FLAX CULTURE

IN: THE

UNITED STATES

E. A. WHITMAN
J. R. LEESON

FLAX CULTURE:

AN = OUTLINE ~OF* THE « HISTORY « AND
PRESENT : CONDITION - OF : THE : FLAX
INDUSTRY: IN: THE: UNITED: STATES, * AND
A * CONSIDERATION ° OF - THE: INFLUENCE
EXERTED - ON : IT ~~ BY ° LEGISLATION.
BY
EDMUND A. WHITMAN, A.M.,

OF THE BOSTON BAR.

WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY

J) KwLeEEsON,
AOE ye ESN
( , WAY 25 18Re .

>

BOSTON:
RAND AVERY COMPANY.
‘1888.

Copyright, 1888, by J. R. Leeson.

RAND AVERY COMPANY
MADE THIS BOOK.

Pate FAC EB,

Tuts volume aims to be brief, readable,
and pertinent to the point at issue; name-
ly, that a duty on imported flax is unneces-
sary, and a hinderance to the development
of the flax-growing and linen-manufac-
turing industries in the United States.
The facts and figures upon which this
study is based are taken almost entirely
from publications of the United States
Government, and the object has been to
tell the story, so far as is possible, in the
words of the government experts. Fre-
quent references have been made _ for

ready verification.

a ah a CELE ATE
ee ae

CONTENTS.

PAGE

INTRODUCTION . : : : j : : : 7
By J. R. LEEson.

PLAX: ITS CULTURE AND USE IN THE
UNITED STATES , : : 5 . .

FLAX CULTURE AS INFLUENCED BY
LEGISLATION

APPENDIX

PLAX CULTURE. AND USE IN THE
UNITED: SLATES.

AN INTRODUCTION

By J. R. LEESON.

Tuat ‘supply waits upon demand,” is
so universally acknowledged as to have be-
come a truism; so trite, indeed, as to make
iteration a tedious jarring of a worn-out
string. ‘There are, however, some among
us who would seem to think that demand
is created by supply. This is, practically,
the position of those who advocate the
retention of the duty on flax. They have
endeavored to induce our farmers to pro-
duce flax fibre before the demand of Amer-
ican spinners is sufficiently extensive to
warrant the necessary study and outlay
involved. By limiting the home consump-
tion of flax through the enhancement of the
price of the flax-spinners’ raw material to
the extent of the impost duty, the believers

8 INTRODUCTION.

in this cart-before-the-horse method of pro-
cedure would, to borrow the quaint phrase
of Adam Smith, ‘diminish the number of
those who are capable of paying for it, —
surely a most unpromising expedient for
encouraging the cultivation. It is like the
policy which would promote agriculture by
discouraging manufactures.”

Probably our agricultural friends may be
safely left to decide for themselves what
crops it will best pay them to cultivate ;
they have shown their grasp of the situa-
tion, no less than the fertility of the land,
bya gross annual product of their farms of
two or three thousand millions of dollars
worth, leaving far behind every nation which
gives Statistics of its growth, and supplying
us all with greater variety and abundance
of food than was ever known in any country
or any era.

The advocates of a duty upon flax fail
to perceive the littleness of the interest
under review. What is this demand, for
the supply whereof farmers are advised to
make such elaborate preparation? The
value of flax imports may be taken as an
approximate measure of actual consump-

INTRODUCTION. 9

tion, home-grown flax being of such in-
significant amount as to be inappreciable.
The farmer is asked to turn aside from the
cultivation of hay, with an annual product
of nearly three hundred million dollars;
potatoes, exceeding fifty million dol-
lars; or cotton, with three or four hundred
million dollars worth: in order that he
may supply two million dollars worth of
flax !

What is the inference that is permissible
from these data, namely: the increase in
the growth of flax fibre in the United States
from less than 5,000,000 pounds in 1860 to
over 27,000,000 pounds in 1870, and the
subsequent decline to less than 2,000,000
pounds in 1880? The rise and fall in
supply having been exactly coincident with
the shortness or abundance of cotton,
and the consequent greater or less demand
for a substitute therefor, it is fair to ascribe
the increased or diminished supply of
domestic flax to the varying vicissitudes
incident to the raw cotton supply; the
inevitable conclusion is, that the effect of
the duty on scutched and hackled flax upon
domestic production is absolutely zz/, and

10 INTRODUCTION.

that the statement of the competent wit-
ness given on page 40 may be accepted as
true, that “if there was $1000 per ton duty
on flax, it would not make the slightest
difference with farmers.”

Why should the American farmer devote
years of preparation forthe supply of such
a limited requirement? He wisely scatters
his flax-seed thinly, raises a seed crop with-
out effort or special study, and markets the
product readily at a profit. He has more
sunlight, more heat, and less moisture in
the air, than any flax-grower has in coun-
tries where fibre chiefly is produced. He
will do well to continue his self-appointed
course, which takes into the account the
meteorological conditions which surround
him; leaving the growth of fibre to those
who have experience, cheap labor, and a
humid atmosphere, to aid them.

It might be inferred from the display of
pyrotechnics with which we have been
favored on this subject, that American
farmers must grow flax for fibre that they
may be entitled to a respectable status in
this connection. As a matter of fact,
showing the fallacy in this assumption,

INTRODUCTION. II

the value of flax seed annually grown
in this country exceeds the value of
all the flax fibre raised in Great Britain
and Ireland, equals the value of the cele-
brated Belgian flax crop, is far in excess
of the value of the Dutch crop, and is four
or five times more valuable than all the
flax fibre, straw, and tow of flax, now
imported into this country for domestic
manufacture, while it is of ten times
greater value than all the manufactures
of linen imported, other than woven
fabrics, which are not manufactured here
except in limited quantity. The Territory
of Dakota alone produces flax seed to the
extent of double the value of all the flax
fibre imported. It is stated in a recent
official document that ‘‘in many instances
a single crop [of seed] has paid for the
land, in addition to the cost of breaking
and planting.” With such facts before us,
and bearing in mind the so-called arguments
in favor of maintaining a duty on scutched
and hackled flax with the supposed object
of inducing the growth of flax fibre, it may
be expected that we shall next be gravely
informed that the major is contained in the

rz INTRODUCTION.

minor quantity; recalling Sir Isaac New-
ton’s amusing adventure during an absent-
minded spell in cutting a hole in the door
for his cat to pass through, and then
making a smaller aperture for the accom-
modation of the kitten.

It need not be doubted that the growers
will discover the proper time to produce
flax fibre, without being helped thereunto
by peripatetic blowing of penny whistles,
and the periodical explosion of sky-rockets,
which has been witnessed in these modern
times, in relation to this question.

When we consider the fact that Russia
can annually export over four hundred
million pounds of flax, in addition to a
large home consumption ; when we reflect
that under the stimulus of good prices and
a special demand during the period of
scarcity of cotton in this country, our flax-
growers never attained an annual product
of thirty million pounds, — say one- fif-
teenth of the Russian export,—what is
the inevitable deduction from such data ?
Is it not clear and conclusive that the
farmers fully appreciate the merits of
the case, “the want of a regular and

INTRODUCTION. 13

accessible market”? It indicates no less
clearly the futility of present attempts to
shriek our farmers into flax culture, as well
as the folly of perpetuating the import
duty upon a material which, as all the facts
and statistics show, must be imported if
flax-spinning is to continue in this country.
When an increased use of flax fibre shall
have been superinduced through the devel-
opment of the manufacture of woven linen
fabrics, the intelligence of the farmers may
be relied on to avail themselves of what-
ever advantages may be offered by such
enlargement of the demand at home for
flax of high quality.

Meanwhile, what is the rational course
for the economist and the legislator ?
There is but one answer: Provide an
adequate demand before creating a supply ;
remove every impediment, — take the duty
off the raw material, and thus encourage
the establishment of flax-spinning enter-
prises in our midst, and the supply of
home-grown flax will, in due season, doubt-
less be forthcoming. As President Monroe
so suggestively intimates in his masterly
communication to Congress, in 1821, “ By

14 INTRODUCTION.

the increase of domestic manufactures will
the demand for the rude materials at home
be increased.”

It has been said by the opponents ot
free flax, that because the duty on scutched
flax is two per centum more than on
hackled flax, a large proportion of flax
imports consists of hackled flax, which
would, but for this difference of two per
cent of duty, be imported as scutched flax
to be hackled here. That there are those
who can listen to a proposition that two
per centum less duty will offset a difference
of one hundred per centum in the wages,
which is admitted to exist between hack-
lers’ wages here and in Europe, indicates
the height of absurdity to which the dis-
cussion of this flax question sometimes
aspires. A glance at the statistics will
show how needless are the crocodile’s
tears which a mention of the hackler’s
hypothetical hard lot seldom fails to bring
forth. The imports of scutched flax in
1887 were 4,645 tons, value $1,026,207; of
hackled flax, 1,236 tons, value $649,737. If
we compare the relative value of scutched
and hackled flax imported in 1884 and in

INTRODUCTION. 15

1887, we at once see how little foundation
there is for the outcry now being raised,
ostensibly in behalf of domestic hacklers.
While the increase in the imports, during
the period named, of hackled flax, was
less than twenty per centum, the imports
of scutched flax show a gain in the same
time of over seventy-five per centum in
value. And yet we are seriously invited
to pity the poor hackler, and shield him
from the assaults of that terrible ogre, the
hackled flax importer !

It will be observed that throughout this
volume the nomenclature of raw flax which
obtained prior to the tariff of 1870 is
employed. Raw flax is held to mean the
fibre of the flax plant so long as it remains
a fibre simply. The several preparatory
processes through which the fibre passes
— rippling, steeping, spreading, lifting,
scutching, hackling, each requiring care
and mechanical dexterity — are designed
and intended to put the fibre into a con-
dition suited to the reception of the first
process of manufacture, 1.e., the preparing.
Until the preparing frame has metamor-
phosed the material, there is no essen-

16 INTRODUCTION.

tial change in the form or nature of the
substance: the bulk is lessened, the
dross thrown off, the fibre disintegrated,
but it is a fibre still; it is flax, not a yarn,
nor in any scientific sense a manufactured
product; it is unfit for use in any art, and
is therefore strictly a raw material, and
nothing more. In this sense it was always
regarded and legislated upon before the
passage of the Act of 1870, when by spe-
cial pleading and sophistical ratiocination,
suggested by the exigencies of a private
need and particular interests, it was sought
to attach to hackled flax a different char-
acter from scutched flax. That this is an
unnatural, far-fetched designation, a ‘ dis-
tinction without a difference,” will be ad-
mitted by those who candidly analyze the
nature of the material, who study and re-
flect upon the methods of manipulation to
which it is subjected, and who, throwing
aside that prejudice which is born of a
restricted vision, regard the elements and
principles at issue with the single desire to
judge aright, and form a just conclusion.

Pi xX.

Its Culture and Use in the Untted States.

Amonc the articles placed upon the
“free list,’ in the so-called Mills Tariff
Bill, is unmanufactured flax in its various
forms, dressed and undressed. Ata recent
meeting of the Flax and Hemp Spinners’
and Growers’ Association, held this year in
the city of Washington presumably for the
purpose of influencing legislation, it was
unanimously voted that the interests of
the flax industry require that the present
duty on unmanufactured flax be retained ;
and memorials were presented signed by
employees and workingmen in flax manu-
facturing establishments to the same effect.
The present treatise is devoted to a review
of the condition of the flax industry in the
United States, and an examination of the

ay

18 FLAX CULTURE

question whether the present rates of duty
are of any benefit to our flax growers, and
may not, indeed, be a burden to the farmer
as well as to the manufacturer and con-
sumer; whether, in short, the duty on raw
flax is not one of those curiosities of the
protective system that the tariff reformer,
whether free-trader or protectionist, desires
to remove.

Flax has been grown and manufactured
in this country ever since the first colonies
were settled. Before the invention of the
cotton-gin so cheapened the production of
cotton fabric, flax spinning and weaving
was a common household industry. The
older generation of the present day re-
member the spinning-wheel, and distaff
wound with flax, in the corner of the
country kitchen.

The importance of the industry was
early recognized, and it was carefully
fostered by legislation. The Massachu-
setts General Assembly passed an Act to
encourage the production of flax as early
as 1640; and Massachusetts was followed

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. I9

by Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, and
other States... In 1719 a large immigra-
tion of Scotch-Irish from Londonderry to
New Hampshire improved the colonial
knowledge of the cultivation and manu-
facture of flax.2 A series of papers be-
tween 1787 and 1791, by Tench Coxe,
Commissioner of the Revenue, shows the
manufacture ‘“‘in a household way” of all
sorts of linen goods. In the first nine
months of 1791 he reports the manufac-
ture, “in a family way,” of 25,265 yards of
linen cloth in Massachusetts and Rhode
Island alone. The census of 1810 shows
the production for the census year, of
21,211,262 yards of linen made in families.
Of this amount New York produced
5,303,000 yards; Pennsylvania, 3,000,000;
Connecticut, 2,250,000; and New Hamp-
shire, 1,000,000 yards. The flax was in
most cases grown by the families that
manufactured the linen.? Sixty years ago
Connecticut flax was strong, clean, and

™ Rep. of Dept. of Ag. for 1862, p. 119. 2? Thid.
Pp Pp. 119
3 Rep. of Dept. of Ag. for 1877, p. 176.

20 FLAX CULTURE

good. The flax from New York and
Vermont was strong but not clean."

As has been said, the invention of the
cotton-gin, and the consequent cheapen-
ing of cotton cloth, destroyed this house-
hold industry ; but it by no means killed
the linen: industry. For certain purposes
linen is indispensable ; and its strength,
beauty, and durability so far surpass
cotton, that it maintains its place in defi-
ance of all competition.

However, the domestic production of
flax fibre gradually fell off and died out;
and, to quote from the report of a Con-
gressional commission in 1864, “It is
well known that the only mill of this class
in our country, fully equipped for spin-
ning and weaving fine long line yarns
(located at Fall River, Mass.), was, after
a great outlay of capital and immense
exertions to operate at a profit, converted
into a cotton-mill at a heavy loss, in con-
sequence of an insufficient home supply
(of raw material), the mill being precluded

1 Rep. of Dept. of Ag. for 1879, p. 573.

AND USE IN CNITED STATES. 21

from using foreign stock by a practically
interdictive duty.”* In other words, for
some reason, a “practically interdictive
duty” did not induce our farmers to turn
their attention to the cultivation of fine
flax fibre.

Let us now see what protection the tariff
has afforded to the flax growers. From
the establishment of the government until
1842, unmanufactured flax was admitted
free of duty, except for a short time be-
tween 1828 and 1832, when a duty of
thirty-five and sixty dollars a ton was im-
posed. Even Alexander Hamilton in his
watchful care of American industries saw
no reason for imposing a duty on raw flax.
In 1842 a uniform duty of twenty dollars
a ton was imposed on all forms of raw flax.
In 1846 this was changed to an ad valorem
duty of fifteen per cent, which amounted to
twenty-five to thirty dollars per ton on the

t 38th Congress, 2d session, Sen. Ex. Doc. 35, p. 51.

2 “On unmanufactured flax, thirty-five dollars per ton, until
the thirtieth day of June, 1829, from which time an additional
duty of five dollars per ton per annum, until the duty shall
amount to sixty dollars per ton.” Act of May 19, 1828. United
States Statutes at Large, vol. iv. p. 272.

FLAX CULTURE

i)
bo

average. In 1857 raw flax was again re-
stored to the free list, and it there remained
until the war tariff of 1861 which imposed
a uniform duty of fifteen dollars per ton.
This figure ran the gauntlet of some six-
teen tariff bills, until 1870, when raw flax
received a most vigorous taxing. Flax
straw, which had never hitherto had any
duty imposed on it, was now taxed five

dollars per ton, —a prohibitory duty. The
duty on the tow of flax, which had been
five dollars per ton, was doubled; and a
curious distinction, which had never been
thought of before, was made in the forms
of flax fibre. The duty on the undressed
fibre was raised from fifteen to twenty
dollars per ton; but dressed or ‘“ hackled”
flax, which is the fibre with the chaff and
tow combed out, practically merely cleaned,
was taxed forty dollars per ton. These are
now the present rates of duty.’

We have seen that the tariff killed one

1 These figures are taken from the “Tariff Compilation,
1884,” 48th Cong., Ist session, Sen. No. 12.

In this connection, the following quotation from a letter
of a manufacturer to the Secretary of the Treasury in 1886

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 23

large linen industry; what has been the
history of the general industry? An enor-
mous impulse was given to the flax indus-
try during the war of the Rebellion. The
supplies of raw cotton were cut off, and
the Northern mills lay idle. This increased
the demand for linen goods, and every
effort was made to encourage the domestic
production of flax. The Agricultural Re-
ports of the United States during the years
of the war are full of careful reports on
flax, and contain much valuable informa-
tion on flax culture to aid the farmer. In
1863 Congress appropriated twenty thou-
sand dollars for an investigation ‘to test
the practicability of cultivating and prepar-
ing flax or hemp as a substitute for cotton.”
A commission was appointed which exam-
ined the whole subject thoroughly, and

is of interest: ‘ Flax is long fibred and kept straight. Tow is
short fibred and not kept straight. Flax is usually tied in
bundles of about one hundred pounds each, and tow is pressed
into bales of about five hundred pounds each. Hundreds of
tons of flax have been entered at ten dollars per ton duty,
during the past three or four years, by being laid straight into
tow presses, and pressed into five-hundred-pound bales, like
tow.” — Rep. of Sec. of Tr. on Tar. Revis., p. 105.

24 MLAX COLTORE

made a most elaborate report to Congress.*
These efforts of the General Government,
combined with the high price of flax, stim-
ulated the growth of flax, and the amount
of flax fibre produced was large. When,
however, the close of the war supplied the
mills with cotton, the production of flax
fibre began to fall off, so that, to quote
from the Agricultural Report of the United
States for 1879, ‘It is impossible to esti-
mate the amount of American dressed flax
consumed at the present time. It is a
ridiculously small amount at best, — too
small for a country boasting such diversity
of soil and climate. The quality of the
last crop was considerably below the aver-
age, and the yield was likewise small.”?
To-day, in 1888, the best-informed men
in the flax-fibre industry are unable to
estimate the amount of American flax pro-
duced. A good deal of flax is still sown,
but merely for the seed. Nothing is so
convincing as the actual statistics, and that
is our excuse for the tables below.

1 38th Cong., 2d session, Sen. Ex. Doc. 35. 2 De 570

AND USE IN UNITED. STATES. 25

Statistics of the Production of Flax Fibre in the United States.

.,| Census of | Census of | Census of | Census of
Pounds of fibre 1850. 1860. 1870. 1880.

produced. 7, 709,676|4,720,145|27,133,034)1,565,54

Thus, in spite of the high rate of duty
imposed in 1870, the production of flax
has fallen off enormously, and the amount
produced in 1880, under a high tariff, was
less than one-third the amount produced
in 1860, when flax was on the free list.

Ohio has been a leading State in the
cultivation of flax. The following figures,
taken from the State Agricultural Reports,
will indicate the history of the flax industry
in that State :* —

Pounds of Fibre produced. Pounds of Fibre produced.

In 1862 2,738,238 |) In 1875 285,417
1865 3,146,892 1880 | 3 5,642,025
1870 16,864,378 1883 2,501,545
1871 | 2 24,477,361

™ See Rep. U.S. Dept. Ag. for 1877, p. 175.

® Highest point reached.

3 There is a discrepancy between these figures and those in
the return of the United States Census. This is probably due
to the return of the State Board including coarse fibre and tow
not taken into account by the census officers.

26 FEAX CULTURE

It is estimated that in 1883 seventy-five
million pounds of straw were grown in
Ohio, though but two and a half million
pounds of fibre are returned, five or six
pounds of straw producing one of fibre.
The remainder of the straw was burnt.
The rapid decrease of the production in
Ohio is shown most strikingly by referring
to the figures from a few counties.

avon Trumbull Greene Allen Preble Darke
pounds County. County. County. County. County.

1881 | 459,435 | 338,900) 155,900 | 433,700 | 339,676
1882 | 150,900} 20,434] 10,621] 134,800] 87,178

1883 | 66,890} 11,000 - 4,114| 56,880

New York was once a large flax-growing
region ; and a similar comparison by coun-
ties shows the history of flax in New York,
the figures being taken from the United-
States census.

Produc-
tion in
pounds.

Whole Washington | Rensselaer |S. Lawrence|Schoharie
State. County. County. County. ounty.

1870 | 3,670,818 | 1,285,033 | 774,773 | 104,266 | 84,811

1880 | 843,965] 343,262] 324,642 1,510 30

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 27

These are some of the counties where
the well-known “North River flax” is
grown, Rensselaer County being ‘the seat
of the linen industry in this country.”*
Turn now to the statistics of the imports
of unmanufactured flax into the United
States, the figures being taken from the
Agricultural Report of the United States
for 1877, except for the two last years.

Cwt. Value.
Tesoy t ; : F 14,474 $128,917
1855 . : : : 28,961 286,809
1860 . : : . - 213,687
1865 . : . : 28,332 369,359
TOTO is j , ; 38,540 605,962
TO75 ; : : 86,440 1,112,405
1881. : ‘ ; 108,920 1,462,286
1887 . : : : 141,960 1,908,845

It is instructive but tiresome to multiply
tables. Some further tables, giving the
most recent statistics, are to be found in
the appendix.

* Rep. Dept. Ag. U. S. for 1877, p. 183.

28 FLAX CULTURE

It has been assumed in the foregoing
discussion, that the flax fibre produced in
this country, though yearly diminishing in
amount, was of a fine quality suitable for
manufacture into threads and cloths. But
this is very far from the truth, and it may
be confidently asserted that outside of a
very small amount of “ North River flax”
grown in New York, and possibly an in-
significant amount grown in New Jersey,
the bulk of American flax is fit only for
paper-stock or upholsterer’s tow, and only
a small amount is good enough for even
the very coarsest kind of bagging.

In 1879 Mr. Gary, a flax manufacturer
of Dayton, O., estimated that there were
then a hundred flax-mills in the West turn-
ing out a yearly product of three hundred
tons of zow. Three-tenths of this amount,
he estimated, was used by upholsterers,
four-tenths as paper-stock, and the remain-
ing three-tenths for bagging.’ The follow-
ing significant note is repeated in the
Agricultural Reports for the State of Ohio

™ Rep. Dept. Ag. for 1870, p. 577.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 29

for the years 1881, 1882, 1883, at the end
of the tables showing the production of
flax : “This crop is of very uneven dis-
tribution throughout the State, though not
for lack of adaptation of soil or climate.
The total production has much diminished
since the change in the tariff on jute. It
was formerly considered one of our best
paying crops for its cost of production,
and was somewhat extensively raised.” ?
Jute is an East-Indian fibre used in the
manufacture of coarse bagging. The Agri-
cultural Report of the United States for
1877 also shows that the fibre produced
was of the very coarsest kind, and the
production was stopped by the placing of
jute on the free list. In Portage County,
Ohio, the report goes on to say, “The
largest flax-mill in operation a few years
ago has failed. The market for seed and
fibre was too far away; and though the crop
paid well, it was thought to be exhaust-
ing to the land; and now one may travel
hundreds of miles in the county, and not

7 See Rep. Dept. of Ag. Ohio, 1883, p. 405.

30 FLAX CULTURE

see a flax field.”* ‘In Delaware County,
of the four //ax-mills formerly in opera-
tion, the three smaller ones run about one-
fourth time, producing éow which now sells
for two and a half cents per pound.” ?

As has been said, a small amount of the
better grade of flax is produced in New
York, but even there the production is
rapidly falling off, and the quality declin-
ing. A mill at Herkimer, the same report
says, uses forty tons annually, and em-
ploys two hands, cheese dairying having
almost entirely superseded flax culture;
and flax for the mills in Rensselaer Coun-
ty is largely imported from Canada and
Europe.

In the Transactions of the New York
State Agricultural Society for 1870 (p.
491), there is a report from the secretary
of the local society in Washington County,
the source of much North River flax. He
says, ‘ Favorable mention may be made of
the flax crop, but it becomes evident from
year to year that its culture is decreasing.

<p, 162. P Pelots 3 Tbid.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 31

Our thirty or more flax-mills have dwin-
dled to a half-dozen.”

Nor is all the flax grown in New York
of a quality suitable for linen manufac-
ture, as witness the report from Steuben
County, found in the Transactions of the
State Society for 1871 (p. 599). The sec-
retary of the County Society says, ‘‘ The
culture of flax is already occupying much
of the attention of the farmers in the
northern part of our county. This sea-
son about four hundred acres were sown.
The straw is entirely used in making wp-
holsterers’ tow.”

This State Society takes the place in
New York of a State Department of Agri-
culture, and its annual reports are now
published with the official documents of
the State. It is a curious commentary on
the importance of the flax industry in
New York, that since 1871 there is no
mention of flax to be found in these
annual reports, although much space is
devoted to almost every crop; nor do the
reports from the counties mention flax.

32 FLAX CULTURE

The ‘Tariff Commission appointed in
1882 paid a good deal of attention to flax,
and incidentally much that is interesting
came out in the testimony. Mr. Hiram
Sisson of Eagle Bridge, N.Y., appeared
before the commission as_ representing
the flax-growing industry. His testimony
is sO instructive that it is quoted at
length :—

Q. How much capital in round numbers is in-
vested in the manufacture of flax, jute, and hemp
fibre to be used in textile fabrics in this country ?

A. Iam not prepared to state.

Q. Is there any considerable amount invested ?

A, ‘They are raising a great deal of flax in the
West at present, but it is for seed only.

Q. Iam not talking about that; but I understand
from the paper submitted by your association (Flax
and Hemp Spinners’ and Growers’) that you recom-
mend an additional duty on the raw material, rather
in the hope of encouraging the growth of the raw
product in this country for the purpose of manufac-
ture hereafter, than for the purpose of protecting an
agricultural industry, if I may so call it, which has not
attained any considerable magnitude.

A. Weare in hopes, if we could get more protec-
tion, that this business would increase and enlarge.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 33

Q. I understand that it is grown now principally
for seed, except in New York State.

A They do that, but they cannot afford to raise
tie flax, and prepare it for market, because there is no
money in it.

Q. And it is not now raised for market, except in
New York State?

A. But a duty might help to do that.

Q. That is exactly what I wanted to get at.
Now, can you tell me about how much capital is in-
vested in New York State in the production of the
fibre, exclusive of the seed for oil?

A. Ido not know that I could answer that, except
by saying that within the past year (1881) I have han-
dled between four and five hundred thousand pounds
of dressed flax.

Q. And that flax was produced in the State of
New York?

A. Yes, sit; produced in the State of New York.

Q. What is the value of that flax?

A. Perhaps that amount would be worth $60,000.

Q. And the capital invested in producing that
amount of material is how much?

A. I could not say. Zhe farmer sows tt, and
then it goes to market, and he gets what he can out
of tt.

Q. But there are not firms exclusively devoted to
this industry ?

A, No, sir.

34 PLAX CULTURE

Q. How much enhancement of price would be
necessary to induce the farmers to bring it (the flax
straw that is now burned in the fields) to market?

A. That I cannot state.

Q. As I understand, the reason it is not used by
the manufacturers, is that they can buy the material
in other quarters cheaper than they can get it of the
farmers of the West.

A. Certainly.

Q. Can you tell how much cheaper they can buy
it in that way ?

A. I cannot say, because there are so many grades
of flax. / am not very well informed in regard to

American flax.

Very evidently not, and yet this is the
sort of testimony that is relied on to
keep the duty on flax.

Mr. Sisson apparently forgot to say that
cheese dairying was replacing flax culture
in New York. He remembered only that
he handled half a million pounds of New-
York flax the previous year (1881). If
that is correct, he must have handled more
than half the crop of the State, as the
whole production of New York by the

* Rep, of Tar. Com., pp: 282; 283;

AND GSE-IN - ONITED STATES. 35

census of 1880 was 843,965 pounds. This,
at Mr. Sisson’s figures, would be worth
something over $100,000; and yet to en-
able a few flax dealers in New York to
handle even less than this amount, the
American people were called upon to pay
$154,508.63 in duties on raw flax during
the year ending June 30, 1887, and domes-
tic linen manufacturers were handicapped
to that extent.

It was variously estimated before the
commission, that from half a million to a
million ¢ozs of flax are annually burned
by Western farmers.’ The larger limit is
probably nearer the truth. Mr. Sisson
tried to convey the impression in his testi-
mony, that this was done because the
manufacturers of linen could buy their flax
cheaper abroad; and that, although the
Western farmer would be glad to give
away the straw to be rid of it. As Mr.
Sisson expressly stated that he was not
well informed as to American flax, his
misstatements may be perhaps excusable ;

* Rep: Var. Com:, pp: 287; 28¢,, 992.

36 FLAX CULTURE

but the truth is, that this Western flax
is utterly worthless for linen manufacture.
The flax is grown for the seed, and the
fibre is coarse and useless for fine goods.
Such being the condition of the flax-
growing interest, what is the state of
manufactures of flax in this country?
The tale is almost as doleful. In the peti-
tion of the Flax and Hemp Spinners’ and
Growers’ Association to the Tariff Com-
mission, it is recited that ‘‘ Several millions
of dollars have been expended by more
than fifty flax-spinning mills, in an effort
to manufacture linen goods in the United
States ; but although capital was not lack-
ing, the American Linen Co. of Fall River,
Mass., the Willimantic Linen Co., the
United States Linen Co., the Sprague
Linen Co., and szanxy others, had to aban-
don the business, . . . so that the pres-
ent manufacturing establishments number
about one dozen.”* It was also shown in
evidence, that there were only ten millions
of dollars invested in this country in the

™ Rep. Tar. Com., p. 287.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 37

manufacture of flax, hemp,’ etc., — an
amount but very little in excess of the
amount paid in duties on flax, hemp, etc.,
for 1887 ($9,497,981-74).

The present condition of the flax-grow-
ing interest in this country was very well
summed up by one of the manufacturers,
in his testimony before the Tariff Com-
mission.

(p. 275.) Q. What is the objection to
putting flax, jute, and hemp on the free
list, as raw silk and raw cotton are now
on the free list? A. Jy answer ts, that
wt would spoil a magnificent possibility for
the American people.

This is indeed protection run mad, —
to tax the whole American people annually
as much as the entire capital invested in
the flax industry, in order not to spoil a
magnificent possibility, and what, in spite
of strenuous efforts on the part of the
Government, has remained a possibility for
a hundred years. If the witness had
called it a magnificent impossibility while

t Rep. Tar. Com., p. 288.

38 FLAX CULTURE

the present tariff on raw flax, dressed and
undressed, continues, he would have been
nearer the truth. If, however, he meant
a possibility in taxation, the prospect is
truly magnificent.

What, then, is the reason for this con-
dition of the flax-growing industry in the
United States? Is it because the tariff is
not high enough, and more protection is
needed? It would seem that if good flax
can be easily raised in the United States,
the present prices would be a sufficient
inducement to the farmer without any
duty at all. Flax fibre brings from $300
to $500 per ton, and the finest grades of
dressed flax bring as high as $750 a ton."
The average price of the ‘dressed line”
imported in 1887 was $525 per ton. The
Western farmer sells his straw at $3 to $6
per ton, and, more often than not, is un-
able to sell it at any price.

The Flax and Hemp Spinners’ and
Growers’ Association says that a higher
duty is needed; although a leading manu-

’ Rep. Tar. Com., p. 1526. Rep. Dept. Ag. 1579, p. 568.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 39

facturer and member of that association
told the Secretary of the Treasury in
1886, ‘The duty upon foreign flax is $20
per ton, which is, and has been, entirely
inadequate to insure the cultivation of
flax fibre in this country for our own use.
The duty should be increased to $60
per ton as a stimulus to the American
agriculturist.”* But what say the farmers?
The report of the ‘Tariff Commission
gives some light on this point, in the
testimony of H. Koelkenbeck of Chicago.
He testified that he was not connected
with any manufacturing industry, and was
engaged in improving flax culture in the
West. He had visited the flax districts
of Missouri, Illinois, and Iowa, and was
the only person who appeared before
the Commission who showed an intimate
knowledge of flax culture. His testimony
is as follows : —

Q. ‘You are decidedly of the opinion
that the taking off the duty on flax would

t Rept. of Secretary of Treas. on Revision of the Tariff,
1886, p. 105. No data are given to show that this increase of
duty would produce the desired result.

40 PLAX COLITULE

not interfere with its manufacture in this
country ?”

A. ‘My opinion is that if there was
$1000 duty on flax [per ton], it would not
make the slightest difference with farm-
ers. I have been four weeks among the
farmers of Missouri and Illinois, and I
have asked them, ‘What do you think
of the present duty?’ They say, ‘We
do not trouble ourselves about it: we
could not undertake the preparation of
flax fibre for manufacturing purposes ;
it is altogether out of our power to
do so: we have not the knowledge or
the time for it.”

And later when he was again asked re-
specting the farmers, he said, ‘‘ The farmer
says, ‘I cannot trouble myself about that,
because there is nobody who wants the
fibre. Nobody comes along and pays me
a reasonable price for it; for if I was to
cultivate flax especially for its fibre, I would
have to bestow a great deal more labor and
care on it, and have to sow four times as

* p. 995.

AND. USE AN CNITED STATES. 4I

much seed; and I prefer my present mode
of culture.’”’

Here, it is submitted, is the key of the
difficulty. The fibre that is at present
grown in this country is worthless for the
manufacture of linen, and the farmer can-
not produce suitable fibre without very
much more trouble and labor than he is
willing to give in the present state of agri-
culture. That is the whole trouble, and
the only trouble, with the flax-growing
industry, and no amount of duty can over-
come it.

In order to bring out this point more
clearly, it is necessary to give a_ brief
account of the methods of cultivation
necessary for the production of fine flax
fibre, and contrast them with the agricul-
tural methods at present in vogue in
America.

The finest flax in the world is produced
in France and Belgium, and it is generally
conceded that the success of the French
and Belgian growers is largely due to their

1 p. 996.

42 FLAN COLTUKRE

methods of cultivation. The United States
Government in its Agricultural Reports has
often described the best methods of flax
culture, and the substance of this sketch
is taken from the Agricultural Report for
1879. The report in this volume, cover-
ing over a hundred pages, is by Charles
R. Dodge. In his letter transmitting the
report he says, ‘“‘ The report has been pre-
pared particularly with a view of impress-
ing upon our farmers at this time the
importance of fibre cultivation as an ele-
ment of farm practice, in the hopes that
languishing industries may be _ revived,
and new ones established. The best prac-
tice in regard to cultivation and prepara-
tion of the fibre has been given.”

Flax is peculiarly susceptible to influ-
ences of climate and soil. It requires a
moist climate, and for that reason the low-
lands of Holland and Belgium are well
adapted to flax. A moist, deep, strong
loam forms the best soil. The flax plant
grows from two to five feet in height, and
the roots penetrate deep into the ground,

AND CSE-IN- ONITED STATES, 43

frequently extending as far into the ground
as the plant extends above it. The
ground must be ploughed deep, and well
pulverized. The land should be ploughed
in the fall, and in the spring a second
ploughing should be followed by a thorough
harrowing, and before sowing the ground
should be ploughed and harrowed again.
In Belgium, the land is, in addition, thor-
oughly trenched with a spade. Much
attention is given to the manuring of the
land. In the fall, twenty-five to thirty
loads of solid manure to each acre are
ploughed in, and in the spring liquid ma-
nure is applied to the extent of twenty-
five hundred gallons per acre." After the
last harrowing the land is rolled, and then
gone over with a hand bush, or wooden,
harrow followed by a light roller, as in
that condition of the ground a heavy
horse would trample it down too much.
“The object of the Belgian farmer,” says
the Congressional Commission of 1863,
‘is to obtain a deep and _ friable soil,

’ Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 586.

44 PLAX COLTORE

equally enriched throughout, which is only
accomplished by great care and attention.
The land has the appearance of the most
perfect garden cultivation.” *

Much attention is paid to the rotation
of crops, flax being rarely planted oftener
than once in seven or eight years on the
same land.’

After the land is prepared, the sowing
must be carefully done. The seed should
be sown in rows eight or nine feet apart,
and the sowing had best be done by hand.
It should be evenly sown, and much prac-
tice is necessary, as the seed is very
slippery. The Belgian farmers, who cul-
tivate for fibre, sow from two to four
bushels of seed to the acre; the Ameri-
can, who cultivates chiefly for the seed,
sows half a bushel or three pecks to the
acre. Where the seed is evenly and
thickly sown, the plants grow tall and
slender without much branching except
at the top, and the fibre is thus long and
fine. Where the seed is thinly sown, the

+ Rept.; p22. 2 Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 585.
] P | g 9, P- 595

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 45

plant grows low and bushy, with many
branches growing out close to the ground.*
The fibre in such plants is coarse, weak,
and brittle, and worthless for the manufac-
ture of any but the very coarsest fabrics,
but the yield of seed is large.’

After the sowing, the land should be
again gone over with the hand-harrow
and roller.

While the flax is growing, it must be
carefully tended to remove all weeds. In
Belgium the weeding is done by hand,
when the plants are a few inches high,
by women and children who crawl about
on their hands and knees with cloths to
protect them from the ground, working
always towards the wind so that the plants
may be at once blown back in an upright
position.s All writers agree that it is
absolutely essential to remove all weeds.
“Flax will not thrive in close proximity
to obnoxious weeds; on dirty land it will
prove a failure, or will treble the expense

™ Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 587. 7 Rep. Dept. Ag. 1862, p. 115.
3 Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 587.

46 FLAX CULTORE

of harvesting,” says one.’ “It is a crop
that absolutely compels clean culture,”
says another, for “weeds stunt the stem
and impair the fibre.”? It is easy to see
what a task this imposes on the Ameri-
can farmer, with the wonderful reproduc-
tive power of weeds in our fertile soils.
Who has not seen a field neglected for a
few weeks after harvest, so covered with
a dense mass of bushy and clinging weeds
that locomotion is seriously impeded, and
the traveller struggles through to find his
clothing covered with rough burs and
clinging seeds? All this is utterly incom-
patible with flax culture. In fact, Mr. J.
R. Dodge, an expert in flax culture, in a
report printed in the Congressional docu-
ments of the Thirty-eighth Congress, says
that the trouble with weeds is the promi-
nent reason why flax is not cultivated in
the United States. ‘‘ The task is too her-
culean for the industry and perseverance
of our farmers, when natural disinclination

ep. Dept. Ag. 1864, p. 92.
ep. Dept. Ag. 1863, p. 116.

be

R
R

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 47

is combined with the high price of labor.”
He enumerates the various weeds that
afflict the flax grower, and quotes from
an old English local poet, speaking of
the kerlock weed, —

“‘ But he says, says ’e, ‘ It ain’t no use
Vor to go to a girt expense,
Vor ’twill come agen, whate’er thee does,
Nor a year a two from hence.’”’!

The flax should be harvested when the
leaves begin to fall and the stems turn
yellow, albeit the seed is not at that time
fully ripe. In Europe, the harvesting is
done by pulling the plant up by the roots.
In this country it is usually cut with a
machine. Pulling is essential to the best
fibre ; for, apart from the fact that cutting
dries and injures the fibre and gathers the
weeds, it is said that “one inch of straw
at the base is worth two at the top of the
plant.”* The pulling is thus described :
‘“When the flax is standing erect, a hand-

* Also in Rep. Dept. Ag. 1863, p. 116.
? Rep. Cong. Com. p. 24.

48 FLAX CULTURE

ful should be grasped with both hands
just below the seed-bolls, and pulled ob-
liquely from the ground with a sudden
jerk, the dirt adhering to the roots being
shaken or knocked off on the boot.” * The
plants should then be laid evenly on the
ground, and be kept straight throughout.
Compare this careful and tedious cul-
ture with the methods that now obtain in
the West. There flax is grown for the
seed, which is used for making linseed-
oil. The seed is allowed to ripen fully,
thereby injuring the fibre. Mr. Hiram
Sisson, although he represents himself
as not very well acquainted with Ameri-
can flax, told the Tariff Commission, ‘ I
will tell you what I know about flax in
Illinois and Iowa. There they sow their
flax for the seed wholly. All they do is
to plough the ground, sow their seed, and
mow the flax with a machine, dry it, and
put it through a machine that is pro-
pelled by horse-power, to knock off the
seed, leaving the straw on the field.” * And

™ Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 588. ? Rep. Tar. Com., p. 281.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 49

yet Mr. Sisson tried to make the commis-
sion believe that an increase in duty would
bring this sort of stuff to the flax market.
The linen-manufacturer can do nothing
with this straw that is sold by the load,
like hay in a tangled bulk of fibre, pitched
on the load loose as it comes. In some
sections it can't be sold at any price, and
in such case is burned to get rid of it.’

Mr. H. H. Stevens, of Lexington, Ky.,
who appeared before the Tariff Commis-
sion in behalf of free flax machinery, said,
“Tt is the handling of the stalk that makes
or mars the fibre. An Englishman some
thirty years ago said of American flax,
‘They handle it like hay.’ It is the same
to-day.” ”

The Congressional Commission of 1863,
in summing up the situation in this coun-
try, say, ‘The raising of marketable flax
for long line, imposes too many burdens on
the grower, and is produced at too great a
sacrifice of seed, to warrant at present its
extensive cultivation in this country... .

t Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 572. 2 Rep. Tar. Com., p. 1948.

50 FLAX CULTURE

It seems to be better adapted to countries
of humid climate, and of comparatively
small areas of cultivation, subdivided
among a dense population, accustomed
to cheap hand labor.”' It is submitted
that this is equally true to-day.

The flax is, however, by no means ready
for market when it is pulled from the
ground. ‘The flax of the arts is the fibre
between the outer bark and the inner
woody pith of the plant; and_ several
tedious processes, requiring skill and ex-
perience, are necessary to separate the
fibre from the wood and bark. Most of
this work must be done by the farmer,
before his product is marketable, partly
because much of the work can only be
done by hand, and partly because, in our
vast country, the flax-mills are too far
away to warrant the shipment of the bulky
flax straw. A brief review of these pro-
cesses is necessary to a clear understand-
ing.

The plants must not be allowed to lie on

? Rep. Cong. Com., p. 51.

AND GSI, AN UNITED. STATES. 51

the ground, but must be at once gathered
into sheaves, and stacked, as the fibre may
be injured by the heat of the sun, or the
seed by dampness. When the seed is dry,
the next process is “ rippling,” or remov-
ing the seed. This can be done by hand
or by machine, care being taken to keep
the stalks straight. This, of course, pre-
vents the use of the threshing-machine,
and consequently the small farmer must
do it by hand.

The next process, which is termed “‘ ret-
ting” or rotting, is the one by which the
fibre is so loosened from the wood, as to
be easily removable.’ The process requires
great skill and experience, and, if unskil-
fully done, will injure or entirely ruin the
fibre. The retting is a fermentation of
the gummy substance that binds the fibre
to the wood, and is accomplished by ex-
posure of the flax to the dew in the fields,
or by immersing it in water. The former
process is the most common in this coun-

1 See Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, pp. 589-590, for a more detailed
account of this process.

52 FLAX CULTURE

try, as requiring less labor and trouble ;
but the latter process is used abroad, and
is the only process by which really good
flax can be made. ‘The flax must be kept
entirely under water, and yet must not
rest on the bottom. Soft water is the
best, in ponds or slowly running streams.
Retting pools are constructed, twelve or
more feet long, six feet wide, and four feet
deep. The flax is laid carefully in rows,
with the roots all pointing one way. In
a short time fermentation sets in, and
bubbles of foul-smelling gases rise to the
surface. This process occupies from five
to ten days, according to the weather,
coarse fibre taking longer than fine. The
retting should be carefully watched, and
when thought to be completed, the flax
should be tested every few hours, as the
change for the worse 1s very rapid. If
the retting continues too long, the fibre is
rendered weak and cottony; if not long
enough, it is dry and coarse, and much
of it is knocked away in the later pro-
cesses. The flax is then removed from

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 53

the pools, and in this operation too much
care cannot be used. Hooks or pitch-
forks injure the fibre, and the bundles
must be handed out by a man standing
in the now disgusting pool. In fact, the
water in the pool forms an excellent liquid
manure, and is sometimes strong enough
to kill fish, when allowed to escape into
the stream. The bundles are drained on
the bank, and then carefully spread out to
dry, evenly and thinly over the grass, the
flax being occasionally turned with long
wooden poles. When the plant is thor-
oughly dry, it is again gathered into
bundles and housed.

It is evident that this retting process
requires great care and skill. Repeated
attempts have been made to expedite the
process with hot water or steam, but none
have been successful, or able to supply the
place of water retting. Much of the value
of the flax depends on the retting, and the
quality of the water used has much to do
with the success of the operation. Thus
flax retted in the river Lys in Belgium

54 FLAX CULTURE

brings twenty-five per cent more in price
than flax grown on equally fertile soil and
retted in France. There is no other place
in Europe where the same quality is ob-
tained, and it is not improbable that there
is no water in America that has the pecul-
iar chemical qualities of the Lys.'

The next process in the preparation of
the flax for market is the ‘“scutching,” or
removal of the woody pith. This is accom-
plished by breaking and beating the flax,
when the wood drops out, and the fibre is
left. This may be done by hand or by
machine. The operation, when performed
by hand, is very dirty and disagreeable,
but is a necessity unless there is a flax-mill
close by, as the scutching machine is an
expensive piece of machinery.

The last process is the ‘‘hackling,” a
combing process, by which the chaff and
short tow are removed, and the long, clean
flax fibre left ready for spinning. This
process also is performed either by hand
or machine, but mostly by hand, even in

large mills.
* Rep, Tar. Com., p. 1526.

AND OSE {N UNITED STATES. 55

The reasons why the American farmer
does not grow fine flax are now apparent.
The farmer who has sufficient intelligence
to cultivate flax, does not care to send his
wife and children to weed the flax field on
hands and knees. He himself is accus-
tomed to do his farming with improved
machinery. He ploughs, sows, reaps, binds,
threshes, etc., all by machine. Labor is
expensive, and he cannot afford, nor is he
accustomed, to employ sufficient skilled
labor to go into a culture that requires so
much hand-work. Nor does he have the
time or patience to acquire the special
knowledge and manipulative skill of the
manufacturer. These difficulties have been
repeatedly stated in the Agricultural Re-
ports. For instance, here is a quotation
from the Report of the Department of
Agriculture in 1864: ‘ But flax growing in
this country has its drawbacks at the pres-
ent time. First, the farmer lives thirty
miles or upwards from where he could bring
his flax to market: what is he to do in the
event of growing such a crop? Where is

56 FLAX CULTURE

he to get it broke or scutched? Should
he contract with a man coming along with
his machine, who works for him, he must
submit to his exorbitant charge which
would take away half the profit of his crop.
This is not all. Although his flax has got
into small bulk by scutching, even if he
has to send a great distance to market, he
is still at the mercy of the buyer, who prob-
ably would tell him that it got too much
rotting, find some other faults, and finally
say it would not suit him. The farmer
gets bewildered, thinks of the long jour-
ney home, calculates his expenses, offers
his flax at a reduced price sooner than
bring it back, and lastly will sicken of flax
growing.” *

The same thing is said more in detail in
the Report for 1877: “Among the obsta-
cles in the way of profitably growing the
fibre are the following: First, the want of
a regular and accessible market. Second,
the labor involved in pulling flax on a
large scale is greater than can be secured

1 Rep. Dept. Ag. 1864, p. 183.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 57

at the proper season at wages which will
leave any margin of profit. Third, the
process of ‘rotting’ or eliminating the
fibre from the stalk in the old-fashioned
way is tedious, and thought to be un-
healthy. Fourth, most farmers do not suf-
ficiently understand the rotting part of this
process, and are therefore very liable to
injure the fibre by some failure either in
method or degree. Fifth, the processes
of breaking, scutching, or hackling by
hand are very disagreeable, necessarily
involving the operator in an atmosphere
thick with dust and dirt, and yet requiring
skilled workmen, such as it is often quite
impracticable to secure.” ‘In the Ohio
Valley there is objection to flax on the
score of injury to the soil. ‘It is hard on
the land, is a common remark of corre-
spondents.’’”

Besides all this, American flax is seldom
prepared twice alike. No two growers
seem to seek the same standard. In

t Rep. Dept. Ag. 1877, p. 183.
2 Rep. Dept. Ag. 1885, p. 417:

58 FLAX CULTURE

Russia, on the other hand, all flax ex-
ported is subjected to government in-
spection, which establishes regular and
uniform grades of flax. The manufac-
turer, therefore, prefers the imported flax,
though it costs a third more.’’ The Report
for 1879 emphasizes the point that flax
culture “is, in one sense, a trade to be
thoroughly learned, and followed after it
is acquired.”

The question naturally arises, that if
this is all true, why is it that the Flax and
Hemp Spinners and Growers’ Association
persist in asking for the retention of the
duty? This question can receive no satis-
factory answer. A hint may perhaps be
gotten from some of the testimony before
the Tariff Commission.

We have already had some instructive
quotations from the testimony of Mr.
Hiram Sisson, who represented the flax-
growing industry. As a_ grower, his
evidence is of value.

’ Rep. Dept. Ag. 1879, p. 573.

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 59

Q. How much duty are you asking to be put on
imported flax ?

A. The duty is $20 a ton now. We only ask
to increase it to $30 a ton. On what is called
hackled flax, it is now $40 a ton, and we want that
increased to $50 a ton. TZhis 7s a kind of compromise
between the manufacturers and the growers of flax.
We have already agreed to this arrangement, so that
it will give them a little protection and us a little.

Q. This increase of duty, $10 a ton, which you
ask, you assume would bring this flax that is now
burned to the manufacturer ?

A. Itwould be a help in that direction, although
it would not be very much help. All the flax that
comes in here from foreign countries would, under
such an increase of duty, cost the manufacturers a
half a cent a pound more than tt does now.

Q. That is to say, $10 a ton additional duty
would enable the manufacturers to buy American
flax to advantage ?

A. It would help. We would like to have the
duty more, but I don’t know that we can get that
done."

It is unnecessary to point out what non-
sense this all is; but the instructive thing
about it is that the Flax and Hemp Spin-

™ Rep. Tar. Com., pp. 283, 284.

60 FLAX CULTURE

ners’ Association favor protection for that
somewhat mythical personage, the grower
of flax fibre, on account of a compromise
arrangement by which their own protec-
tion is secured.

The American Flax and Hemp Spinners’
and Growers’ Association would have in-
creased the surplus in the treasury by
$58,825 in 1887 if this increase had been
adopted, and they are unable to show any
benefit to accrue from this tax to any
domestic interest. Even Mr. Sisson ad-
mits that “it would not be much help.”
If, then, an increase of fifty per cent in the
duty on raw flax “would not be much
help,” why retain the present duty, which,
so far as can be ascertained, is no help at
all ?

There are linen-manufacturers, however,
not connected with the Spinners’ and
Growers’ Association, and not, therefore,
under the spell of such sophistry; and a
most fitting summing-up of this whole
discussion is to be found in the recom-
mendations and suggestions to the Tariff

AND USE IN ONITED STATES. 61

Commission, of Messrs. Finlayson, Bous-
field, & Co., flax spinners at Grafton,
Mass. They say in substance :' —

1. Flax is not grown in America to any
extent for textile manufacturing purposes.
The bulk of it is produced only for seed,
the fibre being destroyed. None is pro-
duced of a quality high enough for fine
linen thread or yarns.

2. The manufacture of linen does not
receive any encouragement by having raw
material of sufficient quality grown on the
spot. It would not develop, but cease to
exist, unless supplied with material from
abroad.

3. The development of the manufac-
ture is the only means of encouraging
the production of superior flax. The
market must be created for the farmer, or
he will not attempt the growth of a crop
requiring care and skill.

4. The manufacture of linen can best
be encouraged by the introduction of

* Rep. Tar. Com., p. 1526.

62 FLAX CULTORE

the raw material, whether dressed or un-
dressed, free of duty; and with this devel-
opment the farmer will in time find a
profitable market open to him.

5. The quality of the fibre is so depend-
ent on favorable conditions of soil, climate,
and water, that it is questionable if any
one country can produce the entire range
of qualities of flax necessary for the manu-
facture of linen thread and fine linen.

6. Even under the most favorable cir-
cumstances, many years must elapse before
the American farmer can acquire the requi-
site skill to produce fine flax.

7. The manufacturers must have guadity
at any cost.

This admirable summary, made by intel-
ligent manufacturers, states the whole sit-
uation, and suggests the true remedy for
the existing difficulties. The Western
farmer does not raise flax for fibre, because
he has no market for it, the few flax-mills
being all in a narrow compass on the
Eastern seaboard; and the fate of the

AND USE IN UNITED STATES. 63

American Linen Company, the Williman-
tic Linen Company, and other concerns
of large capital, which failed in an attempt
to manufacture linens, largely on account
of their inability to get cheap raw material,
is a sufficient warning to any but the bold-
est, not to establish any more linen-mills
here. The farmer does not raise flax, be-
cause there is no home-market for it, and
there are few mills to create a market.
If the duty on raw flax of every descrip-
tion were wholly removed, a_ stimulus
would be given to the linen-manufacture
in America; competition would then be
encouraged, and the consequent demand
for flax would be an incentive to the
farmer that no duty can supply. With
flax-mills springing up in all sections of
the country, a ready market would be pro-
vided for the farmer. His attention is
more likely to be directed to the niceties
of flax culture, should he receive the direct
encouragement of domestic manufacturers
to grow fine flax. At any rate, it is diff-
cult to see what interest will be injured

64 FLAX CULTURE

by the removal of the duty on raw flax,
dressed and undressed.

In spite of the present duty, the linen
industry of America, having an invested
capital of ten millions, imports annually
nearly two million dollars worth of the
raw material, and from that source the
surplus in the treasury was increased by
over a hundred and fifty thousand dollars
in 1887; and yet the production of Ameri-
can fibre is steadily falling off. Instead of
manufacturing our own linen goods, we
are importing over fifteen million dollars
worth per annum. How much of this
could be manufactured in this country if
the manufacturers could import their raw
material of every kind, free of duty, may
be left for future determination. With the
present duty on raw flax, however, it is
idle to expect the manufacturer to risk his
capital in an enterprise where so many
wealthy corporations have failed.

Enough has been said to show the bur-
den of this tax on the domestic manufac-
turer, and its uselessness, nay, direct

AND USE LN ONITED STATES. 65

injury, to the grower; but a few words
more are necessary in defining what is
raw flax. A curious distinction was in-
vented in 1870, between the ‘“ scutched ”
flax, from which the woody fibre has been
revoved by hand or machine, and the
‘“hackled” flax, which has undergone a
further process of combing to remove the
chaff and tow. For some unexplained
reason, the duty on ‘“hackled” flax is
double that on the ‘“ scutched” product.
It can hardly be because one is regarded
as a manufactured product; as both have
been subjected to mechanical operations,
differing only in degree.

It is not easy to frame a definition of
‘‘raw material” to cover all cases; but it
may be roughly defined as material that
requires some further mechanical process
to fit it for use by the consumer, it being
of no use to the consumer in its existing
condition. Under this definition, flax is
still raw material until it is manufactured
into thread, or yarn at least. This defini-
tion applies equally well to cotton and

66 PLAX COLIORE

silk, and no one ever thought of calling
ginned cotton a manufactured product, to
be taxed at a rate different from unginned.
In fact, to draw a rough parallel between
flax and cotton, if it were the custom to
gather the cotton-plant, the removal of
the fibre from the boll would correspond
to the ‘ scutching ;” and the ginning, which
removes the seed, to the subsequent
‘hackling.” Yet ginned cotton is univer-
sally admitted to be a raw material. So,
too, with silk; the eggs of the silkworm,
the cocoons, the silk reeled from the co-
coon, are all admitted free of duty. In
the tariff of 1846, a duty of fifteen per
cent was imposed on reeled silk, while the
cocoons were admitted free, but that need-
less distinction has long ago been repealed.

The maintenance of this distinction be-
tween ‘“scutched” and ‘ hackled” flax
can only be a burden on the manufac-
turer. It were just as reasonable to
compel the Northern cotton-mill to gin its
cotton, as to force every American flax-
mill to hackle European flax.

AND OSE IN UNITED STATES. 67

The foregoing considerations should be
sufficient to convince the candid reader
that the proposal to place flax on the
“free list” is a reasonable one. The re-
moval of duties on raw flax will be an in-
centive to the linen industry in America,
that free-traders and protectionists can
alike welcome. To retain the duty on
flax of any kind, is not protection.

FLAX CULTURE AS INFLUENGES®
By LEGISLATION,

Ir has been said that the present pros-
perous condition of the flax and linen
industries in Great Britain is due to the
careful legislative protection granted to
those industries a hundred years ago when
they were in their infancy; and that the
maintenance of the duty on flax will have
a similar tendency to build up the linen
industry in America. ‘The foregoing pages
of this volume are a sufficient answer to
this assertion; but it will be of value to
sketch more in detail the legislative pro-
tection and encouragement that has been
given flax growing in Great Britain, and
contrast with it the very similar measures
that have from time to time been adopted
in the various Coloniesin America. Vari-
ous statutes are cited at length in order
to show the extent of legislative care, and

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 69

they are well worth reading. ‘The facts as
to the history in America are taken mainly
from Bishop’s “‘ History of American Man-
ufactures,” a standard work published in
1861. The source of the information as
to Great Britain is the work of a Scotch
linen merchant, Alex. J. Warden, entitled
‘The Linen Trade, Ancient and Modern”
(London, 1864).

GREAT BRITAIN.

By the statute of 24 Henry VIII.; chap.
A, in 1532, it was enacted that, —

‘Every person having in his occupation threescore
acres of land apt for tillage, shall sow one rood with
flax or hemp-seed, upon pain to forfeit three shillings

fourpence for every forty acres.”

And elsewhere fines paid for non-com-
pliance with this law are recorded. In
1562 this statute was re-enacted, with the
amount of land to be sown in flax increased
to an acre, and the penalty to five pounds ;
and it was not until 1593, after sixty years
of protection, that these statutes were re-
pealed, because they failed to accomplish

7O LAA COLIURE

the desired result. In 1668, almost a hun-
dred years after, ‘“ England was almost
wholly supplied with linens from France.” *
In 1731 Parliament passed an Act that may
be commended to modern legislators,
preamble and all. It is entitled, —

“An Act for further encouraging the manufacture
of British sailcloth.

“Whereas the wealth and prosperity of this king-
dom does very much depend upon the preservation
and improvement of its manufactures, and whereas
the manufacture of sailcloth does give a comfortable
support . . . to many of his Majesty’s subjects em-
ployed in the same, and there is reason to believe that
it would be greatly improved in this kingdom, and
the exportation of it to foreign ports considerably
increased, if the duties payable upon the importation
of rough and undressed flax ... were taken off;
therefore . . . be itenacted . . . That from and after
the 24th day of June, 1731, it shall and may be lawful
for any person or persons whatsoever to import into
this kingdom any quantity of rough or undressed flax,
without paying any subsidy, custom, imposition, or
other duty whatsoever for the same.”

Thus it appears, that, at the time when
England was maintaining a protective tariff,

* The Linen Trade, p. 363.

AS AINFPLOENCED BY LEGISLATION, 7%

it was deemed important to admit raw flax
free of duty. Section four of the same
Act increased the bounty on sailcloth ex-
ported. The cultivation of flax was, how-
ever, not neglected by Parliament; for in
1766 the sum of 415,000 annually ($75,-
000) was set apart from the import duties
on linen ‘“‘as a fund for the encourage-
ment of raising and dressing hemp and
flax in this kingdom.” ‘Three years later
this amount of £15,000 was apportioned,
48,000 to England, and £7,000 to Scot-
land. The amount for England was in-
Greased, I I7ot, by Stat. 21, ‘Geo, IIT.,
chap. 58, § 3, —

“That for the encouragement of the growth of hemp
and flax in . . . England there shall be applied . . «
in bounties yearly a sum not exceeding £15,000, .. .
at the rate of fourpence per stone for every stone of
flax weighing fourteen pounds to be raised in. .
England in the year 1782, and in every subsequent
year, for the space of five years, and which shall be
broken and properly prepared for market.’

This munificent appropriation should
have increased the production of flax; but

72 FLAK COLIGRE

Mr. Warden states that for fifteen years
no one claimed a premium in England,
and but few in Scotland; and he cites as
his authority the thirteenth Report of the
Commissioners for Examining the Public
Accounts, dated March 18, 1785.’
Compulsion and bounties have alike
been unavailing to turn the attention of the
English farmer to flax-growing; and Mr.
Warden, writing in 1864, says’ that “at
the present time, the quantity of flax grown
in England is insignificantly small. Many
counties produce none at all. Dorset
and a few others grow small quanti-
ties, and in certain portions of Yorkshire
a little more attention is paid to the culti-
vation; and although the quality of what
is raised is good, the quantuty is very
much less than it ought to be.” He goes
on to quote from the annual report of
Mr. Baker, a factory inspector, who says,
“We can neither produce from abroad (?)
nor induce our farmers to grow the raw
material in sufficient quantity. The same

z I

p: 372. pp: 378, 379:

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 73

complaint is made in the Federal States
of America, where the production has fallen
off enormously.” This reads much like
the quotations from our own agricultural
reports. Of Scotland Mr. Warden says,"
‘“At one period a very large quantity of
flax was raised in Scotland; but the culti-
vation has gradually decreased, until it is
now all but extinct in many counties. In
1812 about 5,000 acres were grown, worth,
at £20 an acre, £100,000. In 1834 great
complaints were made about the growth
of flax at home having ceased.” He adds
the following statement of the decrease in
acreage of flax in Scotland : —

ACRES | ACRES
YEAR, IN FLAX. | YEAR. IN FLAx.
1854 . : ohGOFO"'| 1856 . : . 2723
1855 . : s Pear | reny « : Ae!

Like American writers, Mr. Warden de-
plores this decrease in flax-growing, proves
the profitableness of the crop, and urges
the farmer to an increased production of
flax.

This brief review of the history of flax-

* Pp. 439

74 FLAX CULTURE

growing in England and Scotland strength-
ens the position taken in the body of the
book, that flax-growing for fibre is a trade
to be learned, and cannot be successfully
followed without much care-taking and
patience. The British and American
farmers dislike the trade; and compulsion,
bounties, and duties are none of them
sufficient to induce a general cultivation.

Whether or not the various bounties
and duties on linens stimulated the pro-
duction of cloth, and contributed to the
present status of the linen industry in
Great Britain, is a question outside the
present inquiry. We are now concerned
merely with the inquiry as to the effect
of bounties and duties on flax-growing,
and it is certain that at the present day
the British linen-mills are largely supplied
with the raw material imported from for-
eign countries.

In Ireland the course of development
was somewhat different. The climate there
is well adapted to the growing of flax and
the bleaching of linen ; but the linen indus-

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 75

try there has been stimulated by the course
of the English Government, in vigorously
discouraging all other branches of manu-
facture except linen. At the end of the
seventeenth century Parliament restricted
the exportation of all woollen goods from
Ireland except to England, where pro-
hibitory duties were laid on their importa-
tion. ‘This action ruined the woollen trade
in Ireland. Several thousand manufac-
turers left the kingdom, and some of the
southern and western districts were almost
depopulated.*. The course of England was
doubtless influenced by the fact that the
Protestants in the North of Ireland were
engaged in the linen industry, while the
Catholic part of the population was mostly
engaged in other industries. About this
time an Act of Parliament allowed flax and
linen produced in Ireland to be imported
into England free of duty (stat. 7, 8, Wil-
liam III., chap. 39). This stimulated the
growth of flax; and for several years
420,000 was appropriated annually to

* The Linen Trade, p. 391.

760 FLAX CULTURE

encourage the industry. Much was done
by way of bounties, but mostly for the
production of linen cloths; yet for some
reason no mill for the spinning and
weaving of linen by machinery was erected
in Ireland until some forty years after
similar mills had been put in operation in
England.’

This generous assistance from the gov-
ernment, continued for more than a hun-
dred years, does not seem to have been
entirely successful. Mr. Warden gives
tables showing the acreage of flax in Ire-
land, and also the imports of raw flax,

which are worth summarizing : —

YEARS. Acres Sown. YEARS. Acres Sown.
IS15 : . 148,124 | 1850 : - 91,040
1820 ‘ ~ 148,554 | 1855 ‘ Baers
1825 ‘ - 139,412 | 1860 , . 128,595

The imports of raw flax into Belfast

were as follows :—

YEAR. Tons. YEAR. Tons.
1848 . : . 4,665 | 1858. : - 7,816
1851. ; w 2 9sThS |) Deaaees ; - 10,965
1854. ‘ . 8,986

' The Linen Trade, p. 4oq.

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 77

Mr. Warden goes on to say that “the
linen trade in Ireland has progressed very
rapidly of late years, but it might have
extended still faster had the supply of the
raw material been more abundant.” ‘ The
great hindrance to the more extensive cul-
tivation of flax,” he says, ‘‘ is the ignorance
and prejudice of the farmers.” He rec-
ommends the spinners and merchants to
take action to instruct the farmers, and
root out their prejudices, and quotes from
the ‘‘Trade Circular” for 1862, that the
want of a low-priced scutching-machine
is a serious obstacle to flax culture.
“Surely,” he says, ‘the intelligence, the
skill, and the wealth of Ireland, will
speedily overcome this difficulty, and pro-
duce a low-priced, portable scutching-ma-
chine that will do the work cheaply, yet
efficiently.” This all reads like an agri-
cultural report of the United States, or an
annual report of the Flax and Hemp Spin-
ners’ and Growers’ Association; but. it
hardly bears out the theory that an import
duty on raw flax will induce or encourage

78 FLAX CULTURE

farmers to raise flax for fibre, or justify
those who are clamoring for the reten-
tion of the duty on flax, in pointing to
the success of English protective meas-
ures in supplying the home-market with
domestic flax. It is a consideration worthy
of note also, that, in spite of this govern-
mental protection to linen in Ireland, flax-
growing has not enriched the people who,
under the fostering care of England, have
become almost a nation of paupers.

THe UNITED STATES.

This digression into the history of flax-
growing in Great Britain has led us away
from the examination of the comparison
of the protective legislation in England
and America. Asa matter of fact, during
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
while England was granting bounties and
compelling the growing of flax, the Eng-
lish Colonies were doing the same thing in
the same way, and, in some cases, ona much
larger scale. They also received material
aid from the mother country, which was

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 79

always ready to encourage the production
and exportation to England of raw mate-
rials for manufacture. Thus, in 1764, Par-
liament granted a bounty of eight pounds
per ton on all rough flax imported into
England from the American Colonies.
This, taking into account the value of
money at that time, is considerably more
than the present duty imposed by our gov-
ernment on imports of dressed flax. In
1771 the bounty was decreased to six
pounds per ton, and it remained at that
figure until commercial intercourse was in-
terrupted by the Revolution.” In 1703 a
similar bounty of six pounds per ton was
allowed on the importation of hemp; and
the Assembly of Pennsylvania, in 1730,
increased this by an additional bounty of
three half-pence per pound.’

Massachusetts gave early attention to
flax culture. In 1639 it was enacted in
Plymouth, —

“That every householder within the Government
shall sowe one rodd of ground square at least with

' The Linen Trade, p. 369. ? 1 Bishop, p. 336.

80 FLAX *CULIUKE

hemp or flax yearely, and some one in every Towne to
be appoynted to see the same donn, and present it
to the Court in June yearely.””?

In the next year it was further en-
acted, —

“That all such person or persons as have sowed any
hempe or flaxe according to the former act of the
Court, shall not waste the same but shall dress the
said hemp or flax, or procure it to be dressed fitt for
some good use, and preserve the seed ; and the Com-
ittees of the several Townes shall see the same soe
donn the week before the Eleccon Court, and to
make report thereof to the Court, upon penalty of five
shillings to be forfaited to the Colony’s use for every

delinquent therein.” ?

This is a reminiscence of the statute of
Henry the Eighth. In the same year the
Colony of Massachusetts Bay granted a
bounty of three pence on every shilling’s
worth of linen cloth of the growth of the
province ‘for the incuragment of the
manifocture,” but this was repealed within
a year “because too burthensome to the
country,” but not until some bounties had

’ Plymouth Colony Laws, p. 63. ? Lbid, p. 68.

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 81

been paid... In 1656 it was ordered that
every family should spin some flax; and
the Act prescribed minutely the number of
pounds to be spun by each family accord-
ing to its ability, and imposed a penalty of
twelve pence for every pound short.

In 1728 a considerable bounty was
offered for flax-growing by an Act enti-
tled, —

“An Act for encouraging the raising of flax within
this province.’

Ҥ 1. That from and after the publication of this
ct. tor the encouragement of the manufacturers of
canvas and cordage, there shall be paid out of the
public treasury the sum of 18 shillings and 8 pence
for every one hundred and twelve pounds of water-
rotted, well-cured, and clean-dressed flax of the growth
of this province.

Ҥ 5. That if any one shall bring to the market
the quantity of two hundred and twenty-four pounds
weight of flax, he shall be allowed 4 shillings and 8
pence per hundred over and above what is before
allowed by this Act.

“5 7» his Act to continue «. «for the space of
five years.”

When this Act expired, it was renewed
with a larger bounty, and a recognition of

? 1 Bishop, p. 299. ? Province Laws, 1728, chap. 7.

82 FLAX CULTURE

the superiority of water-rotted over dew-
rotted flax.

“$y, That .. . there shall be paid out of the pub-
lick treasury the sum of . . . 37 shillings and 4 pence
for every 112 pounds of wazer-rotted, well-cured, and
clean-dressed flax, and 18 shillings and 8 pence for
every 112 pounds of dew-rotted, well-cured, and clean-
dressed flax, of the growth of this province.

“$5. That if any person shall bring to the sur-
veyor the quantity of 224 pounds of hemp or flax
... he shall be allowed . . . for water-rotted flax, 9
shillings and 4 pence, and for dew-rotted flax, 4 shil-
lings and 8 pence a hundred, over and above what is
before allowed in this Act.

Ҥ 6. This Act to continue ... for . ; . three

years.” *

By this Act a bounty of $225 per ton,
reckoning money at its present value, was
granted,—a sum far in excess of the
bounty offered by England in 1781 of four
pence per stone (equal to $12.80 per ton),
and five or six times as much as the present
duty on dressed flax imported to this
country, with results equally meagre.

In 1722, and at other times, premiums

? Province Laws, 1734, chap. 15.

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 83

were granted for linen cloth; but this
inquiry is not so much concerned with the
growth of the cloth industry, as with
the production of the raw material, but
in the early history of the Colonies the two
are intimately connected, as, unlike Eng-
land, the only source of flax was the home
supply. A large brick spinning-school was
erected in Boston; and the Massachusetts
Assembly, in 1737, imposed a tax on car-
riages and other luxuries, for its mainte-
nance, and in 1753 the Assembly appro-
priated fifteen hundred pounds annually to
aid the society in charge of the school.’
In 1770 a further appropriation was made
for the school, and a large fund was raised
by private subscription. It would be tedi-
ous to enumerate the many other meas-
ures taken in Massachusetts to encourage
the raising of flax, the government, even,
at one time (1737) taking flax in payment
of taxes, at the rate of six, pence a
pound.

Connecticut was not behind Massachu-

1 1 Bishop, p. 333- 2 Ibid, p. 346. = [bid, Ps 335.

84 FLAX CULTURE

setts, as an entry in the colonial records
In 1640 reads : —

“Whereas yt is obserued as experience hath made
appeare that much grownd win these liberties may
be well improued in hempe and flaxe, and that we
might in tyme haue supply of lynnen cloath amongst

o'selves . . . it is Ordered that . . . every family that
keeps a Teeme ... shall sow... at lest on rood
of hempe or flaxe . . . or in default thereof are to

vndergoe the censure of the Courte.” !

In 1725 the exclusive right to make
canvas in the province was granted to
Richard Rogers.’

In Virginia, strenuous efforts were made
to promote the cultivation of flax. In
1673 an Act was passed for the encourage-
ment of flax-growing, and the develop-
ment of the home market. It reads : —

“An Act for the advancement of the Manufactory
of fflax and hempe.

“Forasmuch as it conduceth to the well being of
any country that the necessities thereof be supplyed
from their own industry within themselves, and that
the lesse they have occasion for from abroad, the lesse
will be their dependance on forreigne supplies whereof

1 Colonial Records of Connecticut, p. 61. ° 1 Bishop, p. 335.

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 85

the calamity of warr and other accidents may prevent
them; and whereas this assembly takeing into their
serious consideration the low and contemptable price
we are allowed for our tobaccoes, occasioned cheifly
by the greate quantityes yearely made, hath thought
fitt, if it may be to abate from the quantity by ad-
vancing the more usefull and necessary manifactory
of fflax and hempe, and in order thereunto have
enacted . . . that the respective County Courts with-
in this colony doe, at the cost and charge of their
counties . .. procure one quart of fflax and one
quart of hempe seed for every tythable person .

and cause the same to be distributed amongst the in-
habitants, and that the courts failing to procure the
said flax and hempe seed... be fined five thou-
sand pounds of tobacco: And it is further enacted
. . . that every tythable [person] . . . doe make, or
cause to be made, one pound of drest fflax and one
pound of drest hempe, or two pounds of either, and
soe yearly and every year, under the penalty of fifty
pounds of tobacco for every pound of fflax or hempe
neglected to be made as aforesaid . . . and for the
better discovery of such neglect that . . . tythables
at the time of laying the levy . . . deliver upon oath

22).

that it is of his owne growth.

This Act does not appear to have been
fully successful in causing flax to be
grown, and it was apparently evaded, as

a 2 Wen. Stat., pe 316.

86 FLAX CULTURE

in 1682 a subsequent Act gave one-half
of the penalty of fifty pounds of tobacco
to the informer; and as a further stimulus
the Act provided : —

“That what person or persons soever shall by his
industry out of his own growth and manufacture work
up his flax and hempe fitt for the spindle . . . for
every pound so wrought up, either of fflax or hempe,
he, or they, shall be allowed two pounds of tobacco
for his or their encouragements by the publique.” *

The Act went on to allow a bounty of
six pounds of tobacco for every ell of linen
cloth, three-quarters of a yard wide, made
from such flax.

In spite however of the fine burst of
patriotism and protection in the preamble
of the Act of 1673, the Assembly of Vir-
ginia felt obliged to repeal these laws.
After reciting in the preamble of the Act
the various bounties given and penalties
imposed, they say, —

. “which said encouragements . . . are found
to be rather a charge and inconvenience, then any

benefitt to the publique, the charge thereby accumu-
lated likely to be great, and the effect of transposi-

1 2 Hen. Stat., p. 503.

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 87

tion of tobacco through officers hands and much
thereof thereby exhausted; and the persons them-
selves to whome the encouragements are thereby due,
desiring to relinquish all their claimes, and the same
being so represented to this assembly, finding suffi-
cient encouragement by the benefitt received of their
labours to promote and propagate soe beneficial
manufactures.” !

After which follows the repealing clause.

Bounties were again offered in Virginia
inet 7 5."

The Assembly of Rhode Island granted
considerable aid to William Borden in the
manufacture of canvas and duck. In 1722
he was granted a bounty of twenty shil-
lings on each bolt manufactured for ten
years; and in 1725 he was granted five
hundred pounds a year for three years
from the general treasury, ‘if there be so
much to spare.” Not content with this
generous provision, he applied for and re-
ceived in 1728 a loan of three thousand
pounds, without interest, for ten years ; and
the bounty of twenty shillings per bolt was
continued In 1731, 1735,and 1751, Acts

1 3 Hen. Stat., p. 16. 7 1 Bishop, p. 382. 7 /éid, p. 334.

88 FIAX CULTURE

were passed granting bounties and _pre-
miums for flax raised in the province; but
the colonial records, as reprinted, do not
contain copies of these acts. Notwith-
standing all this, there was in 1767 scarce
flax enough raised to supply the spinners.’

In 1765 New Jersey granted bounties
on the raising of flax and hemp, and in
1766 the bounties were continued until
1772; but these Acts are printed only by
title in the collection of Statutes.’

In Pennsylvania, besides several Acts of
the Assembly for the promotion of flax
culture, a society composed of many influ-
ential men of the province was formed in
1764, to encourage the manufacture of
linen. Large premiums were offered for
the raw material and manufacture, among
which were premiums of thirty pounds to
ten pounds for the greatest amount of flax
raised by one farmer, and fifteen pounds
to five pounds for the greatest quantity
on one acre.’

t 1 Bishop, p. 373.

* Acts of General Assembly of New Jersey, 1702-1776, pp.

281 and 313.
> 1 Bishop, p. 367.

AS INFLUENCED BY LEGISLATION. 89

A similar society in New York: gave gen-
erous encouragement to domestic industry
for a number of years, but the North-River
industry in New York seems to have been
begun at a much later date, at a time when
flax-raising had no legislative protection.’

In some Colonies the local authorities
took steps to encourage the industry; and
Annapolis and Baltimore in Maryland, in
1731, both offered premiums for linen
cloth made of flax grown in the Colony.

It is thus evident, that, while England
was encouraging the production of flax at
home by protective measures, her Colonies
were quite as active in their own behalf;
and it is also clear that the governments of
Great Britain and America have not been
successful in inducing the farmers to grow
flax for fibre by any system of duties,
bounties, or penalties. It is also to be ob-
served, that flax-growing has had as much
protection granted it in this country as by
Great Britain ; and that while the protec-
tion granted by the latter country was long
ago removed, raw flax having been placed
on the free list as early as 1731, notwith-

‘ 2 Bishop, p. 205.

go FLAX COLIURE.

standing a much larger product than ever
attained here, in America the protective
duties still exist. Is not the burden on
those who ask for the retention of the
duty, to show what there is to be pro-
tected, to come forward with facts and
figures showing the number and location
of the flax-growers, and the amount of
their annual product, and the extent of the
benefit that accrues to such growers from
the duty? Is it not also incumbent on
them to show that the imposition of the
duties has increased flax-growing, or even
prevented it from decreasing? In short,
is not the burden of proof on them to
show that the benefit resulting from the
duty on raw flax outweighs the manifest
injury to the manufacturer and consumer
of linen goods who pay the duty? No
intelligent person can give any but an
affirmative answer to these interrogatories.
The weight of evidence, of facts, of expe-
rience here and abroad, all lead to the
same conclusion, that a duty on scutched
and hackled flax is not protection; there
is nothing in America to protect.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

ooo‘ogZ‘06 | HSf‘Ig gis‘S6g gzz‘of 009‘z : ee ROT
000‘zZZ‘66 Igi‘Sz 1Z2°L¢ 611‘L6 6gbtss : * + euvipuy
ooogst'Sz1 | Log‘Zg1 g09‘boz‘z S€z'‘ev £90‘0gI : * * soul]
000'971 ool €g6 Cole LgEis : * + B1d10047
ooo bre‘ 1 of! gZg z11‘g VLSI : * ueMrjaq
000'zZ6 ~ - ~ - : * + RyoxRd
oooh - oof L£gu‘s gcO‘Z1 : ynoyauUu0D
000‘9tg‘1 - obl‘1f - - : * VIUIOsITED
000'g£g of ozb 1zg‘e 16z‘c1 ; * sesueyiy
000‘o$ = ze 111 1z6‘¢ : * vuleqrry
ooo'gSo'zbg | gtS‘SoS‘1 peoee ‘Lz | Sbi‘ozl‘y 9L9‘60L‘Z " $9}¥}G pou)
“MBAS jo spunod *xe[y jo spunog | *xe[y JO spunog “xELT jo spunog *Xe[ YY JO spunog
: *“passoip
d of re “Wa. e :

“Oggi snsuad sfemeenat ie OOF rod S1$ Aing ACT J Sora preons ay ritts OO oS
Aq mens xepq | uo} rad oz} Aynqq

‘SBT Jo sustag | ‘OL8T Jo sustaD | ‘QOBT JO sustag | ‘OGgT Jo susuaZ

"susuay yIve Jo
aut) ayy gv Ajnp ays fo JuilowDy ay)? SALOYS OS]V 3JQV] AYT ‘OSgr ut UunrorS ‘pornporg st aigyl
ay) ynynr mosf ‘mavajs Jo gunowp ayy ystar ‘spuogar snsuay ay. AQ uans sv ‘oggr ‘olor
‘cogs ‘OS9r ut sapvysy pajiugy ays ur unos (spunog ur) aig xvyf fo yunowv Summoys agv

L 2eisy

93

Fe

APPENDIX

*uostiedulod jo
sasodind 10; spunod 07 paohipos a1ay are YOIYM SUO} UT JUNOWY ayi S9AIZ a]qu} SnsUdd aYT, “JUNOUIe snNOUTIOUAD siy} WOIy pImnpoyd
aiqy JO JuNOWe |[eWIS a4} MOYS 0} Pappe si ‘oggt UT paonpoid Mes XeYy JO JUNOWL ay} Surmoys uwnjood ayy — ‘aLON

000‘g0z‘o$ Vale g6e‘Lor bro'1z €6E‘gg «| tt tf UISUOOST MA
000'9z£‘OI C6E'PV glz‘z - - ‘+ RIULBITA ISI AA
000‘0g¢‘z bg9z°99 oS L‘o£1 gso‘Ler oS tb‘ooo't sg ETE LA.
000'gEz‘or $L5‘6 669‘z1 LoLl‘L zSQ‘oz . 9 «© * juoUIIa A
000‘z00‘z oS 1 Sz S11 gto 1 Cee Sea
000‘bFo9‘h 109 61 o£6‘0g b6z‘tor 1€1‘gg£ - * « * 99SsouUuaT,
000‘217z‘1g 96361 906‘S 1g ggezi£ Lot‘of$ ‘+ + vrueayfsuua dg
000 bE 661 ‘gz blb‘or zQI otg 7 5 8 8 9 yosIIO
oo0'0Sg'SZ Lo €z1 bz9'0ge‘L1 €zbh‘z9g zl6‘obb Sembee Se ones 2 OTU GC)
o00'bhgz‘z 179 6 cas'6S cbt ‘giz g6L‘€6S * + RBUlLoIe> YON
000966 z$ S96: trg g1g‘olo‘¢ LLS‘ot6 Szo‘g1S$'1 "5 + + WIOK MIN
000‘91z‘z1 10Z‘9v 190‘h&z 159‘gv $96‘Z81 & #6 “shasta MONT
000‘g1Z‘9 - LL1 LVe'T SOL * sauiysdmepy MON
000‘Z 1£‘9z 006 vs - - . #89 * “BuSeIe NI
000‘9g 1 ‘z zSv‘6r £i9‘QI L£9‘601 o91‘Zz9 "of 5 8 LIMOssifl
000‘o£ - ool oS $99 * + + iddississifl
000 bZb‘g L6¢ TLS Cel €96'1 - $3) ©) * BIOSSUUITA
oo0'zbS ‘9 Ol o11‘o$z gz1v ae iy ‘ °F UCSITITA
ooo'hrZ'¢ . - of6 Sgl cgi‘ * + spasnyoesse yy
000‘gez‘gI 60g og ‘o£ igt‘v1 g3g‘S¢ sos 8 puepdreyy
000'9Sz‘€ 101‘I scv's L662 1g0'Z1 See ae BOT
ooo'coh‘zr -| 16b‘st ggz‘Ltz Pez‘gzl gittoor'z |* * + + yonuay

00091 1‘ge oS 11 obo‘! Srey = 2 Ft ie tet SP STINT

APPENDIX.

+
OV

0S 96z‘9SZ‘v

gi v‘6gs‘€1

S¢

££ oSb‘gq oS 695‘S61 z6z‘ZzS‘1 » ode

99 ozh'SSz¢ | Sg 19S ‘glo¢ - ‘yuao sad ob
“spunog

“£9 gosbSig | 00 Shg'go61g | Spo. * >

16 €z1‘z1 00 06¢9‘c£z Sooeeie 1 ree

gI 1 oo II gcc i

Sb 916‘c6 00 Loz‘gzo'1 | SEzgSto'v mich

60 Lobv‘6rg | 00 LEL‘Otgo¢g | 14Lg'9€z'1 |'uoj Aad OF
“suoy,

“sarin, “sone A ‘sannuen(d) |*Aing jo saiey

‘hs 5s gnyeaA Jaryd Jo [eI19}
-ew yuauodwos ay} aq [jeys dway
Jo aynf ‘xeg yoiym jo 10 ‘duiay 10
aynf ‘xey jo ‘sume pue syza1yo19y
-puey ‘syorq-e-yony ‘ysvio ‘saad
-BIP ‘SW0}}0q-}09 ‘Suipped ‘seauvo
‘syonp ‘suaul, poyovajq pure uMoig
ote taetig cal aad 1671s “xULq
:SUIeA
uUaul{ 10
xvpy ‘pearyyyoed pure ‘aurm} ‘peary
“SHU NLOVANNV IN
painjovjnuvwun [e}O 7,

. .

. . . . . . . . .

jo MOL,
MES
* passaip 10 payyovy JON
({3Ul] passaip,, se UMOUY ‘paryov]Y
P42 Of
‘daa NLOVANNVNNN

. . . . . . . . .

. . . .

"Logr ‘oF aunt, surpua avak ayy sof uoasays pivg

saunp ays yj xvyf fo sainjovfnuvu ays puv xvyf fo sprogutt Jo JUNOWDY ay) SALOYS 219] SIYT

a], a lava

95

APPENDIX,

bl 196‘Z6b 6g] SS Egz‘Log‘El¢) - - ‘SONSIL]S S3}VIS poyluy url 19y}e5
-O} passrpd ‘painjorjnuewun pur
paanjorjnuvur “aya faynf ‘dwoy ‘xrpyq

gL o66‘LoL‘S¢| 66 LSCZSS ‘Lig - = Fae tie Gece ee | > toto)
-ovgnuLWUN pUe painzoVJnURW [L}O J,

€1 cgv esv's¢ | v6 ziS‘ghg'sig ~ ae s+ * © ganpoRjnuEU [IO],

Sc Les re bi £re‘19 - »» Of] fanyea zaryo Jo [etsa}ew yUasUOdWIO0D
ay} aq [veys xXey yorym Jo 10 ‘xey
jo ‘10J paptAoid pue payesguinua
Ajjeroads Jou sainjovjnuewl 19410 [TV

61 gSS‘t SZ cfz‘9 - »» $2) * BUIM} Bulppis pue oulas puv saulag

09 6z1'IzE 00 z£h‘oLo‘! - » Of} * udaull io xey ‘ssuljiosur pur saoery]

ob z19‘Iz S€ 1vo‘~ ~ »» Of + «-AOT paptaosd so payesd unud ATR
-1oads jou ‘ssa9o1d 1340 10 v[paau
ay} ym a0 Arauiyoeutr Aq ‘asim
-194}010 WOO] 94} UL painoqwr} 10
posaploiquia jl ‘uauly Jo Saanyzovryn
-uUvUI 10 ‘(UdUT] 10 xvY) SatIaploiquiy,

oz ILb‘b$¢ 00 boé‘ri¢ bobb6 |yuaosad of] * * * sles 10J seAued JO ‘yOnNp [les
“Ssple x
“sarin “sante A ‘sannuend) |Ainq jo sey

‘papnjIuo) —"|] ATAVI,

APPENDIX

zLo'ooL'og

Sal‘zgz‘gz¢

19 ‘PEL beg

gzo'fof

6SL4‘z10't

£og‘S10' S‘ zg ‘zz
9 8 882 28

bP eSz

o96'Zz1g

£16‘6h6

S26‘ Lig‘ 1¢

sgg‘ziig

z10‘9OI

gob ‘ogz‘zz

£6b'g96

oth Olt 1g

bor'gdh'tz¢g

obt‘ez

tgo'oSS‘1z

oof ‘gL

oof ‘6z hig

* usuly, pue xvy ‘s[ejo

‘of 8 8 sartaproiquua
pue saovyj {dja ‘satinxnyt
‘asn Arejyunfoa Jo sapniy
ee oe eee eee
‘suoult {uoyduinsuod 105
Apear ‘painjovjnuew sopoiy
. . . . . . . sured
foinjovynueur UL SsTeLioyeur
se asn JO¥ podnjoesnueur
Aypeyaed 10 AT[oyM sapnay
Sane: MO} pue Xe MeL
{ AIYSNpUL dIySaWOp Jo sassaod
-O1d 9tj} OJUT Ja}Ua YOIYM
uol}ipuod opnid ul sapsy4y

“sonny

*sanye A.

“sound

“sone A

‘sonny

“sone A

“Egger *ZQQt “Iggr

‘QUBDIYLUSISUL St DILAIULY Ut peAnjov{nuvut spoos
nau fo qunomv oy ‘pivg sarnp fo S]unoup ay] Yj ‘SSgr-IEgT Swad ary IY) UL SAIS
Pel) yp o7us pajaogur ‘sasn AQ payissyy9 ‘spoos uauy puv xvyf fo sanpwir ayf SMLOYS 279V} S14.

WL ee EE

97

APPENDIX.

64:2

*yuad Jad

“Sggr ur Ajnp

jo ayer "702
pv sselvay

L99‘9Sc'Z¢ |

* uaul] pue xey ‘spe}oL

‘oh 8 8 8 sataproiquia
pue sade {oye ‘satanxnt
‘asn AreyunjoOA Jo soapy
Se ere eer aia aan
‘suouly {uoydumsuod 105
Apvas ‘painjoeynuew sopy.ty
. . . . . . . sured
faINJOVJNULUT UT S[ela}eU
se asn Joy painzoejnueuw
Aqeysed 310 ATOYM sapnIVy
"+ 5 MO} pue Xey MBI
{Aaysnput o1ysawop Jo sassao
-o1d ay} OUT ajuda YoTyM
uorjIpuod apnio ur sopiIVy

SS6'Zehezg || r116'Sho'L¢g 6S 1'zSo'bheg
Lgz‘6be 6gz‘borst ol ‘ch ggo'tbhst
61F £96 ‘9 [06‘zt6'gt TggoSi1'Z £61‘LS9‘oz
ggi ‘60z $60'6 Ezg'gSt Sr6'Sty
£26 ‘bl 1g Logzf lig L9g fog SS6'Zob ‘1g
‘sound ‘son[eA *sornnd *son[eA
“Seer

‘papnjruoy — TI] ATAVL

r
.

APPENDIX

ie)
On

16
<9
L6
0§

88
of

Co
gL

6£
9S
Mi
Lo

‘uo} Jod ane, ade10Ay

z6I
o61
gi
og1¢

Ozz
Let
ce

trc¢

rAd
ZLS
06S

cos ¢

16 $21 ‘Zi
€$ 996‘91
zg 966‘91
ob 102‘Z1¢

Sb 916‘z6
cO-£ce I>
99 SgE‘ZZ
gi oss ‘Lrg

60 Lot‘6b
€€ beoth
00 68S ‘oP
LS O6gS‘el¢

‘sound

co 069'zfz
oo brrece
00 6£z‘olz
oo Ff L‘hgzg

00 Loz‘gzo'l
00 z6S‘E9S
00 $£6‘z9g
00 ooo‘ogsS ¢

oo LEL‘6tg
00 9LL‘1bg
oo €S4h'66S
00 zzz‘ers¢

lo lo
ae
Ic IO,
|
oNWN
OV
co
—

lo, ele
a
ao

198

a,
c
oD.

al?
oO,
ae,
=
NAO
Ne)
an.
ey

ole,
on
is
ir

sose'
mee
“971 VIOT
oo or +96

. . .

* £9Q1
* 9881
* SQOI
Pegi

*u0} ad
ord Ayn ‘xepq jo MOT,

-VGQT
* OSS!
* $QQI
" tggi

*uo} iad

*x¥] J passoipuy)

* L991
* O8si
* Soor
* PQgI

*u0} Jad

ob Ayn ,,{aury passaq ,,

“Son[e A

*suoy, — sonnurn?)

*uo02say) pivg sargnp ay. ypia ‘savad Anos ysvg ay) U2 S2zD]S pIj1Uy) IY}
ojue pazrodiu sutsof snot syrur xvyf mova ayg Jo sanpva puv sorgiquvnb ayz saris 22Qv] SIU.

“AI HTaAVL

APPENDIX. 99

TABLE. V;

Much is said about the inability of the
American flax-grower to compete with the
‘pauper labor” of Europe. The follow-
ing tables show the comparative cost of
the production of flax in America and in
Ireland. It will be seen that while the cost
of labor is undoubtedly higher in America
than in Ireland, yet this is to a great degree
compensated for by the greater value of
land in Ireland. In Holland, flax land
readily brings a yearly rent of 300 to 350
francs per hectare, equal to $25 to $30 per
acre, a price for which good flax land can
be bought outright in the West. In all
manufacturing processes, America has an
advantage in cheap fuel and water-power.
(The first table is taken from the Report of
the Tariff Commission, p. 995.)

APPENDIX

100

st SIL

‘2]qe} SUIMOT[OF Oy} Ui UMOYS

‘LOMIWY Ul XE IBY JO UOILAIY[ND JO SOO dy} MOYS JOU SaOp “AAAIMOY JIqe} SIU LT,

eee eS is ob €1¢ | SZ 11¢ | SZ g$ | Of o1¢
* + + Zurpuiq pure Buyjng | $c 1 | of S€ os
oe = 6 BtipaamM | OF f o$ of = of I
* * + + gules jo sado1 0g 00 Z 00 I SL
Suryeu pur ‘saysna suryyny | of os le) Sg
‘+ + © sraysnq €z ‘paag | oo I SZ 1 Ss ce 2
*Sul[jod pue ‘paes Surmos | of oI oz z
‘squojs Suryoid ‘suimosiepyy | Sz $1 Oz se
* +s 6 + Surysnojd auc | of 1 ae $8 00 I
‘ + + + saxpj puvjuey | OS $ | OO SH | OS cH | G4 Es
*Ayunos) *Ayunos *Ayuno7) *Ayunosy
“ANVIAY] Ul IY aU Suyeanjng Jo 3sop suet Aru9 7] stad SEE al Pe aebal sl

A

“SIONITT] 40 YLVLS

A 1a VL

* TROL

Suljpoylvyjy
Surysasy L
* SULYIVIS
* + Sunyng
Pees
* Surjurid
SUIMOIIL
* Surysnolg
pur) fo 27

‘aNDy Vag

IOI

AAPL NDT X.

‘rr -d ‘uorssruuo0z jeuorssa13u0D yo yoday 4 “26d ‘togt 10y oN NOUS jo yuamjiedacy jo yoday x

Suyjnd spury Z1 | > ‘+ * Surpnd
Suipaam spury ZI | : sos 8 8 + Burpaa AA
‘ paas jo sjaysnq fz | a * paas Jo sjaysnq Fz
. . . . . . . . Sulypfor
puv ‘Saimoieg ysnq ‘suimos
‘+ + Zulpor pue Summoiivyy
ro) = ra} Sg | ay eee yenT
SUIMOS puv SuIysno[d || | sSuryonoyd omy,

* + + gaxey pue yuay || pur] jo juay

{+puvjary wr aiay ted yso9 i| x eoUawy ul ay red 1°09

‘papnjIuo0) —*A ATIVE

102 APPENDIX,

TABLE VI.

This table shows the acreage of flax in the flax-growing
countries of the world, with the yield in fibre, the value
of the same, and the average value per acre.

Report of Tariff Commission, p. 1967.

‘ Quantity
Acres 0 of Fibre ; Yield per
Country, 1880. ase: produced, Value of same. Kore!
in tons.
|
About

Russia . . . |2,000,000} 250,000) $50,000,000|$25 00
Germany . .| 329,362] 57,432) 11,500,000] 35 00

Austria. . .| 245,090] 50,463! 10,900,000] 44 00
Italy. . . .| 200,356) 22,953} 4,600,000] 23 00
France . . .| 162,099} 36,969) 11,000,000] 68 00
Ireland . . .| 157,534} 24,508} 7,500,000] 48 00
Belgium. . .| 140,901] 29,580} 9,000,000) 64 00
Holland: 44,114) 7,286 2,200,000) 50 00
Sweden. .. 33,039 5205 850,000] 25 00
BOvpe. oa: 4 15,000] 1,875 375,000] 25 00
Great Britain . 8,985} 1,398 300,000] 33 00
Denmark . . 6,292 787 158,000} 25 00
Greece... 957 119 25,000] 26 00

Total Europe, 3,344,329] 487,675'$ 108,408,000

UNITED STATES, 1881.

LOWal cn ve assy 287,400 )

Indiana. « -| 193,400 | No merchantable fibre pro-
RanSas.,./ eee 160,900 duced; flax burned or
Illinois . . ~| 160,300 | otherwise destroyed.
Minnesota. .| 95,200| ; Total quantity of flax
Cyiidus, 2 gato 80,600 seed raised on this area,
Missouri . . 55,000 about 8,000,000 bushels,
Nebraska . . 50,000 valued at $8,000,000.!

Wisconsin ee 44,500

Total Western
States, {1,127,300

I The crop of flax seed for 1885 is stated to have been 12,000,000 bushels,
valued at $13,500,000,

eon i
Oh nena
- reads

uy : ie

ne

ivi

000093e1b640