The Sun.
London, England, 1860-03-12 00:00:00

TEE PAPER DUTY.

The following letters have been addressed to the
editor of the 7'inies:—

Sir,—Permit me to make a few remarks upon the
letters which appear in the Times of this morning
from Messrs. Wrigley and Routledge. Both these
gentlemen are paper-makers.
I am one of those "London wholesale stationers"
who, as Mr. Wrigley observes, might very justly be
" alarmed" at the original determination of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to refuse drawback
upon stocks in hand. I am, also, deeply interested
in every question which relates to paper or paper-
making, inasmuch as I have for many years sought
information from every quarter upon the subject,
and I am unacquainted with any author who has
treated that subject more generally than myself.
I mention these things merely with a view of put-
ting an end to those absurd ideas which prevail re-
garding the possibility of obtaining readily a sup-
ply of raw material to compete with rags—aven at
their present high price—in the manufacture of
paper.

From a personal acquaintance with most of the
leading manufacturers, I can distinctly state that,
although•some new. fibre is being constantly pro-
posed to them for adoption there is at present no-
thing whitever known which is capable of being
converted into a fair quality of printing paper ; for
which, as a matter of , course, there is the greatest
demand, and for which the demand, owing to the
repeal of the duty, will be mainly increased.
As regards thefibre referred to by Mr. Routledge
from which he manufactures cartridges and print-
ings, there can be no doubt that for a variety of
uses the paper turned out u,ay be very serviceable;
but any person acquainted with that quality which
will be more generally known in the paper trade as
"260 mill," and which approximates closely to the
commonest description of the penny newspapers,
will understand that such material for the great
bulk of printing paper is utterly useless.
I shall say no more upon this point, as I know
your space is valuable, and I wish to observe, with
referente to the drawbacks upon stocks in the hands
of stationers, that Baron Rothschild has received a
letter from Mr. Gladstone, in which he declares his
intention to insert a clause in the bill about to be
discussed relative to the repeal of the paper duty,
to the effect that ld. per lb. drawback shall be al-
lowed to all dealers in paper upon stocks in hand,
providing the excise label has not been cancelled,
and that upon all paper made after the passing of
the act the full allowance shall be made of lid. per
lb.—l am, sir, your obedient servant,
RICHARD HERRING,
Author of " Paper and Paper Making,
Ancient and Modern."
64, Watling-street, March 9.

Sir,—As a papermaker, I beg to offer my thanks
both to you and Mr. Wrigley for the letter which
appeared in your paper this morning.
In his view of our hard ease I fully concur, and
my object is merely to add to his statement a sup-
plementary fact or two of which we ought not to lose
sight. _ _ _

"The paper duty is doomed, and we rejoice at it,
and a satisfactory arrangement has now been made
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for allowing
the drawback of the duty upon the stocks of paper
in hand. We may also regard the free importation
of rags and other paper-making materials from
France as having been conceded to us, and may
hope that until we are allowed free access to them
our present import duty of Id. per pound on foreign
paper will be maintained.
So far so good; but people seem inclined to for-
get that France is only a portion or that vast tract
of Europe from whose rag markets we are excluded,
and yet whose paper it is proposed to let in duty-
free to compete with ours.
From Spain, Portugal, and Belgium we can get
no rags, and in most of the other countries, seat,
for instance, as the German States, where we are
allowed to purchase, there is an export duty of
from 6s. to 9a. per cwt., and which is equivalent to
from ld. to 12d. per lb. in the paper made from
them, as 100 lb. of rags will not on an average pro-
duce more than 701 b. of paper. Under the new
arrangement hovi shall we stand with regard to
such countries ? As far as we are concerned, an
export duty abroad and an import duty at home
amount to the same thing, so that German rags
coming to England will have to pay 9s. per cwt.,
while German paper will come in free.
The result will, of course, be that the paper will
come here, end not the rags. The increased manu-
facture of paper cannot, however, raise the price of
their rags until the whole of what they now export
is consumed at home, as it no doubt will be.
We are therefore threatened with having the
supply of rags we now derive from Prussia and
Hamburg, some 7,000 tons per annum, cut off from
us, and its place supplied by an equivalent amount
of paper manufactured in Germany under an arti-
ficial advantage of about lid. per pound in the cost,
and with which we are to be ealled upon to com-
pete. And yet Germany will be only one of our
competitors !
How is it possible for us to face such competition
with the price of our materials kept up by their
free export to America ?

With our present high price of rags as an induce-
ment, no substitute for them has been found ; and.
Mr. Wrigley has shown, all assertions to the con-
trary notwithstanding, the moral impossibility of
any raw material being found to compete with low-
priced rags. It is indeed merely a question of price.
We could make paper of mahogany dining-tables,
but it will not pay to do so. We do make it of straw,
but it would be absurd to think of doing so in a
country where rags are cheap.
The case of the Israelites was nothing to •urs.
They were told to make bricks without straw. We
are told to make paper with it, and then sell it in
competition with foreign paper made from far bet-
ter an& cheaper materials, and to live upon the loss.
Our only remedy is free trade in rags with all other
countries as well as with France, and now is the
time for our Government to make every exertion to
obtain it.

Should we fail, this is our position, with some al-
lowance for our superiority of manufacture. Europe
will export paper, but not rags. America will im-
port rags, but not paper, and, in consequence, Eng-
land will have to take her paper from Europe and
send her rags to America, and then, Sir, what will
become of your most obedient servant,
March 9. A PAPERMAKER?