The Washington times., 1911-04-21


the sugar schedule is absolutely neces-
sary to prevent the Sugar trust fixing
its grip on a complete monopoly Of the
| sugar business of the country, inde-
pendent refiners are opening a deter
mined campaign to convince the Ways
and Means Committee that 1t ought to
place sugar on the free list.
The trust, 1t is alleged. has got prac-
tically complete control of all the
sources from which cheap sugar may be
brought in. 1t controls the beet sugar
and the Louisiana cane of this country.
1t gets practically all sugar which Is
brought In at duties of less than H.6S5
per 100 pounds. Its competitors must
pay the full duty prescribed by the
tariff. and doing this they cannot possi-
bly, compete with the trust.
The trust has turned a sharp trick
on its competitors. The Arbuckle Bros.
Of Brooklyn, and the Federal Sugar Re-
fining Company, OF Yonkers, are its
most important competitors. For years
the trust has been working quietly. but
effectively. to get control OF all supplies
of sugar which come into American
ports at less than the full tariff rates.
1t has now secured this control, and is
oblC " VI lhB llS sugar dl very
much lower than must be paid by COM
petitors. The result Is that II Is in
position to put its refined product on
the market at prices so much lower
than competitors can possibly reach
that rival concerns are in imminent
danger of being driven out Of business.
This Country's Consumption.
The sugar situation is the most COM
plex that revolves about any single
schedule Of the tariff. This country
uses about 3,5OO0OO tons Of sugar an
nually. Nearly 25 per cent of this Is
produced by the Louisiana cane grow
ers and the beet sugar factories scat
tered throughout the West. This leaves
about 100000 tons to be imported,
either from foreign countries or from
our tropical colonies. Porto Rico and
the Hawaiian Islands send each about
$4,000 tons per annum. These islands,
being integral parts of the United
paying any duty whatever. Cuban
sugar comes in under the Cuban reci-
proclty agreement, at so per cent Of
full tariff rates, that is sugar of Sc per
cent purity must pay Sl.324 per hundred
pounds.
But the total of the duty free sugar
from Porto Rico and Hawaii and of the
so per cent sugar from Cuba is still in
sufficient to supply the tremendous de-
mand OF the country. 1t Is still neces-
sary TO import considerable amount
from countries which must pay the full
tariff rate, or $l.625 per hundred pounds.
In 1910, for example, there was imported
from Santo Domingo, the Danish West
Guiana, Peru and the Dutch East In
dies. just about 100000 tons Of sugar,
all of which had to pay full tariff rates.
Competitors Pay Full Duty.
AS has been said, the Sugar trust
gets nearly all the raw sugar which
comes In either free or at the reduced
rates fixed by the Cuban reciprocity
arrangement. The competitors of the
trust, deprived of any. important par
ticipation in these supplies, are compell-
ed to get most of their sugar from the
countries nat pay full duty.
It requires little effort of the imagina-
ton to appreciate the disadvantage suf-
fered for example by the Arbuckle con-
Germ under these circumstances. Sup
pose on the same day two cargoes of
sugar arrive in Kew York. Each con-
tains 5000 tons: one is from Porto
Rico, and is consigned to the American
Sugar Refining Company the trusD. the
other Is from Java, and is consigned to
Arbuckle Brothers. On the 5000 tons
from Porto Rico there Is no duty to be
paid On the 5000 tons from Java, the
Arbuckle concern must pay S1.625 per
100 pounds, or a total of Sl62,50O. This
figure represents the tremendous handi-
cap which is imposed upon an independ-
ent refiner who, paying the full duty,
attempts to compete with the trust,
that controls nearly all the sugar that
gets in free.
Fair Competition Impossible.
To take the case of Cuban sugar, as
suming that the Sugar trust gets its
cargo Of 5000 tons from Cuba, while the
'Arbuckle cargo comes from Java. then
while the Arbuckles pay s162, 500 in duty,
the trust pays only so per cent of this
or $50 900. Even in this case. the advan-
tage in favor of the trust is so great
as to make anything like fair competi-
ton utterly impossible.
This situation has been getting more