing elevators, the cost of which scarcely exceeded sixty 

 millions, as the country would reap a benefit of more 

 than 100 per cent, on the capital sunk. 



There was no reason to suppose that the State 

 would have any difficulty in collecting the interests and 

 amortization on the investment. 



THE FAILURE OF THE ARGUMENT. 

 Undeniably, had Elevators been constructed, as 



