Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1902-05-17
TO CHEAPER SUGAR.
HOW TARIFF CONCESSIONS MIGHT
HELP THE CONSUMER.
While Reducing the Duty Cub.'s
Raw Product the Duty Refined
Sugar should Be Correspondine1y
acknowledgements Trust Fronts

If the friends of the Cuban Relief
something for the American consumer
while relieving the Cuban producer.
they can accomplish this result by
adopting the plan submitted by Repre-
sentative Morris of Minnesota. This
plan, briefly stated, provides that the
tariff reduction on raw sugar shall also
apply to refined sugar The bill as re-
ported from the ways and means COM
mittee makes a reduction of 20 per
cent in the duty on raw sugar, but
leaves the duty on refined sugar as it
is now. 1t cheapens the cost of raw
sugar to the refners to the extent
of the tariff reduction, without cheap
ening the market price of the refined
product. That is what Mr.. Havemeyer
meant when a few weeks ago he an
nounced that the selling price of re-
fined sugar would not be in the least
degree affected by the reduction, or
even the removal, of the duty on raw
sugar. He knew what he was talking
about. He knew that the greatest
boon that Republican congress could
possibly confer upon the sugar trust
would be to cheaper raw sugar by
means of tariff reduction, while re-
8
He, knew that almost the entire bulk
of money thus lost to the United
States treasury would, in such All
event, find it's way into the sugar trust
treasury.
There is not a single Republican in
congress or out of congress whose
bowels of compassion yearn for SUI
fering Cuba who does not know that
in cutting down the tariff on raw sug-
ar and leaving intact the duty on re-
fined sugar he assists in swelling the
profits of the sugar trust by many mil
lions of dollars. There might be some
excuse for Republican at either end
of Pennsylvania avenue who did not
know, or did not believe, that the $780,
900 tons of sugar held on the wharves
in Cuba has long since passed out
of the hands of the planters who
raised it and into the hands of the
sugar trust, and hence that the pro
posed relief" measure would prove
hollow mockery to the original pro-
ducers of that sugar. The sugar trust
has covered its tracks so skillfully that
even Governor Wood might be par
doned for his inability to find the trail
and for publicly asserting that practi-
cally all of the held-up sugar is still
owned by the parties who raised it.
Ignorance and excessive credulity
might possibly reach these extremes,
but that is the limit. To vote for CT to
approve of a scheme of tariff reduction
that -withdraws protection from do
nestle producers and adds millions 20
the already swollen gains of the sugar
trust by leaving that concern in the
full enjoyment of a tariff protected
profit margin would be bad economics,
bad craftsmanship, bad politics. We
cannot believe that the Republican
party will be made to stand for blum
der so atrocious as to amount to
crime.
The American Economist, speaking
for the principle and policy of protec-
ton, deprecates as ill-advised and un-
called for the entire scheme of tariff
reduction for the benefit of aliens and
to the injury of our own producers:
but, if any scheme of the kind shall
unfortunately prevail, it earnestly
hopes that through the retention of
the differential on the finished product
while reducing the duty on the crude
material it will not take the shape If
big prize package for the sugar
trust.