:iHcnf(;AX. i3f:ET sit;ar 413 



This is undoubtedly true but there is Cuba to be considered. That 

 annexatiou is the natural destiny of the island is so obvious that we 

 need not discuss it; that the ann<'xation of Cuba would be of tremendous 

 importance to the I'nited States is also too plain to Avarrant a detailed 

 relation of the advautajies. The ojtposition within the I'nited States 

 to the annexation of Cuba comes chiefly from the tobacco and the beet 

 sujiar interests. They cannot be blamed for considering their own 

 \\'elfar(\ but the fact remnins, nevertheless. 



^\■c thinl; that on the whole Cuba is worth more to the United States 

 than the building up of a beet sugar industry. Cuba can raise a suflS- 

 cient quantity of cane to manufacture nearly all the sugar the country 

 will consume for many yeais. The (^'nban cane sugar can l)e sold at a 

 profit cheajicr that the beet sugar can be manufactured in the United 

 States. It is a serious question whether it would not be more profit- 

 able to the country in the end to allow Cuba to nmnufacture the sugar 

 while the American farmer devoted his energies to other forms of 

 agricultuie. 



I'rof. Kedzie does not agree with us that the cost of sugar to the con- 

 sumer is not likely to be cheapened by the development of the beet 

 sugar industry, and calls attention to the reduction in the price of nails, 

 cotton sheeting, matches, oil, etc.. during the last twenty-five years. 

 But this cheapening has all been due to the protection of labor-saving 

 machinery, and it is doubtful whether there can be great advance in 

 the way of further cheapening the cost of manufacturing beet sugar. 

 The great item of expense is labor, hand labor that cannot l)e cheapened 

 or made more effective excei)t to the detriment of the community. The 

 lleets cannot be weeded or thinned by machinery. 



Then, too, the interest on the money invested in the plant is bound 

 to continue, even though the machinery can be operated only three or 

 four monlhs in the vear. The normal element of deterioration will 



« 



not be changed greatly. If any great cheapening is effected in the 

 manufacture of beet sugar, it seems to us that the farmer and his 

 eni])l(»yes will be the chief suflerers. The company will pay the farmer 

 less for l»eets. The farmer in turn will be compelled to employ cheaper 

 laboi-, and the benefits may be far less apparent ten years hence than 

 they are today. At present the farmer is the principal beneficiary of 

 the beet sugjir industry: but even if Cuba is not annexed it is economic- 

 ally improbable that he will long remain the chief beneficiary. 



At the same time we liave no disi»osition to discourage the industry. 

 We desire only to call attention t<» the fact that there are other interests 

 and other elements to be considered. — Free Press, Oct. 22, 1001. 



