57

H.-2

As regards the duties suggested by the Chamber of Commerce, they were based upon opinions which are herewith reproduced. The Prague Chamber restricted its comment to molasses, mainly as the primary material for the distillation of spirit. The law of 1868 places upon the molasses spirit an excise duty of 33 per cent, more than that on spirit from other primary materials as potatoes, corn, &c. Hence the distilleries cannot offer as high a price for molasses as the foreigner can, who does not appear in any country to suffer from such a differential duty, and consequently an export for molasses has since 1869 been developed, as the following statistics for the frontier into South Germany, Saxony, and Prussia show: —

"Whenever therefore the price of molasses and the produced spirit fell, export of molasses took place. The quantity exported averaged one-half of the total production of molasses. In the beginning of 1875 the price of molasses spirit fell to 39 kr. per degree, at which price the distiller could only give at the most 190 fl. for molasses. A fear that exporting would raise the prices, led to a demand for an an export duty on molasses of one florin per centner. In further support of this claim, the fact was stated that out of distillers' wash potash was made, and the anomaly was mentioned that the import duty of 315 kr. on molasses (sugar, syrup, Position 7 d) prevented any import from abroad, whereas the export to the foreigner was free. The sugar manufacturer and the exporter of molasses declared against this export duty, for, being equal to 33 to 50 per cent, ad valorem, it would have' been a prohibition of export. But the potato distiller, being favoured by a lesser excise of 33 per cent., had not so much reason to oppose the molasses distiller, for a lowering of the price of molasses spirit would not have affected him, inasmuch as the price of spirit is not determined by the molasses distilleries but by the Galician potato distilleries, and still more by the more profitable Indian-corn distilleries of Hungary. The evil is in the irrational system of taxing molasses spirit: if this be removed, there is no need of an export duty. If, however, this did not succeed, the Chamber would recommend an export duty of 30 kr., which would be about 10 per cent, ad valorem, and would represent the usual difference in prices between molasses over the frontier and within Austria. And the Chamber considers that this would not be injurious to the sugar manufacturer, for it would not hinder export whenever the demand for distillation was not good enough. The Troppau Chamber recites similar reasons for an export duty on molasses, and also mentions that, when exported, on the one hand the State loses l'4O kr. per centner of excise, i.e. 14 kr. per degree of the ten of spirit produced in a home distillery, and on the other hand agriculture loses a valuable manure, as well as industry its potash. But the Silesian manufacturers, who generally make beet-root sugar, distil molasses spirits, and grow on large estates their roots, and who are therefore impartial and competent to judge, oppose any export duty, for if all molasses were distilled into spirits in home distilleries it could do great harm to the general industry. Moreover, the agricultural use of molasses is practically very small, and in Silesia the molasses distilleries do not suffer. The Chamber consequently opposes the introduction of an export duty, and the abolition of an import duty on molasses. The Vienna Chamber enters into the classification and taxation of sugar, as well as with the question of an export duty on molasses. On this latter point the Chamber refers to the reasons, above mentioned, in support of an export duty; and then opposes it on the double ground that it would be prejudicial to the sugar manufacturer and eventually to the distiller. As regards sugars, the Vienna Chamber recommends, as it recommended in 1869, the simpler classification by two positions, instead of the existing three proposed by the Government, and is pleased that since then the Zollverein had adopted such a classification. The Chamber proposes to divide the sugars at No. 19, taxing all under No. 19 at 6 fl., and all at and above No. 19 at 8"50 kr. The standard of No. 19 is chosen, as allowing raw, and especially colonial, sugars to partly come into ordinary consumption. The duty of 6 fl. is considered an ample protection to the home industry. The drawback on sugar is 455 kr. on its export; whence 455 out of the GOO represents a duty from the foreigner equal to the excise from the home manufacturer. The difference of T45 is a sufficient protection, whatever the agio may be on the lower sugars. The proposed duty on the higher sugars represents the excise, this protection on the raw sugar, and also a further protection of 2 \ fl. on the refining, which is sufficient for the best equipped refineries, and corresponds also to the increased value, usually 3S to 40 per cent, of the higher qualities of sugar. It had. been proposed to suggest a duty of 750 kr., equivalent to that in the Zollverein. But this was rejected; for the Austrian factories and refineries are in several respects at a disadvantage compared with those of the Zollverein, especially in respect of dearness of fuel and distance from markets. The export of sugar arises from an over-production, and cannot be quoted as a proof that the Austrian industry is in as good a position as that of the Zollverein. The Chamber proposes the following classification: — B—H. 2.

Price of Molasses at Factory, in buyer's casks. Price of Molasses Spirit per Degree. Export. Fl. kr. Kr. Centners. 1867 ... 1868 ... 1869 ... 1870 ... 1871 ... 1872 ... 1873 ... 1874 ... 2 71 2 14 2 6 1 97 2 70 3 2 2 98 51 45 47 49 55 54 51 1134 65-626 207-245 190639 119-401 •16