View report page

6
London, some 15 years ago, seems to have enjoyed to a large extent a monopoly in the hide
trade. Raw hides were brought over to this country, tanned in Bermondsey, and re-distributed
sometimes to the very localities from which the raw product came. In several places, however, which at
one time exported nothing but raw hides, local enterprise has led to the development of tanyards, so
that, instead of the raw product, a more or less finished article is sent to Europe; moreover, the
alteration of trade routes brought about by the construction of the Suez Canal is said to have affected
the leather industry (a good deal of material which would in former days have found its way to
Bermondsey being intercepted and dealt with in Italy and elsewhere). Further it may be noted that
increasing amounts of dry hides have been exported of late years to America, where they are tanned.
Whatever the causes of the change may be, there can be no doubt that during recent years there
has been—
(a) A considerable diminution in the number of tanyards in Bermondsey.
(b) A tendency for London tanners to deal more and more exclusively with English hides.
In several yards the pits are pointed out which were formerly employed for the treatment of dry

During 1892, 256,460 cwts. of raw hides were exported from London. This leaves a balance of
185,178 cwts. of hides, and this may be taken to represent the yearly quantity of foreign hides at
present dealt with in London or distributed by vessels " going coastwise "to Hull, Goole, and other
English ports. It may be assumed that a considerable part of this balance is disposed of in the lastnamed
manner.
As regards China hides, the Custom House return already quoted shows that the number brought
to Great Britain has never formed any considerable proportion of the total import of dry hides. In 1882
China hides constituted rather more, and in 1892 rather less than 2 per cent. of the total import of dry
hides in the respective years. (The total import of dry hides in 1892 is between 30 and 40 per cent. less
than in 1882.)
There can be no question that the outbreak of 1882 and 1883, investigated by Mr. Spear,
impressed those interested in the hide trade with the idea that particular danger attaches to the
manipulation of China hides, and this may, in some measure, account for the diminution; on the other
hand, the falling off in the import of China hides is not much in excess of the falling off in the import
of dry hides generally.
With regard to the "curing process" there seems to be some indication of a tendency in the
trade to encourage the adoption of the "wet" as opposed to the "dry" cure. In the "dry" cure, the
hide is usually treated with one or other material which is supposed to prevent its becoming worm-eaten,
but the essential part of the "cure" consists in drying by exposure to the sun. The dry cure is largely
adopted in places where difficulty of transport makes weight an important consideration; the hard dry
hide weighing much less than the wet hide. In the "wet" cure, salt is rubbed into the hide, or the
hides are steeped in brine and subsequently stacked. The inferiority of the hide cured by the dry process
is insisted upon in a recent article on the "Proper Curing of Hides,"* and it is stated that improved
systems of working hides are now beginning to be adopted in several places, such as parts of India, the
Cape, and Mauritius, and it is implied that to some extent the dry hide is going out of fashion. The
article continues "we have said sufficient to show to merchants engaged in the China trade how much
it would be to their advantage in all their chief centres to establish saladeros as they have in South
America, where all green hides shall, after slaughtering, go through a proper system of brining or arsenic
curing or salting by which the pelt will be preserved."
D.—Remedial Measures.
Mr. Spear discussed this subject under four heads.
(1.) "The establishment of an organisation by which this country may be warned of the existence
of the disease among cattle" with a view to prohibiting the import of suspected hides. Mr. Spear did
not look upon this suggestion as a promising one, and nothing has occurred since his report was written
to make it more likely to be regarded as a practicable and efficient safeguard.
(2.) "The general adoption of some process of cure which would serve not only to protect the skin
from the ravages of the 'worm,' but would lead to the destruction also of morbific germs." Mr. Spear
commented upon the extraordinary power of resisting chemical agents possessed by the spores of the
anthrax bacillus, and added: "It might, however, be possible so to treat the skins by a preliminary
process as to cause any attached spores to germinate into the easily destructible rods." There seems
some reason for hoping that the problem will, at no distant period, be to some extent worked out
on these lines. The facts which have been ascertained as to anthrax prevalence, point to the conclusion
* Leather Trades Circular and Review, February, 1894.