The Lafayette gazette. [volume] (Lafayette, La.) 1893-1921, 1901-11-30
FIGHT ON SUGAR
Tariff Reduction Urged on the
Cuban Product. Formidable
terests Unite to Defeat
Administration Plan.
ktepress NATIVE Sugar Me Gather
i'm Force at Washington.

i'm Force at Washington.
Special to The Times-Dcmocrat.
New York. Nov. 26-A special from
Washington to the Tribune says:
There is good reason for believing that,
in his annual message to Congress, the Pres
icient will recommend a substantial reduc-
ton in the duty sugar coming from
the Philippines and Cuba. If he were to
listen to the advice of some people he would
recommend the abolition of that duty al
together. He is not prepared to go SO far
as that.
In opposition to any and every change in
the present sugar schedule there have
gathered in Washington the representatives
of a number of interests, who are prepared
to ply Congress with arguments to show that
the government is under obligations to main
tain the status quo at any cost and in de-
lance OF all considerations of policy, good
| morals or common sense. AT the head of
! this opposition to the presidents policy
stands one of the Oxnards, who, with his
! brother, is interested in the manufacture in
this country of beet root sugar. Judging
from the fact tina, he has taken a large house
this winter, admirably suited tor entertain
ing, it is evident that he thinks he will have
something of fight on his hands at the
coming session. Here are the interests
which may be considered to have pooled
their issues:
1. The beet-root sugar manufactures of
the West.
2. The cane-sugar growers of Louisiana.
:. The sugar producers of Hawaii.
4. The sugar producers of Porto Rico.
The magnitude of the stakes for which
Mr. Oxnard and his friends are playing can
be gagged by glance at the following table,
which is computed the basis of an average
duty of $50:
Domestic beet root sugar. 10000 tons,
$4,000 protection
Louisiana planters, $4,000 tons. SI2,-
100000 protection.
Hawaiian planters, $4,000 tons, s12,-
100000 protection.
Porto R:can planters, 10000 tons,
s., 10000 protection.
Totals, 100000 tons, S56,ooo,ooo pro-
lection.
Here, then, is a tidy little pile of $780,
900, 900 to be defended, and here some
Of the arguments which will be used in the
defense:
First-The beet root sugar industry is,
like any other, entitled to protection. So
are the planters of Louisiana.
Sccond-lf left in the enjoyment of pro-
lection the beet root sugar industry will grow
and, together with the sugar produced in
Louisiana, will before long be able to sup
ply the demands of the home market.
Third--It will then have made the United
States, far as its sugar supply is con
cerne1, independent OF the rest of the world
Fourth--It furnishes a new crop for the
farmer and, therefore, a new source of in
come to him.
The following are some of the arguments
which will be made in defense of the adj
ministration's position. There is to begir
with the question of free sugar. Is, or is
not the cr,' of free sugar, a violation of Re
publican doctrine? Is the demand fol
lowering the duties sugar, indeed, ire
concilable with an adherence to the prin
cples of protection? 1t seems less strange
that such question should be asked at thi:
time than that it should be asked at all
Mems political memories proverbially
treacherous and in this instance they seen
tloubly SO. Not more than a dozen year
ago the Republican shibboleth ''tre'
breakfast table for the American working
) man. and in response that demand thu
Mckinley bill made sugar free. The Demo
cratic party restored the duty and the Ding
lev bill continued it. To say, therefore
that abolition of the sugar duty is a viola
ton of Republican principles or that
modification of the schedule at present il
! force is an abandonment of the doctrine o
protection is in the opinion of those VIII
, share the governments views, to ignore tn
records of the past.
There is. however, a more importan
5 feature of this whole question which appeal
} to the Judgment of those in touch with tn
, administration in its efforts to
greater degree of reciprocity with Cuba an
the Philippines. 1t is thought that sub
stantial encouragement of the sugar industr
D would more promptly put an. end to tn
i rebellion in Southern Luzon and Cuba tina
Y the OF gatlings and bayonets. Will
p, this may be an exaggerated view, possibly
to talk of the effect which free sugar woul
= have on the disorderly elements IN the PHI
: lppines, there cannot be the slightest dout
J. in the minds of even the most conservative
n Judges that 4 concession sugar woul
a start sugar plantation going once more a
over the islands and divert the attention {
the natives from bushwhacking to mo,
peaceful and profitable pursuits. AS merel
=, an economical proposition, therefore, i,
volving, possibly reduction in the arm