The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1893-11-29

ducers; Ohio's, SO, sol to 443 producers.
Ia New Hampshire, l66 licenses were
called for, 126 in Michigan, and the re-
mainder Of "a total OF 6 095 were scattered
through eight other states.
Louisiana received, in the sum of
So ,5S4 ,S65, The lions share of the bounty
on clne sugar. California received
S425,723 on beet sugar; Missouri, &c.
10, and Utah 500, 40 Sorghum sugar
rewarded Kansas producers with Sl9,-
79S.
Very naturally, the producers of cane
sugar, particularly in Louisiana, will
not be enthusiastic over the proposition
to abolish the sugar bounty. The fact
that no duty has been placed on raw
sugar will not lessen their dissatisfac-
ton with the new schedule. The Nc
Kinley act guaranteed the continuance
of the bounty until July l, 1905. The
sugar planters maintain that, in antici-
patton of the bounty during this period,
they have invested some $50 900 900
for machinery alone, and similar sum
! for the construction of levees to pro
tect their plantations from the waters
of the Mississippi and o.her rivers. If
the bounty is now abolished and raw
sugar admit ed free of duty, this vast
sum, the planters maintain, will be
rendered paratively worthless. The
beet-sugar makers also set forth that
their product has increased from 357
tons in 1890 to % 900 tons at the pres
ent time. Those interested in this
branch of industry are dismayed at the
propo ,ition to withdraw the sugar
bounty. They argue, and with appar-
ent reason, that if the existing law is
allowed TO remain, enough cane and
beet sugar will ultimately be made in
this country to supply home consump.
ton. The proposal to abolish the sugar
bounty will undoubtedly be opposed by
the representatives of the maple sugar
producers. The tendency of the
bounty is to stimulate the production
of an important article of income to
| the flrmers in number of the north
ern, central and western states. The
tendency also is to encourage the farm
| ers to maintain or extend their maple
wood ands, instead of cutting them
down and converting them into fuel.
All things considered, the prospect
that the sugar schedule will be adopted
is not exactly binding with an intens-
itv of brightness. If the remaining
schedules exhibit similar efforts at car
rying out democratic schemes of tariff
reform, the likelihood of any radical
change in the tariff laws, never exceed
ingly promising, is practically relegated
to the limbo crowded with the unful-
filled promises of the democracy.
Another proposition of the commit
tee, aft citing the sugar schedule, illus
trates in very striking manner the fact
that the whole scope of democratic
craftsmanship is to tear down every
thing that their predecessors in power,
the republicans, have built. This is the
abandonment of the reciprocity which,
at the suggestion of NJ. Blaine, was
incorporated into the Mckinley bill
| The democrats maintain that recip-
rocal trade with reproducing coun-
| tries-the free admission, for example,
of Brazilian sugar into the United
States in consideration Of the free ad-
mission of American products into
Brszil-has been without advantage TO
this country. On this point, as well as
on every other point in the bill to be
reported, the republicans will unques-
tionably make sharp issue with the
democrats.
There is another point, the decision
of which will be watched with an &C
tive interest. The committees pro-
posed reduction of the sugar duty will
make large deficit in the revenues of
the government which must be sup
piled throu h some other means of tax
alton. 1t would not be democratic to
increase the tax on whiskey, beer or to-
bacco. An income tax, or tax on in
corporations, or q tax on legacies--to
these measures, singly or combined
democratic craftsmanship may have re.
course for supplying the deficit in the
revenue resulting from pairing down
the sugar tax. All things considered,
republicans will wish their opponents a
merry time in incorporating into law
their doughty schemes of tariff reform.
Celebrating Victory.