4 MARCH 1905, Page 18


[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."] SIR,—In your issue of February 18th "W. J. H." attributes the enhanced price of sugar to what he terms "this experi- ment in Protection." But "W. J. H." and others state the case from one side only. They overlook mentioning the follow- ing four important facts :—(1) That lid. per pound was not the average price of sugar for even ten years prior to the Con- vention of 1902; (2) that for comparison practically id. per pound must be deducted from all prices since 1901, when the duty was imposed for Revenue purposes; (3) that the world's total visible supply is estimated at about 2,848,000 tons, against 3,733,000 tons at the same time last year; (4) that sugar costing to-day, say, 15s. 2d. per hundredweight, can be bought for October-December delivery at us. 4.d. per hundredweight, under precisely the same conditions as now exist. —I am,