RuIN. 81 
merely on account of national jealousy. ‘‘ JOHN BULL” 
is hardly likely to give up his free-trade principles for 
the benefit of the sugar planter, when he has consis- 
tently refused to do so for the British wheat grower. 
What can be done? A great deal has been written 
about taking up other things, but the difficulties are 
almost insurmountable, Cotton is so low in price that a 
return tosits cultivation would be useless ; coffee is 
possible, but if this were taken up on the coast it would 
thrive only on the back lands of the estates, and even 
then would require Erythrinas or other shade trees. 
This means the total abandonment of all the front lands, 
and the loss of all the capital—in some cases amounting 
to about 2 hundred thousand pounds—invested in Sugar 
machinery. Mr. HILHOUSE* suggested that, given an 
equal remunerating value, the first 500 roods of a coast 
estate should be planted with cotton, the second with 
canes and the back with coffee and plantains. Canes 
being inadmissible and the prospeéts of cotton by no 
means encouraging, the only cultivable produét to be 
adopted is coffee, and this as he says will only do well on 
the back lands, There would be no real difficulty in 
growing coffee provided the capital could be raised, but 
it is doubtful whether it would not be better and cheaper 
in the-end to abandon the coast altogether, and buy land 
on the Canals or within ten miles of the mouths of the 
rivers, on their banks. At all events it would mean 
ruin to the present estate-owners. 
Under the old system the planting of a sugar estate 
with cotton or coffee meant but a small loss, for the 
horse-power mill and coppers were of little value com- 
* Page 33 ante. 
