The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1881-01-29
Maryland Tobacco Inspection.

arc not surprised at the American, but
that the San, which sheds eight for all'
and is paper Of general circulation, should
cspouse local interests to the detriment of
large class of the citizens of the State, is
perplexing to comprehend.
The present system Of tobacco inspee-
ton has been in operation for more than
half a century, and the Court Of Appeals
last week affirmed the constitutionality of
the law establishing it. But it was not
on the unconstitutionality Of the law that
the Sun based its objection to the system,
for upon undecided matters the SIN is
remarkably cautious journal. The COM
mercial interests of Baltimore, the Sun
believes, are affected by State inspection,
and it is of the opinion that private in
spection, or free trade in inspections, is
what is needed Ito give our (Baltimores)
tobacco exports boom"
Those engaged in exporting and inspect
ing (private inspectors) tobacco in Balti-
more are rot as one in hundred as COM
pared with planters, and. applying the
principle "the greatest good to the great
est number the interests of the planters
should be considered first. Planters be-
licye that the present system is beneficial
to their nterests-more SO than private
inspections would be- Their tobacco is
now handled at a less cost than i'll Newly ork,
Virginia, St. Louis or Cincinnati, where
private inspections prevail. They have
free storage at the State warehouses, and
if the State system is done away with,
there is every probability that private In
spectors would add charges for storage,
thereby forcing sales CT tobacco or de-
crcasing profits on the product by impos
ing storage charges.
The report Of the United States consul
at Bremen, of complaints being made
against Maryland State inspection, has
afforded the Sun ground upon which to
enforce It's opposition to the system, but a
second letter from that officer says that
complaint is made against tie inspections
in New York city, also, and particularly
against Virginia and Kentucky tobaccos.
Thus, by the very authority upon whom
the opponents of the Maryland State sys-
TEN largely depend for support in the war
fare upon State inspection, it is shown that
while complaint is made against our State
inspection, complaint is also made against
the inspections in New York, and Pa7ttc-
n5ar complaint against those of Virginia
and Kentucky.
In New York, Virginia and Kentucky
private inspections obtain; ''rcstrctions on
free trade" as tie Hagerstown Mail de.
dominates our State inspection system, i:
removed; and yet, by the very authority 81
the SIN, american and Mail, it is shown
that private inspection is no more accep
table to Bremen tobacco merchants than
is our State inspection. Not so acccpta
BILE, in fact; for, while complaint is made
by Bremen merchants against Mary
State inspection, complaint is entered
against the private inspections Of New
York, and particular conlplaiat against tht
private inspections in Virginia and Ken
lucky.
Bremen merchants, we take it, would
rather have tobacco inspected lay sworr
officer Of State, with fixed liberal sal
airy, than 10y ore whose pay depended upot
thc amount of tobacco he inspected, an'
whose business might be increased by the
high character of his sampling. There /:
no reason why private inspection shouIC
not lie as just as those by State officer
but the necessities of private inspector
might induce him to resort to high sam
p!ing ia order to increase his revenues.
What advantage would accrue TO th'
people by fee inspections, We are unable
to discern Only limited number o
persons Can proftably engage liz tobacco
inspecting, and it matters not whether
they arc appoiated by the State or are al
lowed to enter the business of their twI
accord. The State only requires tina
Maryland grown tobacco shall be inspected
Ly the State inspectors, and our system
has no effect upon 'The large and increas
ing Western crops spoken of by the S"q
which are expected to give Baltimore
tobacco exports "a boom" And heF2 i
the point We cannot understand in The
Suns advocacy OF free Inspections; for
by allowing free inspection, only few
private inspectors would be benefited
while the State would lose reyenHe aac
tobacco planters would not find their crop
as romuuerative. By abolishing the State
system, and with it free storage, private
INSPECTORS could add to their revenues BY
charges for storage. As the State allows
four months free storage for tobaccos, sole
or uasold, grown out of the State, private
inspectors must do the same. Abolish
the State system of free storage, and in
spectoys will charge storage, for it is no
supposablc that private inspectors here cal
work any cheaper than they do in heE
York or Virginia or Kentucky.
Il having been shown by the Bremen
Consul that Maryland inspection is as &C
ecptable as private inspection elsewhere
let as consider the cost of our system a:
compared with the free systems, aud lei
us look at it in connection with the great
Western crops, alluded to by the Sun. A
hogshead of Ohio tobacco, if sent to New
VorL wouH east S3 for insDection. and