The sun., 1893-09-14
Pro,pects for Sugar Tarlff.

TFOSpecbb IOF bukbF
There has been good deal said
about the sugar duty; and, as in every
tariff measure, there are two ways to
look at it. from the tariff reform and
from the protectionist sides, respect
lively. AS long as SO large proper
tion OF all sugar used in this country
was grown outside of 1t, the sugar tar
itf might be considered a revenue duty,
and thus not to be especially criticised
as an essentially protective measure;
though the policy Of so heavy tax
ation-amounting to nearly leo per
cent upon what has become the
necessary of life, next to the bread
stuffs, might be questioned. With the
development, however, of our Florida
plantations and Of the beet sugar In
dustry of the West, there seems to be
for the first time some prospect that
we may yet produce large proportion
OF the sugar we consume. Meanwhile,
we admit raw sugar free, we pay
bounty of 2 cents per pound on its
equivalent produced here, and we i'm
pose duty of cent per pound on re-
fined sugar-thus giving that much
bonus to the American sugar refner,
who gets his raw materials upon the
same terms as the foreigner and his
labor cheaper per ton of product than
any competitor in the world.
have no special prejudice against
trusts. / have never been able to un-
derstand the casuistry that defends a
man for getting the tariff to put the
money into his pocket and then con-
demns him for taking every precaution
to see that the money results do get
into these pockets. Indeed, if anyone
i e. II Oh 10 fnr
tariff and then consciously lets it's pro-
ceeds slip through his fingers, be strikes
me as an Esau who, having sold his
birthright of principle for mess of
greens, is SO superiuously foolish as TO
forget to carry off the pottage. At
| the same time it seems to me that the
sugar trust ought to be made an exam
pie of, to the extent at least of depriv-
ing it of sTecial privileges, after it has
had the effrontery to use them as it
has done. To impose a tax of seven
| sixte 9nths of a cent per pound upon
raw sugars imported would compel the
sugar trust to pay a trifle less extra for
it's raw materials than the extra bonus
secured 1t by the tariff on refined sugar
the product of refined sugar being
somewhat more than seven-eighths of
| the raw material.
The result, therefore, would be a
| gain of $15, 5,000,000 year to our Treas
ury without the addition of a mill to
the cost of sugar to any inhabitant OF
our country; while the sugar trust
would still be enabled and interested,
to control the market of this country
as now, but would be confined to the
legitimate profits of enterprise and
economy. More than this, the bounty
now paid by our Government could be
reduced by nearly, if not quite, the
amount of the duty imPo ed up2p raw
sugar and thus, say, one-fifth of the
total expenditure for sugar bounties
saved without decreasing in the least
| the effective bonus now secured to the
domestic sugar producer.
am aware of the tremendous oppo-
sitlon that there would be to such a
measure. The resources of the sugar
trust are practically boundless; and
unless this matter is thoroughly agi-
tated, the attempt to get its profits
would be more strenuously resented
than would the attempt to wipe out
every cent of protection, by bounty Or
otherwise, that any sugar planter re-
ceives. If, however, the matter is
once understood by our people, be-
lieve that this addition to our revenue,
this saving in expenses, this cutting
! off the sugar Trust from extraordinary
! profits levied upon our people by Gov
ernment for it's benefit, can be enacted
into law.-John Dewitt Warner.