what is the consequence? To secure this excessive drawback, the French refiners push their export trade to the utmost, and offer their sugars in other markets at prices considerably lower than they can be manufactured for, thus underselling all other competitors and gradually placing them one by one hors de combat. Two methods have been suggested for remedying the evil. One is the use of the polariscope or saccharimeter, which gives an accurate indication of the quantity of sugar contained in the sample, but which can scarcely be said to be a safe guide to the yield of the sugar, since it requires so much care in using it aright, and may in the hands of custom-house or excise officers afford ample facilities for evasion and bribery. The other method is refining in bond, pure and simple. In the opinion of British refiners there is only one mode of solving the difficulty, and that is refining in bond. And to this the French Government is shut up, notwithstanding its extreme unwillingness to adopt such a course. In 1874 the French National Assembly, by a majority of 97, passed a law that refining in bond should be established on August 1, 1875. But the question was remitted to the Superior Council of Commerce, and they recommended as follows:-1st. That the Government should seek earnestly to introduce refining in bond as an international régime. 2nd. That the Government should endeavour to extend the new convention to the European powers, which were not parties to that of 1864, especially Germany, Austria, and Italy. 3rd. That in case the foreign powers should not accept refining in bond, the Assembly should be solicited to revise the law which established the same in France from July 1, 1875. 4th. And that in such a case, with the consent of the Assembly, the Government should endeavour to obtain the concurrence of the foreign powers upon using the saccharimeter as a basis for the levying of the sugar duties.' In June 1875 the National Assembly passed a law authorising the prolongation of the time for the introduction of refining in bond, the French Government summoned an International Conference, to be held at Brussels, for the purpose of urging on the other powers also the establishment of refining in bond. But Belgium was not prepared to adopt it, and Holland would not commit herself to such a policy. Nevertheless, an International Conference was held, of the same four powers, parties to the Convention of 1864, viz., Belgium, France, Great Britain, and the Netherlands, on May 24, 26, and 29, and June 1 and 2, 1875, and the result was a Convention by which France, the Netherlands, and England adopted the system of refining in bond, and Belgium agreed to alter the scale respecting the yield of sugar and to reduce the duties. The part taken by England is indeed exceedingly ambiguous and unsatisfactory. Article II. says: In the event of duties on sugar being re-established in 3 England, supervision shall be applied to the factories and the refineries according to a method which will be the object of an agreement between the high contracting parties.' Why Great Britain should have contracted any such obligation, at a time when there was not the slightest chance that the sugar duties would ever be re-established, it is difficult to say. Had not the Committee of the House of Commons in 1862, definitively reported that the evidence does not justify the committee in recommending the adoption of refining in bond;' and had not the system, when it was in force from 1833 to 1854, proved an utter failure, so much so that scarcely any refiner refined in bond? To contract to establish refining in bond under such circumstances could only be empty talk and a delusive promise towards the other contracting parties. The Government of the Netherlands entered into an obligation to introduce refining in bond from September 1, 1876, evidently with great hesitation. The Minister of Finance commended the adoption of the same by the States General, on the ground that by means of such Convention only was there any chance for inducing France to put an end to the protective policy. But the Dutch are adverse to refining in bond, and the position of the Netherlands Government is too weak to be able to resist. Belgium rejected refining in bond, but agreed to alter the mode of levying the duties by raising the yield of the different standards of sugar and making a considerable reduction in the rates of duties, though no change appears to be made in the system of abonnement,' a feature not very creditable to the skill of Belgian 4 The circumstances which have led to the acceptance of this clause by the British delegates are as follows:-When this clause was first proposed, Mr. Walpole said: 'We have now no duties on sugar. If they should be reimposed, it might be in case of war or for a short period. In that hypothesis it would not be possible to establish the system of supervision; it would be attended with great expense to the refiners.' The French delegates, however, required an engagement on the part of England, and Mr. Walpole, having undertaken to obtain instructions from the Government, the English Government, by telegram, accepted the principle of supervision. In the despatch dated May 29, the British delegate said: As regards the adoption of refining in bond by England, in the contin gency of her reimposing new sugar duties, we take leave to state that this system was strenuously urged by Her Majesty's Government for acceptance by all the parties to the Convention of 1864, at the Conferences of London, 1872, and Paris, 1873, and that we are not aware of any objections at the present time which would not apply equally at the time when the conferences above referred to were held, except that it would be difficult to apply this system at once if the duties were reimposed to meet a special emergency; but we propose to meet this difficulty by the addition of the words "à un delai de six mois," which will be readily conceded; but this is a matter upon which, previously to the ratification of the Conventions, your Lordship may be pleased to obtain the opinion of the Commissioners of her Majesty's Customs.' The abonnement system is a le sort of theoretical average. The r of the sugar really made (the Exci yield in sugar of the beetroot juice prise en charge, or legally presumed per hectolitre of juice, at 105 degree financiers. France, as well as the Netherlands, consented to refine in bond, but in a manner which gives reason to fear that the system of bounties would not be effectually checked. It would be unjust to charge the French Government with an absolute want of bona fides or deception in the whole of these transactions, but there was good ground for not entertaining much confidence in the sincerity or goodwill of France to abandon the system of bounties; and the British Government was more than once asked to put an end to the evil by imposing against such countries a small compensatory duty. Eventually, the Netherlands Chambers rejected the Convention, though it carried a motion in favour of a renewal of negotiations. Again another Conference was accordingly held on the drawbacks on refined sugar in July and August 1876, of delegates from the four states. But no accord existed between them, and they dissolved in order to receive fresh instructions from their Governments. The Conference resumed its labours in February and March, and agreed on a draft Convention, to the effect, among other things, that in France and the Netherlands the sugar factories and refineries should be placed under supervision. But once more the Netherlands Government refused to accept the Convention, and the negotiations were thus practically suspended. It is under such circumstances that, on April 22, 1879, on the motion of Mr. Holms, the House of Commons appointed a Committee to inquire into the effects produced upon the home and colonial sugar industries of this country by the systems of taxation, drawbacks, and bounties on the exportation of sugar now in force in various countries, and to report what steps, if any, it is desirable to take in order to obtain redress for any evils that may be found to exist. The Committee examined numerous witnesses upon the matters referred to them, but they only reported the evidence already taken, and recommended that the Committee should be reappointed in the next session. Would it be expedient or possible for the British Government to impose countervailing duties against French, Dutch, Belgian, or other foreign refined sugars to check the effect of such bounties? Would such a policy be consistent with the commercial policy of the country? Would it prove effective? Would it be desirable to enter into a war of tariffs with France and every other European and American state? Would the consumers of this country permit degrees Centigrade. The real result of course varies in practice ad infinitum, S to the qualities, seasons, and proces, but is always greater than the 1verage vielā ца years has shown by industries, L M M ve factories during a term of five ult of 1,634 grammes, being nine olland, where the abonnement is voluntarily accepted by twenty rence to manufacturing in bond. the restoration of duties on any such grounds? Surely not. The British refiners urged that the imposition by this country of countervailing duties on French sugars would not give any protection to British refiners, but simply restore the equilibrium between the exporters of refined sugar in the different countries. The adoption of retaliatory duties when such duties are not wanted for revenue purposes would certainly be antagonistic to our commercial policy. Suppose, moreover, such retaliatory duties were imposed on refined sugar coming from French ports, will they not be evaded by causing such sugars to come through Holland or Belgium? In truth, the proposal does not admit of discussion, as it is wholly inexpedient and impracticable. It is not likely that the Committee of the House of Commons will commit itself to a policy of so mischievous and retrograding a character, nor would the people of the United Kingdom ever consent to the same. CHAPTER XIII. STATE OF BRITISH INDUSTRY. Industrial Progress of the United Kingdom.-Invention in the United Kingdom.-Coal, Iron, and Steel.-Products of Coal.-Gas.-Colours.-Paraffin. -Hardware. Electro-plating.- Papier Maché.— Machinery.- Chemical Manufacture.-Cotton and Woollen Manufactures.-Industrial Competition.-Industrial Progress of Foreign Countries.-Relation of Industrial Population to Industrial Progress.-Need of extended Commercial Education. THE International Exhibitions in London, Paris, Philadelphia, and Vienna, afforded an opportunity of comparing the latest achievements in productive industry. They were so many glorious festivals of industry. They provoked great emulation. They brought forth marvels of skill; and in one and all of them England was second to no other country in the variety and extent of the products and manufactures which she was able to exhibit. As a matter of fact, Britain is probably the greatest of all producers. She is a perfect beehive of human labour. Taking space and population into account, possibly there is no other country in the world where there is so large a proportion of actual labourers, where harder work is gone through all the year round, and where the reward of labour is more liberal than in the United Kingdom. No industrial census has ever yet been taken, and we have but little information of the geographical allocation of the different industries; but they are fairly spread over the country. Lancashire is the seat of the cotton manufacture; the West Riding of Yorkshire of the woollen and worsted; Birmingham of the metal manufacture; and Newcastle and Sunderland of the great coal mines of the country. But the best evidence of the increase of industry is the large increase of the urban population. In 1801 the town population of England was in the proportion of twenty-four per cent of the whole. In 1871 it was in the proportion of fifty-six per cent. Within the last seventy years the population of the metropolis increased 23 per cent.; that of Manchester 406 per cent. ; that of Leeds, 416; that of Glasgow, 518; and of Bradford, 998 per cent. Britain is rich in her mines. Coal will always hold the very first rank in her industries, not only for its intrinsic value as a source of wealth, but for its special value as a motive power in all other industries. One hundred years ago there was produced in Great Britain about 6,000,000 tons of coals per annum. Since |