Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1913-03-22

%. 7
Condemning absolutely the policy Of
those American legislators who would
put sugar on the free list, and stat
ing in no uncertain terms that re-
duction in the sugar tariff will bene-
fit no one but the great refineries,
about 80 per cent of which are con-
trolled by the sugar trust, former At
toFney General George Woodward
Wickersham, in an interview this
morning with a Star-Bulletin represen-
tatiye. expressed his views on the Ia
riff. Mr.. Wickersham's opinion on the
subject is important and wellnigh
conclusive not only because of his
great reputation as lawyer and. a
student of political economy, but also
because he has, for more than two
years, made an intimate study of con-
ditions surrounding the sugar indus
try in his prosecution under the Sher-
man antitrust law of the refined sug-
ar monopoly in the United States. Mr..
Wickersham said:
Il can ascribe no valid or sensible
reason for the fact that some legisla-
tors in Washington are for, a moment
considering the reduction Of the Ia
riff on sugar. The idea that such a.
reduction will work anything but.
great harm or that it will benefit TO.
any extent the consumer of sugar is to
my mind so fallacious as to be alb
surd
"The great sugar refneries in the
United States, the majority of which
are controlled by the so-called sugar
trust will get all benefit from any
reduction in the cost of the raw pro-
duct, and it is beyond by comprehcn-
sion to see any reason why the price
of the refined product to the consumer
would be reduced.
"On the other hand, by taking away
the tari.f protection from the sugar III
dustry the government would without
doubt stamp out an industry which, In
many parts of the United States, is
still in its infancy. We cannot COM
pete in the production of sugar with
Cuba or with other foreign countries;
this seems to be beyond the question,
In the Philippines, In Hawaii in Louis.
lana, and in belt running east ana
west from Michigan, to Utah, the
growing of sugar and more particu-
larly In the latter places, of beet sug-
ar, has become a growing industry ana
an industry of the greatest import
ance to these sections of the country
81 cannot conceive of any reason
able man so foolish as to believe that
this Industry should be sacrificed Tor
the sole benefit of the refining conf
panies. To my mind the question OF
the reduction of the tariff on sugar,
more than any other single question,
is apt to result In the disruption OF
the Democratic party. 1t is an all-im-
portant question and one upon whlch
the people of the United States are VI
tally interested. At present, the gov
ernment realizes no less than $60,000,-
600 annually from the tariff on sugar.
Besides this, the sugar industry is a
great and important factor in the ecoa
nomic progress and prosperity of the
country. We should encourage its de-
yelopment, not stamp it out of exist
ence by a foolhardy measure.
FalIacy of Free Trade Talk
at is not possible to sustain the
plea for the reduction of tariff on sug-
ar by saying that free-trade is the
ideal economic condition and that
pIotection itself is an economic fall
lacy. If all the countries in the world
would agree to free trade. satisfac-
tory economic condition might result,
and each country might then grow
that produce to which it is best adapt
ed. But this is not the case. On the
contrary, practically every nation IN
the world has agreed that some form
of protection to home industry is
necessary, and as result they alt
have their tariff walls. Italy, Ger
many, France, in fact all of the ma