, 1885-01-10

have got hitherto, and what is very neces.
sary to be held in view, whether they will
bind themselves TO do 80 for a number of
years. In this respect there appears to be
a circumstance, which, as long as things
went on to the satisfaction of everybody
concerned, may not have been much looked
to, but which cannot escape attention after
the unexpected change that has taken
place, and that is, that as far as we are
aware, the relations between grower and
manufacturer are not parie fgale. The
claim of the latter for his roots is not limit
ed to the person with whom he contracts,
but is secured by a lien on the land where
as the former has no means, in case of
failure OF the factory, to enforce his claim
for the continuance of the bargain. Of
course this difference disappears in the
case of the Antheilsfabriken mentioned
above, which rest upon the assumption,
that there will always be a profit, and
where in the az least not impossible case
of a failure, the roOt.deliverer is a loser,
both in his capacity as such and as partner
i'll the manufacture.
1t is by no means probable lin dealing
with a mere conjecture we can only speak
of what is p%robable that i'll establishing
the rate Of payment for the roots those
that governed the enterprise principally
capitalists have gone farther in liberalitv
towards the growers than was necessary
to make it an inducement to join the I'M
dertaking, and it is therefore not probable
that there exists a margin between the
present rate ofpayment and that at which
the roots could be sold with advantage. so
wide, that the grower would submit to q
reduction. Still it would be a matter of
justitiable curiosity to find out, how the
case would stand, if the growers were to
consent, to, let us say, a reduction of ten
Per cent, which cannOt be called unrea-
sonahly small. The saving TO the factory
for 100 cwt. of roots, or log Centner of SUI
gar would then be 10 Marks=$2.50, or for
! cWt. 25ctS. whether that would materi-
ally alter the case is easy to be judged.
With regard to the last item, an ~increas-
ed aid from Government in the shape Of a
reduction of the tax on roots, it is to be
observed, that the tax was originally intro
duced to serve as indemnity to the Treasu-
~ for the loss arising from the impOrt-duty,
if the consumption of the country were to
he supplied, us it afterwards did become,
by internal production.
When the enormOu extent is considered,
which the expectation has reached in late
years, and the increased burden thereby
thrown on the Treasury, and in conse-
quence Of which the outlay that was meant
as an encouragement to a production prof.
table to the %enterpriZer inc thereby bene-
fetal to the Country, has from the altered
circumstances come to be an aims for the
maintenance of an industry which cannot
support itself, how is it to be expected,
that a prudent Government like the Ger
man should be willing to increase the hea-
Wy burden already weighing on the finances
from this cause ? And is it not we'll known
that the Government has already a year
ago, appointed a Commission to investigate
and report on the subject with a view to
lower considerably or even abolish the ex-
port premium, and that the proposal of
the Commission has been both to raise tho
tax on roots, (Which would increase the
cost for the home consumption) and to
lessen the export bounty7
All that has been said above refers
solely to the effect of the b~eetroot- produc-
ton. 1t is however not to be forgotten,
that this is not the only formidable compe-
titor we have to face; the production of
cane-sugar is also making considerable
strides towards increase, particularly in
the far East; but there is this difference,
that that increase can only be gradual, and
while that extension goes on, the cOnsump-
ton also increases; whereas what has
taken place in several countries on the con-
tinent of Europe has almost the character
of a revolutionary change, turning a large