The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-12-31
M1NNEsorAs BEET SUGAR BOUNTY

MINNESOTA'S BEET SUGAR BOUNTY.
In 1895 the legislature of Minnesota
passed q law Offering q bounty of 1 cent
per pound on beet sugar made in the
state from beets grown In Minnesota,
and in 1899 this beet sugar bounty law
was amended so that the amount appro-
priated for the purpose of paying this
bounty was limited to $4,000 each year,
and not more than $4,000 to be paid in
| any one congressional district. The OBJ
| Ject Of the law was to encourage the gen
eraI growth OF sugar beets and the e.
tabrshment Of beet sugar factories
throughout the state.
| If the true object OF the law had been
achieved the product of numerous small
er factories would have found local sale
among the retailers, and perhaps the con-
sumers living in the vicinity of the facto-
Iies, and the monopoly of the sugar bust
ness by the sugar trust would have been
| broken in much the same manner as the
| monopoly Of binding twine was bro
ken by the manufacture of binding Irvine
at the state prison, such Irvine being sold
to retailers or consumers only, and not
to JobbeTs.
To further encourage the plan, the state
purchased S., 900 worth of sugar bset seed,
| and has distributed the same in the ag-
ricultural counties.
| But up to date the result of the beet
| sugar bounty law has not met public ex-
! pectation. The state paid out in 1898, as
bounty on beet sugar, I997, and in 1899
| further sum of $19472, or total of &c.,
947 in bounty This large sum has all been
| paid to the Minnesota Sugar company, a
single concern in Minneapolis, and fur
Their sum of '$52S has been paid by the
state for inspection:
This company is said to have made
100000 pounds of beet sugar In the past
/ year, and expects to double its output in
| a year or so. OF course it has drawn in
the way of bounty as much as it can ever
| draw in one year, SO that increased pro-
| duction would not mean increased boun-
| separate factory in another congressional
| district, when it might absorb the entire
appropriation of $4,000 annually.
The entire product of this bounty-fed
company, amounting to about 48 days
supply annually for the whole state of
Minnesota, would have but small effect
on the price of sugar, as the annual con-
sumption Of the state IS said to be about
100000 pounds. Still. it might be ex-
pected to have some effect, but, as a mat
ter Of fact, 1t has had no effect at ALL
The reason is not far to seek. The
whole product of the Minnesota Sugar
company Is sold to the jobbers, who dis
pose Of 1t to the retailers at the same
price as trust sugar. 1t is claimed by
the company that. at present, 1t is not
practicable to dispose of the beet sugar
in any other way; that If the company
sold to retailers they would be boycotted
by the jobbers, and that to sell to retoil-
ers would create extra expense in the
way of bookkeeping, shipping charges,
etc.
If one of the objects of the payment Of
bounty on beet sugar was the breaking
Of the monopoly Of the sugar trust, as
the states engagement in binding Irvine
manufacture at the state prison was for
the purpose of breaking the monopoly in
binding twine, that object has not yet
been attained. It was not intended that
| ba binding fvuiOa FJ,o
state prison should be sufficient in guam
tity to meet more than a small percentage
Of the demand In the whole state, but 1t
was intended that 1t should create compe-
tition and lower the prices which the
trust attempted to maintain, to the great
detriment Of the farmers and that object
has been achieved, because the Irvine is
sold directly to the consumers, and IS not
disposed of to jobbers
The only beneficiaries up to the pres
ent from the sugar bounty law, which
has cost the state $4,000 up to the pres
ent time, in the course Of two years, have
been the jobbers who have handled the
product the Minnesota Sugar company
and the few farmers who have actually
raised and sold sugar beets to the com
pany 1t would seem that an amendment
to the law of 1899, providing that the prod
uct of any beet sugar factory receiving
the state bounty should be disposed of
directly to the consumer, would tend to
encourage the industry and would secure
for the consumers in the state some OF the
dement's of the law. If bounties are 20