The Washington herald., 1912-06-09
CULTIVATION OF SUGAR BEETS
ADVOCATED BY DR.. H w. WILEY
Noted Scientist Hope Scientific Method of Tng
So-Amerca Behind Times in This Branch of Industry Null
fpIcty of Arguments in Favor Of Beet Raising

lasses. when mixed with other foods
fattens and improves the appearance and
value OF the cattle. The farmer Incl
dentaIly nDds himself getting larger
quantities, Of manure. IN better condi-
tion than, ever before. He learns to be
more careful about preserving this nat
ural fertilizer.
= Sugar beet culture should be- encour-
aged not only as an aid to agriculture,
but for the product itself Sugar is a
most valuable food element, and we are
learning to consume more Of il every
year. ~
THE present per capita sugar consump-
ton in the United States Is about eighty
pounds annually, or larger than that OF
any country except Great Britain. It is.
OF course, only a partial food. giving
heat and energy and building up the
fatty tissues, but not building muscle
or bone or restoring waste. II is q most
abundant and delectable fuel for the
human machine. It is necessary as q
food element because we not only have
TO build I'D our nitrogenous tissues, but
we need animal heat. II is particularly
valuable for q man engaged in hard
physical labor. but should be eaten by
persons OF sedentary habits with some
restrictions.
Urges Protection for Farmer.
''The sugar beet. then is q great fac
tor in making farm life more attractive
But farming Is at best a struggling oc-
cupation- The farmer should have a fair
chance in the markets, governed by sup
ply and demand as to rise and fail. and
not have everything he grows and every
thing he buys manipulated as to price
by people who have nobody's interest
at heart but their own. The farmer can
not sell q steer to-day, or a bushel Of
wheat, or q bushel Of corn at a price
governed by supply and demand.
And II there Is to be tariff protection,
the farmer should get It first Of all. I
do not wish TO discuss whether the tarif
Is good thing or a bad thing. but II we
are to have a tarin in this country the
farmer should get some benefit from H.
II our present tariff schedules are TO be
adjusted. and would not say for a mo-
ment such adjustments are not neces-
sary. let as much as possible be saved
to the farmer.
Regardless OF the abstractments Of
the question, II is evident from what
have already explained that the effect
Of the free sugar bill now before Con-
gress would be only partly felt by those
directly engaged in the culture and man
ufacturs Of this product. II would deal
a blow to all branches OF agriculture and
leave the farmer to struggle along for
decades yet to come with problems
which, without the aid Of sugar beet cul-
ture, he has been unable to solve Its
staggering and numbing influence would
pervade all branches Of agriculture and
put back the era OF development for
years to come.
Should Encourage Agriculture.
while there has been a general tend
ency toward the reduction of tariff
duties, this tendency has not reached
in many cases the extent of the abolition
Of import duties altogether. The bills
for the reduction Of the duty on wool
have not contemplated placing wool on
the free list. The same is true of the
greater number Of changes which have
been proposed in the duties on manu-
factured articles. Why. then, we farm
ers may well ask. has such an extreme
measure been contemplated IN respect TO
sugar? In my opinion this should be
the last, rather than the first point at
which &c remove the customs duty.
while the yield from our titled lands
is far below what IL should be and far
below what II may become with intelH-
gent effort and while the returns which
the farmer receives from his labor and
Investment are stIll too meager, do not
see in this situation any reason for dis
couragement. Instead, It should be