17 SEPTEMBER 1881, Page 10

THE CRIMINALITY OF REGRATING.

,OF all who read these columns, probably not half, though they are most of them educated persons, will be quite sure that they understand exactly the meaning of that word.

• They will nevertheless, we fear, have to learn it, for, unless we mis- take greatly, Regrating will shortly become a feature in daily life that will interest all men, and rouse once more the old question whether absolute freedom of dealing is indeed possible, in a world like this. Every housewife in England was last year paying more for her bacon through the system, and this year will pay • more for her loaves. So abhorrent to the elder world, that the practice is denounced in the Old Testament as a grave crime, regrating—properly speaking, the engrossing of goods in open market, by an individual or coparcenary—continued almost till the time of the present generation to be regarded by the popular mind as a malignant offence. Latimer thundered against it, Spenser denounced it, it was declared an offence at Common Law, and down to quite recent days was considered an injury to the people—especially when practised in corn, salt, or hops —justifying insurrection. New ideas of the rights of dealers sprang up, however, food was not engrossed, owing to the greater extent of the markets, and the popular feeling died away, until, as we say, people have nearly forgotten the meaning of the old words, and the abhorrence of the device has come to be regarded as an antiquated prejudice. We shall see the old feeling revive, though, before many 'years are past. At this moment, if a small ring of brokers in Liverpool made their appearance in Burnley or Oldham and were recognised by the operatives, it would take soldiers to save their lives ; the American regraters are adding a halfpenny a loaf to the cost of every poor man's bread, and even if there is not, as we suspect, a " corner " in butter going on, Messrs. Armour or some such firm may be adding a fifth to the cost of bacon. Nor is anything that has been done a fair gauge of what may be immediately at hand. So perfect is now inter- .communication, so complete is commercial information, so easy is financial combination, so vast is the wealth at the command of individuals, that we speak most seriously when we say that we believe the regrating or engrossing of articles of the first necessity may be carried to lengths which will provoke insurrec- tions, and compel powerful States to act in earnest.

Regrating has always been one of the quickest and most certain ways of making money, but till our own time, only Princes and Satraps ventured to engross actual food. The merchants confined themselves to smaller and less dangerous articles. A dye was bought up, as indigo was one year, without much profit, we believe, to the great firm which struck the blow—the world not holding indigo quite indispensable—or a drug was monopolised, till chemists re- • fused to sell it. There are, fortunately, not many drugs for which science cannot provide an alternative ; and opium, which is one of them, can be produced for medical purposes over half the world; and mercury, which is another, would demand enormous funds. The Rings do, however, play with scammony, rhubarb, and above all, quinine, their dealings with the latter involving sometimes a considerable cost to human life. Twice at least within our recent recollection they have mastered the market, have held or controlled all quinine, and have rapidly raised the price from eight shillings to a guinea an ounce, thus not only rendering it inaccessible to ordinary fever patients, but, what is

even more dangerous, almost compelling the poorer chemists to use an adulterated drug. Even as it is, the patient who wants heavy doses of solid quinine, or of bromide of potassium, or of one or two other drugs, should choose his chemist, or the

chances are he will get one-third of the dose prescribed Important articles, like quicksilver, have been repeatedly en- grossed, as, curiously enough, has one of the very smallest, canary seed. Canary seed is bought mainly for the pleasure of children, its cost is at any time not much, and forty years ago all procurable canary seed was in one man's hand, as it also was a few months since, the engrosser, in the second case, having the courage to triple the price at a stroke. He must have netted a fortune in a quarter, and if he will just publish his name for the benefit of bird-fanciers, he will have an in- teresting quarter of an hour. These are trifles, however. The grand regraters are now striking at heavier game, and with the assistance of the system of buying "to arrive," that is, of making future contracts, are threatening the food and business of whole nations. A Ring in Liverpool at this moment has control of all procurable cotton, and has raised the price till the Lanca- shire millowners have collected votes, and have decided to stop their mills for a fortnight altogether, and then work half-time. They think that suspension of business, by limiting demand, will compel the go-betweens, who must have money, to sell at a reduc- tion—a calculation drawn too fine, particularly with all this warn- ing—but even if they succeed the misery inflicted on hundreds of thousands will be great enough perceptibly to affect the pros- perity of the year. Lancashire will be " clemmed " for a fort- night as by a universal strike, in order that twenty men may become rich at a stroke. Even that is nothing compared with the " corner " that exists in corn, and especially the " corner " that might exist. It is known that speculators in America are holding back corn by enormous purchases till the " elevators " are choked, the warehouses bursting, freight a difficulty, and the price some shillings a quarter above the level that would other- wise prevail. That combination may fail, because English agri- culturists have been over pessimist about their crop, and the re- graters may have to wait longer than their resources will stand ; but next year they will come into the market with a larger Syndi- cate, better information, and heavier resources, and there is no saying what they could not do. England never has more than half enough bread, and France is often a tenth short, and in a bad year we see no reason why a Ring commanding ten millions of credit at five per cent. should not buy all corn "to arrive" for four months, run up prices 20s. a quarter, and make two millions sterling. The world could not pour its surplus to the centre of dearth in time, for it could not arrange transport and freight without three months' warning. Indeed, we are inclined to believe that by long bargains bolder things than this might be done, and are afraid to say what, in our belief, are the limits of the possible. There are articles, like coal, corn, and salt, in which an unscrupulous Ring, with really great means, by buying "futures," might seriously affect the happiness, and even the safety, of nations. Suppose it held the flour of London for only one week ! There is hardly a limit to the credit and the funds procurable, when profit can be shown on paper to be certain ; the supply, even of corn, is a fixed quantity; it can always be sold, if the speculation fails, at cost price; and as for regraters relenting, they would starve the human race to make a million. The writer once, by an accident, had the means of personally remonstrating with a Syndicate which attempted a much more risky " operation " than even that the Cotton Ring is trying. They had determined to deprive Bengal of salt, and they succeeded—it was before the time of cables—in getting hold of the whole amount available for four months. So complete was their success in their purchases and contracts, that fortunately for British rule, it turned their heads with greed. They quad- rupled the price in a week, and the Government, foreseeing universal popular insurrection, took a step to be justified only by extreme fear for public safety, and though themselves the manufacturers, practically broke faith with their own customers, by publicly notifying that if the plot were not abandoned, they would sell their own reserves of salt at cost-price Not one of the group engaged could be made to see that he was personally responsible for all the misery that might arrive, or could sup- press his delight at such a chance of making a heavy fortune suddenly. It was all "legitimate business."

Now, was it ? We have ourselves no doubt of the true answer, but there is hardly a more perplexing proposition in morals to make clear. The case is one of those infrequent ones in which guilt depends almost entirely or entirely upon degree. A farmer is clearly not morally wrong who holds back his corn. If he did not, the market would always be glutted after one harvest and starved before the next one, and there would -never

be that steadiness of price which, in the long-run, is for the general benefit of the community. The regrater is nothing but a very big farmer indeed, who holds back his corn. Nor can it be alleged that he is wholly without use, that he is a need- less middleman, who, like a robber in possession of a necessary ferry, levies a toll which is all pure loss. He is the ferryman, to begin with, and he does, by making a constant and a rapid market, help on production and steady prices. The Illinois -farmer could not sell direct to the cornchandler in the City of Lon- don, he would not know him or trust him. If, then, holding-back goods is not by itself an offence, and the regrater is in himself only a useful distributor, why does extreme holding-back turn a decent and useful trader into an offender against whom, in -extreme cases, the law of public safety might be quoted ? The answer to that question is clearly that no man can have a right knowingly to inflict great suffering on his fellow-men, and more -especially not to inflict great loss of life, for his own gain. Suppose a doctor to possess a mixture which was an infalli- ble cure for cholera, and in an outburst of the disease to -charge a price which left all but millionaires to perish. He would have quite a right to charge a price, and it would be -all the better if he made a fortune, as an encouragement to in- vestigation; but to charge a prohibitory price would be a -cowardly kind of massacre. The farmer does not intend or do any mischief, but the regrater who passes a certain limit, roughly stated as the profit which makes his trade worth while, both does it and intends it, and is, therefore, a fitting object of indignation, or, in extreme cases, of abhorrence. If he only inflicts suffering, he is a torturer for gain ; and if he causes -deaths, a murderer, and nothing better.

Whether it would be well for the law to interfere with his trade is a still more difficult and perplexing matter. In ordi- nary cases, it certainly would not. The regrater has a func- tion, and a beneficial function, and it would be nearly impossible to state the limit after which that function might be misused till it burdened:or threatened the community. It is quite con- -ceivable, however, that regrating might proceed to lengths at which society would not be safe—that might easily happen in regard to salt, coals, disinfectants, and corn,—and in that ease we see no reason whatever why a Supreme Court in each country should not be allowed to apply the old principle that a -contract contrary to public policy and good morals is void, or -even to punish one by the infliction of adequates fines. After all, if Governor Verelst and his accomplices did buy-up—as Macaulay believed, though we confess that we do not—all the rice in Bengal, and so cause or intensify one of the most hideous famines on record, Governor Verelst deserved death. There is no limit in such a case to the right of a people, and the evi- denc,e would be upon the face of affairs,—the coexistence of -suffering from hunger, and of vast unsold stores of grain.