Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-12-25

ioo ssiois OF ncia+ses hut we will take what co,,-
siderei a low IN. tium say 500 acres OF cane, a, 1851
peund' per acre, 375. 900 ID. IN ias s. about 81 gals
per acre, 2o 900 g,lous. AT ih- presrn, TINE, sugar
IL quoted GA thu = antaiio"s, In the " W Ooieaus Pace
Current, at 5 cents, End molasses at 10 cents. In Tor.
ner years, they Rave been qroted and sold much
higher.
37S,ooo lb'. brown sugar, at 5 cts. pr ID SIS. $50
$4,000 gals. molassss, at Is cts. per gal. $50
%. 500
Deduc, o. yearly expenses Of the estate, 5000
sIs 500
Thus we see a mott revenue Of ninsteen tn ,ussnd
hve hundred dollars, or an income oil 80 per cent. on
an investment OF fifty thousand doilars-a result which
SO a%PPrehend is tot lar i.om cor. ect. Thus much fl
protection.
Let us Tow proceed in exami,iu ing wheti or the bust.
ness would tie worth pursuing, without this ex'Tso.d d.
nary contribution iron the p. PIE. Lst u. see what
"ouii be the condition Of the planter, were the duty
on foreign sugar reduced two cents, tina, is to cay, from
3 cents 10 cent per p~ound-which reduction would
have the effect TO reiuce the price Of dom. $ ic sugar in
a like proportion. We have already said, that 500 a.
cres ct cane-pl,nted land, would yield S75 600 lbs. SUI
Sil, $50
zo,VOO gals. Tpolss'es. a 10 cents, 1850
Deduct as before for yearly expanses. 3 900
$4,000
cent on hi. c 'piai. Now, This il SIM y the nett in
come from has outlay, W Trout taking into our calcLia
.ion' the increased value of h farm. or he natural
Increase OF hue negroes. How do ,hsse results com.
pare win those OF our tanners Of the North and West.
Can any one CT them huist OF such golden returns. Yet
ne oil The Worth or West, has not been sparing OF his
ia'or. lie and his sons have worked with their own
hands In the hsld they have, perbaps, cui waited " it'll
'heir own hands qhite az many acres; and when, a,
ne emu Of The year, they have cold the whole fruit OF
their labor, what is the sum totat Of their earnings p
why, II aDy one OF hem has made a clear two .hou
sand collars, he has done better than most of his neigh
oors And We ak, why should thi. man to called up-
OH n Hia nj n 49, m. -.
MIN 10 eOiich a fellow-cit"xen, who stands precissly in
Inc same moral condition "a himself!
But ~ Is SAIL the sugar painters la d out large capt.
ta's under the implied faith OF The government, that thew
would be pEote cted against foreign competition. by
laying a duty upon thai. imported from abroai. la the
nrst place, we deny THE doctrine of Implied protect on.
congress has n m time to time increased ar mod. lad
ne ,af'fi, az has appeared to ,hen necessary or expe-
dient, wiibou, ~pledging itselt 10 pursue any p.rmanen,
oil protection. But, even had such a pledge
over o"rn gwen, Is II absolutely necessary that A yoy.
should pc rpe'uate all error, because II has
once committed it? Must we year after year psrse.
'tre IN eniorcing a law, which a large portion II the
is~-in1kers Themselves now a knowledge to be impoli.
Tic, or oppressive? Another plea for projection. IL The
uncertainty OF The sugar crop in Louisiana and we
!nu't confess, TIA, OF all arguments, this appears 10 b.
The mcst extraordinary, that any set of INTELLIGENT mon
'hou'i ssriously ask Of their elbow ci,iz, ns 10 pro,sc.
u IN, by taxing themselves, for pursuing a bnsin.s.
which nature herself has made hazardous. w. are
,na' 'he sugar crop is precsrious on account of
the climate. Therefore, hecau.e tie climate of Lon al.
ana Is not always congenial 10 the growth oil the sugar
cane os'ause an early or a late frost, or a wet or a
season, destroys a little or much of the cro,
We thu consumers Ct lhe article, are REQUIRED 10 mats
sood this loss in good years, as we'll as in ,ho,s seasons
when The crop has tailed. In short, we ara ask.d tn
TAX Ourselves, TO insure the planter ag aipst loss in an
VI der'aking, which they themselves pronounce baz.
ardous.
But let us examine further into the erteut n IN. ga
c inces "hlch we are called upon TO make. in order IN
project this branch of agriculture, p"
Va referring 10 the iast report of the Sscye,arv Of
ne irea'uTy, on the commerce and navigation of the
U. s., here appears TO have been impor,ed nm n ,hs
30 h Sept. 1929 w
6s 597 ,574 rs. brown sugar. Exported 10 GA s5o
'o,.-o ~ ""ne no DO 1899, 629
IL so5' 10 lbs. brown sugar, payiug3
cts. per ID. duty, LAS XII Ak
''0A''''i io5 "hi'e' paying 4 eta. Id. 100, 402 Ga
II appear, then, that the people have
cortribu cd eI ego +, M
Tor protection OF domestic sugars. But large as his
sum ~, u Is not all. We are re quired to contribute a
ihscn 'rge' cum In another way, although not quite
20 apparent: we are called upon To pay the Loui.iana
o cents per pound '::ore for his sugar, tn an we
should do, could fo'"ign sugars come 10 the cousumsr
without The PRESENT duty Of 8 cents per pound. We
VII suppose the quantity OF foreign sugars consumed
during the PRESENT year, the zane az that reported a
Dove, and we will suppose the quantity OF the LAST L,ou.
i'iana crop to have been so. 600, OOOlpounds. Now, if the
8 cents per pound more for the domes site sugar. ,b,v,
ne would have to pay, were there not that du'y on an.
gars rom abroad, does II not follow that SAXON 0Oo
must be added 10 The 81 500. 900 paid into the III, a.uyy
"i me United States, in order to show the sum total n,
"hch me sngar-c onsuniing people pay for protecting
ments OF nature have confined TO a ANAL section If our
country only" '
The subject v i'll be resumed d in our next.
lN Y. Euen. Post.