The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-03-27
WHY INSURGENTS.
- =: = -.
Three Minnesota Congressman on
..,,-. Concessions to Cuba. !, p
CHAMPIONSHIP OF BEET SUGAR
Messrs. Stevens, Morris and Tawney
80 in Authoritative Explanation
= 80 - of Their Attitude.


are given by Represent atives Stevens,
Morris and Tawney to questions respect
ing their attitude on the Cuban reciprocity
problem. They consider the point as to
their general attitude toward reciprocity
with the island as we'll as granting the,
desired relief, and also as to the meas
ure OF protection that should be given the
6eet sugar industry. Representative F. C.
Stevens said:
am in favor of congress taking some ac
tlon that shall really benefit Cuba or the
cuban people, and which shall not greatly:
lhJure any industry in the United States.
am also in favor of some action by con-
gress that shall reduce the excessive rates
on some tariff so that our foreign trade may
be extended and our people in the west,
especially, relieved OF some of their burdens
The advocates of the 20 per cent reduc-
ton on sugar state publicly and privately
that they will not allow any other changes
in the tariff under any circumstances, and
that no action can be taken until after the
election of 1904 l oppose the ways and means
plan because it means the only change in the
tariff that probably will be allowed. It will
increase but slightly, If at all, any trade
in western products, while it will ruin one
interest which does benefit our western farm
ers. .-.. ...S r. '> ~ ..- g. -.
This reduction may not affect beet sugar
factories we'll established. 1t will ruin all not
! SO situated, and certainly prevent any further
| extension of them. By preventing further
extension of beet sugar factories it will place
| the American people completely in the hands
| of the sugar strust, which last year wrung
out $25. 100000 in profits by their own state
mentS.
Six Millions for Sugar Trust.
| believe this 20 per cent reduction on the
present crop will not be received by the
| alleged suffering planters, since they have
| largely disposed of their product, will do
SO before passage Of the bill, but it will yield
an immediate profit Of about Sc, 900, 900 to the
| sugar trust and SPECTATORS. This reduction
will not reduce the price of sugar to the con-
| sumner, as all admit. The benefits, of this
! proposed reciprocity would be mainly real
| lied by manufacturing interests, like textile.
| iron and steel, which oppose changes in the
tariff and the ratification Of treaties like that
with France. which could extend the sale
of farm products. I believe our action will
force an earlier revision of the tariff by the
| republicans without damage to the business
! interests of the country l am In favor OF a
plan that shall pay sum equal to some pro-
portion Of duties realized on Cuban products
| to the Cuban government. In consideration
for that, Cuba shall give no trade privileges,
recouping her loss OF revenues by reduced
| duties by such payment. ~. .. =.
Our payment should be sufficient to pay for
| rights in naval and coaling stations, for
| right in Isle of Pines or for whatever may be
| agreed upon. The present low price OF sugar
is only temporary. 1t will be increased when
the revision of Brussels conference shall be
effective. In the meantime this payment into
the Cuban treasury will relieve immediate
necessities: will carry on their schools, build
roads through the suffering district that shall
employ their people and improve their prop
Eerty 1t will furnish proper police protec-
ton to government property and health,
which the other plan does not guarantee.
+ Judge Norris explanations.
Following is Representative MOTHS
statement: Ill E.
I am not opposed to reciprocity with Cuba,
but am opposed to the method by which it is
|proposed to effect it. I am opposed to Cuban
. reciDrocity by reduction Of duties, because
| believe the greater part of the-beneht Will
| 20 to the sugar trust rather than to the Gu
hans: because l believe it will injure domes-
tic industry the beet sugar industry, which
has Just Reached that stage in its growth and
development when it most needs protection,
and will put an end to its further develop
i ment If l am right in this belief, reduc-
| ton of duties is contrary to republican plat
forms, and is clear violation OF specihc
republican pledge, and it is also contrary to
the republican doctrine OF reciprocity. II any
enc doubts this, invite him to read the re-
publican platforms Of 1896 and 1900. The OBJ
iect of republican protection is not only to
protect an industry already established, buT
also to encourage it's further development.
This is against both of these objects.
Republican reciprocity does not seek trade
at the expense of any American industry.
This does l am also opposed to it because
reciprocal trade with Cuba can be secured with
greater advantage to- Cuba and without injury
to ourselves by continuing to collect7the same
duties we now levy and paying to the Cuban
government a certain percentage OF the
amount collected. BY this method the Cubans
and not the trust would be benefited, and
that too, during the years when they will be
most in need Of full treasury. If Cuba Is
in need Of any relief. and OF this am not at
all sure, it will only be for few years, and
during those years, by this method we could
give her, not 20 per, cent, but any per cent
she may need. i do not wish to force re-
dhction of any other tariff schedules. I do
not think this is good time to disturb any
schedules. In the event that reduction and