Year: 1878

tlemen engaged in the sugar trade and


manufacture. 1t is not easy for laymen to


comprehend the merits of such dispute;


hence we have given opportunity for both


sides to be heard in our columns. and we


are certainly amazed at the charges put


forward by one of the contending parties.


correspondent, who signs himself "Amen,


in Wednesdays HERALD accuses three sugar


refining firms of this city, first, Of deiraud-


ing the revenue, and. second, Of poisoning


the public When we remember, what


this correspondent adds, that these


three firms import three hundred and


fifty thousand Of the FIVE hundred


and sixty thousand tons of sugar annu-


ally imported into New York, we must


say that ..Amen's" accusation is a very seri-


Gus matter, both for the government and


the people and for him. If it is true it


should be at once established by incontro-


vertible facts, and if that is done-and it
has not been done so far--the three firms
OF sugar refiners will rightly have their
property confscated by the government
and be themselves driven in disgrace from
the community. For it is very grave mat
ter for three manufacturing firms to defraud
the government OF its just dues on three
hundred and fifty thousand tons of raw
sugar and to poison the consumers Of this
vast quantity of sugar by mixing with it
poisonous drugs and minerals.


We say, therefore, to ''Amen" that he is
bound to produce, without delay, proof of
what he has ventured to assert. The col
umns of the HERALD are open to him for
this purpose but, we will add, they are
not open to him or any one else to make
further anonymous accusations until these
are proved.


When we come to read the other side we
find it asserted that, first, as to the charges
of fraud against the revenue, the Treasury
and Custom House officials have no knowl-
edge that such offences have been COM
mitted they have seized no sugar have
brought no suit against refners, and
yet it is their imperative duty to
do both, and they have the District
Attorney and the whole power of the gov
ernment behind them, not merely to sup
port them, but to compel them to prevent,
discover and punish such frauds As to
glucose and deleterious minerals, MIR.
Havemeyer denies in our columns, in his
own name and for other refners, the charge
that he and they use them, and on the
forcible ground that they do not need to
use minerals, while the glucose manufao-
turers find other markets for all they pro-
duce of this harmless substance. Under
these circumstances, until amen or
some one else proves the contrary, it is fair
to believe their accusations unjus.ifable,
even though caused by the irritation Of
business rivalry.


But, it is urged by one of the parties to
this quarrel, firm after firm Of sugar re-
fners has failed in business and gone into
poverty, while certain other refners, among
them the three SO grossly accused by
sAmen," are prosperous. How is this to
be accounted for? The unsuccessful men
say the only cause of their misfortunes is to
be found in the frauds of their rivals in
which, they assert, but
which in justice we must repeat, are not
proved, and which we are informed are de-
MED by the Treasury officers. But Mr..
Havemeyer and others answer that these
bankrupt sugar refners failed, not because
they alone were honest, but because they
lacked sufficient capital for their business
because they did not use the best machinery
because the margin OF profit in sugar refining
is SO minute that small leak, trifiing per-
centage Of expense added, an interest ac-
count to carry, the load of an injudicious
purchase, may easily bring misfortune and
failure, particularly if firm lacks capital
or has become embarrassed. Everybody
who is familiar with the varying fortunes of
sugar planters knows that all this is GER
tainly true of that business, in which, all
over the world, thousands of men have
sunk great fortunes. 1t is very possible
that il is just as true of the sugar refners
as it is of the planters and when we con-
slider the enormous economy Of great capi-
tai in these days in all the great operations
of commerce and industry there is little
room for doubt that this is the true expla-
nation of the failure Of some refners. 1t
is fair, at any rate, to hold it true until the
reverse Is proNeu-untii snose VINO CuaIBe
fraud come forward to prove (which they
are SO far from doing that inquiry of the
highest government sources brings the
reply that nothing but bald assertion has
ever cometo them.


Finally we come to the proposed change
in the sugar duties, and we ask, first,
whether there is any good reason for q
change? The present scale of duties is
high because the government needs great
revenue; but it was fixed with great care.
The trade has grown up with it, and it ought
not to be changed, no matter on whose de-
mand, without the best reasons. The Sec
retary of the Treasury proposed uniform
rate in his annual report, but he has already
seen that this was i'll advised and has sub
ux,s..o1 CO. that apofbar raonn,,, ~ IL