Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1882-01-20
Gorrfsponocntr.
TOBACCO INSPECTIONS.

editorial comment on a communication ahuut
Tobacco Inspection in the same paper. In re-
spouse TO your invitation FOR an depression of
views from our readers on this subject of so
much importance, beg you to publish these
lines in hopes they may reach those of yonr
readers who perchanCe have been ulS}td by
the very forid and somewhat dramatic con-
municalion of your correspondent Mr.. Has-
kins.
DO not wish to be understood as interfer-
ing in The discussion between that gentleman
and the Brothers Boniuger. or as taking it up
on their part, but since il Is So interviewer
with the main subject, it is difficult TO separate
them in my efforts to expose the weakness Of
his argument.
He opens hr giving what would seem to Ic
copy OF the Boulnger letter TO GOV. liamii-
ton ami makes it appear that the 81 hogs
heads specified in that letter, is the sole basis
of complaint against the State inspection. He
goes on and spends half a conmn Of your pa
per to show that this % hog>headS is an sb-
surdly small percentage of the Ia 500 hogs
heads supplied to France by the BoninceTs and
that the amount of their claim upon them = y
still less percentage Of the total value. He re-
duces il all 10 figures, four hlihS uf one per
cent in the first. and one third OF one per cent
in the other, and very logically reduces the
complaint TO a ''rsiicuiu, mas using his own
termsl Finail~ he cougrItUlttes himself and
his fellow Inspectors upon the vast improve
meat in the State inspections. that there were
only % hcssheads out of IL 500 to he con-
planned Of But on examination Of the letter,
which Nr Hawkins refers to In the ,S,sn OF "a
December, we find Immediately preceding that
portion quoted by him the statement, tha,
one ma of the / ! 500 hoEshcsds turned out
very Enthusiastically. being vastly inferior to
the Baltimore Samples. etc. and lha: th- 81
hogshcsis is bot part OF tie complaint, This
particular parcel being found - seriously oh
jeciio onahis, the samples Hre sent uaCk TT spc-
cial investigation.
The fact IL, Mr. Hawkins publishes = part o.
the letter from The San aud builds 1p aa arcu-
ment, which falls TO pieces a. .ooa as the rssi,
which he has withheld, comes to light
Quoiiog from Nr- Hawkins letter he asks
If the allegations are 10 bc accepted that the
samples made under system Of priraic IN
spection are current all over Europe, while our
samples command no respect and s;e current
nowhere how dos ii Coupori nth {h~ fact,
th.t the French contract last wear called for
II 50J aogshc~ds Of MARYLAND tobacco, ant
only 3 O"O hnGshrats Of Ohio"
FIRST of all the allegations are literally ia.
Ind the unfortunate tstts Exist. hoHercr uu-
pall4iAble aud Inconsistent ihey nav seem 20
your correspondent, bat 30 fsr as the French
contract is concerned. that Government has
nothing whatever 10 do sllh the Nsrylaut
State in.pcciioEs. The Government gaakrS
q coa,rac, Tor certain Qu,nlIiy Of MARYLAND
tobacco to be delivered, not tn Bslt;mc.r. b.,
State inspection samples, but in HavFr. Boz
irauI and Nars.Iilcs Agreeable 10 the in.rey-
tions o. their o~n experts and certain Copi.-
ttuss Whlch The contractors must comply with
under forfeit deposited ~ them so Il ID.
contraction. agents max purchases h- cevsaiu
State Inspection samples conforming TO th-
Ii pes % specified saA..Sics 10 be deis~szrss
and send rhe hogsheads which fail to co.. -.
poad, the Govesnmcat REJECTS them asI 49,
rcsrney has 10 sPeases sgy ris- esSf frsTssr-
not in the shape Of Maryland State inspection
sAmp'es, but in she quantity and description uf
tobacco " h,,h is contracted :ur.
Thus ~hsn NJ Hawkins rarsf-ur, ,E.
fact O; France bgsins more Ns-yjaui goharvo
than OHIO, into comp. Iu,cul 10 shs State in.
sgectioas. ne exhibits mu~h less tlmjA4g5,r
sIla the rial posn' At lssgc than With tho srs-
tistIcs toT rather EsusralI'srsE }. Na..b Ac cite.
10 indicate tbs "Vsrg decided prsrout,rau-r
"a hts anIiciy 10 show tbss prcf-unI-sanee 10
gItss / Boa Maryland sSsiust 3. .usJ uhs8 10
1850. aat overlooked the asarvs a. ls~i
more casiiT aer-s..hl'} 80 : e#3 aud gau
respectively. ! meauoh IN >. aoi Ia srEH G.ru'.
hui uncgc3r to show. "a n case Of thc ntEvtr.
tour hog.hcsls. how M iI4akias g.eAs ou,
be part whlch seems to sui' bin sut lsav.s
The rest For A.s Information. ! would ssy
The cnnuact for Hesr-yn to- aCco. whlrh IS ir.
MED the blessing of State inspection was for
IL coo haEsheAds. cqgA. TO about ?. 500 hogs
heads Of Maryland
- II j. The Hlrylr f41l-ro the French
Govcrams ni wants tecause Of ~ 0Ea intrinsic
uer,f, snd aoI the State inspections. aud il
must he obvious, even 10 Mr. Hawkins, that
all the obstacles in the way Of dsaIiag 10 IL.
are alike a disadvantage to the merchant and
producer.
If should ask Mr. Hawkins Why 1t is that
The demand Tor this important product sf our
State has fallen of in almost every other Ii
rcclion so as 10 leave market practically a.
the ruercy Of tie French Contractors. why Is IL
that thousands Of hog .hetds are piled up it the
State WAREHOUSES unsaIatle at "A living price,
Why it Is, that many prominent dealers a.
home aud abroad have given up the busa's -
10 disgust To use their own language Why
II is ths.e Is a general err OF complaint from
every Interested qnsrler? Why il IS that our
growth lies neglected in face OF a general boom
in the tobacco markets Of the country? say.
II | were TO put these questions to him aud ask
for an explanation of these incontroyerti ole
facts, be would surely answer in all sincerely,
because Maryland State inspection samples
tHh'HHHH NJ FPsbtCl HHi 3Fr current HDtEhFFf
II these samples were current and had a re-
sPonsibliity attached TO item available under
the ordinary commercial usages (which the
Governor. in n letter last February. saws there
Is notl. there is little doubt that the tobacco
could be dis rihutei in other markets aivan-
tageously 10 the owners and participate in the
general demand, instead of lying here it is to
grow gray in avaiIing OF the free storage
which Mr.. Hawkins fHars it may he deprived
OF, II the planter is set free to exercise his con-
'taHttonIl right to dispose OF his product as he
deems best for his interest. And here il Is
plainly evident, that the continued demand
from France is infsptndent Of the Stlte inspsc-
tons and the discontinued demand from other
quarters is because Of that serious hinderance
Again Your correspondent reserects me-
mortal submitted to the Legislature of 1878 by
the tobacco trade of Baltimore, and a number
of prominent planters, setting forth certain
facts in support of their petition to be free
from the compulsion Of Slae inspection.
Among these facts were number Of statements
of reclamarlons paid hy certain dealers on to-
bacco which fniled TO correspond to the State
inspection Slmples by which il was sold in
other markets. Comparing these statements
with the number of hogsheads dealt in by the
several firms, the calculation showed the recla-
matious to have amounted to 50 each most
the memorial as follows:
"The direct loss from bad inspection is not,
Of course. really borne by the Baltimore trade,
as the average loss per hogshead necessarily
enters into the market valuation and falls upon
the planting interest. The Maryland crop
ranges between 80, 600 to AZ. 900 hogsheads, SO
the iItcs Of trade annually mule the planting
interest in about $500. 900, because of the
fraudulent practice Of some of the growers and
repackers. The honest planter pays the PEN
atty and a premium is set upon knavery."
Now for this propensity for culing, Mr..
Hawkins picks ont this paragraph from the
memorial, without explaining its connection
with the rest of il, and characterizes as "bra-
zen effrontery and the suhlimity of impu-
dence." any claim against the State inspection
for incorrect sampling, on the part of the
Brothers Boninger and therefore, on similar
grounds, all other signers OF the memorial.