The Hawaiian gazette., 1908-02-07
As Others See Us
Washington correspondent Of the New York
Evening Post accompanied Congressional Party.

hO1<O ahOa, 1clduu VI IldWd1Ay ~ III
Here in the Kona district of thi
big island is being made the most sue
eessful effort to diversity the agricul
tural industries of this territory. COT
fee, vanilla beans, and pineapples ar
all being raised successfully. The cot
fee raisers-and there are only fey
| of them-InspIred by the true spiri
of protection, which is another way o
saying greed, are eager to have a ia,
of three or five cents a pound put OIL
Brazilian coffee in the hope that tn
impost will drive it out of the American
market. Phrased another way, the,
propose that the eighty million people
of the United States shall be taxed t.
enable hundred or so of men to make
money raising coffee in Hawaii.
W. W. Rruner is at once the most
intelligent and the largest coffee planter
in this district He is also one of the
strongest advocates of an import duty
1t is evident that these planters are
going to make strong and persistent
effort to secure action from Congress
1t may be well to set forth their rea-
sons for their demand. When the visit
ing Congressman came through this dis
trict Mr.. Bruner talked to all of them,
presenting these reasons and arguments
why the Congressman should tax their
constituents to aid himself and his fell
low coffee planters:
A COFFEE PLANTER IS VIEWS.
Chow is Hawaii to be developed
along American hnes7 BY placing a
duty on coffee, and this duty need not
be over three cents pound on low, or
Brazilian, grades and five cents a
pound on coffee of the mild or higher
grades produced in Hawaii and Porto
Rico. Such a duty would result In i'm
mediate change of conditions in all
tropical America, and would open up to
cultivation immense areas unadapted
to sugar that now are idle.
EPrior to annexation Hawaii enjoyed
a local protection of a duty of six cents
a pound on coffee, which was lost by an
nexation, and the Hawaiian Govern
ment assisted coffee culture by exempt
ing it from taxation for a long term
of years. now about expiring. Home
steads were opened up on the best lands
the Government had, and many took up
the cultivation of coffee. Nearly all of
these homestead settlements have prov
en- failures, and now are not cultivated,
except in the vicinity of the sugar plan
tations, where they have been planted
in sugar. The reasons for the failure
of the local Homestead law furnish
complete argument for the necessity of
the protection of other industries be-
sides sugar in Hawaii.
''In Porto Rico prior to 1898 the main
industry of the million people of the
island was coffee. Today after eight
years of American possession, due en-
tirely to the effects of the Dingley tar
if, sugar is first, tobacco is second. and
coffee a weak and struggling third.
What has been done for the great Porto
Rican coffee industry, the mainstay of
a million people7 She lost her markets
by American possession. The State De-
partment negotiated trade concessions
with Spain and France to recover in
part the markets lost. The Porto Riean
Government is expending annually $685.
700 to assist the sale of her coffee. What
futile efforts, in the face of the fact
hat the United States needed this cof-
Zee, annually importing $70,000,000
worth. The remedy was a simple one of |
protection on coffee. With a duty on
,offee, great prosperity would imme-
lately result in Porto Rico.
REPLY TO OPPOSING ARGUMENTS
What are the arguments against a |
uty on coffee? I have heard two. /
me was that the country did not need |
he revenue which would be derived |
rom it, and the other was that 1t
you'd be a tax on the breakfast table.
was in Washington two years ago to .
ee Secretary Wilson to get his views
the probability and possibility of a
uty on coffee. While discussing the
ubject, Senator Proctor of Vermont
anne in. Secretary Wilson said, Sen
tor Proctor, want to introduce Mr..
'runer of Hawaii, who is a coffee
lanter there. and he has been dis
ussing with me the possibility of a
uty on coffee 1T is contrary to the
leas of the Republican party to put
tax on the breakfast table, said
enator Proctor. 1 replied that 1 had
card that political phase of the ques-
ion before, but I desired him to give
le his own personal views on the sub
act. To this Senator Proctor replied
hat personally he was not interested,
nat he drank an imitation of coffee.
81 would like you to analyze with me
nat a duty on coffee of cents a
ound would mean to the American
lmily. The annual consumption is
bout u pounds per capita, which
'ould be equivalent to 36 cents duty
er capita per year, or about 81 80 for