Sivut kuvina



[blocks in formation]

GENTLEMEN We, the undersigned citizens of the State of California, respectfully submit our most earnest protest against the passing of a free sugar bill such as was offered by your committee and passed at the last session of the House of Representatives.

It is not our intention to enter into an extended discussion of the tariff situation, but we wish to impress upon you and to bring to your attention more clearly the widespread influence the beet-sugar industry is exerting in the agricultural and the general business conditions of this State.

With our 11 factories now in operation we consume over 1,000,000 tons of sugar beets annually, which requires approximately 110,000 acres of well-cultivated land, giving employment to 25,000 people during the growing and harvesting of the crop. The influence exerted by the culture of beets is not alone that of furnishing employment to a vast amount of labor, but it also tends to raise the standard of the agricultural industry and brings the land into a higher state of cultivation, so that the returns per acre from crops following beets are very materially increased both in quantity and quality.

We wish to call your attention to the growth of this industry, which from 1897 to 1911 has developed from a production of 40,000 tons of beet sugar to 600,000 tons annually, increasing 1,500 per cent in 14 years. In spite of this splendid growth we scarcely produce 8 per cent of the sugar consumed in the United States at the present time.

This industry has brought into the community prosperity and growth beyond that of most agricultural or manufacturing industries, owing to the great amount of labor required to produce the raw material besides the labor required to manufacture the finished product.

However, in spite of our favorable soil and climate conditions, we can not compete with the cane plantations of the Tropics either in the yield per acre or in the cheap labor which is employed to grow the cane and manufacture the sugar.

The future development and growth of this industry is entirely an agricultural problem and requires the protection which it has enjoyed during the past and which is necessary for its growth and development in the future. With this protection removed and brought into open competition with Asiatic labor and tropical conditions it will unquestionably destroy an industry which has done and promises to do so much toward the development of the agricultural communities of this country. This steady development has been observed by the cane sugar refiners, who have been gradually acquiring large holdings of cane plantations in the foreign cane-growing countries, which plantations will grow less valuable as the beet-sugar industry develops and consequently their desire to crush same.

It is not the intention of this petition to place before you a long list of statistics, but it is the hope and desire of the petitioners to impress upon you the fact that the beetsugar industry is strictly an agricultural industry which not alone develops lands for


the growing of beets and promotes the manufacture of sugar, but also exerts a widespread influence upon the agricultural conditions generally where beets are being grown.

We therefore respectfully repeat that we protest against any legislation which threatens to destroy an industry which has taken such a prominent part in the development of this country.

Very respectfully,

(And 51 others).


SAN FRANCISCO, CAL., January 13, 1913.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

GENTLEMEN: As manufacturers of beet sugar, it is with considerable apprehension that we read in the daily papers and elsewhere articles emanating from Washington, all intimating that the incoming Congress is contemplating either a severe reduction or total abolition of the duty on sugar, and we take this opportunity to present a few thoughts for your consideration:

1. Congressmen, Representatives, and incidentally the members from those bodies comprising the different committees, assemble in Washington from time to time, to confer together and pass on many diversified subjects for the good of the country, and, incidentally, for the good of the individual community. We assume that this is the function of government in these United States, and for that reason we feel at liberty to address you, as we can not bring ourselves to realize that it is the intention of Congress to wipe out such an important industry as the beet-sugar industry is at present and bound to become in the development of our country as a whole, and particularly so in the Western States, where to-day, in many localities, the development is nil.

2. From time to time, and often from year to year, Congress has authorized the investigation of agricultural pursuits, making a specific point to authorize the gathering of statistics regarding the beet-sugar industry and the publication of such statistics and notes as are gathered, all looking to the encouragement of the industry and the establishment of new factories in new localities. This has been going on for a great many years, and one of these books has been received by us within the past week.

3. As you are aware, factories for the processing of beet sugar cost large amounts of money, and the only way these factories can be built and equipped is to supply such money in cash. The production of beet sugar in the country has been increasing year after year, thereby indicating that the factory builders of the country had been only too willing to help develop this very important branch of agriculture, and we will leave it to you to determine to what extent the bulletins of the National Department of Agriculture had in influencing builders to embark in these numerous enterprises. 4. We have before us as visible evidence the growth of this industry in the country from 40,000 tons in 1897 to 650,000 tons ir 1912. This shows how the industry has responded to suitable conditions, and when one considers that due to encouragement on the continent of Europe, the countries there are producing now over 8,000,000 tons annually, it seems to us the facts are self-evident without comment. It is interesting and instructive to note also that the rate of progress in the building up of the industry has been greater in this country than in any of the continental countries, the growth from 40,000 to 650,000 tons having been accomplished in this country in a shorter length of time than anywhere else.

5. As the owner of a factory located in the Salinas Valley, Cal., we continually have before us the visible evidence of what one factory has done in that community and the experience we have met with is the same everywhere where factories have been built. Land in our locality is worth to-day three times as much as when our factory was built, 13 years ago. The farmers and landlords are receiving rental returns from their lands in proportion to the increase in value. The increase in crops from the same acreage has, naturally, been in the same ratio, and we think we are safe in saying that no other enterprise going into a community begins to accomplish the diversified good, directly and indirectly, as the beet-sugar industry represented by the individual factory, does, and in explaining the foregoing we would call attention to the following:

The building of a factory has resulted in:

(A) Raising the price of land.

(B) Increasing the rental of land.

(C) Increasing the value of the crops grown on individual acreage.


(D) Providing homes and employment in districts away from the dense centers of population, where the people get fresh air, detached homes, better water and better living conditions generally than are enjoyed by similar people in cities.

(E) In starting agricultural departments where each factory scientifically studies plant life, its possibilities and its diseases, disseminating free of charge this information to the farming community, and last but not least

(F) By giving the farmers of these numerous localities another valuable crop to use in the rotation of land, a crop which probably does more for the value of the soil than any other crop used in rotation on account of the intensive farming required, and giving before the seed is planted an assurance of what price the harvested crop can be sold for.

These advantages apply to no other crops and to no other business. One has only to go through the country and see land which a few years ago was practically desert, producing nothing, and within a few years from the building of the factory the condition of the surrounding country is shown by its increased crops, better farm buildings, larger bank deposits in the local banks, larger business for the local merchants, larger freight earnings for railroads, and the most valuable rotative crop which the farmer has. These points are self-evident to everyone in the industry. As stated previously, it is natural that we should view the possibility of a reduction or abolition of the tariff with apprehension, and in sending this our object is to raise our voice in protest against such reduction or abolition, for we believe that a comprehensive study of the subject would indicate the wisdom of protecting an industry where the advantages to the entire community are so obvious. Respectfully submitted.

By J. D. SPREckels,
Vice President.


NEW YORK, January 22, 1913.

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR SIR: Seeing in the newspapers that the American Sugar Refining Co and the American Beet Sugar Co. were each represented before your committee, urging a duty on sugar, permit me to offer a few reasons and observations in favor of free sugar.

It is so important an article of food for all the people, especially the fifty millions and more of mothers and children, to whom it is almost a necessity for their better growth and health, and to a majority of whom, the poor, it is almost the only luxury within their scanty means. To lessen its consumption or partly to deprive them of its benefits by imposing a duty would be a moral crime which your enlightened members can not, I hope, consider for a moment.

That a former Congress imposed a duty on sugar was, I think, for want of proper consideration. It was probably influenced by the false arguments and theories of the corporations above referred to, and now it does seem strange that these companies should have the audacity to ask favors that they may further exploit the American people, especially when it is remembered how one of these benefited by defrauding the Government in short weighing, and the other lately has accumulated millions by making a "killing," as it is termed, in Wall Street. These companies have already amassed immense fortunes by the facilities afforded by the New York Stock Exchange and the American tariff.

I beg in the name of all the people, or nearly all, that your honorable committee recommend the abolition of all duties on sugar, coming from every source of supply, that it may be sold at the lowest possible price, and to this end I would respectfully ask your best attention.

Very respectfully,




Hon. OSCAR Underwood,

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D. C., January 31, 1913.

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. UNDERWOOD: I hand you herewith communications from various sugarbeet growers in my district, protesting against any reduction on the present tariff on sugar, and respectfully request that same be considered by your committee.

Sincerely, yours,


JOHN A. KEY. JANUARY 23, 1913.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. HONORABLE SIR: As a sugar-beet grower I respectfully ask that you use your influence to prevent any reduction in the present tariff on sugar.

During the last 10 years the sugar-beet industry has grown steadily in this locality, and to-day is regarded as one of the most valuable crops we produce. The growing of sugar beets has served to increase land values very materially, as the sugar beet is not only valuable for its sugar content, but also greatly improves the soil. The removal of the present duty on sugar would destroy one of the most valuable crops we produce.

We earnestly solicit your influence and cooperation in behalf of this most important industry.

(And 272 others.)

(The above petition is signed by citizens of Bucyrus, Castalia, Clyde, Elmore, Fremont, Galion, Gibsonburg, Greenspring, Harfster, Kans., Lindsey, Morrell, Old Ford, Prospect, Sandusky, West Robinson, Venice, and Vickery, Ohio.)


January 2, 1913.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Whereas, the United States Government through its Agriculture Department has issued a sort of an open letter to the farmers of the country urging them to raise more sugar beets, setting forth the fact that the annual per capita consumption of sugar in the United States is 79.2 pounds, of this amount less than 15 pounds is raised in this country, the balance is raised in foreign countries, resulting in a large amount of United States money annually being paid to foreign countries, which should be kept at home,

And, whereas, the Government has caused to be posted in the post offices throughout the country charts showing that the average grain production in sections where sugar beets are raised on lands one year in four to be 44.6 bushels per acre and in other sections where sugar beets are not raised the average is less than 25 bushels per acre,

And, whereas, in Germany, where sugar beets have been raised for years, the average increase in grain production of all kinds the past 30 years has been 80 per cent, while in the United States the increase has been only 6 per cent for the same period. And, whereas, the manufactories of beet sugar and raising of sugar beets forms the chief occupation in our community and by close cooperation of growers and manufactories in regard to methods of raising, shipping, and otherwise handling beets the price paid to farmers since beets were introduced 10 years ago has raised from $4.50 per ton to $6.50, making a fair profit only to the farmer;

And, whereas, there seems to be pending in Congress some hostile legislation to the beet-sugar interest in the way of tariff reduction, which we believe will be a step backward in the agricultural progress of the nation and bringing financial disaster to sections and towns such as ours, whose commercial mainspring is the sugar beet and beet sugar industry. Therefore be it resolved,

That the Swink Commercial Club, being duly assembled, humbly and earnestly request your honorable committee to refrain from recommending or favoring any reduction in the tariff on sugar.

PAUL GEBHARD, President.
J. M. POWARS, Secretary.



United States House of Representatives.

We, the undersigned citizens [of Colorado] petition your most honorable body and ask that you do all in your power to stop any interference of the tariff on sugar whereby the beet industry of this country will be retarded in anyway. We find the growing of beets to be a great help to us from a financial point of view as well as a help to small grain following as a rotation crop, and we feel that if this industry is retarded in any way we will suffer great loss.

(And 245 others.)


House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIRS: We, the undersigned farmers and citizens of Prowers County, Colo., realizing the calamity that would befall the agricultural interests of this section were the tariff to be removed from sugar, do hereby enter our most vehement protest against any reduction in the tariff on sugar whatsoever, and earnestly beseech you to use your best efforts to defeat any legislation tending to reduce the tariff on sugar.

As to sugar beets, the facts are potent and well known throughout the sugar-beet States, that the growing of them one year enriches the soil for another product the ensuing year.

Therefore, the destruction of the sugar-beet industry would work untold disaster to the entire agricultural interests of this State.


(And 156 others.)

PUEBLO, COLO., December 26, 1912.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

GENTLEMEN: We, the undersigned having experienced the direct and indirect advantages of sugar-beet culture, urge, for your earnest consideration that the best efforts be made to retain the present tariff on sugar, as any reduction might act as a very great detriment to the welfare and further development of our farming and other commercial interests.


House of Congress, Washington, D. C.

(And 27 others).

We, the undersigned residents of Ventura County, State of California, wish to enter our urgent protest against the threatened tariff reduction on sugar and citrus fruits, as we feel that such a reduction would prove a dire calamity to Ventura County and California in general.

We feel that the Hon. E. A. Hayes, Member of Congress from the eighth congressional district, is sufficiently familiar with conditions as they exist here and realizes the importance of both the sugar industry and that of citrus fruits to California, and that our interests are entitled to serious consideration at the hands of your honorable committee.


(And 841 others).

JANUARY 4, 1913.

To the honorable members of the House Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, D. C.: We, the undersigned residents of Orange County, State of California, wish to enter our urgent protest against the threatened tariff reduction on sugar. We solicit your serious consideration of this matter, feeling confident that any reduction would prove disastrous to the beet-sugar industry in California and this country in general.

(And 117 others).

« EdellinenJatka »