5 11 



JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



the highest class of fruit under glass began to export Grapes for this 

 purpose to France, and a very considerable and most lucrative trade was 

 springing up. But, on representations made to the French Government, 

 a prohibitive duty was placed upon foreign Grapes, and since then not 

 only has the export from England entirely ceased, but Grapes from 

 Belgium, which formerly went to France, have been diverted to the 

 English markets. 



G9. Mr. Blackwell also mentioned that the McKinley Tariff had 

 destroyed the export trade of jam to the United States of America. He 

 was not, however, in favour of the imposition of duties, and stated that he 

 had been fortunate in finding markets elsewhere, chiefly in the Colonies, 

 and must run the risk of prohibitive duties being imposed there. 



70. On the other hand, a large number of witnesses stated that the 

 importation of foreign fruit was a great advantage to the British fruit 

 grower, as it created a taste for fruit, and kept the fruit merchants busy 

 and the fruit shops open all the year round, thus greatly assisting the 

 distribution of British fruit when in season. Among those who supported 

 this view were Messrs. Berry, Poupart, Best, Pringle, Lobjoit, Templeton, 

 and Craze. Other witnesses, again, such as Mr. Hodge, Mr. Sinclair, and 

 Mr. Chi vers, objected to the suggested imposition of duties, on the 

 principle that the present fiscal system of free imports was best for the 

 country generally ; but Mr. Sinclair added that protection against foreign 

 fruit would be a great benefit to him as a grower. 



71. With regard to the important question here raised, the Committee 

 desire to state that at the outset they decided not to ask for evidence on 

 this question, nor to make any recommendation, as it was really part of 

 the larger question, into which they could not enter, viz. that of the fiscal 

 policy of the country generally. As a result many of the witnesses ex- 

 amined made no reference to the question at all. The Committee did not, 

 however, see their way to refuse such evidence as might be voluntarily 

 tendered. They now content themselves with recording the various 

 opinions expressed and the suggestions made. 



72. Leaving the fiscal question, we may mention the suggestion made 

 by several witnesses that all foreign fruit sold in this country should be 

 marked and labelled, and that a similar note of identification should be 

 applied in the case of all jam made from foreign fruit. It seems to* be 

 generally held that English fruit is preferred to foreign for the table — no 

 doubt on account of its freshness — and that preservers, for a similar 

 reason, would always prefer to make jam from English fruit, if only the 

 supply were assured. It was argued that by such marking the British 

 grower could be helped in his fight with the foreign grower, without any 

 prejudice to the system of free imports, just as has been done in the case 

 of manufactured articles since the passing of the Merchandise Marks Act. 

 Among the witnesses the following may be mentioned as advocates of 

 the marking of foreign fruit — Messrs. King, Trevethan, Kerswell, and 

 Bunyard ; and those in favour of marking jam, Messrs. Templeton, 

 Chivers, Wood, and Sheppard. No doubt it would be considerably more 

 difficult effectively to mark fruit — and also to obtain proof of improper 

 marking — than in the case of a manufactured article, and the Committee 

 are doubtful whether it would be feasible. No such insuperable difficulty, 



