4 
THE  TROPICAL  AGRICULTURIST 
[July  i,  1892. 
Mr.  B.  H'.  Davis  said,  in  regard  to  the  oil  of 
Eucalyptus  oleosa,  that  he  had  now  been  able  to 
confirm  Scbimmefs  statament  that  eucalyptol  can  be 
separated  from  it  by  freezing,  without  previous  dis- 
tillation, He  thought  there  should  be  no  difficulty 
in  getting  the  question  of  the  medicinal  values  of 
the  oils  settled  by  submitting  samples  of  phillandrene 
and  eucalyptol  to  medical  men  for  experiment. 
Mr.  Drysdale,  in  response  to  an  invitation  from 
the  chair,  said  that  there  was  one  point  about  eu- 
calyptus oil  which  he  might  cull  attention  to.  The 
oil  from  E,  oleosa  and  that  from  E.  cneorifolia  were 
regarded  aa  from  two  distinct  ep.ciee,  whereas  they 
were,  in  fact,  cne  and  the  same  product.  Former1 
Baron  von  Mueller  regarded  the  latter  as  a sub-variety 
of  E.  oleosa,  but  later  observations  showed  that  E. 
cneorifolia  was  a distinct  species.  The  firm  of  distillers 
which  he  represented  had  adopted  the  more  common 
name  oleosa  because  of  the  facility  in  pronouncing  it, 
but  tho  tree  was  not  widely  propagated  in  Australia. 
Dr.  F.  W.  Passmore  said,  he  had  lately  been  work- 
ing ou  samples  of  E.  cneorifolia  oil,  and  found  that 
one  specimen  contained  50  per  cent  of  eucalyptol. 
Another  sample  also  contained  some.  He  had  ob- 
served that  the  higher  boiling  fractions  had  an  odour 
like  lemon,  this  probably  being  due  to  the  presence 
of  some  such  body  as  citral. — Chemist  and  Druqgist. 
ABOLISH  THE  TEA  DUTY. 
BY  C.  J.  ROWE. 
We  reprint  by  permission  an  article  coniribued 
to  The  Speaker  by  Mr.  Bowe.  These  articles  consti- 
tute a powerful  argument  for  the  complete  abolition  of 
the  Tea  Duty. 
The  reduction  of  the  Tea  Duty  iu  1889  produced 
an  increase  in  the  home  consumption  of  Tea,  in  1891, 
of  17,000,0001b.  It  was  effective,  too,  in  procuring  a 
great  improvement  in  the  general  quality  of  tea,  by 
causing  inferior  China  Teas  to  be  ousted  in  favour  of 
better  leaf  from  Ceylon  and  India.  In  fact,  the  reduction 
of  2d  was  a national  gain  of  more  than  21  per  lb. 
The  total  abolition  of  the  remaining  dffiy  of  4 1 per  lb 
could  hardly  fail  to  give  the  public  a greater  benefit 
than  four-ponuy worth  of  value  now  represents. 
Under  existing  arrangements  the  duty  has  to  be 
advanced  before  clearance  for  deliv3ry.  Firms  engaged 
in  the  tea  trade  must  possess  a capital  for  duty-paying 
purposes  alone,  over  and  above  their  trading  capital 
proper.  They  must  also  employ  a larger  staff  than 
unfettered  business  requirements  would  demand,  iu 
order  to  transact  their  Custom  House  work.  Extra 
capital  means  extra  interest  charges,  more  clerks  mean 
more  office  room,  higher  rents,  aud  additional  salarie’. 
Probably,  undertliese  heads,  the  duty  requires,  ou  an 
average,  the  employment  of  50  per  cent  more  capita! 
in  the  distributive  tea  trade  of  tho  kingdom  than 
would  snffice  if  there  were  no  duty.  That  is  to 
say,  the  duty  sets  up  a barrier — Protectionist  to 
the  core — which  shuts  out  from  the  trade  all  but 
those  who  can  command  the  extra  50  per  cent. of  capital 
or  credit.  Pro  tanto  it  limits  the  number  of  sailers,  and 
eo  allows  existing  ones  to  reap  a high  rai  ge  of  profit. 
The  immediate  general-effect  of  the  abolition  of  duty 
would  be  the  removal  cf  a protective  barrier  between 
the  trade  and  the  consumer,  for  the  maintenance  of 
which  the  latter  has  to  pay  heavily  beyond  the  4d.per 
pound  that  he  contributes  to  the  revenue. 
There  is  a Still  readier  illustration  of  the  protective 
effect  of  the  duty  and  of  the  consequent  gain  to  the 
consumer  from  its  removal.  Themajo-ity  of  groce  3 
retail  their  ordinary  teas  at  not  le  s than  fifty  per 
cent,  profit.  The  profit  is  made  on  the  duty  payment 
as  well  as  on  the  cost  price.  On  ti  e average  cost  of 
ordinary  teas  the  profit  probably  works  out  in  equal 
proportions  on  duty  and  cost  price,  fifty  per  cent,  oa 
each.  The  tea  of  the  very  poor,  now  s:dd  largely  in 
fractions  of  a pound,  gives  an  even  hi  . her  profit,  aud 
because  of  its  cheaper  cost  to  the  retailer,  a much 
greater  share  of  profit  attaches  to  the  duty  payment. 
Proportionately,  the  benefit  of  the  abolition  of  duty 
will  be  most  valuable  to  those  who  are  least  able  to 
pay  it,  but  who  now  have  to  pay  the  biggest  share  of 
the  profit  it  pro.ures  for  the  grocer.  Propoitionately, 
also,  it  will  be  least  valuable  to  purcha  ers  of  the  finest 
teas  ; those  who  p y a higher  pr  fit  oa  the  tea  itself  but 
correspondingly  lessen  the  duty  payment.  But,  taking 
one  tea  with  another,  we  may  es’imate  the  gain  to  the 
consumer,  directly  resulting  from  the  abolition,  without 
reckoning  improvement  in  the  value  of  tea  given  for 
the  money,  at  not  less  than  61  per  pound. 
Indirectly,  the  consequent  h nefit  cannot  be  estimated 
on  a mere  poundage  basis.  Its  effect  in  vastly  increas- 
ing the  tea  trade  between  ourselves  and  our  Eastern 
possessions  must  be  considered.  There,  tens  of  thousands 
of  ccolies,  now  barely  existing  on  the  verge  of  star- 
vation, will  find  plentiful  opportunities  for  work  and 
wages  in  the  task  of  extending  existing  tea  areas,  and 
in  harvesting  the  immensely  increased  qusn'ities  of 
leal  that  will  be  required  for  the  British  public.  Here 
the  labour  market  will  be  largely  stimulated  by  the 
necessity  of  paying  for  the  growing  imports  by  sup- 
plying homo  manufactures  in  exchange.  Ships,  rail- 
ways, factories,  all  forms  of  industry,  must  profit  by 
the  freshened  activity  of  the  tea  trade.  Iu  fact,  the 
tresh  field  of  employment  crested  by  (be  aboliticn 
of  the  duty  will  be  co-ternrnous  with  the  enlarged 
field  of  consumption  certain  to  r - suit  from  Free  Trade 
in  ten. 
It  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  the  removal  of  the 
four-pence  will  bring  a rate  of  increased  home  con- 
sumption of  tea  greater  than  Las  ensued  up  n any 
reduction  of  duty  in  tho  past.  Hitherto  the 
greatest  rates  of  increase  following  on  redactions 
have  been  in  1866  and  1S91  respectively.  In  1866 
the  reduction  was  from  Is.  to  6d.,  and  1866  showed  an 
increased  consumption  of  10J  percent.  In  1891  the 
increase  consequent  on  the  reduction  in  1889  wa9  also 
lOi  per  cent.  The  reduction  by  50  percent,  in  1865 
is  tbs  readiest  gauge  we  cau  apply  to  an  est  mate  of 
the  pace  c.f  the  increase  in  home  consumption  as  alf  c- 
ted  by  a 100  per  cent,  reduction.  Thirteen  years  after 
1865,  in  1S78,  the  home  consumption  had  doubled.  And 
that,  be  it  noted,  alihough  Ceylou  and  Indian  teas, 
with  all  tha  extra  attractiveness  "to  the  public  taste  that 
we  now  know  them  to  possess,  were  non-existent.  Is 
it  too  much  to  suppose  that,  with  these  teas  coming 
forward  in  fast-increasing  bulk,  with  planters  compe- 
ting agaiust  each  other  to  improve  quality  and  cheapen 
processes  of  manufactme,  and  with  Free  Trade  in  tea 
quickening  theactivity  of  competition amongst  retailers, 
the  rate  of  in  rtase  would  be  likely  to  doublo  the  home 
consumption  in  half  a dozen  yeais?  The  only  factor 
that  might,  conceivably,  have  a disturbing  effect  upon 
the  rate  of  progression  is  the  certTDty  that  the  largo 
extra  demand  for  tea  will  keep  “ bond  ” prices  at  a 
high  level  in  tho  market  for  some  time  alter  the 
abolition.  This  is  what  has h ippened  after  all  previous 
reductions.  But  it  has  never  affected  the  retail  price 
to  tbs  consumer  : nor  is  it  likely  to  do  so  iu  the  future, 
because  supplies  from  India  and  Ceylon  can  without 
difficulty  be  expanded  to  meet  even  so  large  au  extra 
demand  as  may  be  expected  to  result  from  abolition. 
At  present,  producers  are  fearful  of  glutting  the 
market.  With  no  duty  in  the  way  to  check  con- 
sumption, they  will  be  able  to  fully  supply  tho  market- 
without  overflooding  it. 
The  groundwork  oi  the  criticism  expended  by  Li- 
berals both  iu  and  out  of  the  House  of  Commons — 
upon  Mr.  Goscheu’s  reduction  was  its  insufficiency. 
It  was  strongly  urged  that  the  duty  should  have  been 
swept  away  in  toto  ; and  we  may  now  consider  the 
Liberal  party,  as  such,  pledged  to  go  one  better  thau 
Mr.  G ischeu  by  earring  tie  abolition  of  the  duty. 
There  is  to  be  no  more  “tinkering;”  the  nation  is  to 
lc  no  longer  forced  to  pay  toil  for  one  of  the  staple 
necessaries  of  iif • . 
To  say  that  tea  is  a “necessary  of  life  ’ in  the  United 
Kingdom  is  to  admit  that  the  Tea  Duty  is  indeten- 
sib’e  in  principle.  All  the  more  so  bccauie  it  forms 
the  keystone  of  the  system  which  surrounds  the  break- 
fast table  with  a bedgework  of  taxes-  It  shelters  and 
gives  vitality  to  the  duties  ou  coffee,  chicory,  and 
cocoa.  No  one  would  trouble  to  say  a word  in  favour 
of  taxing  these  last  if  the  Tea  Duty  were  aboli-hed. 
To  delay  in  pressing  forward  its  abolition  would  be  to 
