BEET SUGAR 



BY FRANK WILLIAM TAUSSIG, PH. I)., LITT. D. 

 (From " Some Aspects of the Tariff Question," chap, vii, p. 80) 



[Many footnotes are omitted from this reprint. The reader is referred to 

 the original article. ED.] 



TI I E beet-sugar industry presents questions essentially differ- 

 ent from those considered in the preceding chapters. The 

 sugar beet is grown in the temperate zone, and its cultivation is 

 one among many possible forms of agriculture. In view of its 

 peculiar position and significance, it deserves careful and detailed 

 consideration. 



Chronologically, the beet-sugar supply is among the later addi- 

 tions to the total for the United States. Barring a slight amount 

 from one or two California enterprises, no beet sugar at all was 

 produced in the country before 1890. The bounty given by the 

 tariff act of that year (1890) is often referred to in the literature 

 on the subject, especially that put forth by protectionists, as hav- 

 ing had a stimulating effect on the industry. Though this bounty 

 was no more than an equivalent for the duty then remitted, it 

 may have given some impetus, for the- same psychological reasons 

 as in the case of the Louisiana planters. Several states also gave 

 bounties for the production of beet sugar, usually moderate in 

 amount and limited in time; tlu-sr constituting, so far as they 

 a substantial bonus. Probably no less effective th.m the 

 bounties at the start, and more effective as time went on. \\as the 

 propaganda of the Department of Agriculture. That depart- 

 ment preached beet-sugar in season and out of season ; spread 

 broadcast pamphlets dilating on the advantages of beet gr< 

 for the farmer and giving minute directions on methods <: 

 tivation ; maintained a special agent, who kept in touch \\ith the 



919 



