8 THE SUGAR INDUSTRY. 



cents as the cost of making raw sugar from cane in Louisiana or beets in California or 

 New York after the industry is well established. The enormous increase in the Hawaiian 

 sugar industry, the immense plantations that are being developed and the preparations 

 now on to double and triple the sugar output of those islands, are now matters of com- 

 mon notoriety, that have already caused a saturnalia of speculation. 



Cuba has practically unlimited possibilities for sugar production. Porto Rico, 

 though comparatively small in area, can, on a conservative estimate, produce almost as 

 much as the present total yearly production of sugar in the United States! The Philip- 

 pines possess sugar potentialities of unknown extent. 



Much the same may be said of the tropical production of tobacco, rice, fruits, vege- 

 tables 



PROTECTION FOR THE AMERICAN FARMER AND LABORER, 



for the grower of sugar beets and sugar cane, against such competition will be necessary 

 for some years to come. Every legitimate argument for the protection idea applies to 

 this demand. None will undertake to gainsay this statement. 



The battle for protection has waged these many years, during which the farmer has 

 been more or less skeptical of its benefits to him. But irrespective of politics, the farmer 

 (led by the Patrons of Husbandry) has come to agree that so long as there is a tariff he 

 wants as much as the other fellow. And since only duties that directly benefit the farmer 

 are those on agricultural produce imported, because not yet grown here sufficiently to 

 supply the market, on such produce the farmer wants such protection equally with the 

 manufacturer. 



Now, if Congress overthrows such protection by admitting free sugar, tobacco, fruits, 

 vegetables, rice, etc., besides adding to direct taxes, while at the same time continuing 

 the manufacturers' protection, let no one be surprised if the farmers and working people 

 vote in 1900 or 1904 to pitch the custom houses into the sea! 



If there is to be any protection, the farmer wants whatever will benefit him. If 

 there is to be free trade, then the farmer wants "freedom" for all. Of course the loss of 

 revenue that free trade would involve would have to be made good by a federal 

 income tax. 



THE ENGLISH TARIFF APPLIES TO COLONIAL EQUALLY WITH FOREIGN PRODUCE. 



The American farmer is perfectly right in this position, whatever are the relations 

 ot the United States to the tropics. Even England imposes the same duties on imports 

 from her colonies tea, coffee, tobacco, liquors, etc. as from other countries. She gets 

 one-fifth to one-fourth of her revenue from this source. 



Now the whole imperialistic idea in the United States to-day rests on the claim 

 that the United States Congress has ample powers to apply different tariff rates, other 

 taxes and other forms of government in its dependencies in the tropics than are made 

 mandatory within this union of states by the federal constitution. 



LOSS OF REVENUE. 



To admit tropical produce duty free would speedily sacrifice upward of $100,000,000 

 of tariff duties yearly. The $50,000,000 annually paid in duties on imported sugar and 

 $20,000,000 on imported cigar-leaf tobacco (Table E, appendix) would largely go into the 

 pockets of plantation and manufacturing syndicates in Cuba and the Philippines. 



Revenue lost by the free admission of other tropical produce would go far to make 

 up a total yearly sacrifice of $100,000,000. For it must be borne in mind that, with such 



