The intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1887-1891, 1889-07-20
THE SUGAR DUTIES.

The Boston Advertiser has a leading
article entitled "a Calm View OF the
Sugar SitIaliOn." " There is danger it
thinks, lest passion ana prejudice
should get the upper hand and cause
serious injury to one of the most i'm
p0rtant business interests in Boston. IL
is glad to observe that the sugar trust
sis making some concessions to public
sentiment" by charging little less for
refined sugar than the tariff allows. IL
would prefer that there were no such
thing as a sugar trust, but it cannot
sympathize with those who would
like to see the refining business "de-
strOyed simply because il is controlled
bN trust. Accordingly it opposes the
plan OF the Boston Herald TO make
the duty on sugar uniform at two cents
per pound, and recommends instead
that raw sugar be put on the free list,
and that the duty on refined be fixed
at one-haif cent per pound. While
making this recommendation, it says
that 1.-The sugar trust needs no especial
protection" A duty Of oDe-h half cent
per pound would amount to q bonus
of Sl5, ,OGO,000 per year TO the refiners
on the present consumption of the
country - say, 3,000,000,000 pounds.
This, III the Judgment of the Adver-
tiser. is not "especial protection" !"
If the trust has made some cOnces
sions by charging little less than the
tariff allows, that result is due to the
fact that high price curtails the de-
mand The advance in raw sugars,
not the conscience of the trust, has cut
down i'll some small measure the profits
OF the refiners. Conscience has moth
ing to do with the prices anyway, in
sugar or in anything. With or with
out trusts, the price of an article is
what the law of supply andsdemand es,
tablishes. Society would be in perpet-
ual turmoil if we were in the habit of
expecting producers of goods to abate
their charges as a matter of kindness
and hospitality. When the price of
raw sugar falls to its former level, the
trust will pocket the whole of the
margin between raw and refined as
fixed in the tariff, and ought to. If
they have anything to give away, they
will do it as other cbaritably inclined
persons do, like Mr.. Andrew Carnegie,
for example. The country has voted
this margin to them, and there is not
the slightest reason why they should
not pocket it.
The margin is between II and II
cents per pound, depending on the
grade and quality OF the sugars import
ed. The bulk of the sugar which came
in last year tested between 92 and SO
degrees. The duty on each hundred
pounds of raw testing 92 degrees is
81 0S cents. The duty on the sane
quantity of ref. ed is So so. The
margin Of protection is the diffe, nee
between these figures viz, 81 Az AT
96 degrees the duty on raw is 50 81
and the margin of protection is 81 26.
ThIs is what the law doth give. If
the refinerS take any less, they must
do SO either because the maximum
price lessons the demand or because
they see i'll the public impatience,
which the Boston Advertiser depre.
Gates, threatened repeal or reduction
of the discriminating duty.
1t is not likely that the latter con-
sideration enters into their business ar
rangements at all. They may have il
in view as a theorem or abstract con-
ccptioE, like a future state of existence,
but they would be very foolish to give
up present profit for future uncer-
tainty. What congress may do about
it is doubtful. Among the things least
likely TO have weight would be a rlea
that the trust had been on the whole,
generous, and had not taken all that it
might have taken. To any congress.
mcu who med to repeal the duty,
such plea wrnld be laughing stock
To any one who wanted to adhere to
the Chicago platform, the difference be-
tween Il cent and a cent and half in
the margin of protection would be i'm
material Any good business man
and the sugar trust is certainly com
posed If would prefer to make
hay while the suu shines, taking his
chances of the rainy dGy hereafter.
The significance Of the Advertisers
article lies in the fact that one of the
deaiest protectionist papers in the
somewhere around the horizon.
Others had heard it before. The prop
osition to reduce the tax for the ben
eft of the monopoly to about Sl5, ,O00,-
O00 per year is an encouraging symp-
tom. How it is to be reconciled with
the republican national platform,
which demands the repeal of the whis
key tax rather than the reduction of
81 any protective duties whatsoever,
we leave TO the Advertiser and others
like minded TO explain. We do not
think, however, that any half meas
ures will be adopted with reference to
he trust. 70 cut down the margin
between the raw and refined to half a
cent per pound would call attention
to the fact that the trust has its fingers
in every sugar bowl in the country,
and the half cent is sheer gratuity
differing from the present tax only in
amount. The Boston Heralds pro-
pusal TO make a uniform duty on all
| sugars is much more reasonable, but
| the duty ought not to exceed one cent