The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-03-23
(From the Argonaut.)

VI lIiC operations yOuISCll nun was
J probably one Of the main articles of
your diet; it was used in all ways, hence
the chances for expansion have not been
like those with sugar, which was prac-
ticaIly luxury not very many years
ago. We oIdsters all remember very
distinctly what an occasion it was when
refined sugar got down to twenty pounds
| for a dollar We always had two bar
rels in our pantry-one of white, one of
| brown, and for ordinary purposes we
were obliged TO eat the brown, the
white being only for extra occasions and
| special foods That was twenty years
| ago, when the annual per capita con-
sumption in the United States was fifty
/ one pounds (ISS4). Flour was an old,
/ old friend then; we had been accus-
! toned to it for long time, had been
using it as the first of our foods; con-
/ sequently the opportunities for its
wider use are not many as compared
with sugar, which seemingly has now
reached a popular price that IS causing
| its broader use; and it is reasonable that
| it should And yet it is not the element
of low price today that will be responsi-
! bic for the steadily increasing consump-
ton per capita; il is becoming COM
mon food in an open receptacle at the
! cooks right hand, as it were, and to
be used almost unconsciously. That IS
| why the per capita consumption will
| continue to increase, even though the
| price should remain the same. Today
we are eating seventy-one pounds apiece
| in a year Just twenty pounds more than
in 1884 Increasing population has moth
| ing to do with that fact; we are using
! more sugar per individual because 1t
| tastes good and we can afford to do so.
| When we bring the factor of a greater
population into consideration, we must
drop the individual and look at the gross
| tonnage, which gives us some startling
ideas:
Total sugar consumption
in U. S. in 1881. oo3,532 tons
Total sugar consumption
in L. S. in 1891 1879, 400 tons
Total sugar consumption
in Z. 5. IN 1901 ....... 1929 tons
This is a tremendous increase; it ex-
plains the great efforts made by the
national government to develop a domes
tic industry, to grow our sugar at home
instead of importing most of 1t, as we
| have been doing. Even if the tonnage
remained stationary, its amount and
rant magnificent efforts to produce it on
the American farm, as we seem to have
made good start to do. In 1000, out
| of every 1000 pounds. OF sugar used in
| this country, SS7 were from foreign
sources, II were domestic cane, 80 were
domestic beet and three were maple. !
| And it is adding insult to injury to OBJ |
serve that of those 9S7 pounds of for
eign sugar, 100 IL were from European
beets grown by the small farmers of
Germany, Austria, Holland, and France;
or, to be more explicit:
I62 I-2 pounds were from Germany
pounds were from Belgium
II pounds were from Austria-Hung /
ary
SI-2 pounds were from Holland
5I-2 pounds were from France
If we expect to continue writing |
diplomatic notes telling the rest of the !
world Just how China is to be treated |
by everybody. we certainly must be in |
a more independent positi ii ourselves /
as regards one of our most important /
foods, We are shipping flour and meat |
across the Pacific to keep Japan and |
Russia alive and able to fight, and at |
the same time our great ports are wide
open, drawing sugar from the peasantry |
of Europe and tropical coolies. What |
good does it do the American farmer
to grow meat and wheat to feed the for /
eigners, and then draw on those iden- /
teal returns to fay for sugar from the
ends of the world-from places that he
probably has never even heard of-lille |
Belize, Surinam, and others? The
planter in way-off Egypt, or Peru, or
Brazil, opens can of Chicago beef
without being disturbed, because his SUI
sgar is paving for an article that he |
hasn't the gumption" to produce,
whereas it is different over here;
we know that the opportunity is
right before us, going to waste, as it
were. That is why it upsets us. We
have heard so much of late about Cuba
that most of us have the impression
that her cane-felds are the source of a
large part of our sugar supply, but we
usually get more from Europe. Thus
in 1896 to 1900, of our total imports,
seventeen and eight-tenths per cent
came from Cuba, while twenty-five and
half per cent was European beet sugar.
Now that peace is prevailing, this per-
centage will increase, but by no means
with such wonderful strides as some
of the popular articles of the day would
have one believe. In 1901. the total
Cuban crop was 63S.S56 tons; it increased
about one-third in 1902, a sixth in 1908,
and, judging from this years estimate,
a tenth. This rate of development does
not speak in very fattering terms of
Cuban enterprise; to add another item
of interest let us compare their produc-
ton of cane-sugar with the progress of
beet-sugar in this country:
CUBA.
Iooo-I. ........ 635,S56 tons cane-sugar
IooI-2. S5o.ISI tons cane-sugar
Ioo2-3. ...... ooSS78 tons cane-sugar
Ioo3-4. 100000 tons cane-sugar
UNITED STATES.
Iooo-I. ....... 76S5o tons beet-sugar
1902. Io3,I26 tons beet-sugar
Ioo2-3 .......... Io5,463 tons beet-sugar
Ioo3-4. ......... 10000 tons beet-sugar