New-York tribune., 1890-06-12
THE SEGAR DUTIES.

IL is r,lmOred that great eHOrt Is DeiHS
made TO induce the Senate Finance Committee
IN consent to an increase in the duty on refined
sugar TO so cents per 100 pounds. instead OF
40 cents. the rate fixed by the House bill. 1t
would be strange indeed if one OF the few
trust organizations in the country which have
taken conspicuous part in politics, and that
on the Democratic side, should be able 20 OBJ
tain such favor from Republican Senate.
When any motion of that sort is made, some
Senator will kindly ask the yeas and nays that
the country may see who votes for 1t.
Apart from political considerations, the duty
on refined ought not to be raised, but re-
duced. The Sugar Trust is one OF the most
unpopuar combinations in existence, for 1t has
used its power without scruple to extort mill
ions from consumers 1t deserves no consid-
Grafton whatever at the hands OF any Protec-
ZIONIST, for it is the most conspicuous example
of people -plundering conspiracy which asks
defence by the protective tariff while closing
American works and turning American work.
ers out of employment. 1t would be simply
lust because of the attitude of this combna-
ton toward the system of protection and
toward the public, to deprive it OF all possible
benefits from duties on imports.
If there were need of any duty to keep the
industry alive in this country, there would be
no excuse for duty higher than the House
BIZ. imposes. The actual cost OF refining IS
not so much as 40 cents per 100 pounds, un-
less there be reckoned as part OF that cost the
interest on an enormously inflated capl,a, and
the expense of keeping many works idle IN
order to force consumers to pay high prices
Rut the cost of refining abroad is carefully put
out of sight by the advocates of the trust
They talk as if, with free materials, the Amerl-
can refner needed for his protection the entire
cost of refining, and not merely any difference
between the cost here and in other countries.
IF refining costs Just as much elsewhere as here,
as the advocates of the trust have many times
loudly asserted, no duty whatever is excusable
for the protection of the American refiners.
But if the refining costs 25 cents per 100
pounds abroad, and 80 cents here duty OF
8 cents per 100 pounds entirely compensates
and protects, while larger duty with free
sugar could only operate to enable the rehner
to charge more millions by way OF profit on
inflated stock.
The removal of the duty on raw sugar Will
be found the most popular feature OF the new
tariff. But Senators will find that duty on
refined sugar for the benefit of the trust will
be by all odds the least popular feature. There
is no visible need of any duty, unless to defend
American producers against the products OF
countries which virtually pay bounty on beet
sugar exported. Cane sugar from the West
Indies can be landed here more cheaply than
in England. According to the last census, the
entire wages paid to hands engaged in sugar
refining were less than per cent of the value
of the material consumed; that is, to refine
100 pounds of raw sugar costing cents per
pound, the whole cost of labor would be, not
30 cents or 25 cents, but less than cents.
If British labor cost only half as much, the
difference would be only 2 cents per 100
pounds. In this business there is only too
much reason to fear that some reiners not
in the trust have consented to be used as cats
naws for the trust, to beseech Congress for
duties which are not necessary to enable either
to prosper.