The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-09-20
SUTHERLAND'S VIEWS.

very fairly and properly some OF the
leading objections to it. He also OBJ
iects strenuously TO the Democratic
tariff bill. II is pity that he could
not have realized the evil which he
was doing four years ago when he
stood so firmly with Aldrich against
the proper revision of our tariff laws,
which had been promised in tho Re
publican platform in 1905. President
Taft in his campaign for the Presl-
dency that year stated emphatically
his clear understanding Of that pledge,
that the tariff was 10 be reduced
downward Mr.. Sutherland not only re-
fused to give his support TO the carry
ing out of that pledge, but, on the con-
trary, favored raising the tariff on
very many protected articles, and re-
fused to lend his influence towards low
yring it, where such lowering was
shown to be absolutely right and pro-
per, The theory Of protection, as
theory, so obsessed the Republican Sen
ators at the extra session of 1909, that
they gave way to it completely, with
out exercising any discriminating sense;
md that wrong-headed course was
the origin of all the party's woes that
have come upon it since. If the lesson
of that terrible mistake of the Repub
lican Senators of 1909 has been taken
to heart by Mr.. Sutherland, and others
who acted with him at that time, it
will be all tho better for the RepubG-
can party, and more especially all the
better for the country.
AS TO sugar, Mr.. Sutherland holds
that the Democrats made their most Sc
rious mistake (but how about wool?)
| in placing sugar on the free list. He
believes that this will wipe out the
sugar-cane industry in Louisiana and
the sugar-beet industry in Michigan,
| He thinks that the sugar-beet factor
! les in Utah, Colorado and California
will continue to operate under free
sugar. but that no new factories will
| be built, and the extension Of the in
dustry that bade fair to supply the
nation with sugar will be stopped. -
AS to the matter of the beet-sugar fac
tories in this country supplying the ma
| tion with sugar, it should be remem-
bered that the increase in the beet
sugar product in this country by no
means keeps pace with the increase In
the demand by the people of this coun-
try for sugar. More and more sugar is
demanded all the time, and the sugar
beet industry, in place Of bidding fair
to supply the demand Of the people,
in even meeting the increased demand
that the year brings on.
Mr. Sutherland argues further, and
quite correctly, that putting sugar on
the free list benefits only the redners,
and that "sugar will be sold no
cheaper to the consumer. This We
have repeatedly affirmed, stating that
the price of sugar will not be lessened
in the least by reason of putting sugar
on the free list. But here is the di-
lemma: If sugar is to be maintained
at the old price,. why is it that the
cane-sugar industry in, Louisiana and
the beet-sugar industry in Michigan
will be wiped out! Will the sugar
produced by the Louisiana cane-sugar
growers be refused by the sugar re-
finers' IF so, why7 Will tho beet
sugar produced in Michigan be kept
out of the market7 IF so, on what
grounds' But if the Louisiana cane
sugar and the Michigan beet-sugar are
still to be nut upon the market and
sold TO the consumer at the old prices,
why should the cane-sugar industry be
wiped out ~in Louisiana and the beet
sugar industry be wiped out in Mich
igau? What is there about this prop
ositiou that Will Kill tho canc-sugar in
dustrv in Louisiana and tho beet-sugHr
industry in Michigan, when the price
is to be sustained at the same old
fgurc9 These industries are flourish
ing now at the present price OF sugar;
why should they not continue to flour
ish if this price is to be maintainedg
AS TO sugar factories in this region,
in Colorado, and in California. Mr..
Sutherland argues that they will not
be wiped out. This is what The Trib-
une has contended all along. We ar
gucd that precisely on two grounds;
First, agreeing with Mr.. Sutherland
that the price of sugar to the con
sumcr will not be reduced, there would
appear to be no reason why tho fac
tories would not flourish the same as
before. Second, VIC have here a sort of
protection from freight transportation
that will help us in large degree in
lien Of the tariff. And if the price 10
the consumer is TO he the same rs be- |
fore. there is DO reason that we can |
sec why the bect-sugar industry in all !
this region should not flourish precisely !
AS before and new factories be cstab- |
lished from time TO time in different |
places,
The general proposition as to this
taking off Of the tariff on sugar. is, |
as we have heretofore stated, clearly |
in the interest OF the sugar rcfncrs |