The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1894-10-05

| tiCult ludiIlt"inCu' iuciC is nothing
unjust OF unreasonable in its imnn'
sition.
l come next to sugar, When ,hc
heavy hand of the Mckinley bill was
laid upon numerous new articles of
taxation, and the old taxes in MANY
cases increased, it was seen that great
complaint would be made throughout
the country against that law and il
was to be sweetened to the public
taste by what ? BY abolishing all taxes
upon raw sugar under sixteen Dutch
standard, which by the way the people
do not buy at all except in small uuan.
titles, but the great mass of which is
bought by the sugar rehncrics. There
lay the juggle. OF course it would
enable the sugar re6ners in a small
degree to cheaper the price of refined
sugar, that reduction. however, being
traceable TO several other causes which
have not time now to discuss.
Among other causes for the enormous
cheapening in the price of sugar was
improved machinery in lis manufac.
ture improved modes of cultivation
of the sugar cane, sorghum and the
beet. Labor was better organized in
the South after lapse of time than it
was at the close of the war. Under
our trade relations with the Hawaiian
Islands we got our sugar from those
islands without tax. Large tracts of
land in our country that had not been
devoted to the raising of sugar were
brought under cultivation for that pur.
pose. In other countries the amount
of sugar raised was enormously in.
creased and all these causes contribu.
ted to the cheapening of sugar. 1t
was not the Mckinley act that drove
down the price of granulated sugar
from 9 or 10 to S or cents.
repeat that the raw sugars which
the Mckinley bill made free were all
under 10 Dutch standard, and the
great bulk of it goes to the sugar re
fneries for the purpose of being rein.
ed. 1t made their material free to
them although other raw materials
used by our manufacturing industries
were heavily taxed by the same law.
What else did that Mckinley bill dol
1t gave sugar rehners a duty of half a
cent a pound upon imported refined
sugar Then 1t gave a dfferential
duty OF one-tenth of cent upon re-
fined sugars imported from countries
where refined sugars were taxed higher
from raw sugar. In order to execute
this purpose of favorng the sugar
trust, which was the undoubted object
of these provisions l have described,
without utterly destroying the planters
OF Louisiana by the sudden and VIC.
lent change, and the sorghum and the
beet growers in the other States have
referred to, they concluded to make a
gift to them Of from twelve to twenty
million of dollars a year in the three
OF four years from the passage of the
law.
Now let us see what the new law
does. 1t imposes a tax of 40 per cent.
upon raw sugar below I6 Dutch stand.
ard. Most of that is bought by the
sugar rehners and not by the people.
1t reduced the tax on refined sugars
which the people buy to fourth of
what 1t was before, that is, instead of
a duty of half cent a pound it re.
duced 1t to one-eighth of cent The
sugar bounties are entirely swept away.
NO more gifts from the treasury of the
United States to citizens in a particu-
lar pursuit.
have however to express an opin-
ION, which is that within a few years,
when 1t is found that the new law will
procure abundant revenue for the gov
| do not doubt it will
hat certain duties can be taken off
and the duty upon sugar reduced from
10 per cent. to 20 or IS, about one.
lalf OF what it now is. | would then,
Is has been proposed by the House
oil Representatives, take off the tax
ipon iron ore, upon soft coal and upon
he farmers barbed wire. He must
nave barbed wire for fencing, as the
wooden fences of former times are
lot available for him. He has hard
enough time to carry on his farm under
he depreciation of farm products and
he decreased price of farm land.
Now, without wearying you any
urther | will sum up by saying that |
lave gone over every prominent feat
Ire OF the new law with the single cx-
;eption of the administrative provis.
ons those provisions which relate to
he manner in which duties shall be
collected, paid into the treasury and
10 on, which do not relate to the prin-
,iples OF the measure. AS compared
With the former law is it not most
wise, most benehcient, most just and
lghteous enactment ? 1t was passed,
IS have already said much earlier
l. \ 4