Morgan County Democrat. (McConnelsville, Ohio) 1886-1943, 1923-05-24
ROBBER TARIFF AND SUGAR

Editor Matson still refuses to an
swer the question which we have re-
peatedly propounded to him, name
ly: Does the present robber tariff in
crease the price of sugar? He evades
it, and then enters into lengthy
discussion of the sugar situation in
Canada. We can't understand his
object in still refusing to answer our
question. Leading Republican pa
pers of the country don't hesitate to
state that the tariff has increased
the price of sugar. He seems to be
so well posted on the Canada sugar
situation, we wonder if he has read
what the Republican State Journal
said editorially recently on Canada S
sugar example. Here it is, and we
hope that he will ponder it carefully
and then we think he will answer
our question:
1--WE wonder what our tariff COM
mission, which is high-protectionist
to degree, makes of Canada's eX-
perience with the tariff as it relates
to sugar prices. A few days ago
the Canadian government, which has
no great sugar interests on it's hands
to favor and expect campaign con-
tributions from, lowered the import
duty on sugar four-tenths of cent
a pound. That was last Saturday
and on Monday the wholesale price
of sugar dropped four-tenths of a
cent a pound and the retail price a
full cent pound We suppose our
tariff commission, even in the face
of this evidence, would not admit
that the sacred Fordney-McCumber
law has thing TO do with the price
of sugar here. 1t probably would
say that conditions in this country
are different from those in Canada,
but they are not so far as the inter
ests Of sugar consumers are con-
cerned.
The American Sugar Refining
Company, which ought to know,
differs with the tariff commission
on the point under consideration. 1t
says in its annual report, recently
issued, that the new tariff amounts
to two cents pound on each pound
of refined sugar purchased at the
grocery stores" and that Sin all dis
cussions of sugar prices this fact al
ways should be taken into considera-
ton" If we may judge correctly by
Canada's experience, as we think we
may, a reduction of so per cent in
the Fordney McCumber rate, re-
duction possible under the flexible
provisions of the law. would auto
maticallv cut one cent a pound from
the retail price of sugar, while the
moral effect would be such. proba-
bly,, as to make the reduction con-
siderably larger. Our sugar inter-
ests would not take any chances on
losing their tariff protection for the
sake of one years abnormal profits.
Instead of utilizing the one obvious
corrective at hand, however, our
government brings perfectly futile
and farcical injunction proceedings,
while the people themselves in sheer
self defense are driven to the ex-
tremity of trying to organize an eff
fective buyers strike"
The SPRINGFIELD, Mass. Republi-
can, under the caption 1.-The Sugar
injunction Farce" in which it
speaks of Atty General Daughertys
"absurd injunction proceedings, -
says that the President of the United
States has also disappointed the
country in this matter He has the
flexible tariff provision as a weapon
and he sent word from Florida that
he would "be ready to proclaim
reduction of duty as provided by
law" if the tariff commission should
find any ground for believing that
the tariff duty was "even partially
responsible" for the rise in price.
This commission couldn't find the
least evidence to that effect in 1000
years, hard as it might try. 1t has
blind spot in its high protectionist
eye when sugar prices are studied.
The Canadian government has
now given our government lead.
The Canadians have a tariff for the
protection of home industries, but
the cane and sugar beet industries
do not flourish in Canada and, con-
sequently, the Dominion government
is not afraid to strike at sugar
prices through the tariff. On Sat