AGRICULTURAL RELIEF 389 extensive speculative trade. The relations of the various methods of procedure may be represented by the following scheme: Basis idea—relief of exports from duty payment : Return of duty paid on reexportation: Drawbacks—— With proof of identity. According to a principle of equivalence. Writing off of duty credited on reexportation: Manufacture in bond— With proof of identity. According to a principle of equivalence. By granting subsequent free importation on the basis of proof of exportation: Importation certificates-— Nonnegotiable (use restricted to importer by name and to same customhouse). Negotiable Manufacture in bond and drawbacks may in themselves lead to export boun- ties when strict proof of identity is not required. Thus the ratio of utilization may be fixed in such a way that the producer receives as a drawback on the exportation of his manufactured product than he has in reality paid in duties on the foreign raw material. The provisions for proof of importation may be drawn so liberally that under certain conditions the drawback may also be secured on domestic material which has paid no duty. It is further possible that finer qualities of raw material may be imported for domestic consumption, while for exportation poorer qualities produced at home are worked up. For example, the United States of America refunds on exportation the duties, less 1 per cent, paid on any foreign raw material contained in the exported goods, but requires only a sworn aflidavit of the exporter as proof of the fact in question. By the royal decree of February 27, 1896, Italy grants restitution of the duty on exportation of cotton yarns and fabrics: but as the duty is but 3 lire per 100 kilograms while the amount of the drawback is 4 lire per 100 kilograms in the case of yarns, and four and a balf in the case of fabrics, and in addition the tax provisions are very liberally administered, an export bounty is the result. A similar situation obtains in Russia, where, on the exportation of certain cotton and woolen manufactures, a drawback at fixed rates is paid for the duty on machinery and raw material usd in their manufacture, the payment taking the form of an issue of receipts which are rccepted in payment of duties on raw cotton and wool. An export bounty appears most frequently in case of negotiable certificates of importation, and may in fact make its appearance in two different ways. [n the first place, that part of domestic production which comes from the home district most favorably situated commercially, and geographically with respect to a foreign market region can be more effectively exported because of the fact that on exportation the producer can sell his export certificate for the approxi- mate amount of the import duty in another part of the country where an import demand for the goods exist; but this import demand will again be increased because the producing region best situated for exportation can now compete on the foreign market under conditions more favorable than it previouxly could in the more remote domestic markets. In this case the industry will at once he assured of a domestic price profiting by the full amount of the tariff protection, Le. (neglecting freight charges), a price equal to that in the world-market plus the duty, while the exporting district will receive the same price, viz, the price in the world market on the sale of the goods, and an amount approximately rqual to the duty from the disposal of the importation certificate. An export premium may also result from the quality of the imported raw material put into the exported final product, since similarity in quality, is still harder to verify than equality in amount. This import-certifictue system first reached an extensive development in France in the course of the ninetcenth century in the case of cereals and iron; it was later taken over by Germany for grain, and in recent years has found ardent advocates in Austria-Hungary. The ‘titres d’acquits a caution” in France: The importation certificates System first came into general use in France in connection with grain. The ousiness of manufacture in bond, which had been carried on since 1828, was facilitated in the edicts of January 14 and June 1. 1850. by the elimination of the requirement of proof of identity and of the limitation requiring expor- fation to take place through the same customs office. The ratio of product [0 material was fixed. according to grade. at 90, 80, and 70 kilograms of flour ver 100 kilograms of wheat. The period of manufacture was fixed for the