The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1893-10-10
TIE SUGAR QUESTION.

and means may suggest some new
method of dealing with the sugar
question. We are not now in a po-
sition to say whether it is their
intention to maintain the existing
bounty system or whether they
would be more inclined to revert to
our former system of protection by
means of a customs tariff only, or
whether they may be inclined to
admit raw sugar free of duty and
thus not protect the industry at
all.
The position of the American
Economist is well known ON this
subject. We have advocated, and
we always will advocate, that it
will be more advantageous for the
United States to grow its own sugar
rather than to import it and be de-
pendent upon foreign growers of
raw sugar for our supplies. This
country is large enough and has
such diversity of soil and climate,
and we may say such excellent soil
and climate, that we can in one
section, if not in another, raise the
entire amount of sugar that the
American people can consume.
When we realize that our per
capita consumption exceeds sixty
two pounds of refined sugar per
annum and that the total consump-
ton of the country exceeds $780,
600 tons annually, which costs us
1925, 100000 every year for the raw
product alone, it can be seen how
great is the importance of this in
dustry. 1t is important not only
in a manufacturing sense, but also
as branch of agriculture, afford
ing what is needed in these times
of low prices for farm products,
another crop and one that is profit
able.
It was the aim of the Mckinley
act to build up the raw sugar in
dustry by the system originally
established by European countries
viz, a bounty system. The result
has been to cause an expenditure
of 100000 in beet sugar fac
tories, which, last year, produced
1856 tons of raw beet sugar. The
cane sugar industry of the south
has also been extended and i'm
proved. Had it not been for uncer-
tainty as to possible future legisla-
ton and the idea that the bounty
might be repealed or raw sugar adj
mitted entirely free of duty, in
accordance with the policy of the
free trade party, the beet sugar in
dustry would have been much
more largely developed.
We know of a company that had
been formed with a capital of 3d.
100000 for the purpose of erecting
factories. The papers of this COM
pany had been drawn up and
signed and its Incorporation would
have been effected under the laws
of one of our states last November,
had it not been that the presidential
and congressional elections resulted
in the choice by the people of a
president and a majority in con-
gress opposed to protection. 1t was
felt by the incorporators that it
would not be wise to invest their
in such an enterprise until
the present party in power had out
lined its policy in this connection.
This they have not yet done, but |
probably will do within a few
weeks. The more we consider and |
study the matter, the more i'm
pressed we are with the urgent ne
,essity of being self-supporting.
Sugar is a necessity of life. Sup
pose the producing countries were
20 be involved in warfare with
one another, a contingency that is
liable to occur in Europe at any
lime, what would be the result ?
The price of sugar would imme-
lately advance 100 per cent. or
more. We should be entirely de-
pendent for our supplies upon the
small crops grown in the cane
iugar-producing islands that are
scattered about the world. Instead
If paying five cents for sugur we
would, in all probability, be COM
,elled to pay twenty cents.
Is it right, is it patriotic, that a
lation like the United States
hould permit itself to remain in
UGH a position 3? We say decidedly
lot, and we trust that during the
resent session of congress an ex-
'ression of opinion may be plainly
nd unequivocally given by the
'arty now in power that viii guar
ntee the permanence Of protection
o our sugar-growing industry.
his is all that is necessary to in
ure its being largely and success
1llv develoDed. with the result of