Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1902-01-15
AS TO SUGAR.
Nashville AmerIcan. |


world No other nation consumes so
much sugar per capita. According to
Treasury statement. Sugar imports
into the United States in the calendar
year 1901 will exceed those Of any pre-
cedng year by about 250,000,000 pounds
preceding year except 1893, when prices
were unusually high. The total ompor-
tations of sugar in the year about to
end will, according to the Treasury
Bureau of Statistics aggregate 1870
100000 pounds. and the cost about
$ll5,OOOOOO The highest record OF SUI
gar importations in any preceding year
were. in quantity. those of 1899. T.
1919. O7S OO0 pounds; while in value, the
figures of 1898 made the highest record
$l23.OS5.2l7."
The increase in our sugar cOnsump-
ton is shown by the fact that while
there has been considerable increase in
the production of homegrown sugar
Uur imports have increased 30 per cent
during the last decade, the increase
being about 1000, 900 pounds or
about 900 tons. The impOrtatiOns
for the present year amount to 1870
100000 pounds. About So per cent Of
this imported sugar came from the
tropics 30 per cent Of IL being from
Cuba. 10 per cent of it from the East
Indies. and the remainder from the
West Indies and Central and South
American countries. The remaining IL
per cent Is chiefly beet sugal from Ger
many and Austria-Hungary. During
the ten months ending with October
the importatiOns of beet sugar amount
ed to 550,OOO,OOO pounds. The Chicago
Inter Ocean presents the following
figures to show the falsity of the plea
of protection against Philippine sugar:
In 1900 we Of the United States ate
100000 tons of sugar. or 100000 tons
more than in 1899 We shall eat this
year. at the lowest estimate, 1850, 900
tons We shall eat next year not less
than 100000 tons.
Where are we TO buy this sugar?
In 1900 we bought about l60, 900 tons
from our own cane and beet growers,
about 100000 tons from Hawaii. about
5000 tons from Porto Rico. $4,000
tons from Cuba and 800 tons from the
| Philippines, or about 1000 tons
grown on actual or virtual American
soil, leaving about l.3S3,00 tons
bought from foreigners for which we
paid them over S60,000,00
In 1901 our own cane growers have
supplied us with about 10000 tons
ana our beet growers with 10000 tons,
In the ten months ended on October
81 we bought 6OS,000 tons from Cuba
and 322,OUO tons from Hawaii Pur'
Cnases of the last two months may
bring these totals to $4,000 and $780,
900 tons, respectively. Porto Rico will
supply about 10000 tons this year. and
the Philippines less than 1000 tons.
Exact and complete figures are not
yet available. but l,4l7,OO0 tons Is O
lair estimate of our consumption OF
| sugar grown on actual or virtual Amer
lean soil, leaving 943, 900 tons bought
OF foreigners for which we pay them
nearly $42,0O0,0O0.
| To meet our need of $500, 900 tons
next year our cane growers promise u!
$4,000 tons, and our beet growers $50,
900 tons. Hawaii promises $4,000
tons and may 400 1900, and Porto Rice
10000 tons, and perhaps 100000. 1
II doubtful whether these promises
can be fully kept. The louisiana, Ha
wall and Porto Rico cane growing
areas are well occupied, and the bee
sugar industry is largely experiment
al. At any rate, 100000 tons seen
a liberal estimate OF the total suppl!
rom these sources. leaving l,0O0,O
tons to be supplied by Cuba, the Phil
lFpines and foreigners.
Cuba cannot promise at presen
more than 100000 tons. The export
, able surplus OF the Philippines wa
stated In Congress the other day
without contradiction, to be only 10
900 tons. Nor can this be rapidly In
creased, even under the most favor
able conditions, for sugar making 1
| a highly complicated business, de
| handing great Investments OF capita
and much labor both skilled and IN
skilled. Hence we may conclude tina
our largest possible supplies iron
Cuba and the Philippines together 10
next year will not exceed 100000 tons
= leaving at least 100000 tons who
must be bought of foreigners.
The Inter-Ocean, which is a Reput
lican paper, adds: In the light O
these facts the demand Of our can
and beet growers to he protected
against Cuban, and especially agains
Philippine competition, is ridiculous
Yet, in order to protect them-to pre-
tect an industry which cannot suppl
One-dfth of our sugar demand-it
, proposed by the Payne tariff bill t
treat the Filipinos as foreigners, an
to tax their sugar more than we d
that of Brazil. BY doing this we max
1t impossible for the Philippines I
prosper, and ALLEVIATE their people. W
p also compel ourselves to pay hig
prices for sugar to foreigners, whe