The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-05-26

dufy of Is per cent al vsaloresn ON ali
sagars from = 10 ie degrees. with ~is of
, cen. per pound ADDITIONAL on all sugars
above Nc. II Dutch standard IN color and
refined sugars
Aore Than ~ Per Cent. Imported.
More than ~ per esnt oI the sugar ssn-
ported into the United States has been
ccloFsd oF been imported IN d raw ccnSi-
fson, and has been refined here and 70 IS,
therefore. of Importance that We should
consider carefully the effect which the
schedule proposed by the senate commit
tee wo0lS have upon the refining induS-
try. / assume that il will b. admitted
III an quarters that this industry is en-
titled 10 fair tgea tmert. The {acs that the
business conducted today is in cenipara-
lively f'-w hands. and that large poT-
ffon of tt Is carries? on by one company,
while II furnishes reason for unusual care
IN the adjustment OF the rates in order
that ao undue or unfair advantage shall
be given to sugar reEinsrS. should not he
allowed 10 furnish a pretexr in the prepAr-
alton OF a tsrtff bill constructed upon pro-
fectsVe lines for the destruction OF a xrS3.
industry. In other words. u IL important
from every economical standpoint that
we make IL possible thar the reuniaE or
susar can be successfully carried on here.
and that the business should not be turn
ed over ny legislative determinations TO
German ref1ners.
1T Is therefore incumbent upon us TO
show that no protection is given the re-
stning interests by he proposed schedule
beyond that which is adequate for the
continued existence OF the business In the
United States For this purpose I have
prepared series or statements which |
submit for Your consideration. showing
the actual difference between the rates
imposed by the schedule upon raw sugars
OF different grades and refined sugars. Tho
first of these tables. TO which I will call
your attention. shows the rates imposed
upon each grade OF sugar testing above
~ degrees by the house bill and the sen
ate bill. I, shows t,..ther the actual diff
ferentiai on each grade IN both the house
and senate bills. This table shows that
the differentiai between raw and refined
sugars by the senate proposition varies
from y.I to 1910 cents per 100 pounds,
while the differentisi In the house bill
carries from 10 to II is cents per 100
pounds II will he seen from an eyAmina-
tien of this table that the aifrereptial be-
tween grauulated sugar and 81 degree GEN.
trIfugals-thls being by far the most i'm
portant class of raw sugars and In anoant
two-thir6s Of the total imports of raw
cane~-is g<. cents per its pounds: on -
degree Centrifucais the dfferentiai il los
cents; on " degree muscavadees the differ
entail is las
''In order TO show that the commuters
proposition does not sive undue adNant-
afA 10 beet sugars a9 compared with cane
sugars, the following statement has been
prepared by me to show the differential
between raw and refined bee. sugar in
comparison with the differentiai Of ths
same sugars based on The rates imposed
by existing law:
1'.Dinerential rate on raw beet sugar,
IS degree analysis. and on German gran
ulated:
Present law; refined. io4.s"; raw. ss.aa:
Senate bill refined. 1860: raw. isi7a:
differential, H1T."
Mr. Aidrich then submitted statements
showing the dinerentials under varying
bills of sugar, and resumed:
Under existing law, German refined re-
ceives IS Of a cent pc: pound. The coun-
fervaiiing duty here Is bat ] OF a cent
per pound The German refined. there
fore. receives a net bounty OF .S Of
cent per pound. This enables him TO sell
his product AT less price than the Amer
lean refiner has to pay for ~ degrep GEN.
trifugals. II is this kind of competition
which !s driving tho cane sugar produc-
ers and refiners OF the world to the wall"
Aldrich then replied 10 statement by
Hon. William l.. Wilson. In which tho
latter estimated the rates imposed by the
senate committees proposition. Continu-
ing. Aldrich said:
Germany Ready 10 step In.
I'm the tables I have submitted no al
lusion is made TO the bounty provisions
contained In both the senate and house
proposals. The adoption OF these or sim
liar proposals. for counteryailing duties
seems 10 be n necessity ~ we ara 70 de-
yelop the beet sugar industry In the Unit.
ed States. Otherwise IL will be possible
for any foreign country by extension OF
it's bounftes TO neutralize entirely the ef-
feet of our protective duties.
In CONSIDERING the important. question
whether the differential proposed by eith-
er the house or the senate bill is greater
than IL should be, we are bound In fair
ness 10 take into consideration existing
conditions and the changes which have
taken place since the enactment OF tho
law of 1894. When that act was under
discussion in the Sc nate the difference be-
tween German granuIated aid raw beet
ss per cent, analysis was 81 of a cent per
pound In March the difference was .35
OF n cent per pound. The tmportations OF
refined sugars into the United states
amounted I'm 1891 TO 400 90 pounds and
In iSG TO IA ,W1.Dn pounds. The importa-
tions in 1895 amounted TO is7 90 900 pounds.
while the imporfatons In the single month
OF April, 1897. amounted To nearly y. 90, 90
pounds.
German refiners have driven the sugar
refining industry OF Great Britain almost
have already stated. invading every su-
gar market Of the world with their pro-
duct. Most of the German granuiated
imported IL the result OF a continuous
process OF refining. For months raw beet
sugar and German granuiated have sold
on absolute parity Of value, taking into
account only the percentages on pure sii-
gar contained In IT. III We assume tn,
cost of refining sugar In the United States
to boz approximately y a cent per pound,
and IL German refined can be sold with
out loss on the same basis with German
ra VS.. IL must he evident that the differ
en;iais suggested IN the senate PROPOSE
tton are not only not excessive. bat they
are quite likely In tho near future to prove
Inadequate To secure the continuance of
the business OF sugar refining In the Unit
.d States. II the tmportations OF German
granuiated should Increase at the same
ratio rs they have since the act of 1894
was adopted the Germans viii certainly
secure at an early day a large part OF
the American market The protection af~
forded by the dinerentiais proposed by
the senate committee Is, J believe. not
reference 70 the actual requirements OF
the industry than that afforded by rates
imposed upon any other important pro-
duct by the terms OF the bill.
Hawaiian Treaty Must 60.
The senator then took up the Hawaiian
treaty and said:
'~Tfa. committee also prepare and present
an amendment 70 the hotlSe provision IN
regard 20 the HawahsA treaty. The sx-
listing commercial trsJty between the
United States nd the government OF Theses
Islands provides for the free admission of
raw sugars. the product % the islands, into
the United States. IL this treaty should re-
main IN force IL wpsii result in giving
bounty to the Hawaiian sugar producers
amounting e. more than $500 efp per an
nun. IL was not contemplated when the
original treaty was made or when II "azi
extended. that any possible adYantas" of
f$las Kind could ever result from It's terms
10 the people OF the Sandwich Islands
THE efr scf of this bounty VAS undolot-
ssgsy ,n stimulate enormously the rrodnc-
ton Of sugar IN the Hawaiian islands
While we cannot fairly sbroEate treaty
of this Kind with % friendly eountrY with
out notice We believe that negotiations
shossld be at once entered into looking 20
such a modification of the treaty as ~iil
reduce the bounty 10 D. paid Hawaiian
sugar producers 20 reasonable sum.
and the committee viii present an amend
rn4nt looking in that direction al an early
aay There should be no diTficglFy IL go
curing through the treaty making power
s.lch notifications Of the treaty a. viii