Show the real tariff issue there its I 1 eo go much con confusion fasion of thought aej eo so much argil ent at clofar purposes in discussions of ohp th sugar tariff that a brief statement ot of aneta inlay be useful in clearing away some of the fog surrounding this subject and in helping to 0 o define the issue involved in the present tariff controversy so far as there is an issue fifteen years ago tho tile federal asgar agar refining company un der the direction of 0 A spreckels eln who was then ite its president was conducting a vigor vigorous oms amp dign in favor of the entire removal of eust customs dins charges against Import imported ril sugar its keynote was nus the claim printed on sugar packages an and d spread before the public in every other possible way that ii under free sugar the two a pound less ler 4 it lt waa was sugar in in this bag would cost you acas a potent argument and it very nearly succeeded succeed od in baingi bringing ng the to tho the free admission of all sugar at the present time the only propaganda ada being spread in OP opposition to the duty on sugar is i that put out by the representatives of certain producers of cuban sugars its object ia is reduction and not removal of tho tile fluty A low lowering cring of the tariff rate by elimina eliminating marginal producer produce ru in A ahe 0 dome domestic itic field would enable cuba to Pos dossus a still larger sham sharo of the market in which sho she now controls about 60 per cent of the total business ra but abolition 0 L the duty would open this market to the sugar of the world anil and deprie cuba cubit of the special advantage that she sho now enjoys while the impression seems to have been created in many editors A minds that cuban hit interests crests aro are becking seeking removal of the tile aba th fact ia Is that such a result is the last thing hat they desire nor ia is protection a present issue L except in A very modified form MITI fi the term 14 is taken takes as describing a tariff that gives pro dubers within a country such a marked advantage over foreign n competitors as will lead to a rapid expand expansion i ion of the home industry ian in the investigations and hearings hearing of the tariff commission relating to tho the sugar schedule of tho the existing tariff tan law the object ampar antly hae has been to dete the cost of product production ion in the united states and cuba in order t to establish a cr competitive tariff that would equalize the position of domestic and cuban sugars in the united states market placing ta 10 lo 60 two group groups of producers on an exact par in this macket for over twenty year ever sinco since the adoption of the cuban reciprocity treaty in 1903 brov proved bcd lcd for the admi admission sion of if cuban sugar to the united states at 80 per cent of the aftel dut duty v whatever competitive advantages tho the tariff lias bas conferred have bave bc n shared between domestic and cuban producers ars on the one hand it ha has s imposed a marketing charge on cuban raw sugar varying from one cent to 1 3 76 cents a pound which the domestic product was not called upon te t bear but on oil the other hand band it has riven given to cuba cubit a over all tho the rest of the world varying from 5 cent to 0 44 cent a pound tho the test of the practical of these relative adan advantages id JA to be found in the degree to which each or either of the two competing groups haa improved it its position in the tile market and in the c relative attractiveness of tile two wit industries to the in investor veAtor w at tile time when the reciprocity treaty was drawn cuba 10 supplied a it minor part of the sugar used in the united states for tile three yeam imports from other countries supplied 48 per cent of the tile total for theN three year yearl following imports from wom these ruts outside ide countries i had fallan to 21 p cent and in 1910 they were allwn to 7 1 per cent 0 of f tile total uy by sports of full duty paying sugars had bad virtually leased ceased and cuba wa k supply ing all the sugar consul consulted ned in the united states except that pro deuced within the country since the beginning ng of reciprocity ity the annual production of cuban sugar has iner from about long tons to an e estimated or wore whilo while the production of the continental and insular V utcy d sates S ates has grown from a little less than I 1 long tons to about tons the investment of american capi tal in cuba during tins this period ia is estimated at over abo k is ses cral mea the tile Plent in the domestic industry dur k aik I 1 effing the same period As AL capital invariably flows into the channels that promise greatest return it I 1 is i evident that cutata sugar ever since the adoption of reciprocity lias has enjoined tt relative ud vantage in tho th A stated market than the domestic product the bisue of fact co learning the sugar tariff is whether or inot the existing duty actually measures the difference in cost of production between uie united states and cuba the issue of policy I 1 ai is whether the rate shall remain unchanged bc be reduced to give cuba control of a still larger share of the united states market nr nt raised to enable domestic producers to hipply a greater proportion of the country count rya s requirements |