New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-03-05
RFETROOT SIG AR.

Mr.. HOtchklSS5 persistent clIOTJ I'D ODldiu
the consent Of Congress to admit beet sugar
making machinery free of duty, we learn, was
finally successful in the last hours of the
session. Such, at least, is the report. We
hope it is true, if it will do anything toward
turning the attention of our people to sugar
making from the beet. Whatever tends to
give an impulse to this branch of industry is
to be applauded. 1t can hardly fail to excite
surprise in the mind of any one who has paid
attention to the development of it i'll France
and the Low Countries, and seen the success
with which it is there prosecuted, that the
United States has given so little attention to
this subject. We believe there is an idea
afloat and widespread, that France sustains
her beet-sugar interests by large protective
duties. This is not the case. Such duties were
at first imposed by the first BOnaparte, in
order to start the enterprise He was derided
for his attempt. But the protective policy he
instituted triumphed in the most decisive man
ncr The beet culture and the making OF
sugar proved great success under the system
which gave the French markets to the home
producer Of sugar If the blind deyOtees to
free trade doctrines were susceptible OF in
strction, they might find it in the history OF
sugar-making from the beet i'll France. After
the manufacture had become, little by little,
completely established, the duties on foreign
grown sugar were reduced, until at length the
last veStige of protection was thrown down, and
the manufacturers OF beet sugar put upon an
equal footing with the cane sugar makers of the
French colonies And in this way they stand
to-day. Under this system they flourish to
such a degree that the annual product of beet
sugar is constantly increasing. The latest stats
ties show that of the sugar consumed in France
threc-quartcrs is produced from the beet-the
consumption being over II pounds per head.
But the point TO which we desired to draw
special attention is the fact that the product
pays an enormous internal revenue tax TO the
Govcrnncnt-somc five or six cents pound.
Now, if beet sugar making can be made pro-
fitablc under such a tax as this while refined
sugar is everywhere sold in France at IL to IA
cents pound, why cannot 1t be made I'M
mensely profitable here where the tax is little
or nothing and the price of sugar greater
than thercl The soil and climate of the more
Northern States are rs well adapted to the
growth of the beet as those of France. Penn
sylvania and the States lying west OF her.
within the same parallel, can raise the sorghum
10 advantage. and do so. But New York, and
New England, and the Northwest are too far
north for this plant and it is i'll those districts
where the beet best flOurishcs and affords the
largest amount of saccharine matter
From what we know of the culture IN France
and the Low Countries, we do not entertain
the slightest doubt that the bect-roOt sugar
manufacture in this country is destined to be Il
,-,st and nrofitoblc interest. The only wonder
is, il has been so long in being developed. 1t
can only be accounted for by the fact that we
have so long had a supply of cheap cane sugar
from Louisiana and the West Indies. But the
experience of France and Holland shows
that raising sugar from the beet Is both
more certain and more profitable than
raising it from the cane And such
will undoubtedly be found to be the experience
of this country, when Northern enterprise and
energy shall have fairly embarked in this
branch of industry. We are persuaded there is
to be a new revelation of the capacities of
Northern agriculture, when ourpeoplc shall have
fully and Understandings engaged culture.
When we reflect that the beet sugar crop of
France is worth fifty million dollars annually in
the raw state we can fofm Some idea of the
| impulse our agriculture must receive from the
full development of such a mine of wealth
among us.
I