The Donaldsonville chief. [volume] (Donaldsonville, La.) 1871-current, 1882-05-27
The Sugar Tariff.
Interesting Speech by Hon. Randall Gibson
nfI Louisiana

Speech by Hon. Randall Gibson
ofLouisiana.
During one of the recent tariff debates
in the lower House of Congress, Mr..
Gibson of this State made the following
brief speech on the question of the tariff
on sugar, in reply to some remarks by
Mr.. Dunnell of Minnesota:
Mr.. Speaker, had not intended 10 partic-
ipate in the present debate, for it does not
properly embrace any other question than
pointment Of a committee of experts to
examine all the facts relative to the tariff
ard to submit them to Congress. 1t will lie
merely preliminary inquiry, proper in
itself, whatever may be our views, however
We may differ on tie principles, upon which
the tariff should be adjusted, when we come
to deal with that question. But the propo-
sition of the gentleman from Minnesota, to
except sugar from this inquiry, and the
remarks he has made in favor Of reducing
the tariff upon sugar, is SO extraordinary
that may be par,loned if ask the indul-
gence of the House for moment. The
gentleman complains that we are deriving
too much revenue from sugar, and upon this
ground demands that the rates should be
lowered. There is no complaint that the
price is high, none that the sugar interest
the labor and capital invested in this
industry-are receiving more than their fair
proportion of the benefits of the tariff; none
1of a1,af 3,o 1,1+
simply that too much revenue is derived
from this source. @.m @-.
It will be admitted by everybody that
under any possible system of customs duty,
whether you have q tariff for revenue only,
with Incidental protection or for the sake of
protection, SO long as we have a public
debt, pension list, and the Government to
provide for, there will be necessary certain
amount of protection, a certain bounty, in
favor Of American industry. The question
is simply this: Is it philosophical, states
manlike, or just to give all the benefits, all
the bounties to the capital and labor en-
gagged in manufactures and commerce and
to exclude agriculture.
Is it not better that capital and labor
should distribute themselves according to
the laws Of supply and demand as little
affected as possible by governmental action,
and that a system Of taxation should be
adopted that will eq ualize the benefits and
burdens between the three great pursuits,
commerce, and agriculture,
as we'll as between all classes and all Sec
tions of our common country! Even if we
should attempt to distribute these bounties
in the fairest possible manner, even if we
lift ourselves above particular prejudces
and special interests, and deal with this
question in a liberal and national spirit, it
will be found impossible to attain to an
exact equilibrium. But what sort of states
manship is that which would exclude an
article from all the benefits under system
which from the beginning Of the Govern
ment was steadily fostered until after the
year 1861 Why exclude the article of
sugar from the same treatment you accord
to the other schedules of the tariff!
only ask, as one Of the Representatives
Of State that formerly produced so per
cent. of all the sugar consumed in our
country, and to-day produces only 10 per
cent. of the consumption, just treatment.
Give Us the protection that interest uni
formly received until 1861, from the begin
ming of this century, and that State will
produce all the sugar you can consume, and
save the ninety millions of gold you pay
out every year for sugar to countries that
buy nothing. or little or nothing, in exchange
from us. The gentleman complains that we
are receiving too much revenue from sugar