The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-07-30
TREASURY DECISIONS.
HAWAIIAN SUGAR.
When DutiabIe Under Treaty.

| When DutiabIe Under Treaty
| The following being among the de cisions re-
0 1ntly made by the Secretary OF tho Treasury,
will be found interesting to those who are in any
manner engaged in The sugar traffic:
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, June a. 1877.
Sir-Tbe department has had under eonsdera.
lion your report of December 2 last, with accom-.
panying documents, in relation to the appeal
Of the California Sugar Refinery. per O. A. Nc.
Nulty, attorney, from our assessment Of duty on
certain SS8 kegs sugar imported per bank II. q.
Wylie from Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands, Noven-
ber ID, 1876.
The appellants claim that The sugar In question
is entitled to Tree entry under article OF
THE RECIPROCITY TREATY
between the United States and the Hawaiian
Islands, ratified J#nuary 30, 1875, and the act OF
August 10. 1876. carrying tho treaty into effect.
by the terms Of that treaty and the law Of Con-
gress passed in pursuance thereof approved Au-
gust Is, 1876 free entry ID accorded to musco-
yado, brown, and all other unrefned sugar. The
growth and manufacture or
PRODUCE OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS,
meaning hereby tho grade Of sugar heretofore
commonly imported from The Hawaiian Islands
and now known in The markets of San Francisco
and Portland. Oregon, as Sandwich leland sugar,
Three questions are therefore presented for
consideration:
Flrst-ls the sugar in question Of tho growth
and manufacture Of the Ha wasn Islands?
Second-Is Is it unrt fined sugar.
Ibrd--lf so, IN it The grade OF sugar which was
commonly imported from the Hawaiian Islands,
and known III the
MARKETS OF SAN FRANCISCO
and Portland, Oregon, at the date OF the adoption
OF the treaty, ms Sandwich Island sugar?
Upon the first point IL In conceded that the
sugar is the growth and manufacture NJ the
Hawaiian Islands. Az the second poiut, have
to state that upon submission OF samples OF the
sugar to the experts OF tho customs vt some OF
the principal portr, thtre appears to be no differ
ence OF opinion among them as TO whether the
sugar can properly be regarded as unrefned. II
appears to have been manufactured by what is
known as
THE "cENTnIFUaAL PROCESS"
aud during the process Of manufacture jet of
water WAS introduced 30 as to moro fully clear lt
Of it's impurities.
The rate OF duty upon imported sugar is based
mainly upon It's ootor by the Dutch standard, and
schedule q OF The Revised Statutes imposes
duty OF four cents per pound on sugar above
No. 20, Dutch standard, in color, and on all re-
tined, loaf, lump, crushed, powdered and grenu
lated sugarp.
Ia the case of Barlow, claimant OF IS hogs
heads Of sugar (sppellans aganat the United
States, Peters, page 404), it WAS held by the
Supreme Court of the United States that the
term ''refned suga," is to be Construed as OK
clusivey limited 10 such as has assumed at some
time The form Of
WHITE, RvFINED, LOAF on LUMP
sugar. Applying that rule to the present case IL
would Clearly appear that the sugar In question
Ia TO be regarded as unrefined within the
MEANING or THE TREATY
~ H. 4
upon the third question, IS to whether this
grade VI tugar was Mt the time OF the adoption
Of the treaty commonly imported into San Fran
cisco and Portland, Oregon and there known 40
Sandwich leland sugar, you report that the ap-
praiser states that sugar OF the grade in aues-
tion WAS not, prior to the
ADOPTION OF THE TREATY,
commonly imported, although there had been
few importations OF IL made into your port prior
10 the adoption OF the treaty. As opposed TO this
10 the statement Of twenty-one merchants and
dealers Ia such sugars at san Francisco TO the
effect that the sugar in question Is Of the grade
commonly imported
FROM THE SANDWICH ISLANDS,
and that at the time of the treaty it was known
in the markets OF San Francisco and Portland,
Oregon, as Sandwich leland sugar. They fail to
show, however. that sugar OF as high grade as
the present was commonly imported before the
adoption Of the treaty.
The papers In the case were referred to the
Collector OF Customs at Portland, Oregon, for
report upon this question, and he states that
sugar OF the grade embraced in this appeal-that
Id sugar above No. 20, Dutch standard-was not
commonly imported into Portland prior to the
adoption OF the treaty.
The reports Of the appraiser at your port, and
the Collector OF Customs at Portland. Oregon,
are therefore accepted as conclusive upon the
question Of fact to the grade OF the sugar i'm
ported prior to the adoption Of the treaty, and as
these reports show that sugar of ths grade en-
braced in this appeal was not commonly import
cd into those ports at that time, it follows that
it is to be regarded as
AuMIssIpIE EREK q I,rrrx