The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-22 00:00:00

TBE EXPORT DUTY ON FOREIGN

RAGAS.:

A meeting of paper manufacturers was held yes-
terday at the King's Arms Tavern, New Palace-
yard, for the purpose of considering what course
should be adopted in consequence of the expected
imposition of a heavy import duty upon the expor-
tation of: rags from France. Mr. Joynson took the
chair, e.nd was supported by upwards of 40 of the
principal paper manufacturers of this country.
The CHAIRMAN opened the proceedings by calling
upon Mr. A. Kintrea to read the notice calling the
meeting and stating the steps which the committee
appointed at a former meeting had taken. He then
referred to Mr. Puller's motion for the retention of
a id. duty upon foreign paper if free trade in the
raw material was not allowed. It appeared now that
the French Government intended to place an export
duty of from £8 to £lO a ton upon the raw material,
-which would be from 60 to 100 per cent. upon the
value of the article, and practically would be a pro-
hibitory duty. (Hear.) Unless the proposition about
to be submitted to the House of Commons by Mr.
Puller should be adopted, the position of the paper
manufacturers of this country would be one of per-
fect ruin, and the printing and writing paper trades
would be annihilated. The committee had can-
vassed about 400 members of Parliament upon the
subject, and entertained a firm belief that there
would be a majority in favour of Mr. Puller's mo-
tion. That their demand was a just one no one who
considered the facts could doubt. If the United
States were to impose an export duty of £lO a ton
upon cotton, the manufacturers of Lancashire would
soon be in arms, and yet that would only be a simi-
lar course to that proposed to be taken in respect of
the raw material of paper. That export of the raw
material was to be taxed 100 per cent, even in
countries whence they could export it, while in other
countries the export was wholly prohibited. That
was not an equitable arrangement, nor one that
ought to be sanctioned by the Legislature of this
country. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WRIGLEY, of Manchester, in moving the
first resolution, said he had always been a thorough
Free-trader, but he meant free trade based upon
just principles. (Hear, hear.) He had no objec-
tion to free trade in paper upon the same principles
as were applied to other trades, but, as there was
no rule without exception, so he thought the paper
trade was peculiar. There was no similarity or ana-
logy between the raw material of paper and the raw
material of any other manufacture. In the case of
all other articles of manufacture and consumption
the producer of the raw material had a motive for
extending its production, and as long as the manu-
facturer was willing to pay a price bringing a profit
he might calculate upon an almost illimitable supply
of raw material. But the ordinary rules of demand
and supply did not apply to the raw material of
paper, as the home supply could not be greatly in-
creased. He had been delighted to read Lord J.
Russell's statement that the exportation of rags
was to be permitted from France, but he had not
been surprised to hear of the subsequent change of
policy. He could understand that the French Em-
peror would not send French rags to England, there
to be bought up for the American market ; and
-when French manufactured paper was sent here it
had to meet the competition of German paper manu-
factured where the exportation of the raw material
was practicallf.probibited. The most devoted friends
of free trade must admit that there was a great dis-
tinction between the raw material of paper and all
other articles. He was willing to meet the competi-
tion of the world, but let him have all the markets
of the world open to him for his supply of raw ma-
terial, as the cotton manufacturer, the silk manufac-
turer, and all others had. (Hear, hear.) Unless that
was done the result would be utter destruction to
all small factories, and what trade remained in this
country would be centred in the few large establish-
ments like his own, which would be content with a
fractional profit on their production. What was
there to prevent this country being supplied with
paper from the Continent? Would any one say that
the manufacturers of this country could make paper
any cheaper after the duty was removed than they
did now? He knew of nothing that would enable
him to make paper at 1-16th part of a penny less
per pound than it cost him at present. (Hear,
hear.) It was pardonable in men who, like the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, were ignorant of the
practical business of papermaking, talking about
new fabrics being accessible ; but the fact was, as
all present knew, that it was a mere question of
what would pay, and he affirmed that in no instance
had any one ever suggested anything which could
be at all compared with rags as a material for paper
making. (Hear, hear.) The supply of that mate-
rial was not, as in the case of other materials, en-
hanced by an increased demand, for no man would
cast off his shirt any sooner because he could get
2d. per lb. instead of ld. (Hear, hear.) The supply
from other sources was equally inelastic. A cotton
manufacturer had told him that the paper manu-
facturers must not expect to get any increased sup-
ply from him, as he endeavoured to make calico,
and not " waste ;" and, in fact, although that gen-
tleman had enlarged his mills to double or triple
their former extent, yet the supply of" waste" from
them only amounted to the quantity he (Mr. Wrig-
ley) received from them 15 years ago. (Hear.) He
hoped the meeting would unanimously agree to the
following resolution:—
"That this meeting hears with great astonishment and
regret that, instead of the promised removal of the prohibi-
tion on the export of French rags and other paper-making
materials it is proposed by the French Government to levy
an export duty of from £8 to £lO per ton, being from 50 to
100 per cent. on their value, which is, in fact, merely to re-
tain the prohibition under a new form."
Mr. Deputy PEWTRESS seconded the resolution,
and observed it-would be impossible for the paper-
makers of this country, if debarred from access to
foreign markets for raw material, to compete with
foreign manufacturers, who got the raw material at
a less price and paid lower wages, (Hear, hear.)
There was another point, that since the free expor-
tation of coal had been allowed the price of the
article had risen, thus' placing the British manu-
facturer in a still more disadvantageous position.
(Hear, hear.) He could not believe that the Legis-
lature of this country would commit an act of in-
justice which would depreciate the property and
machinery of all present, and tend to annihilate
their trade. With regard to other substances, as
substitutes for rags, he could only say that he
was once persuaded to try an article that could
be procured for nothing—at only the expense of
carting—but after a fortnight's trial he found
that 1001 b. of material only produced 281 b. of paper,
and that at a cost of ls. 6d. per lb. (Hear, and a
laugh.) The waste and the expense of reducing
other materials than rags were so enormous as to
prevent their profitable employment, and thus their
sole dependence was upon rags ; and if they could
not obtain rags at a fair and reasonable price, they
could not compete with foreigners.
Mr. Ald. BALDWIN, of Birmingham, did not take
so gloomy a view of the prospects of the trade as
the previous speaker. He had no fear of French
competition, and thought an ample supply of rags
could be found at home if proper steps were taken
to secure it. At present a large proportion of the
rags in this country never found its way to the
paper
• mill, as, having once canvassed 100 houses,
he found that only in 40 were the rags saved ; in
the remainder the rags were burnt or wasted. A
little extra price would always extend the supply,
He warned the meeting of the position they would
stand in towards the public if they persisted in their
agitation. It would be said that papermakers were
freetrad.ers in all articles but those they dealt in.
The treaty with France was passed, and the public
would not wish to see its provisions interfered with
for the benefit of a class.
Mr. NORRIS, M.P., denied that the treaty with
France had anything to do with the repeal of the
paper duty. All that appeared in the treaty was
that French paperhangings should come in at the
same rate of duty as our own paid. At the same
time that Mr. Cobden was manipulating the treaty
with the French Government the Chancellor of the
Exchequer and Mr. M. Gibson resolved, unknown
to him, to propose a repeal of the paper duties. If
Mr. Cobden had known that, he would certainly
have said to the French Government, " We will let
in your paper free, but you must give us a free ac-
cess to your rag-market. (Hear.) The difficulty had
arisen from the grievous mistake committed by the
Chancellor of the Exchequer in allowing Mr. Cob-
den to negotiate in the dark. He (Mr. N.) fully in-
dorsed the statement of Mr. Wrigley that all other
fibres were valueless for paper-making as compared
with rags ; and as to what the public might say, he
believed that the public would esteem them the more
for looking closely after the interests of their home
trade and industry.
Mr. WRIGLEY suggested that Mr. Baldwin might
look with less apprehension upon the future condi-
tion of his trade than others did from the reason
that the low class paper, which was the chief ma-
nufacture of that gentleman, would be compara-
tively little affected by the new state of things.
With respect to their position before the public, he
thought there could be little ground for any fear lest
their motives might be misinterpreted, but he did
not believe that the public were so much interested
in the question as was supposed. Those who would
be benefitted were the proprietors of newspapers
and the publishers of books ; the readers of penny
newspapers and books would not get a fraction of
the remitted duty into their pockets. (Hear, hear.)
He affirmed that if no alteration were made in the
proposed arrangement the Government would be
deliberately sacrificing one section of the trading
community to another section. (Hear, hear.)
The resolution was then put and carried with
only one dissentient.
Mr. T. H. SAUNDERS proposed the second reso-
lution :

"That, inasmuch as this retention of the prohibition cn