The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1891-01-24
HA WAIIAN INDUSTRIES.
Effect of the Mckinley Sugar
Tariff.
An Essay Real Before the HOnolu lu
Social science Association, Mon
day, January 10. 1891.
BY ". T. FREAR.

iucommensurableness of its elements,
does not admit of exact solution. Pre-
dictions of this kind are peculiarly con-
jectural. But, considering the import
ance OF the question, whatever light may
be thrown upon it, cannot fail to be OF
both interest and value The subject
must necessarily be treated rather sug-
gestively than extensively in so brief
an essay 1t does not cover the entire
Mckinley bill "a copy OF which | have
been unable TO obtain) but only that
part which relates to sugar. This part
contains four principal divisions, ID the
bounty clause, (2) the reciprocity clause,
(3) the duty clause, and "a the free list
| clause. These will be considered in
order, the first two mainly in their
| legal, the last two mainly in their eco
nomic aspects.
First, the bounty clause. This pro-
vides for the payment OF bounty on
sugars produced in the United States,
whether beet, cane, sorghum or maple.
| 1t is to be two cents pound on sugars
testing not less than ninety deg. by the
| polariscope, and one and three-fourth
cents pound on sugars testing less than
ninety deg. and not less than eighty deg,
and is to be paid for period of fourteen
| wears, beginning the first of next July.
| 1t NAV also be added that machinery
used in the manufacture OF beet sugar is
to be admitted duty free until July l,
1892, and that duties paid on such
machinery since January l, 1890, are to
be RENTED.
! No fear of tho bounty clause need be
| entertained so far as cane, maple and
sorghum sugars are concerned. The pro-
duction of these has not been materially
increased in the United states during the
last forty years, though during most of
that time stimulated more by the pro-
tective tariff than it will be by the
bounty.
AS to beet sugar the case is different.
For the present low price OF sugar, as
will be shown below is the result largely
of the increased production OF beet sugar
| due to the bounties paid by various Eu-
ropean governments, and the beet sugar
industry, which even in Europe is COM
paratively new, has already good start
in the United States, where, too, the
available beet-sugar producing area is
practically unlimited, and it is proposed
to pay there to those producing at the
very doors of their own and Hawaiian
markets a bounty OF forty dollars a ton,
or greater than any ever paid in any
J European country, and which will be SO
: much in pocket whatever may be the
price of sugar, the lower the better, since
the percentage of bounty will then be
greater. In view of these considerations
/, the bounty clause, il effectually carried
out. NAV well be feared as perhaps not
| less disastrous in its effects on Hawaii
an industries than the free list clause
itself.
? But the bounty clause is almost GER
tainly unconstitutional The Supreme
Court of the United States, in at Least
three decisions, has in most emphatic
language held that private property can
not, without the owners consent, be
taken for, nor, if taken, devoted to pri
vate purposes The taking, if for private
n purposes, is unconstitutional, whethe
done under color of the right of eminen
domain or of taxation, and even though
e compensation is made and the public il
fact benefited. To be constitutional, tn,
taking must In every case be for publ,
IS purpose, purpose which is public in it
nature, and not by reason of the numbe
l. of persons benefited or the magnitude @
e the benefit Thus, in Loan Association
vs.. Topeka, 20 Wall. 655, the LEADING
case on this subject, the city OF Topeka
IS in Kansas, was enjoined from paying in
IF terest on bonds issued under Legislative
y authority as donation to a bridge manu-
!. featuring company which had been in
:. duced thereby to establish lis works il
Al
r mill, and also to foundry, and in Stat
e courts donations to a grist mill, a lumbe
At mandatory, "a private school of learning
and many other private enterprises, d
we'll as donations, for the purchase {
&c food and seed, to destitute farmers VIII
er had lost their crops, and also loan
f. (though we'll secured by mortgage)
,. sufferers from fire have been pronounce
:; unconstitutional. There can be littl
. doubt, therefore, that the bounty claus
III is unconstitutional. The difficulty is I
)t get the question before the courts. Thi
1T is commonly supposed to be impossible
d and probably there is no way in whic
,t this can be done as q righ. nv on's r y =
81 nj tho hornt,- ,ponent
n, in j., ,no -..,. The ordinary remedy
! :tion does not lie to restrain tn
Secretary OF the Treasury from payin
out moneys, his duty in this respect ht
IA ing executive and not purely ministerial
But in case the Secretary shall be will
io ing TO have the question tested 1t may
+ brought before the Courts in at lea
st three different ways. a. The Seer
tarv may of his own motion under II
a Act OF March 3, 1888, refer the questiC
TO the Court of Claims for its opinion
nc (2.) He may also do this under the A.
" of March 3, 1887, with the consent of ii
ii; persons claiming the bounty. The OPT
lit ION in either OF these cases would
no merely advisory, not a judicial dete
mination of the matter. go lie ma
simply refuse to pay the bounty, al
lip thus force the claimant to bring suit
ce the Court of Claims or IL a District
ar / Circuit Court, and from the decision
10 | any one OF these Courts an appeal wou
~, lie to the Supreme Court. The Secreta
i"i could not be compelled TO abide by al
ne one of these decisions, but there is lit
he doubt that he would. Hawaiian plante
NAV do we'll to combine and contribu
i'll funds for the purpo-e OF bringing prop
= influence TO bear upon the Secretary
IA induce him, If possible, to test the co
Ill constitutionality of this law.
But whether the test is made or M
the law is not likely to remain long
~ the statute books 1t is too obvious
r.. an invasion of private rights, taking
=! property from 4. for the use OF b., RAJ
lis, socialism, to be long endured by Z
'se American people. And whatever t
DIN law may be found to be eventually,
, is fear of it need be felt at present. 1t W
ify take time to increase the production