Commerce.— The sugar trade of the world has become so great that international agree ment has necessary to regulate it. European countries for quite a number of years have paid directly and indirectly bounties to sugar producers and refiners on their exports. This encouraged and abnormally developed the sugar industry in some countries and depressed it in others. The bounties placed the price of sugar so high that the poorer people in bounty paying countries could not afford and so low in many non-bounty-paying countries that the industry was no longer profitable to producers. A movement was started in England in 1887 to correct this evil. A convention representing Austria, Belgium, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, Russia and Spain met in London, 30 Aug. 1888, and passed a resolu tion to guarantee °that no open or disguised bounty shall be granted on the manufacture or exportation of France would not enter the agreement because the United States would have nothing to do with it. There was no ratification of this convention, though it should have taken place 1 Aug. 1890. The bounties paid by Germany and Austria-Hungary were reported to be about $16 per ton, and this was approximately doubled in 1896. Renewed efforts were then made to break up the bounty system and this was practically accomplished, temporarily at least, in Brussels, 1 March 1902, after eight sittings of an international conven tion. This was the eighth European Sugar Bounty Conference since one held in Paris in 1862. Germany, Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Spain, France, Great Britain, Italy, the Nether lands and Sweden were represented in the con vention of 1902. The following is a summary of the principal articles passed upon by that convention: The effect of this international agreement in Europe practically shut off importations of sugar from that continent to the United States, which, however, (including its possessions, Hawaii, Porto Rico and the Philippine Islands) together with Cuba produce sufficient to supply the demand for sugar in the United States.
All Cuban sugars coming into the United States are allowed 20 per cent discount on above rates.
In 1916 a provision in the Underwood Tariff Law, by which sugar was eventually to go on the free list, was rescinded by Congress. The imports of sugar into the United from 1915 to 1918 were as follows : The large increase in sugar export during these years was due to the European War. Early in the fall of 1917 the International Sugar Committee was formed to arrange for the dis tribution of the available sugar in the world. The committee consisted of two members from each of the allied governments, two from the United States Food Administration being also supplemented by the head of the sugar division.
This committee arranged for the purchase and distribution of all sugar to the allied countries, and as it became difficult to procure household supplies, in December 1917 the United States Senate directed an inquiry into the causes of the shortage of sugar. This was found to be due largely to consumer hoarding, and to the unusual amounts used for home preserves, also to about two-fifths of the whole quantity con sumed in the United States being required for the manufacture of candy. The efficiency of the Food Administration, of the International Committee and the willing co-operation of the people served to keep down the price, to regu late the supply and to tide over the difficulty and the shortages occasioned by the indiscrim inate sinkings of merchant vessels through the German submarine policy.
In 1916 the government of Panama was authorized to loan $500,000 to plantation oper ators for the development of the sugar industry in that country, the loans to be repaid within 10 years; a government subsidy of one cent on every four pounds of white granulated sugar produced was also granted. In 1917, from its development fund, Great Britain also made a grant of $625,000 for the development of sugar beet growing and manufacture in England.
Bibliography.—Andrews, F., 'Statistics of Sugar in the United States and its Insular Pos sessions, 1881-1912> (in Bulletin No. 66, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington 1914); Beaudet, Pellet and Saillard, 'Fabrica tion du sucre de betterave et de cairn& (2 vols.. Paris 1894); Brown, C. A., 'Sugar Analysis' (New York 1912) ; Geerlig, H. C. P., 'Cane Sugar and Its Manufacture' (Manchester 1909) and White Sugar Manufacture> (London 1915) ; Helot, J., 'Le sucre de better ave en France de 1880 1 1900' (Cambrai 1900) ; Koppeschaar, E., 'Evaporation in the Cane and Beet Sugar Factory' (New York 1915) ; Mc Intosh, J. G. 'Technology of Sugar' (New York 1903); Meyer, H. H. B., 'Select List of References on Sugar> (Washington 1910) ; Myrick, H., 'American Sugar Industry' (New York 1899); Nelson, 'Sugar Industry of the Philippine Islands> (Manila 1911) ; Newlands, J. A. R, and B. E. R., 'Sugar' (New York 1909) ; Roth, H. L., 'Guide to the Literature of Sugar' (London. 1890) ; Spencer, G. L., 'Hand book for Sugar Manufacturers and Their Chemists' (3d ed., New York 1897) ; Tucker, J. H., of Sugar Analysis' (5th ed., New York 1900) ; Surface, G. T., 'Story of Sugar' (New York 1910) • Wallis-Taylor, A. J., 'Sugar Machinery' (id ed., New York 1909) • Ware, L. S., 'Beet Sugar Manufacturing and Refining' (2 vols., New York 1905-07) ; Wiechmann, F. G., Analysis for Cane Sugar and Beet Sugar Houses, Refineries and Experimental Stations' (3d ed., New York 1914).