The herald., 1897-05-26
WILL 1T STICK?

ture, it is almost certain that we shall
be obliged to depend more and more
upon taxes of this nature for necessary
revenue.
I'm the years to come we must expect
decrease, rather than an increase, in
the customs revenue to be derived under
the principal schedules of the tariff.
with duties adequately protective
upon manufactures of cotton, wool and
flax. we may receive a constantly de-
creasing revenue from importations of
these products. If the rates imposed
by this bill on sugar should be found to
lead to the rapid development Of the
beet sugar industry in the United
States we may expect large reductions
year by year from the contemplated
revenue from sugar. Some Of the most
s'anguine advocates of the policy of en-
couraging beet sugar production in this
country believe that we shall within ten
years produce all our sugar. The legiti-
mate result of protective policy is to
give the American market to American
producers. When this becomes an ac-
cepted fact the revenue growing out of
protective duties will disappear. 1t
must look for other sources of revenue.
Whether it should be along the line of an
increase of internal revenue taxes, such
as we have suggested, or whether some
other sources Of revenue should be
sought, it is not necessary now to deter
mine.
1T is safe to assume that numerous
objectors will always be found to any
plan for increased taxation. In this par
ticular case the committee is only
strenuous that wise public policy re-
quires that our revenues should at all
times be equal to our expenditures and
that the people Of the United States will
not be satisfied with any revenue meas
ure that does not provide adequate in
come for this purpose"
In the sugar schedule E., we have
suggested a change in rates and in the
manner Of assessing the duties.
Senator. Aldrich proceeded to present
in detail the estimated effect the bill
would have upon the revenue and ex-
planned in general way the character
of the amendments suggested, conclud-
ing as follows:
In considering the important ques-
tion whether the differential proposed
by either the House or the Senate bill is
greater than it should be, we are bound
in fairness to take into consideration
existing obligations and the changes
which have taken place since the enact
ment of the act of 1894. When that act
was under discussion in the Senate the
difference of German granulated and
raw beet sugar, SO per cent analysis. was
57-1O0 Of cent per pound. In March the
difference was 33-1O0 of cent per pound.
The importations of refined sugars in to
the United States amounted in 1891 to
100000, and in 1892 to $4,000, 900 pounds.
The importations in 1896 amounted to
1S7. 100000, while the importations in the
single month of April, 1897 amounted to
nearly 100000 pounds. German refin-
ere' have driven the sugar refining indus
try of Great Britain almost entirely out
of existence. They are. as have already
stated, invading every sugar market of
the world with their product. Most of
the German granulated imported is the
result OF a continuous process of refin-
ing. For months raw beet eugar and
German granulated have sold on abso-
lutte parity of value, taking into account
only the percentages of pure sugar con-
tained in it, If we assume the cost of re-
f1ning sugar in the United States to be
approximately one-half a cent per
pound, and if German refined can be
sold without loss on the same basis with
German raws, it must be evident that
the differentials suggested in the Sen
ate proposition are not only not excess
sive, but they are quite likely in the near
future to prove inadequate to secure the
continuance of the business of sugar re-
f1ning in the United States If the i'm
portations of German granulated should
increase at the same ratio that
they increased since the act of 1894 was
adopted, the Germans. will certainly Sc
cure at an early day large part Of the
American market The protection af-
forded by the differentialr proposed by
the Senate committee is, believe, not
only less by percentage, but less with
reference to the actual requirements OF
the industry than that afforded by rates
imposed upon any other important pro.
duct by the terms of the BILL
The senator took up the Hawaiian
treaty and said: "The committee viii
also prepare and present an amendment
to the house provision in regard to ths
Hawaiian treaty. The existing CONNER
cial treaty between the United State;
and the government of these island.
provides for the free admission Of raw
sugars, the product CT the islands, intt
the United States. If this treaty should
remain in force 1t would result in giving
a bounty to the Hawaiian sugar pro
ducers amounting to more than $8 ,00O, 90,
per annum 1t was not contemplated
when the original treaty was made, o.
when it was extended, that any possible
advantage Of this kind could ever re
suit from its terms to the people Of TIL
| Sandwich islands.
THE effect of this bounty would un
doubtedIy be to stimulate enormousl,
the production Of sugar in the Hawaii