OCR Text |
Show means tl.c.t the American producer receives so much more for his output, inasmuch as payment for his crop is based on the market ; price of sugar. The Tariff Commission's investigation shows that the ; difference in the expense of producing sugar in the United States and ; Cuba is almost entirely in the agriclutural costs and that the American ; farmer receives for the raw material required to produce a pound of puar a sum that exceeds the price received by the Cuban cane grower , by more than the amount of the tariff, so that fie gets the full benefit of the duty charged against the foreigner. Investigations of the cost of various manufactured articles have resulted in increases of tariff, lates and the agricultural organizations are interested in determining whether the same course or a different one is to be followed where' the farmer's interests are at stake. Another reason why the farm organizations are keenly following follow-ing the sugar case is because of the precedent set by the 1 ariiT Commission Com-mission in regard to sugar may work to the disadvantage of the farm interests in other cases that are now pending or may come before the Commission. At the present time there are three cases under investigation inves-tigation which directly affect te farmers of the country those relating relat-ing to butter, casein and vegetable oils. In the sugar case it is alleged that the report on which the recommendation for"a reduction in the duty is based on figures of costs prior to the time when the present tariff law was enacted and that it disregards comparative agricultural costs. Many authorities in and out of Congress contend that this course, if not illegal, is contrary to the intent of Congress in enacting enact-ing the so-called flexible provision of the tariff law. FARMERS SOLID FOR PRESENT SUGAR DUTY. R eports to show that the agriclutural interests of the country sre lir.ing up solidly against any reduction in the tariff on sugar such as is reported to have been recommended to the President by three memebrs of the Tariff Commission. The American Farm Bureau Federation, stale farm bureaus, the International Farm Congress, the American Dairj- Federation, the Monutain States Beet Growers" Association and sirr ilar organizations in other section have gone on record with formal resolutions or by letters and telegrams of protest addressed to the Pi esident in opposition opposi-tion to any lowering of the import duty on foreign, jrown sugar. There are several reasons why the farm organ! zation are making an issue of this matter. They recognize the duty o n sugar as one of the few tariff schedules that is of any protection to t le farmer. Tariffs on commodities of which the country produces a sci plus do not help him because the price is fixed in the export market. In the case of sugar, however, the United States imports more th an half its total supply and consequently the import duty on the foreign product |