The Greenville times. [volume] (Greenville, Miss.) 1868-1917, 1894-03-10
WHY SUGAR SHOULD BE TAXED.
IN. o. States.l

IN. o. States.
In a republic, which is q govern
ment by the people, for the people, no
person should be exempt from the OBJ
legation of contributing to tAe support
of the government. Every man Is
protected In bis life, liberty, property
and the pursuit Of happiness after his
own fashion, and for these rights and
blessings he owes direct support to
The government in the shape of taxes
for its maintenance hence any article
Of import of universal consumption
should be put on the dutisble list in q
just and fair tariff system. No man
can, In justice, be exempt from taxa
tion, and hence, If We recognize tariff
taxation at all as n means of support
ing the government, we must put
duties on those imported articles Of
universal consumption, as well as upon
those imported luxuries, which only
few purchase. Under our system only
criminals and paupers are, or should
be, exempt from taxation, and after
all, the State must pay the taxes on
the articles consumed by these classes I;
and surely free men do not desire to
be placed upon footing toward the
government with the inmates of our
almshouses and penitenharies.
Now, sugar is an article Of almost
universal consumption. 1t Is consum-
ed by all classes ofthe people in mod
crate quantities by the poor, iu large
quantities by the rich; a very small
portion of the amount consumed by
tho American people is of domestic
growth, the greater quantity being
imported, hence, a tariff on 1t is tax
upon the masses of the American peo-
pie exactly in proportion to tho
amount consumed, and the pro-
ceeds of that tax go into the COM
mon treasury Of the people who pay
1t, to maintain their free government |;
hence, with the exception of tariff on
coffee aud tea, 1t is the fairest and
most bene6cient tax the Federal gov
ernment can levy. Everybody pays q
part ofit, the poor small portion Of
IL, the rich, who consume It in large
quantities, the greater prrt of 1t, and
We doubt if the enhanced price OF
sugar that would be the result of one
and one halt cents per pound on It
would prove to be a tax Of more than
Que dollar per annum ON the people
of humble means, while It would yield
for the support Of the government
forty, or perhaps fifty millions of dol
lars.
Aud right here let US mark the dis
tinction between sugar Oh the one
baud and iron, coal and wool on the
other. These three latter articles are
Of almost as universal consumption as
is sugar; but we produce them In our
own country in vast quantities and
more cheaply than they are produced
elsewhere, hence very small quantities
Of them are imported.
ANY duty imposed on wool, iron
aud coal, Is, therefore, necessarily, a
dlstinctively protective duty; such o
duty yields the treasury littlc or no
revenue, because, as we have remarked
very small quantities of such articles
are imported aud therefore, the duty
simply euables the wool growers and
coal and iron mine owners, comblna-
tions and trusts TO increase the cost Of
their produsts to consumers of the
country, enabling these mine owners,
combines aud trusts TO put the en-
hanced price in their own pockets.
This is protection this is what such
recreant Democrats as Gormcn, Nor
gan and Brics are trying TO 1orce into
the Wilson bill In the interest of coal
and irol combines this is, In plain
language, taxing the poor, the labor
ing man, the mechanics, the sewing
girl, the shop woman, the widow and
the orphan, not for the support of the
government, but for the further
enrichment of already rich capitalists
and plutocrats, who have already
made millions of dollars through the
operations of this system, while the
masses of the people under 1t have
been aud are growing poorer and
poorer.