THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. [Feb. i, ifefr 
THE TEA LEAF CONTROY EK> Y. 
St. Clive Estate, Mavalapliyi, Feb. 2. 
Deak Sim, — I have watched wi li in e.-cst tii» Tea 
I> c af discussion and your editorial comments (see page 
838) after an interview wi'h Mr. T. li. Walker, This 
gent email has been one of my moat esteenv d and inti- 
mate friends for many yearn past. As for his bona 
fides as a good, and true map, no one need have 
any qualms of conscience. I camot, nor ran any 
sane individual objeot to Mr. Wa ke- advancing money 
against crops be the man, a native propriet >r or a 
European. This custom has been in vogue s'nce 
Ceylon was an island! What I object to thoufi'i is 
bis middlemen and receivers and his depots! Why 
can he not let, the producer consign his leaf direct 
to his address; at Nawalapitiya this is what has been 
done for the past 10 or li years, hihI why should » 
time honored .custom be departed from th repy giving 
aorne unscrupulo is scoundrels (su;h a-i middlemen) 
to set to and get robbed the surrounding estites. I 
am, losing leaf and I h ar my own coolies are the 
thieves. There were no su :h thieve* when there were 
only European receivers! On all sides one hears of 
thejft qf ieaf which has suddenly sprung up sine* 
Mr. Wolker opened his depots. 1 am mre if Mr. 
W. is properly approached in a fiijndly spirit and 
the matters rationally discussed 1 with my know'edge 
pi. Thpman Richard Walk r wil go back he will veiy 
Boon put an end to any institution likely to cause 
tarm an crea.'e bad feeling in our snia 1 community. 
Yours faithfullv, 
J. H. STEPHENS. 
THE TEA LEAF CONTROVERSY. 
Feb. 7 th 189o. 
Dear Sir,— Referring to your editorial and the 
letters that have appeared on the subject of leaf- 
Belling in the Gampola-Nawalapitiya valleys, I 
should like to make a few remarks on the subject. 
The records of the Gampola Court and the 
experience of planters, both European and native, 
in the districts round Gampola and Nawalapitiya 
Will show that instances of leaf stealing have become 
alarmingly numerous since the opening of leaf depots 
in- towns, where leaf in large or small quantities is 
irBceivod, and cash payments made for it by native 
agents. I do not think a register kept by a native 
agent, who has the paying of money in his hands. 
Can be depended on, and nothing would be more easy 
than for him to palm off stolen leaf on his principal 
without the latter having any suspicion of anything 
wrong. 
Mr. Walker's system of cash payments and adraiirex 
to growers is, rightly or wrongly, blamed for putting 
capital in the hands of dishonest receivers where- 
with to tempt estate coolies and villagers to steal 
and sell leaf. 
Agents are catering for leaf at Kadugaunaw a, Perade- 
niya- Gampola, Pussellawa, and Nawalapitiya (I do not 
presume to say they are Mr. Walker's agents), and I 
think you will agree with ma that this practice is 
a direct inducement to leaf stealing. 
Yon have, on imperfect information, championed 
Mr, Walker as the benefactor of the small grower, 
forgetting that the latter has for years had a fair 
market for his leaf at other factories, ?»nd has not 
been under the necessity of going to a middleman, 
unless be preferred to do so. How has Mr. Walker 
improved matters for the small garden owner ? 
Some, of the enterprising " Lebbe " middlemen, as 
they are called, might object to Mr. Walker's in- 
sinuations, and might challenge comparison between 
their honesty and. that of his native agent in Gam- 
pola, and it is just possible that they might be able 
to show as clean a record. 
May 1 1 suggest that, instead of the idea of licens- 
ing persons to deal in leaf, the Pussellawa, and 
Dolosbagie District Associations should fee a Proctor 
of the Gampola, Pussellawa, and Nawalapitiya courts 
to send them short particulars of each case institu- 
ted irt those courts for stealing leaf or tea, whether 
3, coBviction be obtained or not, such particulars to 
be uublishel in the newspapers Receivers would 
then get known, and dealings with them would be 
avoided. 
The recoil would also be useful if the P. A. wished 
to approach the Government on the subject of more 
stringent legislation on the lines of Mr. Austru- 
thers's mot'ou iu the P.D. last year, which has. I 
understand, unfortunately been treated with the greatest 
apathy. M. W. 
No. ft 
St. Clive, Feb. 5. 
Di:ak Shi, — I am sorry to trouble j ou again, but 
I hope I may depend on your indulgence to permit 
me to add an omission in my last letter to you rt 
"Tea Leaf purchase." I should have added, there 
can 1j3 no material harm done by Mr. Walker's 
central places in districts where he has several gaidens 
to receive le.if from, thereby avoiding the bother of 
ever so many small consignments ; but in every such 
place he should o;ily have a p.iid man to receive 
the leaf from each bona iid>- garden appearing iu his 
books and to grant receipts ; and Mr. Walker himself 
should make payments direct to the producer. He 
should first find out where the garden is, its extent, 
age of the tea and the crop li kely to be realized. 
This is what was done in Randy by Messrs. 
Holloway & Edley in the good old days of Kiiu< 
coffee. They went over or sent over and got estimates 
of crops on every native garden where the owner 
wanted advances, and accordingly made such ad- 
vances against such crops. If Mr. Walker would 
only do this he would then very soon bo in a position 
to find out any man over-stepping his margin and a 
careful inquiry would quickly lead to the detection of 
such unscrupulous producers as help themselves to 
their neighbours produce: but as is ventilated (and 
which I will not credit) Mr. Walker has middlemen 
supplied with coin to buy leaf for him then the 
matter assumes very grave proportions ; the tempta- 
tion thus afforded these men can only lead to 
theft of leaf from estates. If Mr. Roberts refers 
only to this as the practice he condemns and is 
sure such a practice exists he is right, but to try 
to throw out objections against advances on a 
man's crop is simply purile. What possible harm 
can be the outcome of my advancing money to 
a man for the leaf off his garden of say 10 acres 4 
year old tea, fairly good (one would be safe to form 
an estimate of from 2 to 225 lbs. Tea per acre). What 
can be against my giving an advance to this owner 
for his crop ! The advantage of this advance system 
is that one who can advance gets all the leaf and 
can get it a cent cheaper than those who only make 
monthly payments. It is proverbial the native ia a 
lover of debt, and will be so to the end of the chap- 
ter. Ramasaniy. Marikar, and Appuhamy alike can 
never be happy unless they owe some money to some 
one, no matter how contracted ; they prefer to get 
100 rupees advanced them, rather than being 
paid daily for their leaf, I know this is a positive 
certainty. Apologising once more for troubling vou. — 
Yours truly, J. H. STEPHENS. 
THE TEA LEAF CONTROVERSY 
St. Clive Estate, Navalapitiya, Feb. 11. 
Deaji Sin, — I have it on unimpeachable authority 
that the purchasing of tea leaf for cash has been in 
existence from .so far back as 1893 in which year some 
well-known factories had men employed going about 
supplied with cash to pay for and purchase green 
leaf, and that those same factories (or some of them 
at least) are still continuing the old old game but 
only ou a reduced scale, Mr. Walker having stepped 
in and secured the lion's share. I do not for one 
moment uphold Mr. "Walker if he is purchasing leaf 
through middlemen indiscriminately, but I certainly 
think, in justice to him I should inform you that 
he is not the only sinner ; it seems hard that 
the proverbial cuinblie should have flopped 
slap down ou Mr. Walker's shoulders only, 
when other sinners equally guilty since 1893 
