THE SEVEN-YEAR MAIDEN. LITTLE seven-year maiden, Thou with choice gifts laden, Lean thy head upon my breast as on familiar place; Foretaste of His Heaven, Little household angel with thy loving childish face. Since my darling blessed me, Cares that erst distressed me All have fled like sunbeams chase the cloud from mountain-side; Thou hast helped my bearing, And hast danced like rippling light across my life's dark tide. What I did before thou camest a fluttering snow-white dove. O'er earth's vain dreams wondering, Sudden substance blessed me, and the baby's name was Love. But with bright thoughts sunning Life that else had saddened down to dull material ways; And with child-heart proving His kingdom of these "little ones" who bless our life's dark days. So I pray the Lord of Heaven, Who this darling child hath given, To keep her for me safely-I have trust and faith in Him- Through this love I hold so purely, And my Angel, who has blessed me, close my weary eyelids dim. Thus little seven-year maiden, With thy precious child-gifts laden, Do I bless thee on thy birthday, while I pray God of His grace Cloud the spirit in thine eyes, Nor dim with sordid worldliness the Angel in thy face. A. L. POPULATION AND TRADE IN FRANCE. BY FREDERICK MARSHALL. No. VIII.-Beet-Sugar anD ALCOHOL. THE existence of sugar in beetroot was discovered in 1747 by Margraff, a Prussian chemist. He published a detailed note on the subject, indicating its agricultural and manufacturing importance; but the price of cane-sugar was then very low, the consumption was small, the disposition of the period was not in favour of industrial enterprises, and he was not able to give a practical form to his discovery. Twenty-five years later Achard, another chemist of Berlin, took up the ideas of Margraff, and made new experiments on the production of beetsugar. Encouraged and helped by Frederick the Great, and then stopped again by his death, Achard was not in a position to publish the results of his efforts until 1795. The book which he then printed on the question contains the most exact appreciations of the various uses for which beet has since been employed; he speaks, almost like a prophet, of the head, leaves, and pulp as food for animals; of the manure produced by this system of cattle-feeding; and of the residues of the sugar manufacture made into alcohol or vinegar. His theoretical indications have been confirmed in practice. But he did not limit himself to theory only; aided by a subvention of 8000l. from the Prussian government, he applied his ideas on a manufacturing scale at the farm of Cunera, in Lower Silesia, where he devoted sixty acres of land to the cultivation of beet. The success of his experiments continued, and in 1799 he presented to the king the first specimens of white beet-sugar. A commission was named to examine his process; its report was very favourable; it even went so far as to assert that brown sugar could be produced at a cost price of 267. per ton, which at that time, with the processes then available, was certainly impossible. The report was equally commendatory as concerned the utility for agricultural purposes of the residues of the crop and sugar. Achard even pretends that the success of his system was regarded as so certain, that the English government, frightened by the possible effects which its adoption might produce on the colonial trade of Great Britain, offered him privately a large sum to abandon its pursuit, and that he indignantly rejected the proposal.+ In 1799 the news of the discovery began to circulate in France. A letter from Achard, giving the details and cost of his process, was published in the Annals of Chemistry, and produced a great sensation. The Institute immediately named a commission to examine the matter, and shortly afterwards the Society of Agriculture of the Seine (now the * Fabrication du Sucre de Betterave, p. 51. Dureau. 1860. Etude sur le Système Colonial. De Chazelles. 1860. Imperial Central Society of Agriculture) awarded a gold medal to Achard.* The experiments made by this commission produced sugar at the rate of 18 cwt. from 100 tons of roots, or not quite 1 per cent. Moreover, this sugar was of such a nature that it was not possible to refine it into a crystallised form. But, notwithstanding these indifferent results, and the high price at which the commission fixed the cost of production in France-641. per ton-the report, as a whole, was favourable. But the moment was not propitious for the establishment of a new trade, which might be destroyed in a moment by the expected conclusion of peace with England (it was just before the treaty of Amiens); only two small factories for the manufacture of beet-sugar were put up, and they were speedily closed again. Shortly afterwards public attention was momentarily distracted from beet by the much-talked-of attempts to make sugar from grapes, and to introduce the sugar-maple and cane in the south of France. Indeed, it was natural enough that all sorts of efforts should be made to produce indigenous sugar, for war had begun again, the continental blockade had come into force, and the retail price of sugar had risen to 5s. per lb. ; it had become almost a medicament, instead of an article of general consumption, and was no longer sold by the grocers, but by the druggists. Pressed by this difficult position, Napoleon named a new commission to examine the various means of manufacturing home-made sugar; its report, drawn up by M. Deyeux in 1810, was again favourable to beet. Experiments continued, MM. Schumacker and Co. founded a factory, and at last, on January 2, 1812, M. Benjamin Delessert informed the government that he had succeeded in producing refined crystallised white beetsugar. The Emperor instantly went to his works at Passy, warmly congratulated him, and gave him the Cross on the spot. The next day the Moniteur announced that a great revolution in French trade was effected, and that date may be taken as the real starting-point of the industry which has since become so important. The question was, however, only theoretically decided, and was not yet quite susceptible of practical application. M. Barruel, a pupil of M. Deyeux, continued to investigate it, and shortly afterwards published an account of the insufficient processes then known. He arrived at a yield of 1 per cent. of sugar on the weight of beet worked, and at a cost price of 1377. per ton. But this price, the highest which had been named, is explainable by the circumstance that he bought his beet, which was grown exclusively in market-garden ground round Paris, at the excessive rate of 11. 4s. per ton. Furthermore, he operated on a very small scale, and without any of the advantages which the working of a large factory affords. While, therefore, he candidly acknowledged what his sugar really cost him, he expressed the opinion that it could be produced, if the manufacture were fairly established, at 391. for brown sugar, and 561. for refined. Almost simultaneously with the experiments of M. Barruel, M. Derosne, whose name is intimately associated with the history of the trade, obtained a yield of 2 per cent. It is chiefly he who has introduced, conjointly with * Revue des Deux Mondes, Nov. 1, 1857, p. 96. Bulletin de la Société d'Encouragement, Feb., 1861, page 69. his partner, M. Cail, the successive improvements in the system of sugarplant which have placed the great firm of Cail and Co. among the first machinists of Europe. Efforts made in other parts of France raised the yield to 24 per cent., and towards the end of the same year (1812) an imperial decree prescribed the establishment of government works for the manufacture of beet-sugar. It was ordered that 100,000 acres should be immediately sown with beet, which, at the then average crop of 15 tons per acre, would give 1,500,000 tons of roots, and, at 2 per cent. thereon, 375,000 tons of sugar per annum. Free licenses were granted to all those who had begun the manufacture, and they were exempted from taxes for four years. This time the trade was taken up with enthusiasm; beet was sown, and sugar works put up all over France. In 1813, 3500 tons of sugar were made in 334 factories ;* but the trade was fated to encounter new difficulties and new failures: 1814 was at hand, and, as the well-known agriculturist, Mathieu de Dombasle, has since said, "The French armies entered Moscow when the beet was sown, and the Cossacks were quartered in the works when it was converted into sugar.' The peace suddenly opened the ports of France; the price of sugar fell from 5s. to 7d. per lb.; and all the beet factories, put up eighteen months before with such brilliant hopes of success, were suddenly ruined. One single establishment, that of M. Crespel Delisse, continued to hold on. It looked as if the beet-sugar trade was hopelessly lost with its imperial founder, for it could not live against foreign competition. But one of the first acts of Louis XVIII. was to issue an ordonnance which, confirmed by another of 17th Dec., 1814, created a duty of 167. per ton on French colonial sugar (the four colonies of Martinique, Guadaloupe, Guyane, and Bourbon had just been restored to France), and of 407. on all foreign sugar: these duties were shortly afterwards modified to 187. and 387. respectively. Under this relative protection the colonies began to resume the cultivation of cane, which they had abandoned during the war, and in 1816 they sent the mother country 17,000 tons of sugar. But the home beet trade profited also by these duties imposed on its rivals, and, after a good deal of hesitation, began in 1822 to show new signs of movement. In 1825 several small factories had got to work; in 1827 there were 39 in activity, producing 1218 tons of sugar; in 1828 there were 58 works, which made 2685 tons† (M. Maurice Block gives this quantity at 6665 tons, but it appears to be an error); the yield of sugar had risen to 3 per cent., and several important improvements, which will presently be indicated, had been introduced into the manufacture. The resuscitation of the trade attracted, however, the attention of the colonial planters, § as well as of the maritime interest and the refiners. They combined together to attack it; the planters urged that it was the duty of the state to protect them against untaxed competition; the * Statistique de l'Industrie de la France, page 281. Moreau de Jonnés. † Revue des Deux Mondes, Nov.1, 1857, page 113; Annuaire de l'Economie Politique, 1859, page 138; and Bulletin de la Société d'Encouragement, Feb., 1861, page 73. Statistique comparée de la France, vol. ii. p. 202. Block. Etudes sur le Système Colonial, p. 135. De Chazelles. 1 shipowners alleged that sugar-refining was an old national industry, which would perish if home-made white sugar got hold of the market (foreign and colonial sugar were and are only allowed to come in in the brown state, and a large premium is paid to the refiners on its re-exportation in loaves); and the refiners declared that the existence of the merchant navy depended on the transport of colonial products. The two latter classes craftily fought each other's battle, so as to make their action appear disinterested. As early as 1822, the colonists residing at Bordeaux had petitioned the government to modify the sugar tariff in their favour. The merchants of Marseilles, Nantes, and Havre had backed their complaints, and had even demanded the entire exclusion of foreign sugar until colonial sugar reached the price of 687., duty paid, instead of the then current rate of 481. The ground was, therefore, prepared for an attack against the beet trade, and under the pressure of the interests hostile to it, which grew stronger every year, the government ordered an inquiry to be made in 1828. No result was arrived at, but the beet-sugar makers were warned that a tax would eventually be levied on their products. The events of 1830 prevented the immediate execution of this project, but the agitation afterwards became more violent than ever. Meanwhile, the production, still unfettered by taxation, increased rapidly; in 1834 it reached 20,000 tons, and in 1836 it got to 40,000 tons, made by 436 factories in 37 departments. The trade had, therefore, become sufficiently considerable not only to give an appearance of justice to the complaints of its rivals, but also to tempt the government to grant their demands of a tax on indigenous sugar, because of the new branch of revenue which would thus be created. But the beet trade was not alone to fight its battle; influences had grown up in its favour; it was actively supported by the agricultural party; and it was not easy to conquer it. The conflict was long and bitter, but finally the colonial interest carried its object, and succeeded in passing through the Chamber a law which, promulgated on 18th July, 1837, imposed an excise duty of 67. 12s. (décime included) on beetsugar, applicable from 1st July, 1838. This law upset the trade again; the production, which was 49,000 tons in 1838, fell to 39,000 tons in 1839, and to 22,000 tons in 1840; 166 factories were shut up, and the manufacture disappeared in 17 departments.* The colonial party did not, however, gain much by their hardly-earned victory. The increase of their exports in 1839 was only 3000 tons, and the price of sugar did not rise. On the contrary, it fell regularly, the demand diminished at the same time, and, instead of the sudden success which they had hoped for, the colonists found themselves with heavy stocks and new difficulties. Once more the government came to their aid; an ordonnance of 21st August, 1839, diminished the duty on colonial sugar from 187. to 137. 4s., so constituting, with the excise of 61. 12s. already imposed on beet-sugar, a difference of 117. 8s. in fourteen months against the latter. It was, however, recognised that these measures were too violent, and by another law of 3rd July, 1840, the duty on colonial sugar * Dureau, p. 80. |