The Dalles times-mountaineer. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1882-1904, 1894-09-15
SUGAR BoUNTIEs.

SUGAR B0UNTIES.
Democratic logic is strange system
of reasoning, and is patterned after
free trade argument. Here is sam
pie from the columns of an esteemed
cotemporary:
"ff the Mckinley bill had been al
lowed to continue in force another year
it would have cost the taxpayers fully
$50, ,00O, 900 for sugar bounties and at
least $4,000, 900 in additional profits
10 the sugar trust. They will escape
having to pay these amounts, for
which they would receive no benefit
whatever. Therefore, though they
may have to pay In sugar duties S4O,-
. 600, 900 as is estimated, they can we'll
kafford to do so. This illustrates the
wisdom of revenue tariff as compared
with a protective tariff and system
of bounties. In other words the diff
ference of the two systems as applied
to next years business is about $SO.-
100000 IN favor of the mass of the
people"
According to the figures given there
would have been $50. 100000 taken
from the public treasury in sugar
bounties, which would in no way be a
tax on the consumer, and which would
have stimulated the manufacture of
the article from beets The amount
of sugar produced IN the United
States is not equal to one.third OF the
quantity. consumed, and it is absolutely
necessary to create supply equal to
the demand to manufacture sugar from
something except from cane, raised
successfully only in one or Two states
of the union. Every dollar Of this
thirty millions would have gone into
circulation among our own people, and
would have eventually built up an in
dustry that would make the country
independent of the foreign production.
This enterprise has been very success
full in Germany, and today that nation
not only manufactures enough sugar
from bee.s to supply the home de-
m md, but has large export trade in
the article. Under the Wilson bill
this bounty is repealed, and instead
duty is placed on the article which
will be direct tax on the consumer,
and from which company of million
aires will derive q revenue of about
$40. 100000 annually. The sugar
trust will reap the benefit of the tariff
and not the cane-growers Ct Missis-
slppi and Louisiana. because the crude
article has to go through retineries be-
fore sold to the consumer, aud these
are owned by wealthy companies.
There will be NO new industry built up
by the Democratic policy, and if it
continues in operation for the next
twenty years the nation will be as de-
pendent as it now is upon the foreign
supply. This would have been differ.
ent under the Mckinley law. Sugar
beet factories would have been estab-
llshed ir all parts of the union, and,
like Germany, in few years. the na-I
tion would have an abundance for
home consumption and would have
built up a trade in the article with
other countries. Every dollar of the
forty millions under the Democratic
law is direct tax on the people. and
will be added to the price of the arti-
Gle on the market. Taking the figures
of our eotemporary. and the advan-
tages are on the side Of the Republi-
can measure. The thirty millions
were to be distributed among the peo-
PIE to stimulate home industry, and
only ten millions were to be a tax ON
the consumers. On the other hand
the Wilson bill will add $4O,OO0,O0O
to the price of sugar. and this will 20
to enhance the wealth of trust CON-
bination that owns nearly all the re-
6neries.