Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1893-01-06
SUGAR DUTYIS A TAX
THE PEOPLE KNOW THAT AND WILL
NOT AGAIN TOLERATE 1T.

TariGs Are an Excellent Means Of Rails
ing Revenues Untn the Masses Realize
That They Are Taxes. and Then the
Opposition Begins.
II is reported that an attempt VIII be
made ia the next congress 10 again put
duty on raw sugar The entire con-
gressional delegation from Louisiana,
Florida aud Texas, including the sena-
tors. Il is said, will demand the repeal Of
the bounty law and the restoration Of
the tariff in reduced form. They are
willing 20 accept as low "A duty as =
cents per pound rather than continue
the bounty Of two cents with the an
noyance and delay connected with this
system This would be in entire accord
ance with the Democratic platform. As
we produce only 10 or II per cent. Of all
the sugar we consume. perhaps four
hfths Of the increased cost due TO
tariff actually reaches the United States
treasury. But few duties will produce
40 much revenue at 80 small a cost to
the people. An average duty Of less
than ri cents previous 10 1891 was pro
ducing between so 900 900 and $G0,-
900 900 year revenue The total adj
vance paid by the people probably was
only from $40 100000 10 $75, 600 900. An
average duty Of 10 per cent, on manu-
featured wooden goods previous TO 1891
produced only about $35. 000, 600 revenue,
but probably took from $3.50. 900 TO
5000 600. 900 from the pockets Of the
people. IL Is evident then that it would
be far better for the people to put
heavy duty on sugar and very light
one on wooden goods, and in framing
tariff for reyenue'bill no better article
than raw sugar could be- found TO put on
the dutiable list And yet. notwith-
standing this fact, raw sugar should not
be taxed again. Nay. it will bring
almost certain ruin upon the party that
taxes w. Why?
First--Becan the people have found
out what they have not yet learned in
regard 20 the duty on wooden goods
that she duty is "A tax. TO replace the
DUTY would be TO give them another ob:
Jet lesson such as no party which cares
a snap for its future will care TO give.
Tariffs are an excellent means Of rails
ing revenue when the masses do not
realize that they are paying taxes in this
way But duties arouse almost as much
opposition as direct taxes when the peo-
Pile sec the taxes in advanced prices. In
the case of sugar, more clearly than
with any other article, the tax is seen
and felt. Every family buys sugar
Adulteration cannot hide the advance in
price. If sugar reached consumers only
after being manufactured into foods
tho tax would scarcely be seen AT all
Many good protectionists might then
assert that IL there was any tax foreign
ers paid il. But the most fanatical Nc
Kinleyite admits that "A duty on sugar is
"A Tax paid 10y consumers.
Second-Because duty on sugar is
not entirely consistent with that clause
In the Democratic platform which de-
clares for free raw materials Not only
IL sugar a raw materials 10 many impor-
tant industries, but II Is a raw material
To some industries upon which the well
fare of farming and other great indus
tries largely depend The United States
because of its uurivaled facilities for
producing fruits, vegetables. corn, fish.
meats, etc, should be the home of the
canning industry and should supply the
whole world with many kinds Of canned
goods With cheap sugar and cans il
would haye begun TO do this long ago
England had cheap sugar, tin and glass
and now Is the center of the worlds
supply for canned goods She even ex-
ports large quantities of jams. iellies
inarmalades, etc. 90 the United States
She can do this because sugar, which
forms half the weight of jams and jel-
lies, has been costing her Gamers only
about half what il has cost ours With
big and prosperous canneries in all sec
tons Of our country our farmers would
have certain and reliable markets for sur
plus products that are now wasted. Many
crops that now often yield losses would
then bring almost certain profits. and
farmers would be prosperous in many
sections where they are now on the
ragged edge of bankruptcy, if not on
their way To the poorhouse.
Third Because sugar is a food and a
necessity 10 all families To increase
the cost OF living is To diminish the
power of the producer and to lessen pro-
duction. The bad effects of such a
policy are manifold Duties on tobac-
cos. WHISTLES. etc, by lessening the
consumption Of poisons and stimulants
may increased the power of producers
and be benefit 10 a nation. Duties ON
luxuries also may do little or no harm
but the duty on sugar is blow to pro
duction.
Fourth Because about the only ben
eft 10 private interests of such duty
will be conferred upon the few holders
of Sugar trust certificates. This Sugar
trust defies the law and is the implacable
enemy Of labor. II is one of the greedi-
est and meanest of trusts. BY means
of the duty Of one-half cent per pound
ON refined sugar it is now robbing the
people Of about 100000 900 a year. 1t
holds about one-third of its refineries
idle, thus throwing thousands of labor
FRS out of employment 1t has reduced
wages until none but Italians and Huns
will work in the intensely heated rooms
of its mills. Instead of giving increased
powers to this hated monopoly we should
clip its wings by removing all duty on
sugar, especially when, as in the present
case. the duty is a trayesty unon Justice