Eagle River review. [volume] (Eagle River, Wis.) 1890-1927, 1901-08-24
The BEET SUGAR INTEREST.
Will vigorously Oppose Havemeycr
Trust Plan of Reduced Duties.

Will vigorously Oppose Hayemeyer
Trust Plan of Reduced Duties.
Mr. Oxnard, a large manufacturer OF
beet sugar, is engaged in tight with
the great refineries of the country,
which control large share of the sugar
business of the country, which draw
their supplies of raw material from the
tropics, and which are decidedly adj
verse to any expansion of the beet
sugar industry here. Mr. OXnard says
that the Sugar Trust is to make
strong effort at the coming session or
Congress to have the present duties
upon sugar cut out of the tariff law
Mr. Oxnard's interests, as we'll as
the interests of all of the producers OF
the raw material which he uses in his
factories, are against the withdrawal
of the duties on raw sugar On the 9th
er hand and here is the important
point which he brings out, the interests
of his rival, the so-called Sugar Trust,
are directly in having the duties on
raw sugar abrogated. The matter is
simple and easily understood OF all
who care to look at the facts. Inc
Sugar Trust, otherwise the American
Sugar Refining Company, obtains from
abroad the bulk of its supplies of raw
cane sugar, which it retines and sells
| in competition with the beet sugar pro
duced in this country, from beets
| raised by American farmers. It's inter
eSts are to get raw sugar at the lowest
S+ill n n itS interests
Quire this because it cannot now mon
opoliZe the American market, but must
share it with American sugar, produced
at home. With free raw sugar, the
Sugar Trust can keep the price so low
| as to prevent any further expansion of
| the beet sugar industry. Hence all OF
| the interests of the American Sugar
Refinery are for removal of the
duties on raw sugar.
This is all so perfectly obvious that
| it would be scarcely worth while to re-
| cite it, were it not for the fact that a
number of rabid free-traders, who rush
blindly into assertions without single
! fact upon which to base them, have
argued that the Sugar Trust is respon-
SlDlc IOE the Imposition vi luc uuty VIZ
raw sugar, that Congress imposed that
| duty in Difference to the demands of
| the trust, and that to remove the duty
on sugar would be to int1ict severe
| blow upon the Trust.
The fact is that the duty on raw
| sugar imported from abroad is not only
a revenue measure of considerable
value to the country's finances, but is
| the main protection Of the beet sugar
industry in this country, an industry of
| large Importance to the agricultural In
| terests and of great economic value to
| the country as a whole. To remove the
duty on raw sugar would have the
| triple effect of advancing the interests
| of the Sugar Trust; of preventing the
| establishment of further beet sugar
| factories, and thus forbdding an eX-
tension of the beet-grOwing industry;
| and of continuing in effect the economi-
cally wrong practice of sending abroad
| millions annually for the purchase Of
| a product which might just as well be
| produced at home. TO advocate this
under pretext that it would injure a
trust is simply to ignore or willingly
| misstate the actual facts.-Seattle
| Post Intelligencer.