The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-09-26

ton OF between % and so per cent; 1873
paragraphs a reduction to less than %
per cent. These great reductions are more
fully shown by statistical tables prepared
by tariff experts, which are now being
circulated. and finding their way through
out the country.
On the Subject of Sugar.
In this connection, however, a few
words are required on another much dis
puted and much misunderstood subject
of tariff legislation. Nothing could posi-
bly, surpass the audaclty and insolence of
republican leaders in assai,ing the demo-
cratic party on the question Of sugar
The sugar trust is a felonlous monster
sired by the republican party, and
damned by every honest man in all the
parties that exist. 1t has no other
origin than republican legislation. and no
other creator than the republican party.
Under the republican tariff act of 1864
the duty on raw sugar was 3l2 cents a
pound. On refined sugar the duty was 5
cents a pound. Reduced to ad valorem
the duties on raw sugar under that tariff
were above 20 per cent. Although
these duties yielded considerable public
revenue, the main object of this legisla-
ton was 10 protect the sugar refiners
now composing the trust by making
discrimination of ~ cents a pound in
their favor
The tariff of 1872 fixed the duty on raw
sugar at cents a pound and on refined
sugar at 3A cents a pound-making a
discrimination Of III cents a pound in
favor of the refiners. This proving not
quite satisfactory to the rehners. the duty
or raw sugar was raised in 1875 to 2
cents a pound plus % per cent. ad va
lOrem. If there was no organized sugar
lobby, which was substantially the same
thing, and which controlled congress.
In the tariff Of 1888 another twist was
given to the sugar duties, always keeping
the interests Of the redners in front The
duty on raw sugar was reduced to 81
cents 4 pound-making a discrimination
of IL cents IN favor Of the refners. IN
der this tariff the 2vers &c duty Of refined
sugar was upward Of y per cent al va
lorem- II need not be said that during
the operation of the tariff of 1888 hardly
pound Of refined sugar was imported
over the high tariff wall The sugar re-
ones were the peculiar objects of the
sohcitude and favor Of its republican
authors.
In looking into the Mckinley bin YOU
viii find that the sugar trust was grant
ID a protection of One-h1f Of 1 cent per
pound laid on al refined sugars inn
ported from abroad, or. as Ii is often
stated. on all sugars above No. 16 Dutch
standard in cO.or. Under this Ubiquitous
provision the loot and p.uuder accruinS
to the trust has been not less than ff-
teen millions of dollars per annum. No
giant octopus, or devil fish Of the sea
was ever more powerful, in its native
element than this huge and dangerous
progeny of republican policy when en-
C0untered ia and around the halls of
legislation. Yet the democratic party H.
its death grape with the sugar trust
and without any reliable majority az all
I'm the senate when in the face Of such
a foe. has cut down the protection on
refined sugars from One-half of l cent
per pound 10 One-eighth CT ] cent per
pound. thus wip.nS out in our first en-
counter three-fOurths, or 80 per cent. Of
the entire amount of the trusts pro-
tected plllage. II IS needless for me to
say that we would have wiped Il ali OUT
if we could have done sold
phalanX OF the republican side Of the
senate chamber, a.Aed > a small bu-
well-klown contingent on orr side is
the only reason why the trust has even
One-eigh,h Of ] cent pound left 20
swear by. or rather to swear at as il has
been doing ever since the senate BIZ b.
came o law I submit 10 YOU. however,
and 10 al the people Of Indiana, that
under the circumstances a great work
has beer done and that we have reached
a point from which ii VII not lee SO
difficult TO proceed hereafter to a glori-
Gus finish. We have broken the power
Of the sugar trust. we have inflicted upon
IL the wound of which it VII eventually
die. ] rejoice in anticipation OF It's
death. and sincerely pray that my own
weary life may be spared long enough 70
witness It's fuCer2l.
But th.re remains sill another point
70 be noticed in regard to sugar. In ad-
dit.on 20 the enormous protection pro
v.5ed fer the trust. as have shown, me
authors OF the Mckinley nil levied
bounty tax on tae who,e population Of
n cf =
few suF2r-producerS, whether in the
ca1eb-akes Of Louisiana. amongst the
sugar trees Of Vermont. or on the beet
farms Of Nebraska. \ more unjust, m
equal, un-Amsrical and uncolsdJu-oad.
tax than this was never paid by the
American people, and yet the authors Of
the Mckinney bill had the brazel hard.-
hood 10 have sugar printed in theT fr5e
list, and have talked with fraudulent in
tent ever since about free sugar. This
sugar bounty tax amounted during the
.2st fiscal year 10 Sl2S00000 paid by
those who plant corn and other farm
productions TO those who pant sugar
cane. bore augur holes in maple trees
and cultivate the sugar beet. l see by
a recent estimate that il amounted to
$50 per acre for al the land used in the
South as sugar plantations. The uncon-
stitutiona.ity Of such a law is only too
manifest Judge Coo.ey, in the cslebrat-
ed case of the people VS.. Salem, says:
but II Is not IN the power OF the
state, in my opinion, under the name Of
a bounty, or under any other cover or
subterfuge, TO furnish the capital to set
private parties up in any kind Of bust
ness or TO subsidlze their business after
they have entered upon It. A bounty
law Of which this is the real nature IS
void, whatever may be the pretense on
which ii may be enacted.
Every honest employment is honora-
bic; it is beneficial to the public; it de-
serves encOurage cement. The more
successful we can make il the
more does it generally subserve
the public good. But it is not
the business of the state 10 make dis
examinations in favor of one class against
another, or in favor Of one employment
against another. The state can have no
favorites. It's business is TO protect the
industry of al, and to give al the bene-
fits OF equal laws. 1t cannot compe. an
unwilling minority to submit to taxation
in order that it may keep upon its feet
any business that cannot stand alone"
1t must be remembered also in connec-
ton with this odlous bounty tax on SUI
gar production that not dollar Of Ii
ever found IT'S way as revenue into the
treasury. but was simply paid in there,
to be paid out again TO private individu-
ais. as a bonus to the business IN which
they were engaged. The human mind
can hardly imagine a worse principle of
government than is here presented.
There has never been a day since the
foundation Of this government when SUI
gar was free from tariff duties of some
sort. but 1t was never before made the