He says: "The substitution of the richer roots of to-day for the poorer ones of some years ago has resulted in the decrease of yield in weight per hectare; the yield per hectare has diminished from 35,000 to 25,000 kilog. Prices have increased 57 per cent., whereas the yield has declined 28 per cent., a difference of 29 per cent." M. Malpeaux adds: “But it is generally admitted that cultivation expenses are heavier."

M. Dehérain considers that the manufacturers who usually supply farmers with seeds have too strongly favoured the cultivation of roots rich in saccharine matter, and that roots of an average richness yield more sugar per hectare than the richer quality.†

But this opinion is open to the following criticism. The manufacturer who, in order to make sure of the quality of the roots, supplies the seed himself, would arrive at a much higher cost price were he obliged to work a greater weight of roots of medium richness to obtain but the same quantity of sugar. It is true that manufacturers pay a higher price per 100 kilog. for the richest roots than for averagely rich roots, and the addition or deduction of a tenth degree on the basis likewise re-establishes the balance. The table we have given does not show the gross yield per hectare. If we take the figures given by the Indirect Taxation Department and multiply the yield of roots per hectare by the selling price, we arrive at the following:

Hence, far from causing an increase in the gross rev

↑ Les Plantes de culture.

enue per hectare, the law of 1884 produced at first a decline of more than 4 per cent.

The following table shows the position for the last

The difference between the lowest point reached with regard to the revenue per hectare and the highest point attained is therefore 19 per cent. ; but since 1884 this revenue has only surpassed the figures of 1881-82 on seven occasions, namely, in 1886-87, in 1889-90, in 189091, in 1894-95, in 1897-98, in 1898-99, and in 1899-1900. In 1883-84, the cultivated area was 240,000 hectares. Yet in 1896 it was not more than 246,000, falling to 237,000 in 1898-99, and rising to 265,684 hectares in 1899-1900. The cultivated area therefore was smaller fifteen years after the passing of the new law than it had been during the season immediately preceding its promulgation. The difference between the lowest and highest figures shows that the cultivated area increased only 10 per cent.

Writing in Le Siècle on the 19th May, 1900, M. D. Zolla, the eminent professor of the "Ecole d'Agriculture of Grignon, gave the following figures which he had compiled from the books of some farmers:

The year 1897 shows good results, the gross value obtained per hectare being 994 fr.; on the other hand, from 1886 to 1897, it was only 829 fr. per hectare, being a lower figure than that obtained during 1880 to 1885.

At a meeting held on the 5th of December, of the Société d'Economie Politique, M. Daniel Zolla said: "Rich roots are not so heavy as the poorer qualities; a smaller weight of roots per hectare therefore was obtained, and farmers came to the conclusion that though they could get higher prices from manufacturers on account of a greater saccharine richness, yet it was not to their interests to grow rich roots. In fact, farmers cannot view with favour the results of the law of 1884, unless they have shares in the sugar mills. Then the dividends received partly or wholly compensate the loss sustained by the reduction of the weight of roots.

One thing is certain, and that is that the law of 1884 is dangerous, for it has given rise to an enormous output and to a surplus production, which mill owners are forced to throw on the markets at the other side of our frontiers. But the day these markets are closed to us there will be a tremendous crisis. And yet it cannot be admitted that the law has increased the gross revenue or the farmers' profits."

The following tables have been published by the Indirect Taxation Department:*

The administration says triumphantly: "Look at this! an increase of 135,334,000 francs!" We wish to remark at once that the comparison ought to be made on the

* Bulletin de Statistique et de législation cɔmparée, January, 1901.

figures shown by the seasons 1883-84, and we also must point out that 1899-1900 was an exceptionally favourable year.

Yet, we will accept these figures. What do they show us? Only that the whole weight of the law has resulted in an increase in the root production of 135,334,000 francs for a period of 15 years, or an increase of but 9 millions per annum altogether. This is a poor enough result, and yet according to the table just published we have seen that in round figures 664,000,000 fr. have been paid on these 260,000 hectares, being 2,555 fr. for each hectare, which is about their value. 2,555 fr. per hectare, then, have been paid by us in order to obtain an increase of 513 fr. gross profit.

It is political economy à la Panurge.

In the Bulletin Commercial of Le Siècle, of February 28th, it is stated :

Concerning beetroot contracts it is now confirmed that manufacturers have reduced their offers everywhere at a rate of from 2 to 5 fr. per 100 kilog., as compared with last year's prices, on account of the low quotations of sugar, and the increase in the price of coal. If in some places these reduced offers are accepted, the same cannot be said of every district in the beetroot regions. For instance, in Arras, the Fédération des Sociétés d'Agriculture de l'Union des Syndicats Agricoles du Pas-de-Calais, at its meeting last Saturday, has passed the following resolutions : A price of 24 fr. per 1,000 kilog., density 7°, as a minimum price. (For each tenth degree of density between 7 and 7°5, 0 fr. 60 as a minimum; and from 7°5 to 8°, 0 fr. 40 as a minimum).'

The manufacturers' contention is that they cannot pay the rate of 24 fr. According to their calculations 1,000 kilog. of roots at 7° yield a bag of raw sugar, of 96°5, which means 24 fr. 25, delivered at the railway station. To this must be added 2 fr. 80 for molasses, 2 fr. 25 for pulp, 0 fr. 35 for skmmings, and after deducting 7 fr. 50 for premiums and 13 fr. for manufacturing expenses, there remains 24 fr. 15. Therefore the price of 24 fr. would, according to their calculations, leave no profit whatever to manufacturers. It may be that these difficulties existing between farmers and manufacturers will somehow influence the extent of the cultivated area. ""

M. Ribot, the reporter of the law of 1884, intervened with a letter, in which he stated what manufacturers should pay to the farmers for their roots. In his opinion

Beetroot in comparison with Agricultural Produce. 95

a ton of roots of a density of 7o ought not to be sold under 24 fr. To this, Le Journal des Fabricants de Sucre replied (13th March, 1901), saying that at that price manufacturers realised no profit whatever. It is strange to see a legislator, who calls himself a Liberal, lay down hard and fast rules about a minimum price. Supposing that manufacturers do not accept it, will he ask the law to intervene? That would be the logical conclusion.

We have already examined (Ch. V, pt. 1) the cost price of sugar at the mills, but we were, of course, only able to take the average, and it is because an average presents only a conventional truth and not an absolute one, that legislators ought never to meddle with the fixing of prices.

II.

Beetroot in comparison with the whole of the Agricultural Produce in France.

IN reports, in the exposés des motifs of new laws, in speeches delivered by beetroot farmers or sugar manufacturers, we find it affirmed that the agriculture of France depends on beetroot. If we compare these allegations with the facts we find that 265,000 hectares are cultivated for beetroot exclusively, against seven million hectares for wheat. Therefore three hectares for beet against 100 for wheat. We find 1,631,000 hectares are planted with vines. Therefore 16 hectares of beet against 100 hectares of vine.

The total of the soil under cultivation in France amounts to 55 million hectares. Therefore, out of every 700 hectares of cultivated soil in France, only one hectare is set aside for beetroot. Supposing that each of these 35 million hectares of tilled soil had, since 1889, been granted 2,555 fr., as is the case with the soil devoted to beet, French consumers would have paid to their agricul