Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1902-04-26

lied 100000 in cash among her PEG.
lie, we have distributed 5.493500 ra'
ions among her people, we have clean
I'd her harbors and cites, we have CIV
N her liberty and independence at the
lost Of uncounted treasure OF our own
and the sacrifice Of the lives OF the best
md brayest of our sons, and still they
come to us for more. In benyene
name, when will this "Oliver Twist
among peoples be satisfied?
II is said however, that Il Is good
business proposition for the United
States. In return for this reduction
upon our duties, we are TO be given a
similar reduction and thereby obtain
the Cuban markets for ourselves. This
particular question must be considered
apart from the question Of our duty TO
the Cuban people. and SO considered
we have "a right 10 analyze II as we
would analyze any other business prop
ositon. We propose TO give TO cuba
Tor somebody the equivalent OF over
b6000000 We turn aside from our
treasury this much money mad for all
practical purposes II Is precisely the
same as IL we first permitted IL to go
Into the treasury and then paid Il out
again What do we get In return
Cuba last year bought from us lit
tie more than SIS 0CO 600 worth Of goods.
She bought from other countries a lit
tie more than sS70O00O0 No one sup
poses that we would secure this en-
tire trade; but suppose. for the sake
OF argument we do. In exchange for
between six and seven millions OF ~
lars some of our business men would
secure the sale OF s3l 100000 worth OF
their goods. Let US assume that upon |
these goods these business men would |
receive a profit Of 10 per cent net |
which think is n very large estimate |
This would amount 10 S370O000. Re-
duced 20 the last analysis. therefore,
this Is proposition 20 give to the Gu
ban people or the sugar trust, or both,
over $1,000 coo In order that some busl-
ness men In this country may reap
possible profit OF s3700.O00
wish had time to discuss nj length
my objection to this legislation upon
the ground that IL Is opposed TO Re-
publican principles, but | have not.
Upon the plalnest principles Of COM
mon honesty, the Republican party can
not afford TO be responsible for Il. We
specifically invited the people Of th0
United States TO engage In the growing
of sugar beets and in the manufacture
OF sugar therefrom, under O. pledge,
not made expressly but none the less
explicit that we would protect them
against the cheap sugar Of other
lands.
The bill Is not In line with the Re-
publican idea OF reciprocity. In 1900
we declared--the Republican platform
aeclared-that we favored the "asso-
rlated policy OF reciprocity so directed
Is TO open our markets on favorable !
ierms for what we do not ourselves J
produce in return for free foreign mar q
cts" II was never intended by that I
declaration, II Is not a part Of the Re- ,
publican policy IL Is contrary TO every =
declaration which the party leaders e
ave made, TO say that we shall make L
lgreement with foreign country by 0
which there shall be admitted TO our G
'orts class of goods which will come
nto direct competition with the prod G.
Icts of our own people. n
But Mr.. Chairman, | must conclude. u
am opposed to this bill because II Is
ased upon a cry for aid that II shown
0 be false because II will destroy con-
dence in the sugar industry OF our
wn land, because its benefits win go
D the grasping hands Of a mercenary
rust that has already grown fat by
aeding upon the people. because II Is
ontrary to the best teachings of the
republican party under which we have
ecome the greatest producing nation
re world has even seen. I'm short, be-
,use II Is unnecessary, unwise, unbusl-
essllke. and un-Republican. Loud
pplausel