cost beyond every conceivable point. Labor became scarce because of the draft; more through industries engaged in manufacturing products that returned large profits and paid undreamed of wages, than the actual draft for military service. Large acreage that was prepred for cane culture had to be abandoned because needed labor was not available at any price. Every item that entered into the culture and production of sugar so increased in cost that the cost sheets submitted to the Government were, in many instances, not more than 50 per cent of the actual cost of the sugar produced. The Louisiana sugar producer found himself bound by his Government to sell his product at a fixed maximum price far below the price he could and would have received for his product (estimated by Mr. Hoover at 15 to 25 cents per pound. See p. 584, Hearings, S. R. 163, of Dec. 12, 1917), while all items that went to make up his cost to produce sugar were free to sell for whatever the market would bring, and cost him two and three times more than he anticipated when submitting his figures to the Government. So that instead of being protected by the 38-cent differential allowed (this in addition to the existing low tariff), he found himself a heavy loser, bound by his Government to a fixed maximum price, when practically all other commodities were free to get any price they could. The fact remains, however, that exhaustive studies and comparisons of cost suggested to the Food Administration that a minimum additional tariff of 38 cents per 100 pounds was required, based on the low-cost figures submitted to eqaulize the American producer with his foreign competitor, actual facts proved the differential far too low. It should have been not less that three times as much. The Tariff Commission, in a report signed by Secretary John F. Bethune, showed "The cost of producing sugar in Cuba during the year 1917-18 averaged 3.931 cents per pound, ranging from 3.081 to 5.353 cents per pound (data received from 7 factories). For the year 1918-19 the average cost was 4.104 cents per pound. ranging from 2.978 to 6.877 cents per pound (data received from 15 factories). The prices above are f. o. b. Cuban ports." Such production costs as these clearly indicate, when compared to Louisiana cane and American beet sugar production costs for the same period, that unless reasonable protection be given to the American industry it must discontinue. A 3-cent tariff on 96° raw sugar-Cuban basis-would only give a cost delivered in America of 6.931 for 1917-18 and 7.104 for 1918-19. Taking the American production cost as a basic price, this would still leave the producer of Cuban sugar a handsome margin of profit. Therefore, it could not be argued that the producer, refiner, or other purchaser of Cuban sugars were injured— nor would any burden be felt by the ultimate consumer of the sugar. With a stabilized tariff, a rate fair to American producers, the consuming public, and rendering a justly proportioned revenue to the Government, a tariff sufficient to warrant the American producer in developing his farms. increasing and improving his factories, investing his money, time, and energy, with a hope of reasonably profitable returns; then America could and would go on to the point where production would meet the national demand. The beet growers of the West, the cane growers of Louisiana, Hawaii, and Porto Rico could and would so increase their output that dependence on foreign sources would not be required. The present output of beet sugar in America could readily be increased from its present 1,000,000-ton production to twice or even three times this amount. Louisiana could and would produce 1,000.000 tons of sugar annually. Add to this the sugar from our insular possessions that naturally comes to us, and no foreign production would be required. A REVIEW OF THE CANE SUGAR INDUSTRY IN LOUISIANA. Practically all of the cane sugar produced in continental United States is grown in Louisiana. War conditions in this industry having so disrupted normal conditions, the census figures for 1910 had best be used. In 1910 there were in the 23 parishes now producing sugar 40,094 farms. These comprised 33.2 per cent of all the farms in the State. These farms included a total of 1,991,473 acres of improved lands. The rural population of the 23 parishesthat is, the population residing outside of cities and incorporated towns of 2,500 or more was 522,054, and this was 44.1 per cent of the total rural population of the State. The total cane acreage in the State was 329,684 acres, and of this the 23 parishes had 313.475 acres, 95.4 per cent of the total. Outside of the plantations operating factories and grinding their own cane, there are more than 10,000 farmers, heads of families, who grow cane and sell it to the factories. In addition to the number of persons directly engaged in operating the sugar plantations and factories as employers, managers, and employees, the larger proportion of both rural and urban population are indirectly identified with or dependent upon the industry. On the acreage planted in cane in the State a total of 4,941,996 tons of cane was raised in 1909-10, and of this 4,793,263 tons, or 97 per cent of the total, was raised in the 23 parishes. The yearly average of cane sugar production in Louisiana for the period 1909-1918 is 542,893,000 pounds, or 39.8 per cent of the yearly average of beet sugar production (1,364,336,600 pounds) in the United States during that period. The largest quantity of sugar produced in Louisiana in any one year was 398,195 tons in 1904-5, and this was followed closely in 1908-9 by a production of 397,600. During the 11 years 1901-2 to 1911-12 this State produced an average of 250,000 tons of sugar. For the next seven years 1912-1918 the average production was 236,000 tons. A very large contributing cause of the decline in this latter period was extremely adverse legislation. With proper tariff legislation, America could and would soon produce ample sugar to supply her needs without depending on that foreign grown. INVESTMENTS. Lands, 1,991,473 acres (improved with buildings and field improvements-all lands in sugar area)‒‒‒ 659,368 acres sugar and supporting crops only, with buildings and field improvements Sugar factories_____ Mules... Implements Plantation, railroad, and equipment_- A conservative estimate_____. $149, 360, 000 82, 142, 000 52,500,000 12, 500, 000 3,250,000 3,500,000 154, 171, 000 Quoting from a report made in 1913 (Domestic Sugar Bulletin No. 4), the annual disbursements for field and factory operations were as follows: Field labor, including salaried officers and clerks_ Annual renewal of mules. Peas and commercial fertilizers.. Seed, corn, hay, etc.. Land taxes and insurance on buildings. Lumber, building materials, and implements renewed annually. Factory labor, including salaried officers and clerks. Factory upkeep and repairs_ Factory supplies Fuel oil and coal___ Factory taxes and insurance_ Freight on cane hauled to factory Freight on manufactured products.... Total annual outlay--. $12, 000, 000 1, 000, 000 1,250,000 1, 000, 000 750,000 1, 000, 000 2,500,000 1,250,000 700, 000 1, 000, 000 525,000 1, 000, 000 1,500,000 25, 475, 000 Bear in mind the above are for prewar period. At the present time the same items would cost at least two and one-half times as much. To be conservative, it would take $50,000,000 at this time to cover the annual operating disbursement for the production of Louisiana sugar, sirup, and molasses. Quoting again from Bulletin No. 4, It should be noted that more than 50 per cent of these expenditures are for labor." Large sums were sent out into all parts of America for the purchase of the numerous and various items required in the production and manufacture of sugar. To Missouri, Kentucky, and the other great stock-growing States the cane fields of Louisiana called for mules; to Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, the Carolinas, Virginia, and other States growing cowpeas orders go every year for numerous carloads of cowpeas; to the States of the great corn belt must go the Louisiana sugar producer for corn and other feeds; fertilizers from the area producing this commodity, especially cottonseed meal. From the oil fields within her own borders and from outside the State, Louisiana calls for many thousand barrels of fuel oil. Coal and iron mines draw a large revenue from the sale of their products used in the manufacture of Louisiana sugar. No other industry requires in proportion more machinery either in value or volume-tractors, plows, imple ments and harness for cultivation; railroad cars, engines, and rails for plantation railways; lumber, builders' hardware, and roofing for housing the labor and factories. Highly improved technical machine equipment, together with boilers, engines, and other machinery, calls upon the highest skill and best equipped foundries and factories of the Eastern States. Barrels and bags form a large item in the annual budget and give employment to these great industries. Thus, not only does Louisiana sugar loom large in the State as an industry, but every section of America and many foreign countries are the direct beneficiaries of her great industry. No account need be taken of sugar where the theory of receiving from debtor nations products of their field and factories to enable them to repay their indebtedness to America. America does not normally receive her sugar supply from such nations. On the contrary, many of these nations import sugar refined in America, and since the drawback allowed on foreign raw sugar refined in America eliminated the tariff charge, neither the exporting refiner nor the foreign nations purchasing refined sugar from the American refiner can be affected by or object to the tariff on sugar imported for consumption in America. In every country of the world, many of them far less suitable to sugar production than America, sugar has always and is now receiving from their Government special attention. The internal encouragement to sugar has made its production possible in every foreign nation producing sugar. The import tariff rates on sugar in the various foreign countries to-day far exceed in volume the American tariff. The latest tariff rates on sugar for the various countries follows: Statement of conversion equivalents (currency and weights) to be used in connection with duties on sugar. Payable in bolivars at current rate of exchange on day of Surtax at Callao, Salaverry, Mollendo, Ilo, Paita, and Pisco Payable at the rate of 55 per cent in gold and 45 per cent in 2.2046 Payable in gold florins. 1.3228 Payable in gold. |