Show Jfreo Sugar Republican papers are descanting on the blessings of free sugar They claim that taking the duty off sugar saved the people of the United States 60000000 a year They are warning the country against the expected restoration of the duty by Democratic Congress and foreshadowing fore-shadowing the great calamity that will result Their sympathy for the poor who will nave this great burden reimposed upon them is truly pathetic and enough to bring tears from the eyes of a sugar beetNow Now if placing sugar on the free list was really such a boon to the buyers why will not placing some other articles of common consumption on the free list add to the great popular benefits enjoyed from that source If free sugar saves the country so much why would not free woolbe an additional saving Suppose it is true which we do not I admit that free wool would lower the I I profits Of the sheep industry sliould not the benefit of the whole country be I studied rather than the interest of a few people comparatively whose business is very lucrative It is a poor rule that will only work one way J and a miserable policy pol-icy that is only good as to one article But fet us look a little closer at this I free sugar boast of the Republicans which is a standing contradiction of their own theory of protection Refined sugar is i still taxed half a cent a pound That is the kind that enters into common consumption con-sumption The tax was taken off raw sugar for the benefit of the sugar trust It cave them free raw material They saved on it two cents a pound fcnd lowered the price on granulated or refined sugar one cent a pound Who gained the great result When the sugar bounty is taken into consideration costing the country about 12000000 per annum and the alleged benefits to the public In the reduction of i the duty on raw sugar are reduced one half how much real good accrues to the consumer from tho mingled free trade and protection policy of the Republican ClIrce sugar humbug Putting aside these stubborn facts and 2 If r < r > r l > i irrefutable figures the principle remains if free raw materials are beneficial to the country in ono line of industry they would probably be beneficial in others Also that tariff reform if necessary and good in one instance is likely to be goo las l-as to others And it is not very consistent con-sistent to oppose what is called free trade as rumpus in general and at the same time boast of astonishing benefits in one particular S |