New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-05-20

PALACES ABOUT SUGAR.
SENATOR MANDERsON EXPLAINS SOME
OF THEM.

VAST EXTENT OF THE PRODUCING INDUSTRY
AND WHY 1T NEEDS PRoTEcTIoN-THE
/ TRUST AND THE PRODUCERS
| tpY TELEGRAPH TO THE Tribunal
| Warrington. Nav Ex-senator Henderson said this
afternoon: Without malice many newspapers IN the
country are denouncing the sugar industry Sohs.d-
erng the actual condition, regard Dein had lot me
facts this assault must proceed either from lgno-
rance an Indifferent desire TO understand the matter
Of from prejudice created by assoclatng sugar pro-
| ductlon with sugar refining. 1t Is time that line
was drawn broad that the veriest tyro may as
| cover that 1t will do to level general charge
| against sugar in discussing the tarin scheduie
| Now what are the facts? The present policy or
bounty system, enacted in 1870. had several distinct
purposes, viz: To reduce the surplus that theh eN
isted. 10 give the people sugar for ) cents pound
| for which they had been paying ana cents 10
give domestic sugar production stronger encourage
nent and TO allow TO use this free Foreign sugar
and bounty policy to force agreements from foreign
/ sugar countries under which exports have been
increased 100000 This policy. therefore was not
enacted to put money the pockets of the sugar
/ nr,lucers because they got more under 1t thaA
! they did under the former duty policy. when they
simply added the duty to the price OF the sugar.
/ Bounty is the direct as duty is the indirect method
of protecting or encouraging home industries
and another fallacy exists. 1t is supposed that
the bounty all goes 10 the sugar-producer on tne
contrary half Of it goes to the farmers VINO rase
the cane and the bee;s that make the sugar F0I
instance. from a ton of beets come 10 POUNDS OF
sugar That ton OF bects costs the manufacturer
| mot the Trusn s.. He gets for the l65 pounds OF
sugar cents a pound from the buyer and cents
| from the Government. out Of this he pays the
farmer for the raw material 50 n ton Tor Dee'S' OF
over 80 per cent OF the whole result In turn the
farmer pays fair proportion Of his one-hah 10 'he
aborers In the field while the other half goes to pay
the expenses OF the manufacturer. his labor, MS
coal coke limestone. charcoal and bagging' ana Tor
transported ton interest on his investment sinking
fund for wear and tear OF machinery etc. IL Is
of material consequence to realize that there Is no
known industry, which calls for the employment 81
such a variety OF labor and Of material as that OF
sugar. no Industry in which agriculture and manu-
facture and transportation or inland commerce
are brough; closely together none "nlch 20
completely shuts out the mddleman who Is abroad
in the land preying upon the people The farmer has
his market sure and close at hand; he delivers MS
bsets or cane and receives his money In cash with
out deductions FOR commission. storage or otner
charges which reduce his profits. and he knows just
what he receive per ton and when ne j. - IT,
ceve t. and he calculate very closely "nat MS
proAts will be With all this the Sugar Trust has
nothing whatever to do The Trust simply refaes
foreign sugar. II does not produce a pound
WHY rRoTsCT1oN Is ASKED FOR.
and now let us see where the protection comes
in so much talked about The actual cost OF domes-
tic sugar 10 our producers is cents per pound
Please keep that fact in mind. because that - the
reason why protection Is asked for our producers.
The difference In the cost ~ ton Of beets abroad
and here Is g. and the difference in the cost Of
labor to turn into the l65 pounds 81 sugar
is 81 o. OF a total labor and raw material diner-
ence Of 81 o.. Then there is an export bounty in
Germany on sugar equal 10 one-twentieth OF cent
a pound which would amount to over cents on the
lc- pounds Here then W. have - contend with
d ~ lie .fC
accounts with increased cost here OF coal coke.
limestone etc. to about "a. cents per pound To
overcome this. sugar farmers ask protection by
duty or bounty They cannot make sugar at All
without one or the other. This statement seems
| pain enough for almost any one but an imbeche
to understand Our strife H. and ought 70 continue
| TO be- 10 make our own sugar. for which We now
send away over sll6OoOOO every year We have the
sol and the climate and the capital but capital VIII
not embark in a business where 1t VIII lose from ia
| to lst cents a pound a product Involved in this
] Is the desire to secure our people cheaper sugar
And now what does the Democracy propose 10 do
BY Tariff bill our producers are offered - per
/ ed valorem. II we take the price OF foreign
raw sugar Of the highest test. ~ cents per pounI
and multiply It by the proposed - per cent. We get
ll5 cents pound only. which less export bounty or
one NTH Of a cent leaves the net duty trihe over
nne-tenths OF a cent per pound. 10 which II Is pro-
posed to add the small discriminating duty OF one
tenth OF cent per PouT M max ene Of 9orei q
! test raw sugar being 2S75 cents a pound. and the
total proposed duty on l. being 40 per cent ana one
ducers must compete on the basis or - GEMS
per pound. Professor Wiley and all other experts
| who have examined the subject say that raw
sugar costs our producers over cents per pound.
| from a.. to cents This clearly demonstrates
1 5hs the h SGs c Ssy here ' o sugar and
! that the proposed duty Is not enough by at least
the bounty law goes upon the u. and cents
] ~
sugar IS concerned, by our cane p!antsrs in Louis
lana en- our beet 0 sugar nr9nersd pac dun
acutai cost Of domestic sugar. ana hence the pro-
posed Tariff Bill tNo. ~ does not give any protection
whatever to sugar production. Nothing more was
pssts re utter r empness Of The political ,hcory
which pins its faith. as Louisiana has done: TO the
viii tax the people from $4,000 to 100000 Tor
e not w Even be Bsdy D" This hi
! counts for the row in Louisiana. The Democratic
in it's fnIness has penetrated in the furthermost
oanebreals The louisiana Senators here have been
hands and Louisiana is out IN the cold.
WHAT ABOUT THE SUGAR TRusT'
And now what about the Trust? What protcc-
tion does get under the proposed bill? The Ger
man refner ana the American renner start with
sugar on this basis. They enter the worlds mar e;s
as competitors FOR the raw product. When It Is
refined the German has Ga cents on the 100 pounds
export bounty. This Will hardly pay freight and
/ insurance 50 that there ia no advantage in that
When his refined product reaches here II r. made TO
pay by the proposed bill duty Of one-eighth Of
+ cen. and One-tenth additional. twenty-five and
one-haf onehundreiths cent per pound, equal to
nine foreths 81 cent il the refined product comes
J from Cuba any country that does give
/ export bounty. the duty IL Is Ono-eighth Of
/ cent only per pound 50 that while the compromise
Tariff bill gives the domestic producer stone II
gives the Sugar Trust from one-eighth 10 nine-for
teths OF cent protection Why is this? This ia the
question which the people VIII ask the democracy
/ to explain later
Tine point rs this The bounty policy has
couraged a wonderful development of domestic
sugar. II has chcapened its price to the people -
the extent OF $30OO)O00O In three years and It has
opened ports a S40000c00 increase OF domestic
exp ports from farms and factories. Why repeal
4? Why increase the price Of sugar. c.ose foreign