The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1881-02-05
Maryland Tobacco Inspection.

The defenders of free inspection are not advocating
local interests much as those prlnclpleS q
general Justice which make TO the interests OF all
alike The Advocate is absolutely wrong in aSsum-
ing that free inspection viii be adverse 10 the pat-
ers interest While resulting IN me ~ ~ ' ~
merchant and exporter Nor IS IT more corFect IN ~
interpretations of the State inspection law as II
stands That law IN rs presenI shape Is many me
creation of the Legislatures of 1872 and 1873 Inc m
specton system erysalzed in the old act OF AS
sembly of lbs. All that is now proposed by those
who have the best interests of the state at heart 10
preserve the admittedly wise and economical fea-
lures of the established system, ana 70 elmlhate
RON i,sss 80 from o,,r mort THE Oh
iectionabe parts of our tobacco system are manly
political Compulsory inspection would never nave
been maintained but for the fact that 1t was sup
posed to contribute essentially TO the reinforcement
of politieal patronage. Merchants deal with one
another on business principles. Balaiaore ne 7.
chant when he now ships hogshead OF tobacco TO
Bremen MaFseilles, to Hayre or lyerpool, mas 70
notify his consignee that twas inspected oy an o
Ger appointed, not because he was Judge OF
or an expert in inspection but because he did some
political services in OF the counties tha seened
10 demand recognition of the state AUTHORIZES.
x The AJrocqfe Venture so far as to assume that it
will obstruct rather than favor the sale OF the bSl
more mer hants consignment OF mary liailS vi ~
able 10 add to the bottom of his invoice meorsh-
dun TO The effect that the hogshead has been III
spected by an expert of his own selection ana IN
whose Judgment he has reason to relyP Why shonid
private inspection add to the cost OF tobacco, which
ieIiver as sheaplv as possible? If the argument
should he seriously made that the state Monu LOSE
free inspection II NOutN ptoDdbtg NJ
at once BY an offer lease the State warehouses on
terms quite satisfactory to the planter as TemuheL
alive TO the government at Annapolis, buI .uas
which is In peril from free Inspection, nor the
planting interest but only the appointing power.
patronage is the fly in the 1drocates olntLe en-,
that Louisville affords the best because the mes
peIit S u aree o, hld ~ g in Ealt
more In Louisville tobacco is suspected by eNpere
This advantage isso obvious that Il does not neea 70
be enforced any further. The 4drOc0e suggests mat
"by abolishing the State system, and with " iree
storage, private inspectors could ada 70 heT IeNe
MUGS by charges for storage hut Tree lhspectlun
does not imply at all the abolition of the State sys
TEN. il simply proposes TO perfect u oy Iemosllg
The chief defect in that system. II the state hAu no
warehouses il would not be wise perhaps, 70 esta0-
fish them now, but having them, the best thing V
do is 10 utilize them. as cheapy as possible lor lne
common good Of all, instead OF retaining then 20
serve, as they do, mainly for political purposes
The above article, from the Baltimore Sun,
Of Wednesday, is an intended replication to
the ADyocArE's comments last week on the
Sua's advocacy of free tobacco inspection.
The ability, which generally charac'erizes the
.Sua's editorials, is lacking, and We are forced
to believe that our article was not closely
read, rather than eoncladethe San has lodged
the issue.
The Sun disclaims the advocacy Of local
iaterests solely, and asserts that the interests
Of planters, as well as those OF private in
spectors and exporters, would be conserved by
free inspection, ba a does not tell rs ho'ri
Assertion is easy, but to subslantiale i by
argument is often quite difficult That jour
nal has been warning upon the compulsory
feature Of the State system for some weeks,
and It has Invariably based its objections
upon the ground that the system works injury
10 the interests OF Baltimore, claiming that, if
free inspection prevailed, the great Western
crops would pour into Baltimore aud give its
exports "a BOOM"
Oar contemporary thinks the ADVOCATE Is
not well informed on the tobacco inspection
laws, bot on that point the ADVOCATE can re
turn tue compliment. On few points, how
ever. there eau be no controversy between the
.Sua aud the ADVOCATE. First, that Western
tobacco Is not compelled to go to the State
warehouses for inspection second, that u y
does, it Is permitted to remain there. sold or
unsold, without charges for storage third, Il
stored there more than four months only IF.
teen cents a hogshead per month is charged.
The AByocATE showed last week tae advans-
age Of Baltimore, under the State system, over
New York where free inspection prevails, yet
;he Saa does not allude to that, bat refers 10
the '.obyious' advantage Of Louisville over
Balt1aore. Let as examine what that lob
vioas advantage is. The outage ia Louis
vile is SI.50 and in Baltimore So Il tOhae.
co IS sold Immediately, Louisville wsuld pos
sess some advantage over Baltimore but i
the planter desires to hold his tobacco for q
rise in the market, or for other reasons, the
advantage Baltimore would possess would be
The difference Of fifteen cents per month stor-
age on a hogshead in Baltimore against fifty
cents per month storsgein Louisville. Fiast-
ers, Is shipping 10 Baltimore, can hold their
eobaeco considerable lime Al small expense,
and are not a, the mercy Of spectators. by
shipping to louisville they are forced TO ae-
cent one or the other horn Of dilemma
either to be subjected to steep compared
with Baltimores1 storage charges, or TO sell
at whatever price buyers may offer. Ia Bal
timore dealers cannot control the market 10
the disadvantage Of the pl&uier aad to their
own profit. If they attempt to "bear'' the
market, planters can hold.
The s'obyioas advantage, then, we take IT,
is in favor Of Baltimore. Not only has Bal
timore advantage over Louisville, but over
Cincinnati, where the inspection charges vary
from So 10 Sc and storage is fifty cents per
month, and over New York, where the in
speelion is SO and storage forty cents per
month.
The advantages Of Baltimore over othel
tobacco markets being shown, let rs compare
the inspection OF Baltimore with other points.
All this controversy over the State inspection
system originated in a letter from the United
Safes Consul a, Bremen, stating complaints
of Bremen merchants sgainst Maryland State
in,peetien. Scarcely had this letter beeH
published than the Consul wrote another let
ter, stating, in effect, that complaint was
made against New York inspection also, and
particular complaint against KeatHeAy and
Virginia tobaccos. Louisville Is in Kentucky
and the SIN says its inspection is the bsssr ys'
the Consul at Bremen says that while com
plant is made against Maryland State IN
speetion, particular complaint is made asainsi
Kentucky tobacco-Louisville inspection
The inspection being al. good in BalIimora
az elsewhere. and the charges Of handbag
being less, the only reason we can discover
why the "gseat Western crops doa't come
to Baltimore and give her exports "a boom,
is that stated last week-ihe decrying of our
State inspection by the journals advocating
the free system.
As to tobacco grown out Of Maryland, ie'
hare free Inspection aor, if planters choose
20 avail themselves of it, But the State al
lows fonr months free storage and for longer
period the charge is quite small, and private
inspectors must do the same. If the State
system is abolished, free storage would be
abolished with it, for other citizens would not
consent to the State maintaining free storage
room for tobacco planters, when the ware
houses could be turned to the financial ben
eft Of the State. By repeating only the com
palsory system, the State system for a while
would be so seriously crippled, that the repeal
of the whole system, through the efforts OF the
Baltimore & Ohio railroad, private inspectors
HI