OCR Text |
Show Let Us Deal Fair With Cuba. AV HONEST MAN is the noblest work of God. The golden rule applies to nations as well as to individuals. No country can safely violate the rules of honesty and fair dealing without coming to grief. Sooner Soon-er or later punishment overtakes that nation. The question of our relations with , Cuba and the promises held out to its people is a matter that should be ex- I chlileri from t ho rlomion of twi-tiu'in ouut-ii iioiu me uoinani oi partisan politics. These promises were binding and their fulfillment on our part becomes be-comes the duty of every honest American Ameri-can through the channel of congressional congress-ional legislation. The operation of the Piatt amendment amend-ment in the government of the island still makes Cuba and the Cubans our vassals. The life of the country, the peace of its people, the crust of the poor, all depend on the disposition the American congress makes of Cuba's appeal. It should be understood in the lirst place that Cuba is restrained from making any treaty with foreign nations na-tions without our consent. Our intervention inter-vention has deprived Cuba of her old j markets, and the adoption of the Piatt amendment at our demand has brought her into a kind of limited partnership with this country. Hence is Cuba obliged to treat and trade with the United States, and rise or fall according as justice or blind avarice are meted to her by the congress. All Cuba asks in order to obtain a revenue reve-nue for the support of her government, discharge her war debt and enable her planters to obtain a bare living off their lands is a reduction of "j per cent in the duties collected on raw-sugar raw-sugar and tobacco. The petition from the government and people of Cuba prays only for fair dealing, reciprocity and a continuance of the patriotic feeling feel-ing which inspired the liberation of the island from Spain. The spirit of James G. Blaine and the last public" utterances of William McKinley admonish the American people peo-ple to render their full duty and pledge to the people whom they have not yet made absolutely free. Will the people redeem that pledge? On the side of honesty and fair dealing deal-ing with the Cubans are the president of the United States, his secretary of war, the former military governor of Cuba, the manufacturing interests of the country and the common people who buy sugar. On the side , of the president are the great leaders of his party, who place honesty and fair dealing deal-ing before polities: such a man as Senator Sen-ator McMillan, for example, who. a I though largely interested in sugar, is quoted as- favoring a reduction of 2 per cent for the Cubans. Even such aj strict protectionist Democrat as Gal-linger Gal-linger of Louisiana, who opposes tariff revision and the pending reciprocity treaties, admits that justice and wise statesmanship demand this reduction for Cuba. On the other hand, who are the opponents op-ponents of justice to Cuba, despite the declarations made in good faith after the termination of the Spanish war? Henry T. Oxnard. representing the beet ; sugar interests, the man who said two years ago that the beet sugar industry was so firmly established in this country that it couid even stand free j raw sugar. Today he says that indus- j try is so feeble that a small reduction in the duty on Cuban sugar alone will be too much for it. Behind Oxnard is a strong lobby raising a cry tnat the Havemeyer interest is alone responsible re-sponsible fo rthe agitation to attack the tariff: that the reduction, would benefit only the "grandess" of the island and ruin the farmers of the west engaged in the culture of beet sugar. It begins to look dark for Cuba in the ways and means committee of congress, con-gress, for hearings on the Cuban question ques-tion were postponed on Wednesday. Is Henry Oxnard right today, or was he wrong two years ago on this beet sugar problem? Certainly he could not be right in both instances, and his contradictory con-tradictory language suggests another man more capable of giving testimony in this matter. That other is no less a personajjo than Bishop Cutler of Utah, the head of the largest company in the state, which has $3,000,000 invested In the beet sugar industry. Mr. Cutler has attended all the hearings hear-ings held by the ways and means committee com-mittee on the subject of reducing' the tariff on Cuban sugar, and although he has been willing to assist the committee com-mittee by his testimony in reaching a correct solution of the question involved, in-volved, for some unexplained reason he has not been called ui'on to do so. To a Washington correspondent or the New York Tribune the other afternoon after-noon Mr. Cutler said he was willing to risk a reduction of "o per cent on Cuban Cu-ban sugar, and intimated that he did nut believe an even heavier cut than this would injure the beet sugar industry in-dustry of this country. While he is not yet prepared to advocate free trade with the island, as he is unable at this time to know what are the sugar possibilities pos-sibilities of Cuba, or to forejudge the conditions in the world's market a year hence, he confidently predicts that in ten years the United States will be In a position to abolish all sugar tariffs and place itself on a basis of absolute free trade in suar. Coming from Bishop Cutler, such an opinion should disarm all fears of strangulation of the sugar beet industry indus-try in Utah and unite his people in the one endeavor to secure justice to the Cubans, regardless of the partisan political po-litical opinions of the Salt Lake Tri-I Tri-I bune or of others speculating in sugar I stocks. The beet sugar farnVrs could come to Bishop Cutler's conclusions with greater alacrity, knowing it does not cost a cent to observe thp srnlrlen rule among nations as well as individuals. indi-viduals. Now how does Bishop Cutler back up his opinions as against those of Henry T. Oxnard? We quote his interview with the Washington correspondent: "I assume that the conditions which prevail in the beet-root industry in Utah are common to the industry throughout the country," said Mr. Cutler. Cut-ler. "About $3,000,000 is invested in the business in my state, and. while we are not the largest producers, we are no more favorably situated as to market, transportation, etc., than are the other seats of the industry. Therefore, There-fore, what we can stand certainly all the others can stand. 1 have Investigated Investi-gated the matter carefully and I am convinced that we can afford at this time to give Cuba a concession of 25 per cent on sugar without doing the least harm to our sugar interests at home. In the first place, I do not believe be-lieve that this reduction would increase Cuban importations to the point where they would cause a drop jn the price of sugar in this country, and certainly they would have no effect upon the world's market, which in the end controls con-trols the price of sugar to the American Ameri-can consumer. Statistics show that our consumption every year increases 6Vi per cent, while but for the beet-root industry in-dustry there would be no increase of production at home. "Now it is a simple proposition to j prove that with this rate of increase of consumption no injury would be in-, tlicted upon our domestic production by the increased importations that would follow a 2", per cent reduction on Cuban sugar. It seems to be a foregone con clusion that if we do not give Cuba the aid of reduced tariffs annexation will be forced upon us- in a few years, and sound business sense suggests that it is a safer policy to have conces- j sions at this time than to bring, Cuba in a short while into free-trade free-trade relations with us and that is what would follow annexation. In taking this position I am guided alike ! by the interests of the beet-root industry in-dustry and a national sense of obligation obliga-tion to aid Cuba. Proportionately I have as much at stake as anybody else, and it goes without saying that I , do not want to see congress adopt any j course that would injure my business. ; But I 'have no patience with this talk about the beet-root industry being threatened with destruction by the . movement for tariff concessions to Cuba. Our business is growing too strong to be hurt now by increased importations from Cuba. At the present pres-ent rate of growth we will be strong enough not to need any tariff on sugar, and then on a free trade basis we can invade the world's sugar markets and compete in Europe successfully with Germany and Russia." Mr. Cutler was asked if the cost of labor in the production of sugar in the United States was not so much greater than in Europe that this country could not safely compete iu the world's markets. "The cost of our labor may be greater great-er in the beet-root industry than it is in Germany, but it is so much more productive that the account is balanced bal-anced up on this score," he said. "In Utah nearly all the work of cultivating is done by boys, that otherwise would not be employed. I understand that the farmers, in New Yowk and some other parts of the country make their wives and daughters do a large part of the work. Our farmers do not let their wives and daughters perform this kind of work, and yet the labor cost with us is no greater than it is in those communities where the women are put in the fields. We thus give profitable employment to the sons of farmers when they are not in school, which teaches them habits of industry and thrift and keeps them out of idleness idle-ness and bad company. One farmer with the average sized family in Utah easily can cultivate forty acres of the beet roots and make more out of thi3 than he can on twice as much land devoted de-voted to other crops. The industry is so firmly established now that I feel certain it will continue to grow- until j it gets strong enough to stand alone." I |