West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1894-11-29
NJ LONGER IN DOUBT.
The Sugar Tax Adds $40, 600, 900 to
the Burdens OF the Poor People.

the Burdens OF the Poor People.
J he bounty on raw Sugar was cents
per Pou 4l, s,.4. the tariT uatv i, nov
- per cent al vilprem, or .e,s than >
/ cents per pound. Shout We not. there
I fore, nave cheaper su gar now than un-
der the Mckinley law?
ONE In DOUBT.
The present duty on raw sugar will
average 1.2O cents per pound on basis
OF cents as the average value of all
raw sugar that we import. This duty
must be applied TO all the sugar that we
consume. because the market value Of
our domestic sugar will correspond with
that of the duty paid imported sugar
Applying this duty Of 100 cents TO the
s.3i3, 200 500 pounds that we consumed
last fiscal year we have total charge
to the people of sJ2, 1854. The boun-
| " OF cents per pound was chargeable
only on the quantity of domestic sugar
produced in this country, being si2.-
091, 500 for the fiscal year ending June
81 1894
Where the bounty cost the people on
~ $4,000, 900 the new duty will cost
S52, OC), 900 on the basis of our present
consumption, making an additional
charge for sugar of $40, OOO, 900 TO be
paid by the people as the result of the
Democratic policy on sugar That is
why sugar will now cost the people
more money than under the Mckinley
tariff, and the producers OF domestic
sugar will also receive less protection
to the extent OF four-ffths OF n cent on
every pound OF sugar that they pro-
duce.
EDITOR ARGUS The above is
from the JournaI. You might have
known 1T without being told though.
1t possesses great merit, great mer.
1t. In the realm of political science
few things like it have come from
the Republican press. The Inten-
ton Of the writer is not above sus.
plclon. The statement seems to
have been without pre- meditation.
But lawyers say witnesses come
nearest facts under such circum-
stances. This may be true i'm this
case. Let us look at the article
again.
l. 1t says "the market value of
our domestic sugar will correspond
with that OF the duty paid import
ed sugar.
1t means, then, that il will in.
ere ase the price of sugar-not only
the price of the imported, but of
the domestic article also. This ut
one time (four years ago, two years
ago. event. Was not AN article of
Republican faith. The Democrats
howIed it over the land that it in
creased the price of goods to the
consumer, but the Republicans said
1t was II campaign lie, manufactured
and circulated TO frIghten men into
voting the Democratic ticket.
2. The Journal says this duty is
"to be paid by the people"
Strange . Democrats said that.
They used to howl it in every cam
paign. But the people were told
10y Republican STATESMEN" that it
WAS all IL fake; that so expert were
Americans in the science OF politi.
Cal economy that they made the
49, - = 'S'o p"J ~, Otuo ouDDOTIIUR
our government. Blu: now Gas the
result of the Democratic policy"
the foreigner doesn't pay it all; but
the consumer, and he an American.
And this increases the price of the
domestic article as well AS of the
imported.
3. About four years ago the ar.
gument would have run thus ::
There can be no doubt that the
bounty Is paid by the people. They
thus take $4,000. 900 ont of their
treasury and pay il to sugar indus
tries. The advalorum duty puts
100000 into the treasury. By
the wisdom of Republican states
m.nship the foreigner pays this.
The difference between taking S12,
600, 900 from the people and giving
them 1852, 100000 is $G4. 900. 900.
The advantage would have been de-
clarrd on the side Of the duty to
the tune Of s64, O0O,O
ONE AMAZED.
-
w have made qpyeruI oorrnci; ors