76 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
[August I, 1898, 
trade taxes; one is draft and the other the dis- 
counting of the prompt. 
Draft, as every planter knows, is a free pound of 
tea given away with every chest weighing over 28 lb. 
gross to compensate the buyer for the turn of the 
scale in weighing off to retail. What can be more 
ludicrously incongruous than the present system in 
force? A box containing 21) lb. net and weighing 
27ilb. gross, gives no draft, yet there are twenty 
turns of the scale at least. A box containing 2.5 lb. 
net is taxed 4 per cent, by the 1 lb. draft. On 
the other hand, a chest containing LOO lb. of fine 
dust is only taxed 2 .Srds per cent- by this trade 
allowance. This, of course, is simply inverting the 
ratio of necessity, lu my crop of 141,000 the amount 
deducted for draft was 1,620 lb., which, at 7J. per 
lb. cost me £19-2-4. But suppose my plantation had 
been up on the Range, and to enable my coolies to 
carry my teas to the cart road I had been com- 
pelled to pack in 40 lb. half-chests. Then I should 
have been mulct 3,6001b., valued at £108-15 0. 
This again is, I think a matter whieh the Indian 
Tea Association should take up. Half a pound of tea 
extra is ample to compensate for the turn of the 
scale in weighing off 1001b. If more is required it 
is the retailer, not the planter, who should suffer 
for what can only be laxity of work. Heaven alone 
knows it is the retailer and not the planter who 
makes the profits. Supposing the scale of J percent, 
draft to have been in force last year I should have 
been cut on my 144,000 lb. only £23 instead of £49. 
The last point I have discuss is discounting the 
prompt. A broker sells your tea, and payment is 
due three months after date of sale. Well, that is 
a trade custom, and the planter agrees to give the 
credit. But here comes in the hardship. Whether 
he wants it or not, whether he objects or not, the 
broker can compel the planter to accept payment 
less 5 per cent, per annum discount, at any moment 
after the sale. If the bank rate is 2 per cent, as 
it often is, there is a clear profit of 3 per cent, to 
the buyer, and I have sometimes suspected to the 
broker, on this ability to compel the seller to ac- 
cept a diminished price for hia tea. I kicked against 
it once, but I was told it was the "custom." This 
custom cost me last year on my crop of 114,000 lb. 
the sum of £38-19-2. I had no choice, but to ac- 
cept money I did not want, to pay 5 per cent, per 
annum for ac cepting it, and then to deposit it at 
my bankers, either at no interest, or at 2 per cent. 
If I contracted to leave it with them for three 
months certain. Another hardship that runs in 
double harness with discounting the prompt is ware- 
house rent. I will quote actual figures. Early in 
September 1 sold 8,380 lb. tea for £848-10-5 as 
per account sales. On the 10th my brokers paid me 
£100. A week later they paid another £200, and 
on the last of October the balance of iS;39-16-7. I 
lost by discounting the prompt £3-13-10. That was 
bad enough I have reason in this particular case to 
suspec 1 that they paid me \ip so sharp because the 
buyer paid them, and that the buyer paid up so 
sharp because hejWanted the teas out of the warehouse. 
To return to discounting : the prompt against the 
desire of the seller. As I have said it cost me last 
year £3819-2. It added 74 per cent, to brokerage 
and sale charges ; wherefore I called thein moderate, 
with a reservation as to this point. Brokerage and 
sale charges alone cost me '09 of a penny per lb. 
on my tea, but when prompt is added the cost 
works out -16 of a penny per pound, or considerably 
more than agency ; and this is too much. Agent, 
broker, and prompt discounter got the odd farthing 
and more of my 7id. tea. It was payment in excess 
of the work they did for me. 
I think this is another point that the Indian Tea 
Association might take up. If sellers want their 
prompts discounted, well and good ; let it be done, 
and let them jpay for the convenience. But if they 
do not want them discounted, then they should net 
be compelled to accept a diminished payment for 
the goods they have sold especially when the rate 
of diminution is 5 per cent., while the Bank rate 
is often only 2 per cent. 
SUBPLUB PaVMEKTS, 
That some of the points to which 1 have attempted 
to draw intelligent attention are important t&e 
following figures will sbow. Taking th« amount of 
Indian tea put through the Luudun waiebousesat 
144,000,000 lb. per annum, and vali'ing it at Hi. per 
lb., 1 believe it will be found that : — 
1. The decrease in discount from 20 per cent, to 10 
per cent, established in l88a costs the tea industry 
on warehouse "management" £15,000 a year. 
2. That the decrease in discount on warehouse 
rent, which was contemporaneously introduced with- 
out a shadow of jastification, costs i'S.OW a year. 
3. That planters are charged rent, over and 
above that due for storage to the extent of about 
.£■20,000 annually 
4. That London bulking, which can be easily 
avoided, costs the industry £30,0(.0 a year. 
5. That 90 per cent, of the London taring charges, 
which could be easily avoided if the margin of vari- 
ation of tares was raissd from 2 lb. to 4 lb. or if the 
teas were weighed net, costs the industry X75,0O0 
and damages their tea into the bargain. 
6. That if the draft to the buyer was equahsed 
and reduced to J per cent, it would probably save 
the tea industry about £25,000 a year. Nearly two 
million pounds .are given away annaallv as 
draft I 
7. That if brokers and buyers choose to enforce 
their legal trade rights they could charge the tea 
industry about £60,000 a year for discounting the 
prompt: that if prompt was reduced to .30 days 
instead of 90 days, or if sellers were allow-d to 
discount It or not as and not the buyers chose. 
It would probably save the industry jfiJO.OOO a 
year. 
8. That if by a general combination of tea growers 
the rate of selling commission was reduced from U 
to 1 per cent, it would save the iudnstrv £25 OOU 
a year. ^ ' " 
Here we have what I venture to think is a not 
unreasonable or impracticable set of proposals to 
orl200.000r';;tr.°' -^-t'y by considerably 
»n'?"^'^/ ^'^ P'^'" B.yet^Re outturn 
and £82 per acre as the average capital, I estima™ 
£12oWoo 'Th:'"'^- ^"'^•'^'^ f^'^^tations at 
.I'iH ' The aoove saving, if effected, would 
capHah ^^^^ ^ ^^""^ 
I have not included the question of steam freights 
and cxchauge, both of which might be influenced 
by combination among planters. Taking the 
present rate of exchange at Is. 4d. every reduct on 
of Id wil give planters an extra half anna per lb 
f 01 their teas; and, on the figures of capital and 
outturn per acre given, every half anna gained means 
an extra profit of over 2 per cent. 
The time has now come for planters to take a 
personal interest in these charges levied in London 
which are in most cases hidden from them by a 
system of quoting -totals" of bills instead of sup- 
plying details, and letting those who pay figure out 
what and why they are required to pay In a matter 
of thi, sort planters naturally look to the Indian 
Tea Association to take the lead. Of course in tha^ 
body there must be many interests that are touched 
by the suggestions I have made. BuT the tea 
industry is in too desperate a condition for 
ce7emony."'^° "'^^^^ ^^'^ stanf^/on 
T InillTl''^^ appending a table showing (A) what 
»^ f T^u ^^-^fiOO lb. on the London market ■ (B) 
what I hope to get off with this year, and fc) what 
I consider is an ideal miaimmn to aim at 
