The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1890-09-25
The Sugar Tariff.

u 111UCO OudUCS oCl0CC-7 w ILL pm y
sugar into this country each year,
upon which the duty amounts to
$55, 900, 900. 1t is a necessary of
life. It is not confined in it's use to
the palace. It goes into every home,
however lowly. Il goes into the
cabin of the miner It goes into the
lumber camp, and into the home OF
every laboring man. All the people
must have it. The domestic pro-
duction is, as I recollect it now, and
I have not time to go into the fig
ures, only about one eighth of the
consumption. It is so trifing, SO
insignificant and it has been SO
since 1860, as not to produce the
slightest effect upon the price of
sugars in this country to the con-
Sumer
So it happens that the duty upon
sugar is a tax upon sugar which
every man who buys pound of it,
be he rich or be he poor, whatever
it's grade, is obliged to pay.
Mr.. President, the senators from
Louisiana, treating this as reve-
nue. duty, demand that it shall be
continued. Although we are trying
our best to reduce the revenue, they
demand that il shall be continued.
Although they call it ''revenue
duty, it affords the largest measure
of protection to the sugar industries
of Louisiana that ever was given to
an industry on this earth.
Mr.. Eustis-Will the senator al
low me to call his attention to a
statement that was made by a re-
publican colleague who investigated
the matter, that there would be a
deficit of $50, 0C0, 600 in the treas
ury of the United States within
eighteen months?
Mr.. Spooner-I know OF nothing
in the constitution or laws of the
United States which requires me to
agree to that statement. | do not
think it is correct. We are endeav-
oring by this bill to reduce the rev
enue. One way to reduce the rev.
enues, and the best way, because it
will bring relief to all the people, is
to take this duty off of sugar. But
I would not be willing to take the
duty off of sugar and leave the
sugar producer Of Louisiana without
any protection. I am not willing
to leave the beet-sugar producer OF
Nebraska or the sugar producer of
Kansas without protection.
Two cents bounty is as much pro
lection as two cents duty; and we
have this alternative, to leave this
duty on sugar, protecting the do
nestle industry in that way, or to
give the two cents bounty, with
what difference in cost to the people
Mr.. President? We can give them
this protection by a bounty at a
cost of between six and seven mil
lion dollars a year. We give the
protection by duty at a cost OF
500, 600, 600 a year. The senator's
from Louisiana ask that we shall
continue duty in preference to the
bounty, although the bounty gives
them the same measure of protec
ton at a cost to all the people OF
the country of the difference be-
tween $55, 600, 600 year and
Sc, 600, 600 year.
Wool may come in according to
the senator from Louisiana from
anywhere in the world to destroy
this agricultural industry. He says
they ought to have their iron ore
free; that New England ought-to
use his own language. Why New
England any more than any other
portion of the country? He said
they ought to have their iron ore
free, not caring what effect impor
tations of Cuban ore, the product
of cheaper and more degraded labor,
would have upon the fortunes Of the
iron miners who dig under the earth
on Lake Superior, in Minnesota, in
Wisconsin, in Michigan, in Penn
sylvania, and in other portions of
the country.
He says New England should
have her coal free, whatever effect
it might have upon the wages of the
coal miners in different parts of the
country.
The same with lumber This will
lingness to place upon the free-list
almost every item which could be
named and demand $50, 600, 600
protection for the Louisiana sugar
industry comes and I close with
the remark with which I openened
very near, if not quite, to the
sublimity of audacity.
I shall vote with great pleasure
myself, intending TO do no injustice
to the sugar industry in Louisiana