638 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. [March 1, 1902. 
apparently had this effect ; since the duty was 
raised tlie coiisunipcion ot rea had iiicreafced about 
13,O0O,U0n lb (equal to about 5i per ceut), 5 of 
which mis;ht fairly be put down to the natural 
growth of population, an:l a considerable quan- 
tity also to the abnormally low prices that had 
ruled almost all throup'li the season. Meanwhile 
cocoa had increased 25 per cent., and coffee 23 
percent., and comparing these articles with tea 
be found that while the market values was practi- 
cally the same— say 7id per lb- -the duty on tea 
was 6d, or 80 per cent, that ou cocoa 1 5-8d, or 
15 per cent, and that on coffee 1 ?> -til, 
or 20 per cent. So that it would be seen tliaC tea, 
which was practically a necessary of life, was 
even now bearing moie than its fair share of tax- 
ation. 
The Chanciillor of the Exciikquer :— Of 
course, you know that Mr Goschen reduced the 
duty on tea to Id, bub did not reduce that on 
cocoa and coffee. Practically the relation is the 
same as when the duty was 6d formerly. 
Mr Thompson ;— Yes, but it seems to me that 
tea as a necessity of life is bearing more than its 
fair share, in spite of the faco that of late cocoa is 
markedly increasing in use. Continuing, Mr 
Thompson said that any increase in the duty 
would be against the well-being of what was a 
purely British growth. Only 7 per cent, of tea 
consumed at home last year was of foreign 
growth. At least half of the extra duty imposed 
in 1900 was being borne by the producers. They 
had a capital out;-lay of £40 per acre, ivith au 
average yield of about 485 lb,, so that the profit 
per acre worked out at about £2 per acre, or only 
about 5 per cent on capital. So any further 
burden must seriously interfere with a most im- 
portant trade of the Indian Empire and also of the 
island of Ceylon. 
MR. J. I. ROGERS FOR THE WHOLESALt]; 
BUYERS. 
Mr. J. Innes Rogers said, he represented the 
tea buyers of London, whose Association repre- 
sented three-fourths of the buying power in tlie 
market. They were there that day for two 
reasons; first, to express their very great sympathy 
with the producers in the sufferings wliich had 
been entailed upon them by the late increase in 
the duty of 2d— |Sir Michael Hicks-Beach ; you 
have not proved that, I think]— and second, to 
point out the interest of the wholesale and retail 
trade of the country in the question. He believed 
the producers had stated their case very 
moderately and in a convincing way. No doubt; 
the main cause of their sufferings had been that 
production had greatly exceeded consumption, 
and whether the extra duty had been put on or 
not there would have been a considerable fall in 
the value of tea. But in his belief, and in the 
belief of his colleagues, the putting on of the 
extra 2d in duty had largely aggravated the 
trouble and accelerated the falling fn prices. The 
public were used to a certain scale of retail 
prices for tea. That scale had not been appre- 
ciably raised, and, as to the actual price charged 
to consumers, they (the consumers) had not 
felt the 2d increase in duty. It was quite true 
that the consumer had had a lower class 
of tea supplied to him, and he had 
been satisfied with it ; he had not paid mate- 
rially more, but the loss had been on the pro- 
ducers and toaless degree on the retail distributeis. 
Ivetail },'rocerf) had had to cut and contrive uot 
to alter shop prices, but to keep up their 
standard grades, by altering quality,and so on, and 
they had succeeded in doing so. " But this led to 
great stagnation in the market when enormous 
supplies were coming in, and the constant strug- 
gle on the grocers' part to buy cheaper and 
cheaper teas, and the consequent depression in 
value, were largely due to the 2d extra duty. 
But this state of things could not be repeated 
if a further increase in duty took place. It had 
been said, " You can't take the breeks off a 
Highlander," and if the duty were again increased 
the policy of the grocers must be altered. The 
scale of prices perforce could not remain 
unaltered, but would have to be raised if 
another increase in duty were decided 
upon, antl the effect of this would be to 
decrease consumption. That, he thouclit, would 
be a very disastrous thing both for producers and 
distributors. The position ot the grocery trade 
was a very peculiar one, and he thought it was 
worthy of more sympathy than the Chancellor 
of the Exchequer had .sometimes been inclined to 
give it ; because, excepting the publicans, grocers 
were the chief people to pay duties. An extra 2d 
in duty meant £200,000 extra capital looked-up 
for his wholesale colleagues and himself. They 
could not go on in that way, for another 2d would 
mean another £200,000. 
The Chancellor of the Exchequer : But you 
take interest on your capital? 
Mr. Innes Rogers :— We try to. Sir. 
Mr. Lecky :— It's impossible to get interest on 
this capital. 
Mr. Innes Rogers, proceeding said, he had 
made a careful estimate , of their trade and 
had come to the conclusion that in tlie grocery 
trade the capital looked np in Customs and 
Excise duties was £3,000,COO. He appealed to 
the Chancellor of the Exchequer not to add to 
that burden. Tea was an article that appealed to 
and was approved by everybody. The effect of an 
increased duty would be to drive people to 
drink common tea, and it would be very injurious 
to Indian and Ceylon producers. One point that 
nobody had yet touched upon was that the effect 
of an increased demand for common tea would 
be to add to the imports of tea from China. 
The China trade would force ahead at the cost 
of India and Ceylon. They appealed to the 
Chancellor of the Exchequer for consideration : 
he had given the Coal people some comfort, and 
they hoped lie would do the same now, and send 
them cheerfully away. 
the chancellor's, reply. 
Sir Michael Hicks Beach, in reply, said : I iiave 
listened very carefully to all that the deputation 
have said to me. I recognise the importance of 
the great industry which you represent both to 
India and Ceylon, and to many pe'sous in this 
country, and I can assure you that I have listened 
to you all the more carefully because i feel 
that it is not a question of taxing an article 
which comes from foreign countries, but one 
which comes to us from our own colonies and 
possessions, and in the production of wliich we 
are ourselves deeply interested. I do not suppose 
that you anticipated that I should he able to 
tell you anything in regard to a reduction in the 
duty on tea, I do not imagine that anybody 
anticipates any reduction of existing taxa- 
tion in the year which is before us, and 
I think the object of your deputation today is 
