Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1897-01-15

senate amendments to the Mills
bill in 1888, which imposed a duty
and also gave bounty, was en-
tirely practicable.
Mr.. Oxnard took strong grounds
against any reciprocity. He
thought dual policy (both duty
and bounty would be fair to all
interests and jeopardize none.
Such a policy, he said, would in
crease the revenue out of which
the bounty could be paid and
would encourage the sugar in.
dustry. The schedule he pro-
posed was a duty of one cent per
pound on all sugars testing 75
degrees or less; 3 cents per hun
dred pounds additional for each
degree between IS and SO degrees
and four cents per hundred for
every additional degree between
50 and 100, with one fourth of
one per cent diiferential on sugars
above 16 Dutch standard. He
asked for the Mckinley duty on
mo!nsses and countervailing duties
against bounty paying countries
on both refined and raw sugars.
The bounty he proposed was B 4
of a cent per pound. one. fourth TO
go off Mt the end OF each four yeats,
the whole bounty to cease in q
years.
"Do you believe that a bounty
would be permanent ?" asked Mr..
Payne. "You remember in 1894
you opposed it on the ground that
it could not be made permanent"
yes" replied Mr.. Oxnard, Il
think it would be permanent be.
cause l believe the republican
party will continue in power"
why ?" asked Mr.. Wheeler;
because it has restored prosper.
ity ?"
Mr.. Oxnard did not reply to
this nor to Mr.. Payne when he
asked if he believed this because of
the encouragement given the re-
publican party by the beet sugar
stat', and tue close squeeze in the
senate.
Mr.. Oxnard in answer to ques-
tions from Mr.. McMillip said tha$
the eastern and western reinerics
had divided the American markets
between them aud agreed not to
jnfringe on each others territory,
The HGwaiian treaty helping that
agreement.
Senator Perkins oS California
pYesen !pd aD argument in favor Of
the imposition OF specific tax of
| 10 cents pound or. i'm ported
raw sugars. He showed tloat the
coDsumptiop of imported sugar by
the United States is about 300
00O tons a year, all of which f
he said, can be pr3duc
ed in a few years within our
borGers. He showed that the
area capable of producing beet |
sugar was sufficient to more shan
supply the demand for the
United States, and that sugar
beets can b. raised or soil
ranging in character from afAsli
plains ip Uhh 10 the rich soil Of
California. Ho pointed ont the
fact that France alone produced
sugar beets' enough to rlanu5ac
ture ell the sugar that We import,
and that Germany is stiII greater
producer o8sugar of this character.
Austria is also q large producer.
These countries, he said, have pro
tected this interest so thas' it has
been snabEsd TO increase toits pre-
sent vast dimensions and are now
increasing the bounties aud duties
to protect their respective produc.
ers against the competition of
other European beet sugar coun-
tries.
Tue sugar producers in the
United States are forced ilto CON-
petition with the protected sugar
of Europe, and for this protected
sugar we are paying ont nearly
$780, 100000 per year. This sum,
he argued, should be retained in
the United States, and be- paid out
to our laborers, farmers and me.
chanics.
The importance OF beet sugar in
She United States was set forth, it
being shown in its benefits confer.
red on a country by giving a new
source of revenue to its farmers,
building up new and tlnurishing
community wherever a beet sugar
factorv il eGtablisha6 aud tha uI.