i66 
THE  TROPICAL  AGRICULTURISI . 
[Sept,  i,  1896. 
As  a general  rule  Colombians  do  not  migrate 
through  their  country.  The  warm  countryman  rarely 
goes  to  the  temperate  zone,  and  those  of  the  latter 
seldom  descend  to  the  warm  climates.  Thus  the 
coffee  growers  depend  entirely  on  their  own  hands, 
and  the  result  is  that  no  more  coffee  can  be  culti- 
vated and  harvested  than  what  the  actual  inhabitants 
of  those  regions  can  accomplish.  At  present  the  de- 
partments in  which  the  cultivation  of  coffee  is  carried 
on  are  as  follows  Santander,  Antioquia,  Tolima, 
and  Cundinamarca.  In  consequence,  however,  of  the 
scarcity  of  labourers,  comparatively  few  large  coffee 
estates  are  carried  on.  The  very  great  proportion 
of  the  yearly  crop  is  produced  on  small  holdings, 
which  are  worked  by  the  holder  and  his  family. 
Last  night  we  had  the  following  : — 
“ COCO.t  BUTTEU. 
“The  Chancellor  oe  the  Exchequer  moved  a new 
clause  imposing  a duty  of  Id  per  pound  on  cocoabutter. 
Mr.  T.  Lough  contended  that  the  principle  of 
the  tax  was  wrong.  This  was  a subtle  attack  upon 
the  whole  policy  of  free  trade,  (Hear,  hear.) 
“ The  clause  was  added  to  the  Bill.’’ 
At  length  our  old  friend 
“ rhka” 
seems  to  have  fallen  into  energetic  hands  and 
Capt.  Whitley’s  Company  is  looking  up  : here  is 
its  advertisement  in  linancial  papers  : — 
“rhea  eibre  treatment. 
The  owners  of  the  Gomess  Patents  and  Eights 
for  the  lollowing  countries  are  prepared  to  receive 
applications  from  foreign  and  colonial  companies  or 
linancial  houses  for  dealing  with  such  of  these 
Patents  and  Eights  as  remain  unsold,  either  in  the 
form  of  working  under  licence  cr 
purchase  outright. 
*Austria 
Tiji 
Portugal 
Argentine  Ee- 
Finland 
Portuguese 
public 
•Germany 
Colonies 
Barbadoes 
Guatemala 
Queensland 
•Bulgaria 
Greece 
*Eussia 
’‘Belgium 
Hawaii 
•Eoumania 
Brazil 
Holland 
Spain 
British  Guiana 
Hong  Kong 
•South  Africa 
British  Honduras 
•Hungary 
South  America 
Bahamas 
•India 
•Straits  Settle- 
Bolivia 
Italy 
ments 
Buenos  Ayres 
Jamaica 
South  Australia 
Burma 
Japan 
Sweden 
British  Co’pmbia 
Leeward  Islands 
•Servia 
Borneo 
Luxembourg 
Switzerland 
•Ceylon 
Mauritius 
Tasmania 
Canada 
Mexico 
•Transvaal 
•Cape  of  Good 
Madagascar 
Trinidad 
Hone 
Newfoundland 
Tunis 
Congo  Free  State  New  Zealand 
•Turkey 
China 
Norway 
•United  States  of 
Chili 
New  South  Wales  America 
Cuba 
•Natal 
Venezuela 
Denmark 
Orange  Free  State  Victoria 
•France 
Peru 
\v^est  Australia 
“The  Patents  and  Eights  for  countries  marked  * in 
the  above  list  are  either  already  sold  or  negotiations 
are  proceeding  with  respect  to  them. 
“Applications  to  be  made  as  below,  where  information 
can  be  obtained  and  samples  seen. 
“The  Foreign  and  Colonial  Ehea  Fibre  Treatment 
Syndicate,  Limited. 
“17,  Shaftesbury-Avenue,  London,  W.’’ 
And  two  London  evening  papers  discuss  the 
subject  as  follows  : — 
“A  rhea  i’ACTORY  FOR  LANCASHIRE. 
Our  old  friend  rhea  has  turned  up  once  again, 
this  time  in  Lancashire.  It  is  to  be  manufactured 
by  a company  which  has  taken  over  the  Castleton 
Mills,  Eochdale,  for  the  express  purpose.  The  pro- 
cess, which  will  be  employed,  is  that  known  as  the 
Gomess  process.  Lancashire  spinners  apiiear  to  be 
taking  favourably  to  the  new  fibres  which  have  been 
recently  exploited  or  perfected.  More  than  one  mill 
in  the  vicinity  of  Manchester  is  occupied  with  the 
preparation  and  production  of  the  particular  fibre, 
and  from  all  wo  hear  they  cannot  turn  out  enough 
yarn  to  meet  the  demand.  Moreover,  wo  hear  of 
other  companies  projected  in  addition  to  the  one 
just  formed  at  Eochdale.  The  capital  for  this  ven- 
ture, liy  the  way,  has  all  been  subscribed  privately. 
There  is  certainly  a big  demand  for  the  commo- 
dity, and  it  looks  as  though  it  may  have  come  to 
stay  at  last.’’ 
MORE  ABOUT  RHEA. 
How  far  rhea  fibre  is  likely  to  realise  all  the  great 
things  that  its  admirers  have  prophesied  for  it  is 
open  to  question.  But  evidently  there  is  no  inten- 
tion of  allowing  financial  enterprise  in  that  direction 
to  be  confined  to  the  flotation  of  the  large  Khea 
Fibre  Company  that  was  offered  to  the  public  some 
months  ago.  A company  has  just  been  registered  to 
acquire  a private  concern  hitherto  known  as  the  Ehea 
Fibre  Treatment  Company,  Limited,  and  the  name 
of  the  new  enterprise  is  the  Eochdale  Ehea  Fibi'e 
Spinning  Company,  Limited.  The  capital  is  .£75,000 
in  25,000  preferred  and  50,000  ordinary  shares.  Another 
interesting  registration  at  Somerset  House  is  that  of 
James  Nisbet  & Co.,  which  has  been  formed  to  take 
over  the  well-known  publishing  business  in  Beniers- 
street.  It  is  gratifying  to  see  that  the  directors’ 
qualification  is  fi.xed  at  £1,200.  It  is  not  often  that 
directors  are  forced  to  take  so  sensible  and  substan- 
tial an  interest  in  a Company  from  which  they  drew 
their  fees. 
T’LANTING  AND  rilODUCE. 
Tai.k  About  the  Tea  Duty. — The  discussion  in  Par- 
liament on  the  tea  duty,  a I'eport  of  which  appears 
elsewhere,  although  it  came  to  nothing  from  a practi- 
cal point  of  view,  gave  the  question  airing,  and 
brought  out  a few  points  in  connection  with  Mr. 
Chamberlain’s  Zollverein  scheme  and  its  application 
to  British  grown  tea.  In  discussing  the  Finance  Bill, 
Mr.  Lloyd-George  on  the  last  occasion  had  moved 
an  amendment  to  exempt  tea  grown  in  any  part  of 
Her  Majesty’s  dominions  from  the  tea  duty.  Since 
this  amendment  was  moved  Mr.  Chsmberlain  has 
propounded  his  scheme  for  an  Imperial  Zollverein. 
The  amendment  gave  an  excellent  opportunity  for 
discussing  it.  The  Eadicals,  in  the  interest  of  pro- 
gress, were  willing  to  forego  the  chance,  but  Mr. 
Lowther — the  champion  Protectionist — would  not  let 
it  slip.  He  has  been  organising  Protectionist  meet- 
ings up  and  down  the  country,  and  was  back  in  the 
House  full  of  encouragement  and  enthusiasm. 
There  were  many  demands  for  the  “ author,’’  but 
Mr.  Chamberlain  carefully  kept  out  of  the  House, 
although  he  was  on  the  premises.  On  the  withdrawal 
of  Mr.  Lloyd-George’s  amendment,  Mr.  Lough  moved 
that  Ireland  should  be  exempted  from  the  payment  of 
the  tea  duty,  a suggestion  which,  as  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer  pointed  out,  would  involve  the  res- 
toration of  custom  houses  between  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland  and  a reversal  of  our  settled  policy  of  fiscal 
unity.  This  amendment  was  withdrawn,  and  then 
Mr.  H.  Lewis  moved  an  amendment  to  the  effect 
that  the  duties  on  higher-priced  teas  should  be  raised 
and  the  duties  upon  lower-priced  teas  lowered.  This 
also  was  withdrawn.  Mr.  Lloyd-George  moved  to 
reduce  the  tea  duty  from  fourpeiice  to  twopence  per 
pound,  but  the  proposal  was  defeated  by  2(1:5  votes 
to  96,  and  the  clause  was  agreed  to  by  228  votes 
to  87.  During  the  discussion  Mr.  Labouchere  was 
afforded  an  opportunity  of  saying  that  it  gave  him 
great  pleasure  to  vote  in  favour  of  a reduction  of 
the  tea  duties,  and  Mr.  Lough,  who  is  in  the  tea 
trade,  was  permitted  to  express  a trade  view  on  the 
question  of  duty  as  it  affects  the  price  of  tea.  The 
funniest  thing  in  the  debate  came  from  that  mad 
wag,  Mr.  T.  G.  Bowles,  who  delivering  himself  on 
the  accident  wheeze  about  the  terrible  effects  of  tea 
drinking  in  Ireland,  mentioned  in  his  playful  way 
that  “the  more  tea  was  drunk  in  Ireland  the  more 
the  Irish  population  diminished.’’  The  debace  on  the 
whole  was  conducted  in  a rollicking  spirit,  and  was 
not  at  all  a bad  advertisement  for  the  tea  trade. 
As  for  the  rights  and  wrongs  of  the  tea  duty,  all  the 
advocates  of  a “ free  breakfast  table  ’’  protested 
against  the  maintenance  of  this  tax  in  a year  of 
an  overflowing  Exchequer,  and  an  unprecedented 
surplus.  'That  the  money  raised  by  a 50  per  cent 
tax  on  the  poor  widow's  cup  of  tea  had  been  squau- 
