The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-12-31


Mr. Humphreys enumerated some or lne
reasons Why "a specific duty On sugar
should be- substituted for an ad val0fem
SYSTEM The ad yaiorem systom, he SAID,
was unfair to- the merchant. because Dee
never knew what duties DE pad 10 pay
unfl the cargo was lquidalct; unfair 10
the Government as "a revenue measure
AMI entirely unreliable. The revenue
from SUGAR two years ago had been about
Si8m.OUO. and he doubted whether THIS
wear il would reach SZl.0oo.ol. This de-
crease OF revenue was due not 10 any
falling OF in importation, bu- ln the re-
ducton of the invoice prices Tie esti-
mated. however that under the specific
rates. as advocated hy the sugar trade
of New York. the revenue from sugar
would be from $4,000 900 20 t50ol)ooO
would not the cost Of sugar. Mr.
Evans (of Kentucky askeL 'be adj
vanced 10 the consumer
eyes" AR Humphreys replied. "but the
additional cost would be SC inexpressi-
biv small that IL would cut no figure IN
the expenses OF a family
Mr. Evans inquired as 10 the total I'M
roriaton of sugar from tfe lia"alii"
Mr Humphreys estimated ,he importa-
uon of this wears crop ~ 1Nop tons
"Ten rer cent Of the whoe sugar inn
portation OF the country" Mr. Evans
"Yes SIR: 10 per cent" said Mr.
I'VE Want" he continued "all the raw
sugar that can be used I'm this country
and we recognize thar, unless = uili ici.,e
is made on sugar above No 10 IN Color
the imnOrfafion OF refined sugar rom
abroad will go on increasing very largely
10 the detrlment OF the sugar tIdut "5
the United states. we also recon- i'1iri m
am additional Discriminating duty on am
sugars coming from hOunty-paying coun-
tries II is manifcsiIN UNJUST 10 ai
surar-producing interests ~ the wofll
for any one country TO alloN AN eAloit
bounty ON sugar. Such export bounty
is n di-orcauizing factor ia the sugar
trade an over the world We are thefe-
fore unanimously OF opinion that one
tenth cent a pound now impd' on SUGAR
from b0unfy-uaying countries is not -ul-
fcirrt as within the last feN years Ger
many has increased the bounty 20 about
Fourth cent pound. we nope,
therefore. that Instead or ore-tentn ,eul
"a pound ON such sugar tte addl tlonal
discriminating duty shall '3e made AZ
least equal 10 the actual bounty.
ONE DIFFICULTY
p. J. Smith. Of New Yori, wished 70
impress upon the committee ire dlHlculty
Of an ad valorem duty Under when.
he said. II was Impossible 10 ten WIZ
landed. Ile cited one case where the
difference In duty on carte amounted
20 $50 600. the rise taking t,ace While
the sugar vas being shlppN. II was
impossitle TO 'and this c1ri0, and u
had 10 be sent 20 LIVERPOOL In this
way many sales were lost.
Mr. James ID. liill. Of Neg Orleans,
made an argument on tcnad or COM
mittee Of the American CaIe-Growing
Association. lie asked thai tne rate or
duty on sugar under the act ot ln>5 le
re.uposcd Nothing less tlian that. he
said. would bee satisfactory
Mr. PAYNE inquired as 10 what the
revenue would be II the duti NJ 1888 was
Sir. Hin calculated that the revenue
would be from $4,000 OoO - SSO,UDOOOO.
on the part Of the home producers OF
sugar whose hope n was that under
the tariff which they recOmin,nded there
would be such development or the
sugar-grOWing interest IN lhis country
as would supply all its consumption. He
FIRST. That specific duties dependent
upon both pOlariscOpic and color stand
ard. should be imposed in lieu OF ad
second. That commencing with 40 for
SUGAR testing - and under ID Dutch
standard and proceeding by .0i for each
degree above -, the duties on sugars
above 10 Dutch standard b0 proportion
atcly increased.
Third. That countervaillng duties off,
setting export bounties be imposed.
Fourth. a proportlonate duty be i'm
posed on molasses.
Fifth That the new law should have
force from the passage OF the act. and
Sixth-rhat in the event OF the adop-
tion OF reciprocity TREATIES and conven-
tions. II shall be without ihjury 10 the
domestic sugar industry and on lines
which fully recognize the ovir-shadowlng
importance OF developing sugar produc-