10 Cbe Conservative *
CUBA AND THE UNITED STATES.
Mr. F. B. Thurbor , president of the
United States Export Association , has
made the following statement before
the ways and means committee of the
house of representatives , in regard to
the tariff on Cuban products :
I am interested in this subject pri
marily as a question of the good faith
of the United States toward Cuba ;
second , to voice the interest of Amer
ican producers and manufacturers , who ,
under proper conditions , would find a
very valuable market in Cuba ; and
third , the interest of American con
sumers of sugar.
1' For many years , I was one of the
largest distributers of sugar in the
United States , and am familiar with
that industry. For the past five years
I have been president of the United.
States Export Association , whoso ob
0l ject is to widen the market for Amer
ican products , and whose membership
comprises leading houses in 98 princi
pal lines of industry , situated in 84
states.
"During the past year I have had
occasion to make a special study of
the tariff relations between Cuba and
the United States ; with the result of
arriving at the belief that the greatest
good to the greatest number of people
of both countries will be subserved by
placing Cuba , so far as our tariff re
lations are concerned , as nearly as
possible on the same basis as Porto
Rico and Hawaii ; and the same may
he said of the Philippine Islands.
' ' Strange as it may seem , the Dingloy
tariff imposes on the chief Cuban pro
ducts sugar and tobacco a duty
amounting to about 100 per cent ,
while on the dutiable products , of all
other countries , imported into the
United States , it averages about 50 per
cent. This is anomalous in itself , and
is rendered still more so by our
changed relations to Cuba , which
virtually makes her the ward of the
nation. She has accepted the Platt
amendment , which imposes upon her
duties and obligations which prevent
her from making advantageous treat
ies with other countries ; and , as stated
by President Roosevelt , "every con
sideration of duty and interest de
mands that Cuba should have liberal
treatment at our hands. " This is op
posed by our domestic beet and cane
sugar interests , who have been mak
ing enormous profits under the excess-
tivo protection afforded them by our
present tariff. The beet-sugar in
terests are on record , over their own
signature , in a letter to their bankers ,
that they could prosper under absolute
free trade ; and it is estimated "by
good authorities thut in factories
favorably situated they have been
making a profit of about two cents a
pound , with a lesser margin in less
1 4 I
favored localities which they now
bring forward as an argument why
concessions should not be made in the
tariff on Cuban products , which is
somewhat like arguing that the tariff
should bo high enough to make the
growing of bananas , under glass , profit
able. I am a republican and a pro
tectionist ; but there is reason in all
things ; and I believe that there should
be a power above unreasoning protec
tionists to say what is reasonable. The
permanency of a protective tariff will
largely depend on this ; and I contend
that it is shortsighted on the part of
our protected industries not to recog
nize changed conditions , and unless
they are recognized , there will come a
ground swell of public opinion which
will go to extremes on the other side
and be disastrous to all our industries.
This was the view of William Mc-
Kiuloy , who could not bo considered
an enemy to American industries. It
is especially shortsighted on the part
of our domestic sugar growers not to be
willing to make liberal concessions at
the present time in the tariff on Cuban
products. There is an influential ele
ment iu Cuba today in favor of annex
ation to the United States , and , if this
is strengthened by disastrous indus
trial conditions in Cuba that clay will
be hastened , and , with absolute free
trade between Cuba and the United
States , our beet sugar industries would
bo in the position of that man whose
' ' last state was worse than the first , ' '
although it would undoubtedly be a
blessing to the consumers of sugar iu
the United States , and our fruit grow
ing , canning and preserving industries ,
which would greatly develop and
prosper with cheap sugar.
"Tho representatives of the beet
sugar industries have industriously
spread the report that the demand
for reciprocity with Cuba was inspired
by the sugar trust ; that it had large
investments iu Cuban plantations , and
hoped , with free raw sugar , to break
down our domestic sugar interests. I
have made diligent inquiry as to tbe
truth of this , and can not find that
there is any truth in it , except poss
ibly , that some individual stockhold
ers in American Sugar refining in
terests also own small amounts of
stock in Cuban sugar plantations ; but
these same individuals are much more
largely interested in Porto Rico and
Hawaii , whose sugar comes in free of
duty.
"I am in no way interested in the
sugar trust , and am not disposed to
believe that the human nature em
bodied in it" is an better or worse than
that embodied in our domestic beet
and cane sugar industries ; but it has
certainly been less greedy in its margin
of profit than our domestic sugar in
terest ; for while they have boon mak
ing from one and a half to two cents a
pound profit on sugar , refining in
terests have varied from nothing to
three-quarters of a cent a pound profit ,
averaging perhaps one-quarter to
; hree-oighths since the formation of
the sugar trust. In the early days of
the sugar refining industry the differ
ence between raw and refined varied
jetween two and three cents per
pound ; now the average difference is
perhaps one cent a pound , with an
actual cost iu the process of perhaps
five-eighths of a cent a pound , leaving
a margin for profit of about three-
eighths. This is doubtless the reason
why under all tariffs , notably tlio Mc-
Kiuley , the Wilson , and the present
Dingley tariff , our sugar refining in
dustries have been protected by a dif
ferential duty on refined of perhaps
one-half a cent per pound , and thisit
should bo remembered , inures as much
to the protection of the beet-sugar in
terests as it does to our refining inter
ests , for the beet-sugar manufacturers
make refined sugar.
"Now , as to what concession should
be made to Cuba ; I believe it would
be to the interest of the Cubans , and
American flour and provision interests
and American fruit canning and pre
serving interests , and the interest of
all American consumers of sugar , if
what the Cubans ask could be granted ,
viz : free raw sugar and one-half the
present duties on tobacco and cigars.
But if in your wisdom you think we can
not go as far as that at this time , then
the very Icasi concession which should
bo made should bo 50 per cent on all her
products ; and with this , it should be
remembered , it would still leave.her
products subject to a duty equal to the
average on the dutiable products re
ceived by us from all other countries. 'I
This would lower by one-half the high
tariff wall which wo have erected
against our ward. And if she in re
turn would establish a tariff averag
ing 50 per cent , on her importations ,
she could reduce that one-half on her
importations from the United States ;
and this would enable her merchants "
to buy all of their supplies in the
United States , three-fifths of which
they now buy in Europe. This would
not violate the most favored nation
clause iu treaties with other countries ,
because no country could offer Cuba
such inducements as * we would offer
her by such an arrangement. And it
would sWl give her sufficient revenue ;
because her present tariff , established
by our War Department for Cuba ,
averages about 25 per cent. American
products would still cuter the Cuban
market at the present rate , but those
of other countries would have to pay
the higher rate ; hence , wo would get
the trade , because with increased pur
chasing power on the part of her people
ple , Cuba would become one of our ,
most important markets. . |
"All of which is respectfully sub
mitted. "