Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1911-05-16
CAMPAIGN ON TO
REDUCE SUGAR
TARIFF


Of these islands make large profits,
but the Sugar Trust also benefits. The
sugar interests of the Hawaiian Is
lands are organized, and do not sell
their sugars individually, but for
many years have had n contract with
the Sugar Trust" which provides
for the latter to purchase from them
ON the following basis:
Prices Paid.
"On raw sugar shipped to New
York or Philadelphia, they pay 1-10c
under the prevailing New York price
the day before arrival. On the raw
sugar shipped to San Francisco, they
pay Csc. under the prevailing market
price in New York the day before the
arrival of this sugar in San Francisco.
In making this arrangement, the
Sugar Trust argued: In shipping
to san Francisco. your cost is less
Z than II is in shipping to New York.
and you must sell us at correspond
ing concession
These raw sugar supplies are re-
fined in the Trusts San Francisco
refinery, and when selling to the
trade, the Trust reverses their pro-
cess of reasoning with the Hawaiian
planter. To the trade they say: The
value of our refined sugar is fixed by
the New York price, plus the freight
to the Pacific Coast. For this reason
refined sugar (. o. b. San Francisco,
Is quoted anywhere from soc to 75c
per hundred over the New York quo
tations. BY this simple process of
reasoning, the Trust in their San
Francisco refinery obtain their raw
supplies from Hawaii at .37hc per
hundred under the New York raw
sugar quotation, and sells its refined
sugar at not less than soc per hun
dred over the New York quotation on
refined sugar, netting not less than
.S7h per hundred, or $3.50 per ton
OVER THE ORDINARY REFINING
MARGIN.
Last year the consumption of sug-
ar through San Francisco was 2ii 1855
tons, so that It will be seen that this
difference alone made a neat EXTRA
PROFIT of $4,234, 1880 which comes
out of the pockets of the consumer,
in addition to the normal amount of
profit for refining. The excessive
protection" is not justified here.
Democrats Appealed To.
IF the Democrats will control the
next Congress, and they are now, and
for some time have been protesting
that the Republicans, in the Payne
Aldrich Tariff, failed to keep good
faith with the people, and, II given an
opportunity, they would see to Il that
honest downward tariff revision was
a reality. The Democratic platform
ri 1870 declared that Justice and
sound policy forbid the Federal Gov
ernment to cherish the interest of one
portion to the injury of another por-
ton of our common country" The
demand for Tariff for revenue only"
runs through the succeeding plat
forms. In 1892 the Mckinley tariff is
denounced as the eliminating atroc-
ity of class legislation" and in 1896
the tariff is referred to as Prolific
breeder of trusts and monopolists.'
The platform of 1900 demands that
products of the trusts he placed on
the free list, and in 1904 tariff pro-
lection was termed "a robbery of the
many to enrich the few" In 1908
they say: Articles entering into
competition with Trust controlled
products, should be placed upon the
free list, and material reduction
shall be made in the tariff upon the
ncccssaries of life
These various assertions and de-
nunCiations state very clearly what
the Democrats think of the tariff, and
to conform with them, sugar, should
either be placed on the free list, or
at least a big reduction in the present
excessive rate must be made"