The Sugar Duties Act 1846 (9 & 10 Vict) was a statute of the United Kingdom which equalized import duties for sugar from British colonies. It was passed in 1846 at the same time as the repeal of the Corn laws by the Importation Act 1846 (9 & 10 Vict. c. 22). The Act, combined with the recent abolition of slavery had a devastating effect on Caribbean economies, which had previously enjoyed preferential treatment in relation to import duties from the West Indies. There were in fact two Sugar Duties Acts in 1846 (c.41 and c.63), one being a replacement for the other.
With no cheap labour force and no preferential tariff protection, the plantation-owners in the British West Indies could not compete with Cuba and Brazil, where sugar was still produced using slave labour. The rise of European sugar beet as a cheap alternative to sugar cane further worsened their position. Plantation owners in the West Indies felt a sense of betrayal in relation to the legislation, as they had taken understood it to be implicit in relation to their agreement to the abolition of slavery eight years earlier that the tariff protection would remain in place as a quid pro quo.
Famous quotes containing the words sugar, duties and/or act:
“Naughty Paughty Jack-a-Dandy,
Stole a Piece of Sugar Candy
From the Grocer’s Shoppy-Shop,
And away did hoppy-hop.”
—Henry Carey (1693?–1743)
“The duty of the State toward the citizen is the duty of the servant to its master.... One of the duties of the State is that of caring for those of its citizens who find themselves the victims of such adverse circumstances as makes them unable to obtain even the necessities for mere existence without the aid of others.... To these unfortunate citizens aid must be extended by government—not as a matter of charity but as a matter of social duty.”
—Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945)
“It has often been argued that absolute scepticism is self-contradictory; but this is a mistake: and even if it were not so, it would be no argument against the absolute sceptic, inasmuch as he does not admit that no contradictory propositions are true. Indeed, it would be impossible to move such a man, for his scepticism consists in considering every argument and never deciding upon its validity; he would, therefore, act in this way in reference to the arguments brought against him.”
—Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914)