Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-08-29
Holds Anderton Erred.
Secretary of Beet Sugar Associa.
ton Says Statement Is Necessary.

To the Editor of The Star:
| May take exception to some OF the
more glazing errors contained In Mr..
George p. Anderton's recent letter on
the sugar tariff? A clear statement Is
necessary because he either n1isunder-
stands the operation OF the tarin or
his calculations were intended TO prove
an entirely untenable point.
Mr.. Anderton argues that, II sugar
were placed on the free list the cost to
the consumer would be 4.24 cents a
pound, since the Cuban rate of 1.76
cents might be deducted from the cur
rent retail price of cents a pound.
That, of course. is pure assumption. 1t
is impossible to foretell what would
occur II sugar were granted free entry.
save only that the domestic industry
most assuredly would be killed. Once
that had been accomplished, Cuba
would have complete control Of the
American market and might. adjust
sugar prices at any level she desires.
Moreover, If the argument for free en-
try Is valid one, Mr.. Anderton might
undertake to explain the price of coffee,
commodity on the free list. Since
! 1913. according to statistics Of the De-
partment of Labor, coffee prices have
Increased SIS per cent. Sugar. IN all
those years. has advanced only 10 per
cent, an increase less than that OF any
Obviously, free entry for coffee has re-
suited In no great saving for the con-
sumner.
From the point in his argument at
which he subtractS the rate OF Cuban
| duty from the current retail price TO
arrive at the goal OF 4.24 cents, Mr..
Anderson's mathematics become as con-
For q time he calculates costs to the
consumer on the basis Of the Cuban
duty. firing of that, he substitutes the
world rate Of duty, which has not the
i remotest practical force because less
than / per cent Of our sugar imports
paws that tariff. He assumes that
manufacturers of food products VINO
use thousands of tons Of sugar must
purchase at the same price as the
housewife who buys 5 pounds at the
corner store.
He compares his hypothetical price
of 4.2< cents with q still more hypo-
thetical price Of 7.24 cents-a fgure
which would include a world rate OF
cents-and arrives at the astonishing
conclusion that the housewife WIN y
family of five will contribute pracu-
cally SIS a year for the support OF our
domestic sugar industry
No one with any knowledge OF the
tariff system believes that the full rae
of duty is passed on to the consumer
| for any product. No one who mas
touched the fringe Of the sugar industry
believes that the average American
consumes directly, as Mr.. Anderton i'm
niles. 100 pounds of sugar year. No
one, with a single exception, can give
serious attention TO savings" based on
metaphySical calculations which strike
a balance between non-existent free
trade and a world rate of duty which is
not in effect. and would have no pracu-
| cal force II 1t were in effect.
The truth Of the matter. demon .N,i
large part Of the tariff Is absorbed by
manufacturers Of cheap, foreign sugar
who are seeking our markets. Another
| large part of the cost OF the tarln Is
| absorbed by the manufacturers OF SOFT
drinks. candy and other food prooucts:
| II the House rate Of 2.40 cents a pound
were granted, the sugar IN bottle OF
| tional and the increase in the cost OF
candy would likely be infinitesimal
| Since candy and pop sell at established
prices, there is no possibility that the
| consumer would be called upon to pay
that cost of the tariff.
The direct per capita consumption OF
sugar in the United States is about 90
, pounds. Thus, II the 2.40 rate were
! levied and the full effect passed on to
the consumer. the additional cost to
| family of five would be no more than
81 90. Like as not. it might be less.
Mr.. Anderton INDUCES in learned
discussion of Senator Borah's bounty
plan'-no mean accomplishment In
view of the fact that the Senator has
not to my knowledge, made pubic any
such proposal. ;,
Sugar imports last year produced
some sl30,o00,o0o in revenue to the
United States. How many members OF
Congress would support plan that will
mean the loss Of that much money to
the Treasury? What other commodity
would they tax to make up for the loss?
! Would they increase the duty on butter.
which now pays IL cents a pound, or
about $3.50 SOC, 900. If We accept Mr..
Anderton's theory that tariff costs are
directly assessed to the consumer.
| Under the proposed Hawley-Smoot bill.
/ the butter rate is to be increased to
! II cents pound. bringing the total
cost to S2e2,000000 according to the
Anderton method of calculation. Per-
haps the members Of Congress would
select milk, on which Mr.. Andertons
reckoning would set the present tariff
cost at 1852 900 900 and at still larger
sum under the proposed Accent increase.
These seem tremendous totals and they
are Senator LaFollette and Repre-
sentative Frear both hail from milk and
butter producing States and both, I'M
derStand, are advocates OF bounty on
sugar, but neither one of them up to
/ the present made any public objection
Of the proposed rates on milk or
! butter.
The purpose Of bounty, or bonus. on
sugar so its advocates say, Is to make
sugar cheap to the consumer. Strange
enough, 1t doesn't work that way. From
| 1890 to 1894 We had duty-free sugar
and a bounty on domestic production
of cents q pound. The average price
on refined sugar in New York during
! that period was cents a pound. When
| the bounty was removed duty OF 40
per cent ad valorem was imposed. Did
the price of sugar advance? 1t did not.
The average price was less than 1t was
during the free sugar period by 70 cents
hundred pounds. SO long as the price
of sugar or any other commodity is es-
| tablished by foreign country 1t Is
mistake to imagine that the tariff gov
erns the price to the consumer. For
! example: The present tariff on sugar
against Cuba has been in effect since
the Fall of 1922, or seven years. Dur
| ing this period refined sugar has sold in
New York as high as $40 hundred
pounds and as low as $4.75, yet the
tariff was stationary. The fact Is that
the price of sugar is based on what
Cuba can get for her raw sugar laid
down in New York. An examination of
the record of these raw sugar prices
during the past seven years shows
figure as low as 1.69 cents pound and
as high as 6.62la cents. Is any one
simple enough to imagine that if sugar
were permitted to come into this coun-
| try free, Cuba would have sold raw
sugar as low as 1859 cents? II there
are such persons they are not to be
found among practical sugar men, who
know better.
The trouble with all free traders such
"a Mr. Anderton Is that they overlonk