THE PARADOXRS OF THE SUGAR CONVENTION.

Grey River Argus, Volume XXXVI, Issue 6275, 29 October 1888, Page 4

THE PARADOXRS OF THE SUGAR CONVENTION.

The convention by which the Powerß have bound themselves to abolish the sugar bounties is interesting, quite as much for the suggestions which it makes as to international action in the future as fop the effect it is likely to have upon raising the price ef BUgar. At present there ia hardly a Continental nation which does not tax its own subjects in order to supply Englishmen with sugar below coat price. By the convention all the Powers except France pledge themselves not to let us havj cheap sugar any more. Further, if any Power should be so resolute as to peraiat in supplying us with augar below coßt price all the other Powera undertake to forbid the entry of sugar from that Si ate into their ports. To complete the paradox it is only necessary to add that this treaty waa entered into at the urgent entreaty of the English Government, whose subjects are in future to forego the luxury of having their tea sweetened partially at the expense of the foreign taxPaj ;T. j iYiF. H. Farrer, in a letter to The ; Tines on the aubjoct, Bays :— The effect of j our boycotting bouui,y-fed sugar will not be to prevent its being made or Bold, but

only to prevent our own people from getting the benefit of it. France, Austria, Brazil, the United Statea, or other augar producing countries, may continue to give bounties, and the only effect or tendency of the convention will be to make it dearer here than it ia now, and cheaper in nonboycotting countries. Any countries which choose to give bounties will find markets in the United States and elsewhere, . . The Convention does not put an end to bouaty-ied sugar, but itdiverta theßtream from coontriea which are fooliah enough to boycott it to countries which are wise enough to receive it, and thia tends to make BUgar cheaper to our neighbors and rivals and dearer to ourselveß. "If this (concludes the writer), and no more than this, ia the result of Baron de Worms's much be-trumpeted exertiona, we may conclude that their real object is rather to produce an effect on certain constituencies than to form a ground for practical legislation. But even If no further harm ensues, we may be permitted to regret the somewhat undignified spectacle of an English Minister making the round of Europe, cap in hand, teaching foreign Finance Ministers their business, advising them not to tax their own people for our benefit, and humbly beseeching them not to make us a present of cheap augar. What wonder if they make auch a Minister a catspaw !"