The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1908-12-26

TALKS FOR COFFEE.
Especial Correspondence

NOpeCldl correspondence
WASHINGTON, D. c., December 1.
The following is a statement to the
Ways and Means Committee by Hon.
]. Kalanianaole, advocating a tar1r
on coffee:
Gentlemen:-Hawaii does not ask
nor expect that duty be placed on
coffee merely for the protection of
Hawaii, Porto Rico, and the Philip
pines. In other words, we do not ask
that the people of the United States
shall be taxed for the mere purpose
of building up the coffee industry in
the insular portions of the United
States
We do, however strongly contend
that if an additional revenue source
is required in the new tariff law, as is
likely to be the case, there is no 9TH
er staple upon which the imposition
of a new or added duty would have
so small a proportion of that duty
added to the actual consumers cost
as on coffee.
The reasons for this are twofold.
The first of these is so clear as to
admit of no denial.
When coffee was placed on the free
list in this country, in 1873, the cof-
Reproducing States of Brazil impos-
ed an export tax on coffee. The result
has been that about $3.50, 100000 has
gone into the Brazilian treasures
from this source. Every dollar of this
could have gone into our Federal
Treasury through coffee tariff with
out adding to the consumers cost in
this country.
The export tax is still in force in
Brazil, varying in amount from 1 to 3
cents per pound.
A tariff on coffee would, to the ex-
tent OF the foreign export tax, simply
transfer that amount of income from
the Brazilian to the United States
Treasury without affecting the con-
sumner one iota.
The second reason why tariff or
coffee would affect the consumer bu'
little is found in the fact that coffee
is retailed at a high margin of pro
fit above the import price. Coffee i'm
ported at cents costs the consumer
20 cents per pound with higher grades
in proportion.
Price records prove that the remova
of the coffee tariff has not reduced tn,
cost of coffee to the consumer in pro
portion to the worlds prices. TIL
additional profit has simply gone L
the jobber, the rooster, and the mid
dleman.
Protected staples, such as flour an
sugar, are sold to the consumer at
very narrow margin of profit; on tn
other hand, duty-free coffee is mad
to yield a very high profit to tn
dealer.
If duty of 8 cents per pound wer
placed on coffee, it would first of a
knock out the foreign tax which
already borne by the consumer.
The difference between the foreig
tax and a duty of cents would yer
largely come out of the middlemen
! profit; the actual added cost to tn
P consumer would be very small.
There is no reason why the col
sumner should not pay a small tax o
coffee, the same as on any other foo
= or stimulant. Talk of a free breal
5 fast table is an illogical absurdit,
I Why should the breakfast eater pa
duty on the chair and rug on whfc
he sits, on the very table from whic
he breakfasts. the linen, cutlery, an
dishes that equip it, the tin pot
! which the coffee is made, the cup thu
, contains it, the sugar that goes I'M
y IL, and the spoon that stirs 1t, and M
o pay the plttance Of tax that would
e added on his coffee?
= Moreover, there Is no longer u
reason to offer for retaining coffee Z
the free list that there is no domest
! production" In both Hawaii and Pc
\ TO Rico coffee is already staple pr
y duct,
c In Porto Rico coffee was the chi
product few years ago, In both II
, wall and Porto Rico the coffee indu
= try was encouraged by the former go
y eUnmentsi IN both countries she I
G dusty has gone backward under 4
" American nag because Of the lack
protection The loss in Hawaii b