Sept,  i,  1892.] 
THE  TROPICAL  AGRICULTURIST, 
205 
MESSRS.  BERBY  WHITE  AND  THOMAS 
CARITT  AT  THE  JOKAI  TEA  COMPANY’S 
MEETING. 
21th  July. 
Dear  Sir, — There  can  be  no  doubt  but  that  the 
growth  and  expansion  of  the  Ceylon  Tea  Enterprize 
is  creating  a deal  of  uneasiness  at  home  amongst 
Indian  Tea  Go.  shareholders,  and  the  more  so  as 
one  oannot  walk  many  yards  in  a street  at  home 
without  coming  to  soma  advertisements  of  Ceylon’s 
fragrant  article.  These  in  themselves  would  create 
a sufficiency  of  alarm  in  the  mind  of  the  ordinary 
shareholder  of  the  pick-nothieg  but-the  broben-pekoe 
type.  Hence  no  doubt  the  question  asked.  You 
will  observe  that  the  replies  are  in  answer  to  a 
Mr.  Rostron.  The  “ rough  edge”  must  be  toned 
down,  and  indeed  if  shareholders  are  satisfied  by 
the  statement  that  Ceylons  will  always  want  a 
certain  proportion  of  Indian  tea  to  give  them 
strength  and  backbone  well  and  good.  It  is  a statement 
that  would  sound  well  at  a public  meeting  such 
as  the  above  ; otherwise  I think  we  may  dismiss 
it  as  if  little  value  to  those  in  the  “ know.” 
Mr.  Thos.  Carruthers’  remarks  were  well  cal- 
culated, no  doubt,  to  give  an  extra  fillip  to  the 
proceedings,  but  why  at  the  expense  of  Ceylon  ? 
He  says  " as/ar  as  he  could  see,  the  quality  of 
Ceylons  was  falling  off  every  year.” 
The  following  questions  then  present  themselves  to 
us  lstly,  Can  he  see? — and  2ndly,  if  so,  how  far  ? 
— Yours  faithfully,  R.  J.  B. 
MR.  F.  SUTTON  HAWES  AND  MESSRS. 
W.  J.  & H.  THOMPSON  & CO. 
Dear  Sir, — Kindly  oblige  me  by  inserting  the 
following  in  your  next  issue: — 
I have  only  just  returned  from  the  country,  and 
have  been  shown  your  issue  of  June  2nd  in  which, 
with  surprise,  I see  a letter  written  in  a highly 
autooratic  tone  from  Messrs.  W.  J.  & H.  Thompson 
in  which  my  name  appears,  re  the  subjeot  of  the 
‘‘Stability  of  the  Oeylon  Tea  Industry.”  1 think 
as  this  article  and  the  correspondence  alluded  to 
was  commenced  by  Messrs.  Thompson  in  a London 
commercial  paper,  it  would  have  been  more  gentle- 
manly and  businesslike,  if  they  had  continu’d 
their  remarks  in  the  same  journal  as  they  have 
sinoe  alluded  personally  to  me  — and  the  subject 
under  discussion  oould  have  been  fairly  judged  by 
those  interested, 
Messrs.  Thompson  send  you  the  article  and 
their  letter  relating  to  it,  but  omit  my  letter  with 
their  criticism  on  the  latter,  as  “In  their  opinion 
it  needs  no  reply  1”  They  did  not  write  to  this 
effect  to  the  Financial  News  here.  Fortunately 
you  have  received  and  republished  my  letter,  so 
their  intended  slight  has  been  defeated.  Messrs. 
Thompson  may  be  an  older  established  firm  than 
my  own,  but  as  regards  practical  knowledge  and 
dealings  in  Ceylon  tea  on  this  market,  I think  as 
for  the  last  8 years  I have  given  my  sola  attention 
to  Ceylon  teas  and  tasted  as  far  as  possible  every 
sample  that  has  been  offered  at  auotion,  I may 
claim  to  have  had  as  much  experience,  if  not  more, 
than  Messrs.  Thompson  ; and  the  opioioos  I have 
expressed  may  perhaps  be  of  a little  more  value 
than  Messrs.  Thompson  choose  to  plaoe  on  them. — 
I am,  dear  Bir,  yours  faithfully, 
F.  SUTTON  HAWES. 
THE  O.B.  ESTATES  COMPANY,  LTD. 
Kandy,  5th  Aug.  1892. 
Sir,-— Report  and  balance  sheet  to  31st  March 
189  ol  the  Oriental  Bank  Estates  Company,  Ltd., 
as  usual  does  not  give  muoh  information  to  its 
shareholders,  especially  to  those  interested  in  Ceylon. 
Assets, — The  item  of  cost  of  estates,  buildings,  &o., 
is  put  down  at  £45 1,354,  18s  Od.  Seeing  that  no  divi- 
dend for  the  last  half-year  is  to  be  paid,  owing  to 
the  hurrioane  in  Mauritius  (so  wo  are  told  1 1), 
shareholders  would  have  been  better  able  to  follow 
the  balance  sheet  if  the  cost  of  the  Mauritius 
estates,  buildings,  dtc.,  had  been  entered  as  one  item, 
and  that  of  Ceylon  as  another—  the  produce  from 
each  place  should  also  be  shown  separately,  and 
shareholders  have  a right  to  expect  this,  in  the 
only  report  theyreoeive. 
The  items  of  share  in  Companies.  .£55,556  10s  Od 
Advanced  on  mortgages..  ..£73,831  11s  5d 
are  large  items,  and  have  come  into  existence  since 
the  £150,000  4£-per-cent  mortgage  debenture  stock 
was  created  1 
What  interest  is  reoeived  for  this  the  accounts 
do  not  show,  nor  it  is  mentioned  where  and  in 
what  this  money  is  invested. 
Liabilities. — Accounts  payable  is  a very  heavy 
liability,  viz. : £106,207  8s  Od.  Ia  last  year’s  aocounts 
it  was  only  £40,978  6s  Id. 
In  the  report  for  1889  the  Dirctors  referring 
to  having  raised  the  mortgage  debenture  stock  of 
£150,000  say  : — “ A saving  ia  th6  working  expenses 
of  the  Company  will  be  effected  by  this  additional 
capitals.”  I cannot  see  that  any  gain  has  accrued 
to  shareholders  or  to  the  Company  ; we  certainly 
have  not  reoeived  any  increase  id  the  dividend,  and 
our  liabilities  are  increasing  by  leaps  and  bounds  : — 
The  total  liabilities  in  1890  were  £628.385  5s  5d 
,,  „ „ 1891  were  £647  598  13s  6d 
,,  „ „ 1892  are  £725,877  7s  8d 
The  £150,000  Debenture  stock  is  included  in  all 
the  above  totals. 
Why  cannot  the  Directors  of  this  Company 
publish  with  their  report,  as  many  companies  do, 
the  particulars  of  acreage,  &o.?  If  they  consider  it 
detrimental  to  the  interest  of  the  Company  to  give 
particulars  of  each  estate,  at  least  we  might  be 
told  the  total  acreage  under  each  product,  and 
whether  in  full  bearing  or  not. 
In  the  report  we  are  informed  that  the  profits 
from  sugar  showed  a good  increase,  and  in  “ Ceylon  ” 
the  progressive  increase  in  the  output  of  tea,  and 
tli 3 profit  th.  refrom  has  been  maintained  &o.” 
After  all  this  I find,  comparing  laot  year’s  report 
with  this,  that  the  increased  profit  is  only 
£3,49  12s  3d  ! ! or  under  1 % on  the  paid  up  capital  1 
( omparing  this  Company’s  dividend  with  others, 
I fail  to  see  where  the  good  increase  and  progressive 
increase  in  profi  s are  shown. 
It  iB  surprising  to  me  that  no  mention  is  made 
of  the  failure  of  the  New  O.B.C.,  seeing  that 
the  Company  banked  with  it  up  to  the  very  last, 
I believe.  If,  as  I surmise,  the  balance  of 
£18,271  13s  8d  available  for  dividend  is  a'l  or  partly 
lucked  up  in  tsh  New  O.B.C.,  this  is  the  correct 
r ason  why  we  receive  no  dividend  and  not  solely  on 
account  of  Mauritius — if  this  is  so,  what  were  our 
Maoaging  Directors  doing  not  to  havo  protected 
our  interests  bet’er  ? 
How  oan  it  be  explained  that  the  prof  shares 
are  at  a discount,  and  ordinary  shares  at  nearly 
50  per  cent  and  very  difficult  to  sell  ? when  the 
profits,  as  shown  by  balanoe  sheet,  have  gone  up 
from  £25  S4L  0s  81  in  1889 
to  £30,101  14s  101  in  1892  ? 
Can  it  be  that  there  is  a want  of  oonti  lence  in  the 
management  of  the  Company  ? 
In  1889  report  the  following  appears: — ‘‘In 
view  of  the  falling  market,  they  (the  Directors) 
consider  that  the  interests  of  the  Company  lie 
rather  in  the  direction  of  inoreasing  the  yield  per 
1 aore,  aod  improving  the  manufacture  by  judioious 
