The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1907-11-15
NO. 35


e ly pledged its protection to the busi.
: ness.
The first disposition on the pant
: OF the government to withdraw that
protection was seen in the Cuban
: treaty, which was passed in 1904.
and which reduced the tariff on su.
gar from Cuba 20 per cent. The
business men of the country pro.
tested, but the treaty was passed, al
though on sentimental grounds only.
1t was not business proposition at
all, nor for the interests of this coun-
tr, but simply and solely to comply
with an imaginary duty toward the
| Cubans.
What was the result? Sugar un.
der the Dingley law pays a duty of
$1.6S a. 100 pounds. The reduction
gave Cuban sugar preference of SO
SO cents 100 pounds. The effect was
a disappointment. Since the adoption
or the treaty We have imported l..
100000 tons of sugar a year from
Cuoa and have given up $8,000,oO0
a year in revenue to that country,
Dut we have not increased our ex-
ports. We get no benefit at all from
our compliance with an imaginary
call upon u.s.
Now the consumption Of sugar in
the United States is just about 2,S0O,.
wv tons year. OF this the beet
sugar factories produce 100000 tons
Hawaii about the same, Porto Rico
about 100000 and Cuba about I,
9Vo'ooo, all of the Cuban output COM
ing 10 this country because of the
tariff and the low freight. That
leaves 100000 tons that must neces-
sary be brought from other coun-
tries and pay the full tariff rate Most
or this comes from Java, although
there is small amount of beet sugar
brought here from Europe.
1t is the recognized principle in
the study of the effect of tariff laws
that the article paying the highest
tariff fixes the price of the entire pro.
duct sold in the country. Admitting
that the price of sugar is decided by
this 100000 tons which comes from
high tariff countries. Now what
does Mr.. Taft's proposed bill aim to
do?
He wants to pass a law for the
cement or the Philippines, reducing
-he tariff on sugar imported from
nose islands to the United States
% 20 per cent of the rate under the
Oingley law, making the tariff AZ
;ents hundred pounds and after
I've years to admit Philippine sugar
rec. This would leave the highest
luty paying sugar imported into the
United States Snat from Cuba and
he natural result would be to reduce =.
he price in this country 33 6-10 8
'undred pounds.
An even worse feature is that the
apacity of the Philippines for pro.
lucing sugar is practically unlimited.
live the islands capital enough and
hey can supply our whole demand.
irving out the Cuban article and
1aking free sugar the basis of the
Imerican price. In other words,
here would be absolutely no protec-
ion for home producers. The Philip
ines with the fertile soil and their
1w cost of labor, can produce sugar
nd land it in New York at a cost
one cent pound, The Michigan
actories are paying the farmers $3.50
ton for beets carrying 10 per cent
sugar, or 2A cents pound for
aw sugar in the beet That is, we
re paying the farmer more than
vice as much as the price of sugar
ould be If Philippine sugar were ad-
lifted free. And have not included
lie cost of manufacture in the esti- !
,ate.
1T comes down to this. With
n unlimited supply of sugar from
lie Philippines the domestic manu-
lcturer must go out of business.
he cost of labor alone will make
ss inevitable for we pay from 81
$l.50 day to men in the fields,
lille the rate in the Philippines is
lly 10 cents day on the average.
If we adopted this proposed Phil
pine traiff we would ruin manufac-
lrers who have invested their capi-
j on the strength of promises of
'otection, cut off from our farmers
Michigan alone s4,760,000 every
,ar and from the farmers of the
'untry $20,OO0,000 every year and.
row thousands of men out of EN-
oyment. And for what? For tEa
opposed obligation to inhabitants OF
country we did not want to take in
e first place and which has never
zen the slightest benefit to us since
. acquired it,"