THE SUGAR MARKET.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXII, Issue 6484, 1 February 1905, Page 2

THE SUGAR MARKET.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—The information reaped by the Guardian reporter from the local grocers concerning the sugar market, is correctly described as interesting, inasmuch as no two agree as to the cost of the article delivered at Ashbm-fcon. I quite understand the reason of this discrepancy, and will deal with that aspect of the question later on. I will tirat deal with the English market, and the appended table will, I think, show conclusively, that whilst the beet crop for 1904-5 shows a falling off, the cane crop (from which we draw our supplies) shows an increase, and moreovor, takiDg the normal increase of population for the past three yeara into account, there should remain ample for all requirements, the indications pointing, if anything, to a " corner " itx the Old Country, as m this, for artifically rising prices. The figures are:—

It will be seen that so far from cane sugar being wiped out, its production has more than doubled m the past 20 years. Beet sugar has, it is true, nearly trebled, m consequence, not wholly on account of bounties, but partly through the scientific growth and manufacture so sadly wanting |m so many colonies. In faot, those who have moßt knowledge of the subject believe that had it not been for the high home prices on the Continent, caused by the cost of the bounties, the beet crop would be much larger even than it now is,

I will now aek readers to compare the English price list for the past five years, with the above figures of production, and it will be at once observed, that whilst the season 1902-3, (the season the bounties were withdrawn) showed a falling off of a million tons m production as compared with 1901-2, the price instead of increasing m conformity with economic laws, shows the opposite to be the case. Then I ask, why should the price increase by nearly 75 per cent, from 1904-5, whilst the decrease of production for the two seasons compares with the conditions prevailing m 1901-2 ? Regarding the rise m the English market | since December, 1904, over which the local grocers seem so much concerned, perhaps it will interest them to learn that the increase during that period amounts to lOd per ton, as against £1 per ton by the Auckland Co. Now dealing with the local grocers' statements, the table of increases m prices made by the Auckland Co., describes them as being " f .o.b. m bond "at Auckland. We are to assume from that the Government permit the Company to land the raw product at Auckland, convey it to their works for refining purposes, and return it to bond after that process or on ship board to coastal ports. Not a bit of it. Duty ia paid by the Company on the raw material imported from Queensland, or elsewhere; and not as implied, a second time. Again, I cannot understand why our local grocers compute the landed cost per ton at Ashburton at .£25 10s lOd, while at Tiraaru, 50 miles further from Auckland, the cost is given as £24 ss; it would surely pay us better to get our sugar by way of Timaru. We are told that the most advantageous terms on which 'the article can be sold here produces only a profit of £2 lls 2d per ton; which by the way, does not include, I obgervo, the trade discount of 2| per cent, which at the least pans out 103 per ton. Just another point. After the rise m December, the Timaru grocers magnanimously decided to bear the £1 per ton increase m price out of their own pockets, not charging their customers the increased rate; and it will also be noticed that the price m Ashburton has not been affected by the rise of Jan. 27th, the price remaining at 3d per Ib, the grocers standing the increase. Now, if the re : tailers throughout the colony will produce the skelton from the cupboard, it will bo found that one of the vilest compacts to deceive the public, has been entered into, and that the concessions granted and profits derived by those m a large way of business, would be of immense magnitude compared with the flour raid of a few years ago ; and that it is almost impossible for foreign sugar to be retailed here. That local grocers must have anticipated the riae from the right quarter, is proved by the following 1 par, which appeared m the " Otago Daily Times " of a fortnight ago: —" A brisk business is passing m sugar, both on the part of distributors and merchants, buyers speculating for another rise." The recent spasmodic rise m price simply j casts before the winds economic laws governing supply and demand, and although we have a plenteous supply almost at our doors, (as per cables from Queensland on Monday) we may yet be called upon to pay 6d per )b. We must rely oniequity as it appeals to the contracting partießj equity, of course, according to the consciences of those who hold the dominant position, who will perhaps remember that honour, justice, reason and equity go a great way m procuring prosperity to those who use them. Had the Government but taken the advice of our representative, Mr MoLachlan, who many years ago suggested substantial bounties for the establishment m the colony of beet sugar factories, the present situation might have been averted, but that was opposed as it would have interfered severely with customs revenue.—l am, etc., Alf J. Tyrrell-Baxter.

88 per cent. Beet. Per Cwfe. First Marks Granulated, Per Cwt. January 27,1901 9s 3£d January 27,1902 6s 6d January 27,1903 8s Od January 27, 1904 8s Od January 27,1905 15s lid lls l*d 8s 4Jd 9s 4d 10s Od 17s 8d

Prices for Five Years.

it 10 Years' Cane. Intervals, Tons. Beet. Total Tons. Tons. .8823 ... 2,200,000 .892-3 ... 2,898,000 .902-3 .. 4,149,632 jasfc 3 Tears. .901-2 ... 4,681,509 .9C2-3 ... 4,149,732 .903-4 ... 4,296,429 Estimate. 1904-5 ... 4,086,000 1,783,000 3,983,001 3,402,000 6,800,001 5,756,720 9,906,85! 6,913,604 10,995,111 5,756,620 9,906,251 6,060,178 10,356,60' 5,141,000 9,827,001

World's Crop or Sugar.