Jan. 1, 1902.] THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
485 
To the Editor. 
AN "AD VALOREM" DUTY FOR TEA 
IN THE UNITED KINGDOM. 
MR. C. SHAND'S views AND LETTER TO 
SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH. 
Kensington, Nov. 1.5. 
Dear Sir,— I enclose copy ot a letter I 
have written to the Chancellor of the 
Exchequer. It will not please high country 
planters. I have read the Ceylon Chamber 
of Commerce's correspondence on the subject 
of the Commonwealth's proposal to lay an 
ad valorem duty on tea. It has not induced 
me to change my opinions. I have always 
thought that what is sauce for the goose is 
sauce for the gander. If an ad valorem duty 
in Australia would be a premium or 
bounty on the importation of cheap China 
tea, would it not be the same on cheap 
Indian and Ceylon tea? The memory of the 
Chamber of Commerce appears to be very 
short ! They beem to have forgotten the 
history of the Tea Trade during the past 
10 or 15 years ; they also ignore circum- 
stances passing under their own noses. I 
have noticed that upwards of 300,000 pounds 
of Ceylon tea, have been shipped to Hankow, 
in tiie centre of the Chinese Empire ! 
What that tea would cost by the time it 
arrived there, you probably can calculate. 
No doubt it was used to niake Btick tea ; 
but it appears that if China wanted cheap 
tea, she has to go to Ceylon for it. Does 
this show that there is in China large 
stocks of cheap tea to send to Australia ? 
The incident appears to me to be a hobgoblin 
set up to frighten His Excellency the 
Governor into action in what does not 
concern him. There is no use in hiding any 
lunger the fact tha.t the interes's of high 
and low country planters are not identical. 
The former, who are the minority, have 
rulefl the roost too long. They only pay 
25 per cent- of the Cess, the lowcountry 
planters paying 75 i^er cent. No wonder 
they propose to: double the Cess, to fritter 
it away, in unpracticable schemes. T)i<?y 
will doubtless console themselves, when 
th(^y read my letter, with the reflection, that 
the Chaiscellor of Excliequer is not likely 
to pay any attention, to the representation 
of a single private individual. — yours truly, 
C. SHAND. 
I see- liy today's newspapers that the Com- 
oionwealth has decided to impose a fixed 
duty of 3d per pound. ! wonder if the 
Chamber of Commerce woukl have |)rotested, 
if tea had been admitted free. Logically 
they should have done so— a high rateable 
duty is experienced of high priced tea. Ihus 
6d per pound is equal to 100 per cent on 
common tea selling on an average at 6d, 
whilst on lOpenny tea it isonly..bjut 60 per 
cent, thus the consumers of cheap tea 
are unfairly taxed.- C.tS. 
52, Lon>,'udge Koad, November, 1901. 
Sir,— As the period is approaching when the 
programme ot the N;itional Ways and Means will 
be under your consideration, I have ag^in the 
honour of soliciting your attention to the question 
of the Import Duty on Tea, which falls so inequit- 
ably on the cheap descriptions, which are chiefly 
consuTued by the bread-winning classes. In the 
event ot the War in South Africa being prolonged, 
and the exigencies of tiie Public Service precluding 
the possibility of your reducing the Duty, however 
desirous you may be of doing so, I venture to sug- 
gest thai, the injustice of its incidence would be 
redre.ssed by your substituting an equivalent ad 
valorem duty in the place of the present rateable 
oiie. As the principle of ad valorem duties is, as 
I think you will admit, the basis of all equitable 
taxation, whenever it can be applied, and is the 
one adopted in nearly every civilised country 
when it is desired to make those articles of im- 
goited and exported merchandise, which vary 
preatly in quality and value, contribute to lie- 
venue. There is, I think, nothing unrea.sonable in 
my^ suggestion, especially as there would be neither 
difficulty nor trouble in assessing the value and 
levying the duty. \ ou are aware that practically 
all the Tea imported into the United Kinjrdom is 
sold by the Importers (chiefly by auction in 
bond, and that the duty is paid by the buyers 
when they wish to take delivery of their pur- 
chases. In their entries at the the Custom Hou.se 
the buyers would assess the value at the prices 
they paid for the Tea, and calculate the duty 
to which it WHS liable. The Custom House clerks 
would check the valuation by simply inspecting 
the duty-payers' " bought notes " or contracts. 
Thus little more trouble is invob'ed in levying an 
ad valorem duty than in collecting the rateable 
one. 1 invite you kindly to compare thj ta.ility 
and simtilicity ot tins method with the trouble eii- 
taile ! in levying the duty on Sugar, Tobacco 
Spirits, and other dutiable goods. The adoption 
of the suggestion will be doubtles.sIy opposed by 
all tho.se who believe that expediency and not 
justice is the predominant principle that directs 
your actions.— I have the honour to be, sir your 
obedient servant, ' 
C. SHAND. 
The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Ex- 
chequer. 
COCONUT FALM WITa 27 BRANCHES. 
H.^nwella, 15th Nov, 
Dear Sir,— With reference to your para re "coconut 
trees with branches " in your paper of the 8th 
instant, I have much pleasure to inform you that I 
have seen a palm with several branches on it 
I counted up twenty-seven branches bat; thera 
were some more— some of them had nuts, like tha 
parent palm, which locked very vigorous and sound 
having a nursery of palm.s on its crown as it were' 
Thebianches wereflimsy andagi-eat man v had withered 
away. The palm I am alluding to was at Negonab i in a 
garden near the lake. I happened to pass by 'it in 
1870, in a boat, when my attention was drawn to 
it by the boatmen, I am not aware whether the 
palm is still alive or not.— I am, yours faithfully. 
AN BYE WITNESS. 
