Show BEET SUGAR COSTS HIGHEST I Strong Statement Made By Utahn In Tariff Case WASHINGTON Jail Jan 23 22 Dem Dem Demonstrating bv by figures of tidally complied by the Ih thrift tarl C commission that the tho cost of oC prodUcing p beet au- au angee u-Kir u gee gr In lit the 1 Ln flied t d States exceeds the cost coat of oC producing cane c ne n sugar In Cuba by 2 76 7 cents cent pr pH p r pound or orono orone orone ono one cent mo moo moie thin than harl Jh he relating t c tariff dut m ea of ot tb the United States State SU sugar r association Tuesday Y the th dl- dl direction di direction ot of SI 11 II Lose LOM Lo e ot of o Salt Lake rested rented thI ller t cie T to the tho pe- pe petition pe petition ot of cert N I Nw w V lork ork for Cor a reduction In 11 tho Dugar tariff by I proclamation he h himself did 1101 net appeal as asEL n EL lIness 1 Mr r Lose Loic presented a of oC boil bed L augar ugar producers and by theli tt tf submitted justification for 01 la 10 l log Ing the tho auger sugu sue whore lot it nd It If ani ans change lis changelis Is to bs- bs made matle fin testimony ot- ot offered ot terell would ju UC Uti an On se I rather th thin n a 0 tl d reM re-is re under the pro ion pro l Ion I-Ion lon ot of the tariff law mong the is place placed on I th- th stand by Mr Loie Lote Lo Loero siere ero George WI n a an man man- m n ard for the lie beet m James JamesD JamesB JamesE D B 01 o 0 Viton Leton L ton Utah A I E Carlton Canton of oC tho the Holly buy Suc i corn com company com company pany of Colorado and California and Truman G Cl secretary and ot of o the United tate Mate Suir Is LOl LO LOB LOE K B L hr sr T When the lat It Li t wilne had con con- concluded con concluded eluded Mr IIII r Lose Lo e closing tor for the beet men ml dc a brief briet statement sas sa saing ing I would like to i the th tb at- at nt of oC tho thu corni Ion sion ion to a 0 mat mat- matter matter mat matter ter which h Ifs Iss not nor et been presented pre- pre by any ny of oC the th w os but but I Is to m my l quite quit sig- sig significant The cf lon ml s report ot Of D embel lt Klics gl the th price paId the farmers farmer In Cuba as II I 1 15 cents per pound of sugar su ar while the theco co cost t of oC bets In 12 1 pr por pounds ot of sug vas at 3 37 cents n a difference ot of 2 1 7 cents cems per pound ot of sugar I The rho m r report t port gives elves the tho as- as av average cost co t of oC sugar at the mill mills of ot the tho domestic beet sugar ugar for tor I 1922 it at In round numbers G Ii t ip se e cents cente per pound It It nih nill HI also alsi b noted that the tho cost ot of refined sugar In la New York using as aa the tast liali lq the thc cost coat of ot raw sugar at the 11 In lii Cuba plus the tho marketing coL co l Li of or tl- tl it tt sugar 22 cents per hundric Ilu plus th the I Ine ella ella- Ing cost coat he the thiC Commission eLates as aa 1 I cent a It wll bs be observed that tha th total cost coat of o refined Cuban can Ural for m in New 1 lork ork Is 19 3 37 liT t l T er pound or ore e the anor i t of ot money mOI the of ot beet bet sugar In In th United mt s paid the farm farm- farmers farm farmers er ers for the tho ho sugar In III the beet In 1 1522 22 r rs Gl-rs CD J In other r I- I ICor for Cor the tha sake ot comparison r difference there is it r the Cost coot co t of oC refined cane sugar and the tho th cost ot of refined marketis beet sugar ro r Ji J for tor the th market Is represented In the difference the he I t Ular producers Paid tko Carr e 9 HOO C what the Cubans Cuban paid li li farmers for Cor each I pound of ot Sugar ugar which in the lie form of ot beets or orconI cane conI 01 ot 4 10 nt of a n nt per pr pound ot of In e s ei-c-'s cao c f t tire the th duty dUly It- It Itself Belt It-Belt self I several and s a for the United States I Suga complainants association the tho complain complain- ants In in the case ase who ho In I Iare are some ome of oC th the tho New York refiners ers but not all of them George V McCormIck of Michigan IS put for ird rd to present tho main case lot fot the beet sugar prod Th callous allous producers now hero here at ata ata ata a conference had gone Bone o er the thee thee e eIde Ide nee of ot the petitioners petitioner and out out- out lined outlined the th case ca e to be b made out In opposition to a reduction In the I tariff and In to- to to day today Mr Ir McCormick voiced the sur- sur sen sentiments I of oC nil all the beet sugar men Mr Lo Lose o e by common consent I contentI presented the serious anous and tin In ln doing doine xo so he said he lie was wa acting I purely a as a sugar ugar manufacturer do- do de desirous sirous of oC getting before the tho corn com commission com commission mission the th thle ste-as ste le s of oC men inca actuallY engaged In hi the th Industry When the tb heft beet men concluded I members of ot tho tariff commission thanked them thorn for Cor their buSiness buSiness- buSinesslike like presentation of ot facts tact p I I The Tho domestic beet be t Bua UKa crop s 9 meets meet as a a 8 competitor InI inthe In I the tho markets market Of or this country the Cuban cane sugar ugar produced In the I earlier months of ot the same calton- calton calen calendar dar Car year said caid Mr McCormick It It If beet sugar Is earned 0 oser er In Into into Into to the tIle sear ear follow Ing Its it tur turo ture he h eald ld It Is ii because corn com competition com competition petition with Cuban sugar pro pro- pro I comI duce produced produce 1 earlier In the th year Is I sup sup sup- supplying up plying a laige laif of th demand for sugar in this country during October November 1 and De Be De- De December comber cember The Th witness pointed out that I IThe within t tio tito 0 months month after the rord rord- rord ne ne law na ee e signed the petitIoners petitioner went to th the tariff corn com commission com mission asking a tor for a reduction In inthe the tho duty on sugar In the 11 clause claue of that law In thing fixing the thO sugar Out duty at cents he said congress had gone ton Into the coet costs cotts of ot production In III the United and In tn Cuba It llad called In tho the tariff commission and had th lh advantage ad anta of Its I i tion and had fixed the th duty Ile- Ile ae cording to the facts then fia jd cd In the th two months month that elapsed there could have hav been no material change In the relationship Furth Furth- Further Furth- Furth Further Further er he h said ald the th petitioners rs In No- No somber ember r 1922 1 22 had said they thy welt wee prepared to oner proof and fur tur- fur furnish fish nish complete and e data to show sho a n reduction In III tat tat- tat itt tai tai-Iff was B-as oas justified It If the petitioner were wr pre pre- gre pared prepared pre as aa they et stated ted to furnish proof to this cOmmission of ot the cost CORt of production of ot sugar lurar In the th States and In Cuba and tie tie- ird lr d to Use the most mOlt recent ala sla- tl ta-tl tlc available at that time tim the only Inference that could be bo drawn WIt re r m their th lr statement Is la that they sere ere prepared to furnish the th lem Items liz cost est of oC production of oC the th lat last la lear Cuban sugar sug-ar crop that of 22 he h argued ar ed Since Sine the tiling filing of oC that petition agents of ot the tho tariff have made an ins In tion of ot costs cots of producing sugar In the tho United States and In Cuba and published their findings Jt it must afford no little surprise to this commission said Mr McCormick mick mick to to have hav counsel for tho the pe- pe petitioners pe petitioner corns come corn here her and contend that It would be bo unfair to tale take tak the tho Cuban crop of ot cane can PI gi- gi pio In 19 2 for tor comparison In face of the fact that they cut Ruf- suf cons com convinced of ot tho ho merits of their case In November 19 1922 to warrant their tiling filing an on I ith the tho tariff commission for an Investigation ration HOW OO COST T IS JS In Tn conclusion Mr fr McCormick stated that by using figures com corn complied compiled piled plied by the tho th tariff commIssIon and taking 30 00 O per cent of oC the th production tion of ot the th Cuban and the Amet- Amet Ame lc lean n crop for tor 1 1922 22 the th ave arsi e a are e cot cost of oC producing a pound of o refine Cuban sugar Is 3 79 cents cent a a poun loun as against II 6 C 55 65 cents for tor producing n a pound of oC beet heet sugar I ugar In the th 1 States a difference of oC 2 76 cents a pound or an e esen een c en cent above the present tariff ra rate rat te Mr 1 Ellison EDison Mr fr Carlton and Mr MI Palmer were placed on the stand and Interrogated at length by bj b Mr Love Lose their testimony supporting the tact facts pre pre louly hid lid before the by Mr rr McCormIck The tariff commission will probably ably close clos the sugar hearings this week after the Ue lie Louisiana cane men have been heard Mr Love laid he before fore the com corn commission commission mission letters letter from the of oC Utah and Idaho asserting In forceful terms term that there Is no question or of o child labor ln In inthe inthe the tho beet bet sugar Industry In their respective states state oG |