The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-12-31
Want More, Protection
Than They Now Get.
Conflicting Interests We're
Given a Hearing.
Refiners Ask That Low Duty Be
Placed on the Raw Product.

yesterday, and IL was the most interest
ing. as well as the most important.
schedule so far considered. The con-
ficting interests OF the producers, re-
finers and importers were brought out
in sharp contrast. The producers wanted
higher duties all along the line, and the
refiners pressed for high duties on re-
fined and not so high on raw sugars.
The latter were especially anxious that
In imposing counteryailing duties
against export bounty countries the
additional duty should be levied only
against the refined article. The ina-
porters the cane growers, the refiners
and the beet growers were each given
innings by the committee.
John Farr OF New York. Solon
Humphreys of New York and +. j.
Smith OF New York represented the
importers; Colonel j. ID. Hill OF New
Orleans represented the cane sugar
growers, w. j. McCann OF Philadelphia
the refiners, and Henry It. Oxnard of
Grand Island, Neb., and Herbert
Myrick, the beet sugar interests.
Francis T. Thurber. New York mer-
chant. and j. III. Sypher of this city,
Bishop Thomas II. Cutler OF Utah and
4. NJ. Allen of Nebraska also made
arguments while Senator Perkins OF
California submitted printed brief.
Francis B. Thurber of New York, in
an argument for sugar protection from
the distributors standpoint said that
no product was sold so extensively in
which there was such small proht
estimated by him at h OF cent pound.
He said that In France and Germany
the great bounty-paying sugar coun-
tries. the consumers paid more for their
sugars than those In the United states.
The bounties given by France and Ger
many had crushed sugar refining In
England, and would do so here but for
our protective barrier.
Does the company require that the
sugar shall not be sold below a certain
figure?" asked Mr.. McMillin.
Yes" replied Mr.. Thurber, "the trust
requires that the sugars shall not be
sold below the Inauufacturers- list
price on the day OF the sale"
us the distributor obliged to certify
that he has sold for the list price?'
He IL. or he forfeits mis- commission"
w j. Mccain of Philadelphia, one OF
the Independent refiners. said the pres
ent tariff had resulted in an Increased
Importation of 10 per cent in refined
sugars, and only 10 per cent in raw
sugars. He said this showed that unless
additional protection was afforded the
refining of our sugars would all be done
abroad.
The beet sugar industry had the floor
IN the afternoon. Henry Il. Oxnard or
Grand Island. Neb., president OF the
American Beet Sugar society. was the
spokesman He charged that the pres
ent tariff not only failed to give protec-
ton 10 the sugar raisers. but discouraged
the investment Of additional capital,
MIR. oxford delivered an argument in
favor of bounty.
"It did not seem TO have much effect
IN Nebraska" suggested Mr.. Steele OF
Indiana.
Nor in Kansas" added Mr.. Nc
Milin.
"Well. look at California" replied Mr..
Oxnard 1T had its effect there"
A moment later Mr.. Oxnard spoke of
the duty OF the majority TO carry out
their platform pledges. while plat
form pledges have no legal binding force.
they certainly ought to bind the con-
science OF members of the majority In
congress" said Mr.. Oxnard
IF they have any" calculated Mr..
Steele, senteniously, wbereat there was
"a hearty laugh all around.
MIR. oxnard took strong grounds
against any reciprocity. He thought a
dual policy (both duty and bounty)
would be fair to all interests and jeop-
ardize none.
do you believe that a bounty would
be permanent" asked MIR. Payne.
you renaa.aher in IA you opposed IL on
the ground that IT could not be made
permanent"
Yes" replied Mr. Oxnard, II think
Il would be permanent. because be-
.ieve the Republican party will continue
in power"
''Why?" asked Mr.. Wheeler.
Because IL has restored prosperity"
Herbert Myrick, president OF the
Orange Judd company. spoke in the In
terests OF the farmer. His argument
was exhaustive, and was largely de-
voted TO showing the advantage OF the
production In this country of the sugar
consumer here. II was an economic
crime, he said. to compel American
farmers To raise staples in competition
with the cheap land and labor countries
with which 20 pay for imported sugar.
besides standing the freight and com
mission both ways. The sugar beet IN
dustry, he said, was on the high road to
success under the Mckinley law. Its
repeal had brought IL to a standstill
Thomas II. Cutler OF Utah. bishop OF
the Mormon church, read statistics of
imports and exports between the United
States aud Hawaii. showing that the
exports for the United states are but
i1% psr cent OF the imports, and that
81 COZ 900 OF duties are rebated TO the
Hawaiian producers. The sugar Inn
ported from Hawaii would give employ
ment IN the United states TO 2iS,OOO men
continuously throughout the year.
AS the first maker of beet sugar ma
chinery I'm the United States, he asserted
that the American-made machinery
was superior 20 thnt OF Germany or
France While much OF the work I'm
connection with the raising Of beets was
being done by machinery the wedding
had 20 be done by hand, but the laborers
OF California would iJr rtu1i n . chance
70 get down on their knees I'm the fields.
Utah has felt the hand OF the Sugar
trrst. He said "the moment Utah tries