1S40] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



313 



But such an arrangement would effect injustice, and could not therefore 

 receive the sanction of a government administered in a due regard to the 

 first principles of its existence — the equal protection of the citizens, and an 

 equitahle distribution of the benefits which its constitution was intended to 

 confer. 



Such a tarifl" would augment the tonnage of the line — but it would pro- 

 duce that result by taxing the citizen immediately at P four dollars, and ex- 

 cluding him from tlie work, and the neighl)0ur immediately beyond P hut 

 two dollars, and inviting him at the expense of a preuiiuni. 



Besides these oljjections to this arrangement, there exists the additional 

 and important one, that it would not fidfil another imperative condition — 

 that of obtauiing the greatest revenue from the trade. 



Of the most judicious charge on articles of heavy burden and small value. 



I conceive that it is essential to the fulfilment of the condition, that the 

 tax levied on the trade of the line shall be reconcilable with principles of 

 equity, that the charge at each point shall be proportional to the ability of 

 the article to sustain it ; and, it fortunately happens, that when the charges 

 are regulated in the mode that will produce the maximum revenue, this con- 

 dition will be fully satisfied. 



We are to understand by the ability of a commodity to sustain a charge 

 for carriage, the difference between the cost of production and the market 

 value of the object. If the article be worth ten dollars in market, and it 

 costs six dollars to produce and prepare it for ULirket, it will sustain any 

 charge for transportation, including both freight and toll, not exceeding four 

 dollars. But its ability to sustain a charge for toll only, depends on the 

 position iu which it reaches the line of the improvement. For, after deduct- 

 ing the cost of production from the market value, the residue may go to bear 

 the whole cost of carriage ; but we must still deduct from this residue the 

 charge for freight, to obtain the sum wliich it will bear to be charged for 

 toll. 



If, for example, the above article reach the line at 100 miles from the 

 mart, and the freight be one cent per ton jier mile, the charge for freight 

 will be one dollar, and the residue will be three dollars. If it reach the line 

 at 200 miles, the charge for freight will be two dollars, and this residue will 

 be two dollars. If it come on the work at 300 miles, the charge for freight 

 will be three dollars, and the residue will be one ; and if it reach it at 400 

 miles, the freight will be four dollars, and the residue will be nothing, I 

 say, therefore, that to make the tax for toll proportional to the ability of the 

 commodity, the charge levied by the State for its passage along 

 100 miles should be proportional to 3 dollars, 

 200 miles shoulil be proportional to 2 dollars, 

 300 miles should Ije proportional to 1 dollar, 

 and along 400 miles it should lie allowed to pass free. From which it ap- 

 pears, that the greater the distance the commodity is can-ied, the less should 

 be the toll levied ujion it. In short, I propose that the tax should be pro- 

 portional to the ability of the trade to sustain the cliarge ; and, by such a 

 tarift', to supersede those now in use — liy which the tax is increased in pro- 

 portion as the ability of the trade to bear the tax is diminished. 



Now, it may be demonstrated, that when the toll is assessed on this prin- 

 ciple, both the tonnage and the revenue will be greater than if the most 

 profitable uniform charge per mile that it is possible to \c\y were adopted. 



But the method of determining this most productive charge, cannot be 

 conveniently pointed out, with a demonstration of its correctness, in a mere 

 popular discussion. I have, however, elsewhere considered the subject in 

 some detail, and have shown that the toll on this division of the trade which 

 will yield the greatest possible revenue, is about three-eighths of the cliarge 

 which wo\ild exclude the article from market ; or three-eighths the limit of 

 the tax which it would bear. 



In the above example, therefore, tlie charge at 



100 miles, should be f of 3 dollars, or 1 dollar 12^- cents. 

 200 miles, should be t of 2 dollars, or 75 „ 



300 miles, should be g of 1 dollar, or STJ- „ 



400 miles, GO „ 



The difference between these sums and those above given constitutes the 

 profits of the proprietors. 



It cannot be objected to this scale of charges, that it deprives the citizen 

 on the line, near the mart, of any of the advantages of his position. The 

 work, on the contrarj-, furnishes him with the means of transporting the 

 products of his estate to a market for one fourth or one fifth the sum he was 

 compelled to expend before its construction. This is a positive advantage 

 for whicli he is indebted to the commonwealth ; and he has no right to com- 

 plain if the same commonwealth extend the benefits of the enterprise to 

 more distant citizens. The avowed object of the improvement is to bring to 

 market productions which could not otherwise reach it, and, generally, to 

 reduce the tax on transportation. And if the objection, that the mode of 

 charging here recommended may seem to disturb the relative advantages of 

 position of the near and distant denizen, be a valid one, it is a fortiori a 

 conclusive argument against all improvement. A consequence of the con- 

 struction of any canal or railroad, is to increase the value of estates to which 

 it affords new facilities, and of course disturb the relation between the ad- 

 vantages possessed by such property and other estates in the commonwealth, 

 on which it has no effect. 



But such an objection, even if a legitimate one, cannot be applied to the 



scale here adrised. It is not proposed to tax the distant man less for the 

 transportation of his effects than the nearer one; on the contrary, he is 

 charged more. The metlmd merely proposes to make t'lat portion of the 

 tax which is to be considered as the profit of the State— tliat portion which 

 is levied for revenue — proportional to the ability of the trade to pay it. And 

 tins is just. 



\ix. 2. 



If, now, we represent by a proper scale, as in Fig. 2, the area of the coun- 

 tiT which, with tlie data of this example, would furnish tlie tonnage, in the 

 hypothesis of an uniform charge of one cent for freight and one cent for toll, 

 we shall have, as before stated, a triangular figure N P N, with a base, N N, 

 of 80 miles, and height, M P, of 200 miles. 



But if the charges were adjusted with a view to the obtaining of the maxi- 

 mum revenue, the triangle would have a base, n n, of 50 miles, and a lieight, 

 M R, of four hundred miles. In the one case the area of the country would 

 be represented by the triangle N P N, and in the other by the triangle n R n. 



But, instead of aiming to obtain the maximum revenue on all the trade 

 which would reach the improvement from R to M, we may, by the system 

 which it is intended to recommend, adopt iu both instances an uniform 

 cliarge for toll, as one cent per ton per mile, from JI to M' — the point which 

 corresponds with the intersection n' of the sides of the superior and inferior 

 triangles — and confine the arrangement made with a view to the maximum 

 revenue, to that portion of the country situated between M' and R. 



The consequence of this arrangement would be to obtain the same tonnage 

 and revenue from the country traversed by the portion M M' of the line, in 

 both cases, since the tariff would iu that distance be common ; and at the 

 same time to increase the area of the countiT trading on the improvement, 

 a quantity equal to the whole of the shaded space in the figure, and to in- 

 crease the revenue a quantity equal to whatever would be due to this addi- 

 tional trade and the charge upon it, determined in accordance with the prin- 

 ciples here laid down. 



It will be perceived that the increase of tonnage and revenue which, in the 

 first part of tliis article is shown to have place, will be obtained without any 

 increase of toll on any part whatever of the trade. ^A■e have only to take 

 the present tariff of New York or Pennsylvania, or any other state or com- 

 pany, and obtain these results by a reduction of the charges. 



For, at the point P, which is supposed to be 200 miles from M, we have 

 seen that a toll of one cent per ton per mile would entirely exclude the trade. 

 But if, instead of a charge of one cent per ton per mile, at that point, or two 

 dollars for the entire toll from P to M, tlie article were taxed but 75 cents 

 per ton, as is stated to l)e the proper toll under the circumstances, there 

 would remain out of the two dollars, which is the limit of the charge for toll 

 it would bear at that position, a balance of one dollar 25 cents, to pay the 

 expense of its transportation from j; to P — a distance of 12 J miles on each 

 side of the line. So that, Ijy simply reducing the charge resulting from a 

 tariff proportioned to the distance, we shaU here obtain, instead of nothing, 

 a revenue due to the tonnage that would be furnished by a district ji; /;, 25 

 miles in breadth, at a charge of 75 cents per ton. 



It is true that a much more important increase of revenue might be ex- 

 perienced by a modification of the uniform charge supposed to be levied from 

 M to jr, and a reduction from the new tariff beyond M'. For, even where 

 we to adopt the principle of fixing on a determinate toll per ton per mile for a 

 certain distance, we should bear in mind that there is a certain uniform 

 charge which will yield a higher result than any other. But, without any 

 reference to this, or any of the other advantages which would be derived 

 from a thorough and strict regard to the laws of trade in the establishment 

 of the tariff", I have only sought to render clear the fact, that by simple re- 

 duction of the charges on a portion of the trade on all our public works, the 

 revenue and tonnage may be simultaneously increased, and the tax on the 

 public may be rendered more equitable. 



EXPERIMENTS ON THE AMERICAN COTTON-GINS. 



On Wednesday the 12th July, a deputation of the Board of Directors of 

 the East India Company, paid a visit to Liverpool, for the pm-pose of wit- 

 nessing a series of experiments in the cleaning of East India cotton by means 

 of the saw-gins brought to England by Captain Bayles. The object of these 

 experiments was two-fold : firstly, to show that by the introduction of the 

 American saw-gin into India, the cotton of that country might be so well 

 cleaned, and with so Uttle injury to the staple, as to render it a marketable 

 article to an almost unhmitcd extent; and, secondly, to ascertain which of 

 the four gins was best calculated for the cleaning of Indian cotton, in order 

 that other machines might be manufactured, either precisely on the same 

 principle, or with such improvements as might seem desirable. 



