Show A BOUNTY FALLACY A Republican paper has the hardihood hardi-hood in a labored attempt to show the beauty of bounties to try to make it appear that Ht was found that after receiving re-ceiving the bounties the home factories could sell their sugar as much cheaper than the imported sugar as the freight between San Francisco or Chicago ard this city amounted to and that the real fact was that the people who paid the 56000 got more money back by the reduction in the price of sugar than the bounty amounted to If the Utahmade sugar was ever sold at a less price than the imported sugar in this market the buyers here were not aware of it The statement is all of a piece with the deceptions usually practiced to justify the robbery rob-bery of the taxpayers involved in all such bounties The people who paid out 30000 instead of 6000 did not get a cent of it back in a decreased price of sugar The manufacturers met the regular market If sugar went up they rose to the occasion We find no fault with this We are not attacking at-tacking the sugar people We are merely refuting a flagrant falsehood The people of Utah who paid the bounty for the manufacture of sugar paid the same price for it when they bought it as did the people of Idaho and Wyoming who paid no bounty So far as the price was concerned the people of Utah received no returns whatever We do not say the factory has not been a benefit to the territory We have given it full credit for the good it has accomplished not only to the beet growers but to the whole community But the same may be said of other industries in proportion to I their extent and their employment of home labor or materials Some of them have reduced the price of their products to the consumer and yet have I received no bounty If every industry that becomes indirectly a public benefit I bene-fit should be supported by taxation I where would be the limit to that taxation taxa-tion And if one concern should be so supported why not others And what would be the profit to the community com-munity even if it received back a portion por-tion of the proceeds in taking money out of one of Its pockets and putting it into another The only safe guide in these matters is to put public money solely to public uses Whatever plausible excuses maybe may-be offered to deviate from this rule it will be found on examination that they are fallacious in principle and dangerous danger-ous to the public welfare The fostering foster-ing of infant industries out of the public pub-lic bin means bigger supplies as the infant grows older Protected concerns con-cerns whether by tariffs or bounties are like the horseleech ever crying I I more But whatever spacious arguments argu-ments may be advanced to the contrary con-trary of this proposition it will be found that resort to falsehood as in I this sugar question will never help the bounty cause I |