Sugar planter. [volume] (West Baton Rouge [i.e. Port Allen, West Baton Rouge Parish, La.]) 1856-1925, 1869-08-07
AGAIN The SUGAR SHEDS.

GROUND, every loot OF wD'ch you arc '"'n'
iliar with. III 1867. the subject ran dry
thoroughly exhausted itself, even with the
long winded city press. We, too. were cen
PEELED to abandon it for want of material
to work upon. We do not entertain the
slightest disposition to pursue this sub
iect further than the issue OF this mum.
Der. believing that enough has been said,
pro and con, to satisfy all interested ; and
but fer some remarks in the N. 0. Bee, o.
inst, would have refrained from again
referring to the matter. We have been
80 accustomed to regard the Bee as one
of the mos: digni6ed and courteous jour
nails 10 the country, that onr as.oni>h'
ment may we'll be imagined at seeing a
bad.humored fling at the sugar planters
in its columns. Referring to the Plant.
ers' Convention of 1856, the Bee says,
we suppose they 1.-The planters cousid-
cred themselves entitled to shelter for
their produce, from the city and pithout
CHARGE" 1r the second article of the
: Louisiana Sugar Mart Association pub
lished in our last issue, it is stated that
they wish d" to hire or buy a suitable piece
of ground on the ~levee," and Of whom
were they to hire or buy, but the city y
The planters asked for nothing but what
they were willing to pay for /; favors they
asked of none ; they had money enough to
to buy everything tn y wanted, not ex'
cepting the city council of New Orleans,
and there they we're outbid by the factors
and speculators whose particular inter
ests lay 10 having sugars remain on Or
IF the levee as their W convenienc.s
suggested.
The Bee calls our attention to a petit.
ion "signed by one hundred and thirty of
our merchants and planters" and other
firms Of equal standing, more or less in
terested in the sugar business" in oppn
sition to the shed scheme of Mr. Fleitas.
while it only received the endorsement Of
twenty three firms. Now all this looks
very we'll on paper, and might carry some
weight with it we're it not for one very
important fact, and that is, out Of the one
hundred aud thirty opposers there are but
few planters and a host of merchants !
They are o exactly the persons to rep
resent the planters interests /; or, if they
do now, it is more than they did a few
years ago !; and as controlling the sale
Of sugars on the levee, at one time, was
q very profitable business to the mer.
chant. it is very fair to presume tia, it
is equally profitable now. The system of
forced sales Of sugar and molasses upon
The levee is just what the merchant waits
it gives him full power over the plsn.
ter's produce, to sell on the levee or re-
to a warehouse. Planters never
liked the warehouse system for simple
while storage (if it can be so
on the levee, was equally Object
Thus between two fires, the
fell an easy prey to the merchant,
'lways ready to fleece him when tbe op-
.'ortunity occurred. All the planter de-.
ired, heretofore, was q place where his
ugsrs could he secured from the filthy
lop and mud that every winter adorns
he New Orleans levee-a place where
hey cannot be affected by dampness or
xp"sure-snd where they Can be kept a
easonsble time without sale, and not
70 compelled to remove them to a dark.
ingy warehouse. For all these p,ivile.
he was willing to pay, and thus ask
o favors Of any one. But such elevated .
'eas of common sense and reason could )
OF "be seen " by the merchant, and he +,
ook care that the city council shouldn't
see it." when the planters humbly Pc
It'oned for a privilege they had . right :
expect. Of the same pecuniary cali. ,
are the one hundred and thirty who 8
ppose the shed scheme minus, of course