The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-02-05
SUGAR

(speeial . the AdvertIser.l

Especial To the AdvertiseT)
SAN FRANCISCO. Jan. 24.-It is
generally contended in Louisiana that
the policy of reciprocity with Cuba
! would work disaster to the sugar in
| terests of that State. In recent ad-
dress by Hugh Kelly, of New York, be-
fore the Cuban Economic Commission,
| Kelly pointed out what he believed
! would be the benefits that would ac-
crue to the United States, if the duty
| on raw sugar imported into this coun-
try from Cube was abolished. The
speech was circulated in pamphlet
form, and when it fell into the hands
of the people of New Orleans, Kelly S
statements We're attacked by a num-
Der of speakers. At meeting held In
that city a few days ago, the pith of
these attacks was voiced by Charles A.
Farwell, President of the Cane Grow
ers' Association, who said:
In pamphlet extracts from an ad-
dress of Hugh Kelly, at a compliment
airy dinner to the Cuban Economic
Commission, at the University Club,
New York, Nov. 20, are being distrib-
uted the purpose of which is to show
the benefits which this country viii de-
rive from the proposed reciprocity
treaty with Cuba, and more particular
ly in the matter of an abolition of the
duties on raw sugars, imported into the
United States.
Mr.. Kelly figures out grand total
of s133, 504 900 to be invested in this bus
mess in Cuba within five years from
the contamination of the treaty, and
argues that it all will come from our
people, to their advancement and bet
terment.
There is no need to question these
figures, and for the purpose of argu-
ment we assume them to be correct.
We must. however, eliminate certain
portions as not having a direct bearing
on the case, such as:
Purchase of land. SIG. 100000
Purchase of cane. 2I,2OO0O0
Working capital .............. 10,000, 900
Total NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.. S47, 200 ,0vO
This capital may, or may not be
furnished by America, and even if so
might, or might not prove a remunera-
tive investment.
The balance of the outlay, $50. 304.
900, if all the articles were purchased in
this country, may be allowed to stand
as a positive direct benefit to our coun
try. We must also remember that
Cuba has increased her sugar crop
from 100000 tons annually, years ago.
to an estimated yield for the present
season of not less than 1000, 600 tons. 1t
is therefore fair to assume, that even
without the proposed treaty this great
increase would be largely maintained.
If that be so, then considerable per-
PpntaUp pnnl6 he soma hlV deducted
from the above mentioned $S6, 304, 900 of
possible benefit to this country to ac-
crue from this treaty.
Without referring to the beet sugar
industry or that of the fruit and vege-
table growers, we find in Louisiana
alone an invested capital in the produc-
ton of cane sugar of not less than $780,
000,0 and a further annual outlay of
about s20OO0.OO0 in the production of
the crop.
with a certainty of lower figures for
the raw article, it becomes a patent
fact that sugar property will be disas
trously affected, even to the point of
bankruptcy: in which case the $50. 000,- |
900 of invested capital will shrink to in !
fnitesmal proportions, and the thou |
sands of laborers engaged in that in |
dustry Will be thrown out of employ
ment, at any rate for the time being
Several other sugar planters advance
ed similar arguments against the |
threatened legislation.
Hugh Kelly, when shown the state
ments of Farwell, said:
Taking the figures for the past ten |
years as prepared by A. Bauchereau, |
the State Statistician of Louisiana, in |
relation to the sugar trade of that |
Stltn he tod ffA
2, 1876 tons. or an average of 216,SSO
tons per year.
I'm 1861 and 1862, about forty years
ago, Louisiana produced according to
the same authority, 235,S56 tons, and
with the crudest kind of machinery at
hat. Here are about $4,000 tons great
ar production of sugar in Louisiana
two score years ago than they have
been averaging in late years under pro-
lection. Let me ask, then, what has
protection done for Louisiana? The
,rop Of 1861 compared with the average
crop at the present time would show
an area of at least 80 per cent larger,
IN account of the development of mod
ern machinery.
Charles A Farwell, president of the
Cane Growers Association, admits the
of my figures. According
20 his figures, there is invested in Lou
siana alone in cane sugar, capital
)f not less than $50, 900, 900. 1t seems
but fair then to say that the average
crop of sugar in Louisiana in the past
ten years. according to Mr.. Baucher-
eau's figures during the period of
greatest protection has been 2l6SSo
tons.
lit may be pertinent to remark here
that in 1853 Louisiana made 224,1SS
tons of sugar, and in 1861, 235,S5S tons.
Might it not be reasonable to ask him |
to explain these conditions to the pub
lie. How great a benefit has been the (
tariff to the Louisiana people in view |