ist 
similar is ARA in other provinces. - 
3, The memorandum refers in contemptuous t rms to 
- the common sugars consumed by the Indian public. 
a " A $ ^ 
x machine-ma rf 
overcome, there would still remain the question 
‘compost k as gur 
heturer. : 
is 4, I admit all that the memorandum says as to the molas df | 
P .. yleld of sugar per aere in India, as to the inferiority of tlie pres ies 
= . . employed to extract the juice and make it into sugar, and as to t 
quality of the so-called * refined sugars " of India, But itis co 
scientifie processes and high cultivation . Not or 
* the Mauritius system require a large initial eapital expenditure and 
large annual outlay, but it also requires a highly-pai supervisin 
controlling agency. 1 do not defend the imperfections of the 
kd system, ^ I Men it is economically explica 
ix . 8$. There would be some difficulty in indonesia the 
; system bodily. inia India, since a prominent feature of that. 
u 
B : ; t, as the memorandum points out, a sugar refinery | m ight easi r work 
qoae ae ah Indian sugar growing distriet on the lines famili 
planters. It would buy cane at the proper season from culti 
the neighbourhood, and. would restrict its interest in the actu 
duction of the crop advances to the growers. A large sugar 1 
. may point out, would have to fcc two problems which are not | 
solve. The first is the question of carriage. Cane soon dries when eut. 
"and cannot :be carried. long distances. ry 
sugar r ing. - he market ior rum in ES is. td 
: probably efit supplies b, sine concerns. 
i ve From J. P, Tooni Esq, 1,5 HEP fini on, Dri 
dux oo PANE Rxzconps AND AGRIOULTU TURE; CENTRAL Pnoyi 
E 39. THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, - 
: o. 
por a tite the instruction: ; 
5 NT dated 30th July 18 re the houou 
following observations on the views and saps fa m | 
: and esi, of pelos le ie to the pen prod 
