. '. 

. . \ 

r • 

'· 

•' I 

. I 

8904 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE . . AUGUST 21, 

roll is called under a call of the House, and when a member voluntarily ap- pears and reports himself before the call of the roll shall be concluded, his name shall appear on the roll as if he had answered to bis name; 

to the Committee on Rules. 

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. 

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, a report of a committee was delivered 

to the Clerk and disposed of as follows: 

l\Ir. BINGHAM. from the Committee on Merchant Manne and Fisheries. reported favorably the bill of the Honse (H. R. 11654) to provide 

an American register for the steamer Neptuno, accompanied by a report (No. 2992)-to the Hoa e Calendar. 

BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS. 

Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, a bill and a joint resolution of the following titles were introduced, severally read twice, and referred as fol ~ 

lows: 

By Mr. RICHARDSON (by request): A bill (H. R. 11802) to repeal 

the law entitled "An act to incorporate the Maritime Canal Company, 

of Nicaragua,'' approved February 20, 1889-to the Committee on Commerce. By Mr. O'NEILL, of Pennsylvania: A joint resolution (H. Res. 215) 

to print the eulogies upon Samuel J. Randall-to the Committee on 

Printing. 

PRIVATE RILLS, ETC. 

Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills of the following titles 

were presented and referred as indicated below: 

By Mr. PEEL: A bill (H. R. 11803) to grant a pension to Samuel 

P. Smith, late of Company A, Kentucky Battalion, Volunteer Infantry-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. 

By l\Ir. TURNER, of New York: A bill (H. R.11804) granting a pension to Harriet Fawpell-to the Committee on Pensions. 

SENATE. 

THURSD~ Y, Au.gust 21, 1890. 

The Senate met at 10 o'clock a. m. Prayer by the Chaplain, Rev. J. G. BUTLER, D. D. 

The Journal of yesterday's proceedings was read and approved. 

PRIVILEGE OF CO~GRESSION.AL LIBRARY. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the amendments 

of the House of Representatives to the joint resolution (S. R. 116) extending the privilege of the Library of Congress to the members and 

secretary of the Interstate Commerce CommL"Sion; which were, in line 

4, after the word •' Commission," to insert "and the Chief of Engineers of the Corps of Engineers, United States Army." 

Amend the title so as to read: "Extending the privilege of the Library of Congress to the members and secretary of the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Chief of Engineers of the Corps of Engineers, United Stat<IS Anny." 

Ur. EV ARTS. I move that the Senate concur in the amendments 

made by the Honse of Representatives. 

The motion was agreed to. 

PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore presented a memorial of the WageWorkers' Political Alliance, of Washington, D. C., remonstrating 

against the l?assage of the House antilottery bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads. 

Mr. STOCKBRIDGE presented a memorml of the Board of Trade of 

Detroit, Mich., remonstrating against renting the north pier at Buffa.lot 

N. Y., to private individuals or corporations; which was ordered to 

lie on the table. 

Mr. QUAY (by request) presented resolutions adopted bytbe Philadelphia (Pa.) Tariff Reform Club, remonstrating against the passage of 

the Federal election "bill; which were ordered to lie on the table. . 

Mr. BLAIR. I present a pF1iition of the Wage-Workers' Political 

Alliance, which is a derisive piece of ridicule of the pension system of 

the United States, praying that pensions be granted to all over sixty 

PETITIONS, ETC. land less than twenty years of age, among other things. I move that 

Under clause 1 of Rule :X:XII, the following petitions and papers the petition be referred to the Committee on Pensions. 

were laid ou the Clerk's d esk and referred as follows: The motion was agreed to . 

By Mr. BERGEN: Protest against the McKinley bill and suggestion l\Ir. VANCE presented a memorial of a committee of the Chamber 

from Camden County (New Jersey) Single-Tax Club-to the Commit- of Commerce and Industry of Raleigh, N. C., remonstrating against 

tee on Ways and Means. the passage of the Federal election bill; which was ordered to lie on the 

By Mr. DARGAN (by request): Petition of Martin Quick, of Marl- table. 

borough County, South Carolina, praying that his war claim be re- Mr. REAGAN. I present a petition from the Commercial Club of 

ferred to the Court of Claims under t,he provisions of the Bowman act- Albuquerque, in New Mexfoo, praying for the confirmation by Congress 

to the Committee on War Claims. of the Albuquerque town grant; and I desire to read a passage from 

By Mr. ELLIS: Proofs to be filed with Hoase bill for the relief of the petition and to make a remark in reference to the necessity of aeJeptha Williams-to the Committee on Pensions. tion: 

By Mr. FUNSTON: Petition asking for pension for William Dar- Your petitioners respectfully represent that said gmnt contains only 4 square 

nell-to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. leagues and nearly all of whfoh has long; been held in severalty and in actual 

By Mr. GRIMES: Petition of A. H. Hensley and 10 others, of Car- occupancy; f.hat this bill, if passed, will materially aid in perfectfog the title 

roll County, Geor~da, in favor of House bill 8648_to the Commi"ttee to such property; and that such portion Qf said grant as remains common ~ lands of the whole community is consta.n ly being occupied by trespassers. on Agriculture. seeking to acquire tit!e thereto for speculatiye purposes, 1LDd at present, said 

By Mr. KINSEY: Protest of 105 employes of Page & Krausse, of grant being unconfirmed, no public official or body is charged with the protec1 f. II C tion of the same against such trespassers; and · delay in confirmation of the 

81 emp oyt:s of the J. · Pocock an Company, of 31 employes of the said grant will increase the causes for vexatious liti1.1:ation and loss to said comChester-Keller Manufacturing Company, of18 employes of Wolff-Kra- munity. 

mer For Company, and of 131 citizens of South St. Louis, Mo., against 

the passage of the Conger compound-lard bill-to the Committee on 

Agriculture. 

By Mr . .McKENNA: Protest of Single-Tax Club, against the McKinley bill-to the Committee on Ways and Means. 

By Mr. NIED RING HA US: Protest of 25 employes of the Moser Box 

Company, 30 employes of the Kupperle Bros. brass foundry, 40 employes of the Felber machine works, and 11 employes of Glover & 

Finkenour, all citizens of St. Louis, Mo., against the passage of the 

Conger compound-lard bill-t-0 the Committee on Agriculture. 

Also, protest of 13£J employes of the J. H. Courades Chair Company 

and 18 employcs of the Hamilton Brown Shoe Company, all citizens of 

St. Louis, Mo., against the same measure-to the Committee on .Agriculture. · 

By Mr. POST: Resol utious of the Board of Trade of Peoria, Ill., relative to the improvement of the Mississippi River-to the Committee on 

Rivers and Harbors. 

By Mr. WAD DILL: Protest of 476 citizens of Richmond, Va., against 

the passage of the Conger compound-lard bill declaring that the legislation sought wi11 throttle the cotton-oil industry, impoverish the 

planter for the purpose of creating a monopoly of the hog-lard business 

in the bands of a few large packers, who with immense capital and 

packing houses already established can crush out all small competitors-to the Committee on Agriculture. 

I beg leave to mention that under the policy of the Mexican Government in establishing new towns provision was made to endow them 

with 4 leagnes of land, requiring the center of the town to bethe center of 

the 4 leagues of land. The papers which are before the committee now 

upon this subject show that this town was founded, I think, about one 

hundred and sixty or one hundred andseventyyears ago. It is a.considerable city now. In a revolution before the beginning of this century the paper evidences of their title from the Government of Mexico were lost, but we are advised by the papers which they pre ent 

that there are numerous other papers going to ~how that such title did 

exist, besides which we know that that was the policy of the Republic of Mexico. I mention this with a view to suggest that it would be 

a matter of very great interest to the people of Albuquerque if the 

Committee on Private Land Claims l\fould act upon this matter as early as t hey can. I move that the petition be referred to that committee. 

The motion WM agreed to. 

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES. 

Mr. SA WYER. from the Committee on Pensions, to whom was re- ferred the bill (H. R. 6084) for the reliefot Thomas Nelson, reportedit 

without amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

By Mr. WHITTHORNE: Petition of J. W. Bumpass, of Lawrence 

County, Tennessee, for compensation for property taken by the United 

· .. -~ - . States Army-to the Committee on War Claims. 

Mr. BLAIR, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred 

the bill (H. R. 156t:I) ~ranting a pensiqn to Mrs. Delpbina. P. Walker, 

reported it without amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

:Mr. TURPIE, from the Committee on Pensio!!.S, to whom were r&-

.· ', 

-. ,,., 
t 

' ~ . ..; ... • •I \ --

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8905 

ferred the following bills, reported them severally without amendment, 

and submitted reports thereon: 

A bill (U:. R. 10951) granting a pension to Lucinda Rawlingson; 

A bill (.e:. R. 6853) for the relief of Allen Morris; 

A bill (H. R. 10334) granting a pension to Wiatt Parish; 

A bill (H. R.10234) restoring Rebecca Young to the pension-rolls; and 

A bill (H. R. 913!:s) granting a pension to Elizabeth Gushwa. 

Mr. DAVIS, from the Comreittee on Pensions, to whom were referred the following bills, reported them severally without ameudment, 

and submitted reports thereon: 

A bill (H. R. 5736) granting a pension to John L. Lindel; and 

A bill (H. R. 4688) granting a pension to Rev. Thomas James. 

Mr. DA VIS, from the Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 10083) for the relief of George Murray, reported 

it with au amendment, and submitted a report thereon. 

JAl\IES .AND J ULIUS LANSBURGH. 

Mr. HOAR. I have been authorized informally to report, with 

amendments, by order of the Judiciary Committee, the bill (S. 2780) for 

the relief of James Lansburgh and Julius Lansburgb, and I ask to have 

it put on its passage. The bill will commend itself to every member 

of the Senate, I believe, without any exception. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be read at length, subject to objection. 

The Chief Clerk read the bill. 

Mr. HOAR. These were two young men who came over here--

Mr. HARRIS. Let the amendmenta of the committee be read. 

Mr. HOAR. Let the amendments be read. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The first amendment reported by 

the committee will be stated. 

The CHIEF CLERK. In section 1, line 6, strike out the word ''excepted" and insert "exempted ; " so as to read: 

That all real estat-e lyingin the District of Columbit\ heretofore purchased by and conveyed to James La.nsburgh or Julius Lansburgh, or either of them, of 

said Di.strict, prior to the passage of this act, be relieved wnd exempted from the 

operation of an act entitled "An act to restrict the ownerahip of real estate in 

the Territories to American citizens," etc., approved March 3, 1887. 

There being no objection, the Senate, as in Committee of the Whole,-

proceeded to consider the bill. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill having been read at length, 

the further reading as in Committee of the Whole will be waived, if 

there be no objection. The question is on agreeing to the amendments proposed by the Committee on the Judiciary. 

The amendments were agreed to. · 

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments 

were concurred in. 

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the 

third time, and passed. 

WITHDRAW.AL OF PAPERS. 

On motion of Mr. MITCHELL, it was 

Ordered, That Nathaniel l\lcKay and the executors of Donald McKay have 

leave to withdraw their papers from the files of the Senate by conforming to 

the rules of the Senate. 

BILLS INTRODUCED. 

Mr. BLAIR. I introduce a bill at the request of the National Alliance and Industrial Union, providing for the establishment of banks 

of deposit, and for other porpos.es. The Alliance send me a letter in 

which they ask that the bill may also be printed in the RECORD as well 

as referred to the Committee on Finance and printed in bill form. 

The bill (S. 4340) to provide for banks ot deposit, and for other purposes was mad twice by its title and referred to the Committee on Finance. 

Mr. BLAIR. I ask also that the bill may be printed in the RECORD. 

The PRESIDENT P'ro temp01·e. Shall the bill be printed in the daily 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? Isthereobjection? TheChairhearsnone. 

The bill is as follows: 

A bill to provide for banks of deposit, and for othe1· purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Un.i!ed Slata of America in Oo1iuress assembled, That ten or more citizens of the United States 

may enter into articles of association for the purpose of ban king, under the pro- visions of this act, and adopt such rules and regulations for conducting the al· 

fairs of the association as they may deem best: but such rules and regulations shall not conflict with the provisions of this act .. 

I SEC. 2. That the term "first mortgage," as used in this act., shall mean a lien 

lt.f COCKRELL Wh t · th ~ th" ? on the lands of the mortgageor and prior to any and all other liens in exist-ence .n r. · a 18 e reason ior 18 • at the time the first mortgage was given, and that a judgment by any court 

!.fr. HOAR. Let the next amendment be read. having jurisdiction, deeds of trust, homestead exemptions, annuities, mortgage The PRESIDENT pro fem.pore. The next amendment will be read. bonds, or any other form of lien shall prevent the acceptance by the Treasurer 

The CHIEF CLERK. The committee also reuort to strike out section f~~b:c~nited States of any mortgage offered as security by any association under 

2, and to insert after section 1 the following :- SEC. 3. That every association shall, aft.er the organization and election ol a 

And all forfeitures incurred by force of said act are, in respect of sach real es- board of dir.ectorsl wbo ~hal~ be stockhold.er.;i ill; the associat.io1;1, P1;Jblish in a. tate hereby remitted. !leWSJ?aper !n.or c1r<:ulat10g m t~e count}: m ~h1ch the assoc1at1on is f~rme<f. 

' m which official notices a.re pubhshed, settmg torth the name of the assoc1atlon, 

Mr. HOAR. These were two yonng men who came to this country I th_e amount of its capital stock, the names oft.he offi?ers and directors, togetJ;ier with their father just before they-were of age. I think they are Ger- w1lh the name of the owner of the lan.ds. and their ~se~':'Cd value on which 

[ mortgages have been taken by thea.gsoc1ation for deposit with theTreasurerol mans. The Senator from Tennessee Mr. HARRIS] knows the na- tl.ie United Stat-es under this act., theamountoftbe mort!mge and place ofbusf· 

tionality. At any rate, it seems that their father was never natural- ness of the association: Provided Jurt~er, That the dire';;tors' and officers shall 

ized and they have acquired considerable real estate by industry and make oath that the stat-ements .made m ref~rence thereto .are correct. . . . ' . . . . . . . SEC. 4. That under the pronsions of this act the maximum and mmunum thnft, which is snbJect to be forfeited by the Umted States comrng m amount of capital ehall be not Jess than s.:; 000 nor more tban $200 000: Proon the ground that it is held by aliens. vided, That in no case shall the Secretary or' the T1·easury issue mor~ than S25 

}\fr. BUTLER. Are they citizens now? per capita to any city or coun~y in t!>e United States, and tbe last.d_ecennial cenMr. HOAR. They are now citizens, I suppose. ~~~ ~~~!r~h~s!~t.as the offic!Jll guide of the Secretary for all cities and counMr. HARRIS. They came here as minors and supposed themselves SEc. 5 .. T~at every association ha.Ying complie!1 with the pro".isions of thi8 

to have been citizens as I understand. I do not personally know either act, prelunmary to the co~mencement of bankm~ and before it ~hall_be au- ' . . thorized to commence business, shall transfer, dehver, and deposit with the 

of them, but I know they are busrness men here of very high character, Treasurer of the United States who shall receipt to the association for the same and have acquired a great deal of real estate in the District of Colom- first mortgages on real properly, duly authenticated by the clerk of the conntY 

bia court where such real estate is situated, that there are no mortgages, llens,judl{· · . . . . men ts, annuities, or any other incumbrance of any kind whatsoever against the 

The PRESIDENT jJro fempore. If there be no ObJect1on, the bill IS real property mortgaged to tbe association, and that the shareholder who has 

before the Senate as in Committee of the Whole. mortgaged bis or her property owns in his or her own right in fee-simple the 

Mr. DOLPH. I have no objection to this bill but it seems to me property mortgaged to the association for depcsit '!ith the Treasurer ~f !he . . . ' Umted States, and that under the laws of the State m which such a.ssociat10n 

that it is a precedent which may cause a good deal of trouble to the desires to do a banking businesst.he said shareholder bas the right to mortgage Senate. The design of +.be act to prevent alien ownership in the Terri- said lands and t~t. tht; mortgage is gi~en according to the laws of the _Slate 

tories no doubt was good. If it had been restricted to the ownership whe:e such assoc:~tion IS locat-ed: Provided further, That no mortgage will be . . . recen·ed for deposit for more than 75 per cent. of the average assessed value of 

of agricultural lands, I thrnk that would have been sufficient. I do therealestatemortga.ged,as11hownbytheassessedvalueforthethreeyearsprenot think it ever should have been extended to the ownership of lands ceding th;e t.ime "':hen the mortgage was given: Providedfm·ther, That the value 

held for purposes of trade or manufactures and I think it quite likely of the bmldmgs situated thereon b_e also deducted t~e~efrom. . . . ' SEC. 6. That, whenever tbe president of the ai;soc1atlon shall have deposited we shall be called upon to irrant relief JD numbers of cases, because I with the Treasurer of the Uuited States first mortgages a.s provided for in this 

do not think the case of the persons mentioned in this bill is the only act, then ~h.e Treasurer ;>hal_I issue t-0 the association United Stat-es ~i;easury 

one by any means in this District. notes ofd1tlerentdenommattons t~ the amount of th~ 11'.!-ortgages deposited. . . . . . . SEC. 7. That the Treasury notes issued to the associations shall be of the folTh1s b1l~ comes from .the Committee on the Judiciary, I believe. lowing denominations: one,two,.five,ten,twenty,fifty,and one hundreddol· 

The Committee on Pubhc LandR has had before it f.rom time to time lars,and the '.rreasury notes so issued under this aqt shall be receivable for all 

bills introduced proposing to amend the oriainal act. It seems to me blx~s. dues, imports, and in pa.ymen~ofall debts, publi.c and privatP>, ~itbin t~e • • • 0 '. • • • • Umted States, and they shall be received the same as silver or gold corn, at their it would have been better for the Judiciary Committee, if it is gorng to par value, in payments for all loans that may h~re fter be sold or negotiated by 

take jurisdiction of this matter, to report some amendment to the tbe Secretary o.f the Treasury, and may be reissued from tim~ to time in ex- original act that w?uld have cured all similar cases. ~~r~~~ ~~rth~~~~~d notes, but in no case to exceed the per capita amount pre1tfr. HOAR. Will the Senator pardon me for one second? These SEc . s. That every aesocia.tion may take, receive, and charge on any loan or men are now old men. They supposed they were citizens and have discount made. interest at the rat~ of 3 per ~ent., and n!' more, and such interest 

snnnosed so for a long time· but they arrived in this oountrv minors may be taken m advance, reckonmg th.e time for which the not~. bill, or .o~her rr-. . 1 • J ' evid1mce of debt has to run: .And provided fm·ther, That the taking, receiving, and it turns out that their father was never naturalized, so far as can reserving, or charging a. rate of interest greater than aforesaid shall be held 

be shown. They have acquired property; they are large and respected a!ld a~jud_ged a. forfeiture of the ent~re interest tha~ the evide?ce. of debt ca.r· property-owners here. So it is a case of relievina really aaainsta mis- nes with it, an~ fur~her that an action to recover interest paid, iI sustained, o o shall, upon not>ficatton, cnuse the Secretary of the Treasury to demand from 

take on the part of these men. the president of the association an equal amount of Treasury notes furnished 

Mr. COCKRELL. They have been actually exercising the rights of the association, and after the amount hns been repaid the Secretary of the 

citizens for years? Treasury shall return the first mortgages deposited with him by the association · · . and ta.keupthe r.eceipts given for the same; and in the eYenttbe president shall :Mr. HOAR. Yes, all the trme. fail or neglect so to do, then the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to fore-

.... ""-., .... • r ... 

•I 

- \ ·-

·. 

.. ' 

·y 

.. · •• .> 

.· 

,. -

·~ 
~ . 

"- I 

....... 

. · 

I "" 

-: I 

.· .. . ' ... '-

8906 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE . . AUGUST 21, 

close the mortgages deposited by the association within sixty days after the as- sociation shall have been notified, a.nd from the proceeds the Secretary of the Trensury sh~ll deduct tile amount of Treasury notes furnished the a.ssociation, 

together with the costs, and the residue shall be turned over to the president of the association : Provided, That all actions to recover usury paid an association must be commenced within two years from the time of the transaction. Sxo. 9. That every association formed under this act shall at all times have on hand, in lawful money of the United States, 25 per cent. of its deposits. SEc.10. That any association organized under this act shall have power to adopt a corporate seal and shall have succession by the name designated for the period of twenty years from its organization, unless sooner dissolved according to the provisions of this act. And the associations formed under this act may make contracts, sue a.nd be sued in any court of law and equity as fully as 

natural persons. SEC. 11. That on the 1st day of January a.nd July of each year the president 

of tbe association shall make a correct report of the condition of the association to the Secretary of the Treasury, showing the amount of capital stock, assets, 

liabilities, discounts, and deposits; a.nd these reports shall be sworn to before a notary public in the usual manner: Provided, That for each failure to so report there shall be adjudged against the association a fine of one-fourth ofl percel'lt., to be collected by the Secretary of the Treasury from the interest on the mort-

. gages deposited. SEC. 12. That the Secretary of the Tre-asury shall have power to send exarniners to ascertain the condition of any association, aud if at any time there i.!f a failure to keep the reserve provided for the benetit of the depositors the Secre- t.a.TY of the Treasury may close the association and sell as provided the mortgages deposited. SE0.13. That when two-thirds of the stockholders vote in favor of liquldation the president shall cs.use a notice to be inserted in the paper in which official notices for the co1mty a.re usually published, stating when the association will close up its business: Provided, Thatthe notice must have been inserted at least thirty days hefore the liquidation of the said association. SEC. U. Thnt, when any depositor of jswful money of the United States l:lhall make a demand for his deposit a.nd the association shall fail to pay the depositor the amount due him, the depositor shall notify the Secretary of the Treasury, 

who shall send an agent to take charge of the a9.Sets of the association, and 11.fter the Treasurer shall have received for the United States, in lawful money, the amount issued to the associstion by the Secretary of the Treasury, then the creditors of the association shall share equally the residue, aud each stockholder shall be liable to the amount of stock taken, a.nd the property mortgaged to the association and deposited with the Treasurer of the United States shall also be held for the payment of creditors of the association. SEO. 15. That each association shall pay to the Tren.surer of the United States in the months of January and July a duty of one-fourth of 1 per cent. on the amount of Treasury notes issued to the association by the Secretary of the Treasury. and in case of failure to pa.y the taxes aforesaid the Secretary of the Treasury may collect the interest from the mortgages deposited. SEc. 16. That all shares in these associations shall be considered personal 

property and may be taxed by the St:.a.te as other personal property. 

Site. 17. That every director a.nd officer under the provisions of this act shall be a citizen oflhe State a.nd county in which the association is formed. S:&c. 18. That all real property mortgaged to the association for deposit with the Treasurer of the United States shall be held to be paid-up capital to the amount of the mortgages given nnder this act, a.nd that the land so mortgaged and held by the association as capital stock to secure the Treasury notes issued to the association by the Treasurer of the United States, together with interest on mortgages, shall be held as assets for the benefit of the United States, a.nd 

-th.en the depositors oflawfnl money in said association may, in the usual man- ner a..s provided by the Legislatures of the States, collect the amount due them. 

SEc.19. That the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States shall have power to investigate the condition of the securities deposited, and in case of de- preciation of values from any cause he shall demand of the association addi- tional sec11.rity, and in case the association shall refuse or neglect to give th"' ad- ditional security, then the Secretary of the Treasury shall give notice as already 

provided for e.ud close the association. .SEO. 20. That these associations shall have power to hold a.nd own real estate as a body .corporate. SEC. 2L That all titles to real or personal property in which the Government has an interest shall be warranted to the purchaser. Sxc. 22. That no person shall be allowed to take stock in a.ny association in excess of the mortgages given by the stockholder to the association. SEo. 23. That this act repeals all acts or parts of acts inconsistent with this act and that it be in force from and after its passage. 

Mr. SANDERS introduced a bill (S. 4341) granting a right of way 

across the Fort A.ssinniboine military reservation to the Great N ortbern 

.Railway; which was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Military Affairs. 

:MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. 

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. McPmmsoN, 

iU! Clerk, announced that the House had agreed to the concurrent 

resolution of the Senate to print for the use of the Director of the Mint 

1. 000 additional copies of the report on the production of the precious 

metals for the year 1889. 

The me~a~e also announced that the House had passed the bill (S. 

4'33i:J) to change the time of the sessions of the circuit and district courts 

for t.he western district of Missouri. 

The message further announced that the Honse had passed the bill 

(S. 2979) to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River at some accessible point bebween the mouth of the Illinois 

and the mouth ot the Missouri Rivers, with an amendment in which 

it requested the concurrence of the Senate. 

The me....~age also announced that the House had passed the bill (H. 

R. 3715) to amend an act entitled "An act authorizing the construction of a bridge across the Red River of the North, 11 approved July 

16, 1~8, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate. 

LIQUORS IN THE CAPITOL. 

The PRESIDENT pro fem pore. The Chair lays before the Senate a. resolution offered by the Senator from Kansas [Mr. PLUMB], coming over from a. previous day, to be considered in the morning hour. The 

resolution will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read the resolution submitted by Mr. PLUMB on 

the 18th instant, as follows: 

Reaolved, "That the Committee on Rules be directed to make such order as shall 

t,-

wholly prevent the sale and drinking of spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors in the Senate wing of the Capitol. 

The PRESIDENT pro temp01·e. The amendment proposed by the 

Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BUTLER] will be read.' 

The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to add to the resolution the following: 

And that the Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to make de.Uy inspection and examination of the committee-rooms and other apartments of the Senate wing of the Capitol and report to the Com- mittee on Rules after each of said inspections whether he has found a.ny spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors in the same, or any of thew, and that said Com- mittee on Rules shall preserve said reports for the use of the Senate. 

Mr. GIBSON. I suggest to the Senator from South Carolina that the 

Sergeant-at-Arms be also directed to inspect the cloak-rooms and the 

desks of Senat.ors. 

Mr. BUTLER. I will accept that amendment. 

Mr. BERRY. Was there not a motion by the Senator from Maryland [Mr. GoRMAN] to refer the resolution to the Committee on Rules? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. There was. 

Mr. BERRY. I ask if the amendment offered by the Senator from 

New Hampshire--

Mr. BUTLER. We can not hea,r a word. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Business will be suspended until the 

Senate is in order. 

Mr. BERRY. Mr. President--

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator will pause until the 

Senate is in order. When Senat.ors are in their seats and conversation 

ceases, business will proceed. [A pause.] The Senator from Arkansas. 

Mr. BERRY. The resolution was introduced by the Senat.or from 

Kansas [Mr. PLUMB] and an amendtnent was offered bytbe Senator 

from New Hampshire [Mr. BLAIR], and I wish to know whether or 

not that amendment. was adopted. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That was agreed to. 

Mr. PLUMB. The RECORDdoesnotsodisclose; at least Ihavenot 

been ab1e to find it in the RECORD. 

The PRESIDENT pro lempore. It is the recollection of the Chair. 

Mr. PLUMB. I think an inspection of the RECORD will show that 

the question was on the adoption of the amendment when, on the objection of the Senator from Maryland [Mr. GoRMAN], the resolution 

went over . The PRESIDENT p1·0 teinpore. Unless it appears in the RECORD 

ancl the Journal that the amendment was agreed to, the recollection of 

the Chair would not prevail. 

Mr. BERRY. The RECORD does not show that it was aareed to I ili~k 0 

, 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will have the Journal 

examined to ascertain. The RECORD, on page 9529, concerning this 

subject, reads as follows: The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Kansas asks unanimous con- sent that his resolution may be now considered. Is there objection? Mr. BLAIR. I suggest that the words "and drinking" be inserted after the word "sale." [Laughte1·.l 

Mr. PLUMB. I have no objection to the amendment offered by the Senator from New Hampshire. 

Mr. PLUMB. The Chair does not read it all. The Chair should 

read a little further. 

The,PRESIDENT pro tempm·e. The RECORD continues: 

l\Ir. BLAIR. I suggest the insertion of those words. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Sen:1otor from New Hampshire moves to amend the resolution a.s will be read. The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to a.mend the resolution so that it shall read: 

" Resolved, That the Committee on Rules be directed to ma.ke such order a.s shall wholly prevent the sale and drinking of spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors in the Senate wing of the Capitol" 

Mr. PLUMB. That is to say, the question then pending was on the 

amendment proposed by the Senator trom New Hampshire [Mr. 

BLAIR]. - I want to say that I made a side remark to the Senator from New 

Hampshire which the Reporter, with more than his usual facility, seems to have caugbt, for I did not accept the amendment, and did not so 

design and the Senate did not so take it: and, as the RECORD expressly 

discloses, the question was stated by the Chair to be on the amendment 

of the Senator from New Hampshire; an.I while that was pending the 

Senator from Maryland made objection and the resolution went over. I may say that so far as I am concerned, though I did not personally 

care about the remark being published, all I did say waa to the Senator from New Hampshire in a remark to him and not to anybody else, 

although of course any one within reach could have heard it.. It was 

not in the terms named there; I said simply "I have no objection to 

that," bot there was no formal spreading out of the terms as contained 

in the remark put down by the Reporter. 

I do not personally care anything about that; but I do believe that 

the effect of adding either ilie amendment of the Senator from New 

Hampshire [Mr. BLAIR] or that of the Senator from South Carolina 

[Mr. BUTLER] would be to belittle or to hurt the resolution and the 

object which I had in view in offering it, which l will briefly state. 

It i.q known that for a long time under permission given by the 

Committee on Rules, of which I think the Senator from Maine [Mr. 

FRYE] is chairman-- . 
... ' , 

,., 

... 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8907 ·. 

Mr. FRYE. The Senat-Or from Maine has not that honor and bas Mr. BLAm. I suggest that the words "and drinking" be inserted after tae · h d "t fi 1 t• word "sale." fLaughter]. noli a 1 ora ong ime. Mr.PLUMB. IbavenoobjectiontothenmemlmentofferedbytheSenatorfrom Mr. PLUMB. He was for a Ion~ time its chairman and he ought New Hampshire. 

to be now. [Laughter.] Permission has in some way been given to Mr. BLAIR. lsuggest the insertion of those words. 

sell intoxicating liquors in the Senate wing of the Capitol I do not In other words, the Senator from New Hampshire himself did not ac- speak of that to criticise the practice heretofore, but simply to say that cept the side remark I made as fixing the question, and renewed the 

it has gone to a point now where it ought to be stopped. Perhaps it motion or made it in a more formal way. 

may be proper to go further and to say that it never ought to have been The PaxsrnENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Hampshire moves to 

begun; but on that I express no opinion. amend the resolution as will be read. 

It is very easy to be wise after the fact; but I do not think there is If I had stated that I accepted the amendment it would thereby have a single member of this body who bas been obserrant of the transac- become a part of my proposition, but the Chair stated that the pendtions in the Senate restaurant in the past few weeks who has not made ing question was on the moti~n of the Senator from New Hampshire, 

up his mind that the extent to which the traffic is carried on down a statement made after the remark which I have quoted, thus going to 

there is hurtful, irrespective of the question of example which ought show that I did not make the remark in a formal way nor with the 

to be reasonably set by a legislative body. purpose or design of its going into the RECORD. The report continI do not believe there is another legislative body in the world, cer- ues: 

tainly not one in the United States, in my judgment, that would permit The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to amend the resolution so that it shall 

the sale of liquor in the building in which it sits. This is certainly apart read. 

from all question of taste, habit, and everything of that kind, and goes . Now, mind yon, that was the only resolution suggested, and ~he 

to the exercise of that responsibility as legislators which we are here proposition was on amending it by incorporating the amendmen-£ of 

to exercise, and which I think demands, in deJerence at lea§,t to a de- the Senator from New Hampshire. There was no other amendment 

cent public opinion and a sense of the proprieties of the case, that this pending, and no other thing that could be before the Senate except 

traffic should be eliminated from the Capitol. I might say further that the adoption of that amendment to the resolution. If the amend-

! have personal knowledge that it has been carried to an extent which ment had been incorporated the question would be on the adoption of 

has been demoralizing in quarters where the Senate has specific respon- the resolution as amended, and not on amending it, because no other 

sibility. In addition to that, persons who come to the Capitol, in amendment had been proposed; and pending that the President pro 

looking about it are nuder constraint almost to go into the vicinity temporesaid: 

and often through the restaurant, and what they see there is not edi- The PRESIDEZ..'T pro tempore. Is the Senate ready for the question? [Putting fying, but, whether edifying or not, it is wholly and entirely improper. the question]. By the sound the "noes" appear to have it. 

Now, wbetheranyindividnalmaywitbproprietyorimproprietybring Not on the adoption of the resolution, but on the adoption of the a bottle of liquor or wine into the Capitol and drink it himself in his amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, and I appe.al to the 

own way and his own place, without any public exposition, is a thing Senator from Maryland [Mr. GORMAN], to whom I have spoken on this 

I am entirely willing that each one shall consider for himself. The question, if be did not understand at that time, and following the puramendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, which I did not de- pose of bis motion, that the amendment of the Senator from New 

sign to accept, as well as that of the Senator from South Carolina, is Hampshire was the proposition under consideration. Then the REccalculated. to befog the real issue and introduce into this matter consid- ORD continues: 

erations which are entirely foreign not only to the purpose of the res- ~Ir. PLUMB. I call for the yea.sand nays. 

olution, but, in my judgment, to the proper consideration of the re- The yeas and nays were ordered. 

sponaibility for the condition of things which exists now in the Capitol. Mr. GORMAN. Mr. President, let the resolution go over until to-morrow. 

Mr. BLAIR. Mr. President, my recollection is very clear and dis- Mr. GORMAN. My recollectiou is in accordance with the statement 

tinct that the words which I suggested to the Semtor were inserted of the Senator from Kansas. My belief was that the amendment of- and inserted by the assent of the Senator, though the Chair put the fered by the Senator from New Hampshire was pending when I object.ed 

question to the Senate and announced that the amendment was agreed to the consideration of the resolution. I objected to its consideration 

to and the Chief Clerk made his record accordingly, and the resolution for the moment. I thought that the matter had better go t-0 the Comwas print.ed with these words .as an integra.l part of the resolution and mittee on Rules, not that I desired to obstruct the passage of the res- it should be so now. I suppose they are in the body of the resolution olution or the passage of any order preventing the sale of intoxicating now. I am not concluded in my recollection by the RECORD; the drinks in the Capit-01, but I believed then and believe now that it 

RECORD is frequently inaccurate, as we all know, and to a very con- would probably be better to permit the resolution to go to the Com~ 

siderable extent; and I think it is so in this case. I bad occasion not mittee on Rules and let them take into consideration the entire matter 

long since to look up t.hat question, and I found that an entire colloquy and give such instructions as they and the Vice-President unquestionin which I was personally interested of some ten or twenty lines was ably have the right to do, to stop this business in the Capitol. 

omitt.ed, and the excuse given that the reporters were not able to hear I think the Senat-Or from Kansas is correct in his statement. The 

it and so omitted it. It is not right that the recollection of Senators question turned on the amendment offered by the Senator from New on this floor and it may be the reputation of Senators on this floor and Hampshire. 

others should be concluded by the record which is kept here of the Mr. GRAY. I was sitting very near both the Senat-Or from Kansas 

conversations which occur in the Senate. and the Senator from New Hampshire when this matter was brought 

Now, the Chief Clerk, the recording officer of the Senate, recorded up and, interested in the subject-matter of the resolution, I was very 

these words as having been accepted and adopted as a portion of the attentive to what was said on both sides of that aisle. I am as sure as resolution, and it is a question whether the record of the authorized I can be of any negative that the Senat-Or from Kansas did not accept 

officer of the Senate, who makes his reoorn upon which we allstand, is the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire. 

to be depreciated and to be defeated by what may happen to be caught Mr. BLAIR. I do not say that the action of the Senate was by the 

by the Rtenographer. acceptance of the Senator from Kansas. He assented that he had no I am not particular about this matter, only as a question between objection, and the Chair put the question and said it was agreed to, 

the authorized officers of the Senate, upon whose record we have stood and the Chief Clerk made the record accordingly, and i'I; is in the resofrom the foundation of the Government, and this CONGRESSIONAL RF.c- lution. 

ORD, which I know and we all know, probably as a matter ofneces.qity Mr. PLUMB. It is not so in the RECORD. 

and certainly as a matter of fact, is often quite inaccurate in it.a account Mr. ELA.IR. It is in the resolution as printed. 

of the words that are used in the transactions of the Senate. Mr. GR.A. Y. I understood that the pending question, when the reso- If the Senator from Kansas, who assented quite clearly to the inser- lution went over, was on the amendment of the Senator from New 

tion of these words at the time, as I understood him-and it was no pri- Hampshire, and not on the resolution with the amendment incorpoTate matter-does not wish them to be considered a part of his resolu- rated in it. 

tion, I am perfectly willing either that they should be stricken out or .l\Ir. VEST. I want to state that my special attention was called to 

that there shonld be a vote taken upon them. I have not the slightest this matter at the time. I was near to both of the Senators, and, as I was feeling in regard to that matter, but I do think the other point to which emphatically opposed t-0 the amendm€nt of the Senator from New Hamp-

! have called attention is one that ought to be stated in precisely the shire and desired to take the floor to give my reasons for the opp position, 

way I now do state it. I must say that it is simply impossible that I should have overloooked 

Mr. PLUMB. The RECORD clearly disputes both the Clerk and the the fact that the amendment was agre~ to by the Senate. 

Chair, and also the Senator from New Hampshire. I stated at the time to the Senator from Maryland, as he.will reMr. BLA.IR. What record? member, that, as to the original resolution, that was a question of police 

Mr. PLUMB. The CoYGRESSIONAL RECORD. regulation for the Senate about which we could not have any difficulty, 

Mr. BLAIR. The record is what the Clerk does; that is, the rec- bu\ that the amendment would receive from me strenuous opposition; 

ord of the Senate. that the principle involved in it to undertake to say to Senators that 

Mr. PLUMB. I am speaking of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, a they should not bring on their own persons and to their committee 

tolerably familiarly known newspaper, which contains the following: rooms any sort of alcoholic stimulants was so odious to all of my ideas 

The PRESIDENT pro tetnpore. The Senator from Kansas asks unanimous con- of personal liberty that I never would consent to it. 

sent that this resolution may be now considered. Is there objection? The Senator from Kansas states this matter exactly as it occurred. 

·-

-· 

1: 

,. 

: .... , ~ . 

. . 

. -' 

.. 

I . 

. -,·. -

;- .. 
. ' 

·. 

-. •' i; 

•.' ·,· ...... .-

8908 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

I do not think there can be any doubt about it. I never would have com ented to that amendment being incorporated in the resolution without stating my objection in the most public and emphatic manner to 

the adoption ol the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, 

and I understood the matter went over without the action of the 8enate upon the amendment. 

Mr. BLA.IR. The question is not at all wbatoccnrred at this desk 

and at my right and what the Senators close by heard or understood. 

I said clearly that I didnotunderstand that theadoptionoftheamendment depended on the assent of or anything that was said by the.Senator 

from Kansas~ although he did say that he had no objection to its being made a part of the resolution; but the fact depends upon what occurred opposite to where I stand. 

rrhe Chair did submit the question on the adoption of those words as part of the resolution, and declared that they were agreed to by 

the Senate. That is my clear and distinct recollection of the occurrence of which I was observan ~ and if other Senators did not so understand it they simply failed to understand something which I observed 

al\d did understand n.t the time, and the Chair recollects it in the same 

way, or the Chief Clerk, who was interested to know at the time, 

made a record that that was the action of the Senate, and the resolution was printed accordingly, and so appeared upon our desks the next 

morning. 

As I said before, it is a question of accuracy as between the Reporter 

of the Co~GRESSIONAL RECORD and the sworn clerk of this body, and 

I say that the preponderance of the evidence of the record that we are bound by is that of the clerk of this body, but if there be a misapprehension--

Mr. HARRIS. Will the Senator allow me? 

1\fr. BLAIR. The Senator will pardon me for a moment. If there 

be any misapprehension on the part of the Senate, I have not the 

slightest objection to the words being considered as stricken out and 

that there be action upon the resolution as though they were never in-not the slightest; but I claim that the reputation of a Senator is 

not to be left to this inaccurate CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which is 

kept here and which is of necessity, as the Reporters have told us time 

and again, because there is oftentimes such confusion in this body that 

it is impossible for the human ear to catch exactly the words that are said. Bat what the Chair stated in re~ard to the action of the Senate, as declared by the Chair at the time, and the record which the clerk 

made, is, as I recollect it from very distinctly noticing what was done 

at the time, correct. 

Mr. HARRIS. The question l wish to ask the Senator from New 

Hampshire is if his contention is that his amendment was agreed to as an amendment or accepted by the Senator from Kansas. · Mr. BLAIR. It was agreed to as an amendment and was declared 

so to be by the Chair. · . Mr. HARRIS. Then, that being true, the Journal must show it, 

and I ask that the Journal be referred to first, and that will settle the 

question. 

ThePRESIDENTprotempore. The manuscript of the Journal is at 

the printer's and is not now accessible. · Mr. HARRIS. Itmustbejournalizedifitwas agreed to as amended. 

Mr. BLAIR. Is the Chair able to state from the recollection of the 

Clerk or in any way bow that is? 

Mr. DOLPH. Will the Senator from New Hamp~hire allow me to 

make a statement? 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Before the Senator proceeds, the 

Chair, adverting to the alleged inaccuracies of the RECORD, would call 

attention to the fact that the confusion at this moment is so great that 

it is practically impossible for the Chair to hear what is going on. The 

wonder is not that there are so many mistakes in the RECORD, but that 

it is generally so accurate. Senators converse in an audible tone, so that 

they can be trequently heard by the Chair from the seats in the rear of the Chamber. The fault is, in the opinion of the Chair, very largely 

with the Senate in not observing the rules of order. 

Mr. CULLOM. I want to suggest another fact, and that is that there 

is a great deal of debate that is mere conversation between Senators. 

Mr. DOLPH. I desire to state to the Senator from New Hampshire 

tbnt not only the resolution as printed contains the words "and drinking/' which was the amendment of the Senator from New Hampshire, 

but, as first -printed, it contained also the memorandum of the Chief 

Clerk with the word "agreed" printed in the body of the resolution 

after the word ''of;'' so as to read: · 

Drinking of agreed spirituous, ,·inous, or malt liquors in the Senate wing _of the Capitol. 

That is the memorandum of the Chief Clerk that the amendment 

had b~n agreed to, and by mistake it was printed in the res9lation 

which was laid on my table. · My attention was called to it by the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. 

ALDRJCH], and I just now sent to the document-room to get a copy 

r., of that print of the resolution, but I am informed by the superintendent of the document-room that that was a mistake and that he had 

destroyed all the copies containing the word "agreed," and only bad 

copiesofthe corrected resolution, which contains the amendment., 

.Mr. BLAIR. It contains the memorandum made by the Clerk orig· 

inally, " agreed." 

Mr. DOLPH. The Clerk had made the memorandum on the reso- lution, ''agreed." That is, that the amendment was agreed to, and the 

Clerk's memorandum was printed by misliake as a part of the resolu· 

tion and so laid on the desks of Senators. My attention was called 

to it, and now I am informed by Mr. Smith, the superintendent of the 

document-room, that because that was a mistake he bad destroyed the 

copies which were printed containing the word "agreed" and had the 

resolution reprinted. 

Mr. BLAIR. That agrees with the information which I had previously received from the Clerk, that he bad made such a record at the 

time, and I remember distinctly that the Chair pronounced the words 

"agreed to," and there can be no mistake in regard to the record as 

made by the Chief Clerk. 

Mr. PASCO. Mr. President, I call the attention of the Senate to 

Rule X of the ''Rules for the regulation of the Senate wing of the 

United.States Capitol," which states thatXo spirituous liquors shall be sold, furnished, or kept in the restaurant. 

That shows that if there is any evil to be remedied it is not legislation which we need, but the enforcement of the rule which is already 

in existence. I would suggest, as it is impossible to tell in the absence 

of the Journal what the status of the pending resolution is, that the 

matter go over without prejudice to ihl standing upon the Calendar 

and that we proceed with some other business. A great deal of time 

has been consumed in this discussion, and, as I have just shown, the 

legislation of the Senate is ample and sufficient already. It only re· quires the ~nforcement of the regulation which I have read to prevent 

such evils as the original resolution seems to be directed against. 

So far as the amendment inserting the words '' and drinking '' is con- cerned, that matter is in doubt in the absence of the Journal, and I move that the resolution go over without prejudice, to be taken up in 

the morning hour hereafter, when the Journal is before the Senate. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempol°e. The Senator from Florida asks unanimous consent that this subject may pass over until to-morrow, subject 

to be called up in the morning hour, retaining its place without prejudice. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Before that action is taken, in view of the observations made by the Senator from Kansas, it seems to me that I 

should make a statement for the Committee on Rules. 

The rule which has been read by the Senator from Florida [Mr. 

P .A.Seo] was adopted by the Committee on Rules when I was not a mem- ber of it, in l\farch, 1884, and was submitted to the Senate at that time. 

It has been the subject of discussion at several times in the Senate 

since, and the Senate by a vote refused ·to insert in the rule the words 

"vinous or malt liquors," the understanding being that this refusal was an authorization to the caterer who bfld charge of the restaurant to sell 

beer and wine. The rule which the Senator from Florida has called 

attention to distinctly forbids the sale of any spirituous liquors in the 

restaurant. 

Now, so far as I know-and I think I can speak with ample authority- no member of the Committee on Rules has been complained to in 

regard to nolations of this provision of the rule of 1884. I will sa.y 

that no authorization bas been made by the Committee on Rules, as at present constituted, in regard to this matter whatever. The rules 

as printed in the l\Ianual forbid the sale of liquors in the Senate restaurant. 

Mr. PLUMB. I want to say now, in respect to that, that I did not 

design to make any complaint against the Committee on Rules. On 

the contrary, they are perfectly entitled to the benefit of the statement 

made by the Senator from Rhode Island. They have bad, of course, a uelicate question to deal with, and one in which they have undoubtedly gone along to some extent with the times, but we have simply 

gone too far, and it only illustrates bow impossible it is in a case of 

this kind to go on at all without goini:?; too far, but it has come to that 

point now that inevitably this practice ought to be stopped. I have DO doubt the committee on Rules will co-operate just as heartily to 

that end as any other members of the Senate. If I have said anything 

which could in any way be construed as reflecting upon them, I wish 

to say distinctly that it was not so designed. 

:Mr. BUTLER. I offered an amendment to this resolution providing 

for the examination of the committee-rooms by the Sergeant-at-Arms. 

I clid so because we have this periodical exhibition of virtue and temperance in the Senate, until I am sick and tired of it. I do not know 

bow far the Committee on Rules are authorized to go under the provision of the Senate rules read by the Senator from Florida, but the 

matter seems to be entirely covered by that rule now. The resolution 

offered by the Senator from Kansas proceeds upon the assumption that 

that rule has been violated. 

It would seem, to me if there is any complaint or any cause of com· plaint, the proper remedy would be to instruct the Committee on Rules 

to investigate and report to the Senate if it.s rules have been violated, 

and, if so, l>Y whom. For one, I do not intend to pose before the public as having an excessive amount of virtue upon this subject and re-
.... 

·-r·" ,_. \ 

.: 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. 8909 

serve to myself right.a which I .am not willing to accord to other people. 

We get np here and indulge in lectures and homilies upon the subject 

of temperance, and notably when the Army appropriation bill was under discussion inveighing against the custom and habit of army officers in getting drunk, and refused to allow auything ~.be s?ld except 

beer in the canteens, and I believe that was even prohibited m the la.st 

xrmy bill; and, waitin~ now until the session is nearly over, we go 

through with this performance. For one, I take very little stock in 

it. I think the rules of the Senate are ample to protect ns against any 

infraction of propriety, and if the present keeper of the Senate restaurant has violated those rul~ the proper remedy is, as I have stated, 

that a committee of investigation should be ordered, and if he has done so he should be held amenable, and not other people. 

This debate which comes on here periodically, as I have stated, cre- ates the impression all over the country that this body is composed of 

gentlemen who indulge too much in spirituous liquors, as if we were all in the habit of drinking, when the truth is, I think I can say with 

safety, that there is as much abstinence in this body as in any similar 

body in the world. That has been my experience here. These discussions give currency to the opinion that we are all constantly indulging too frequently in spirituous liquors. I have said, over and 

over again, sir, that with the same number of men anywhere in the 

world, I do not believe you will find as much temperance as there is in 

the Senate of the United States to-day; and I repeat, if the rules have 

been violated, the proper remedy is to appoint a committee of investigation or instruct the Committee on Rules to investigate and ~port to 

the Senate, and see in what respects and bow the rule has been violated; and if we are going to enforce it as to other people we ought to 

enforce it as to ourselves. If the habit of keeping spirituous liquors in 

committee-rooms prevails, that ought to be stopped. 

Mr. BLAIR. Mr. President, I quite agree with the sentiments of 

the Senator from South Carolina, but I never at any time introduced 

any resolution or intermeddled with any movement calculated to cast a reflection upon the personal ha.bits of members of this body, and I 

do not believe that it properly can be done by anybody in this country. 

So far as I personally have any quarrel with the business of intoxication, it is with it as a mass, and not with individuals at a~]. I do not 

believe that what we call the temperance reform is promoted by the 

effort to assail individuals, whether their habits may be faulty to some extent or otherwise. It is a great evil which concerns the whole country 

and the whole world, and it has to be fought en masse, and will have 

to be removed by reaching the fundamental principles involved and 

destroying the traffic at its foundation, which is in the manufacture 

and distribution of the poison. But when others have introduced reso- lutions of this kind, which I have sometimes thought were unneces- sary, in the nature of :i. bird befouling its own nest, I have voted one way or the other, as the case might be. 

When the Senator from Kansas introduced this rnsolution upon a subject in relation to which I thought there was plenty of stringent 

law already-and I was not aware of any great and growing abuse in 

this end of the Capitol-it occurred to me that it was time to make 

thorough work and do something and stop posing, and therefore I 

suggested the insertion in that resolution of the words ''and drinking,'' 

for after all it is the drinking of these liquors which does harm, and 

the words were accepted. Now, those words n.re somewhat searching, 

taken in connection with the other language of the resolution, for they 

apply to the whole of this wing of the Capitol, including committee· rooms and all, and I quite agree with the Senn.tor from South Carolina 

that if there be an evil in the committee-rooms it as much concerns 

the reputation ot the Senate and the welfare of the country, and that 

the use of liquor in the committee-rooms should be abolished, because 

what occurs in the committee-rooms is liable to be reflected in the legislation of the country. · It is of comparatively slight importance whether a gentleman coming frOIJl, a di'3tant part of the country, footsore, dusty, 

and weary, comes to the Senate restaurant and partakes of a little of 

that which is to him an invigorating beverage: but it is of importance 

when a Senator of the United States with a befuddled head takes into 

consideration the Federal election bill. 

Ro, Mr. President, if it is necessary to adopt this resoiution at all, I 

submit that the thing to do is to prohibit the drinking and to prohibit 

it in the whole of this wing of the Capitol, and then to reach the Senate, and if the Senate is not drinking no harm will be done. But if 

the Senate or any portion of the Senate is drinking, this resolution will 

give us temperance in all legislation, and King Alcohol will not be a member of this body, and will not be casting bis vote and indulging 

in debate and helping perhaps t-0 bring about that perpetuity of debate of which we are all so much complaining wbt n we want to pass 

certain bills at the present time. 

I had no idea of undertaking, if it were possible, or of trying to have 

the Senate act on this resolution as though the words I suggested were a part of it. They were made so, and the record proves it; but 

if any Senator misunderstood the action of the Senate, I am perfectly 

willing that they should be stricken out, and whatever action the body sees fit to take I shall be entirely satisfied with it. 

Mr. HOAR. I do not know the actual position of this resolution--

·-

The PRESIDENT pro iempore. The Senator from Florida. [Ur. 

PASCO] hM a.skecl unanimous consent that it may lie over until to- morrow for consideration, on account of the absence of the Journal. 

Mr. HOAR. I should °like to say a word if the Chair and the Senate 

are willing. I rise simply to express my concurrence with the stalement which the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BUTLER] has made 

in regard to the Senate. I do not believe you could find in this coun- trv the same number of men in mature life chosen--

-Mr. PLATT. I wish we might have order. I can not bear the Senator, although I am sitting so very near him. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts will 

pause until order is restored. The Chair has repeatedly called upon 

Senators to observe order and refrain from conversation. Busines~ will cease until silence is restored in the Chamber. 

Mr. BUTLER. I think the principal cause of the disorder is the 

collapse in the rnof of the Senate which occurred just now. I do not 

think anybody in the Senate is responsible for that. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The disorder has been continuous 

since the gavel fell at 10 o'clock. The Senator from Massachusetts 

will proceed. 

Mr. HOAR. I do not believe there can be found in the country the same number of men of mature or advanced age, chosen on any prin· 

cip1e of selection anywhere, whose habits of life are more temperate 

and austere than those of the men who constitute this body. I have 

been an observer of this body and the other House now for a period considerably exceeding twenty years, and the habit of hard work, owing 

to the growth of the country, has been constantly increasing, and hard 

work with which habits of personal intempera.nce or self-indulgence 

are totallv inconsistent. I have known men-I could name men who 

I think would be willing I should name them, although of course it 

would not be in good taste to do so, and I certainly shall not do it--

who have brought from the activities of life in other pursuits habits 

of self-indulgence in regard to the matter of the use of ardent spirits 

nod who when they came here have abandoned those habits, although 

they were the habits almost of a lifetime. Names will occur of men 

whom we all value and whom we are all so fond of on both sides of the 

Senate, in the present and in the pa.st, to whom the Senate has been a 

place of reform, of change of life in this particular, and any suggestion 

anywhere that the life here is a life of self-indulgence in this respect 

is, according to my observation and belief, absolutely without founda· · tion, and I am obliged to the Senator from South Carolina for his em· phatic and spirited assertion of that fact. 

The PRESIDENT pro te1npore. The Senator from Florida asks unan- imons consent that the pending resolution and amendment may lie over until to-morrow, subject to be called up in the morning hour. Is there 

objection? The Chair hears none. 

TRIAL OF LIEUTEXANT GUY. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the following 

resolution, offered by Mr. PLUMB on the 18th instant: 

Resoli:ed, That the commissioners of tbe District of Columbia. are hel'eby di· 

i·ected to make forthwith to the Senate a. full a.nd complete rei;>ort, ct>nta.ining copies of a.ll charges and complaints, and by whom made, a.gamst I,ieutenant 

Guy, oft.he police force, and of all testimony and statements taken by or ma.de to sa.id commissioners, or either of them, concerning such charges, and whether 

said Guy in his trial was informed of all the charges and complaints made 

:igainst him by any and all persons to said commissioners, or either of them. 

and, if not, the reason therefor, and what action has been taken in sa.id trial or otherwise concerning said charge. 

The PRESIDENT p ro fempore. The question is 011 agreeing to the 

resolution. 

'!\fr. HARRIS. I move to refer the resolution to the C-Ommittee on the District of Columbia. 

Mr. PLUMB. If the Senator illsists upon that motion I shall not 

object to it, but I want to say to him, as he isamemberoftheCommittee on the District of C-Olumbia, that it was not with any design of evading 

the jurisdiction of that committee that the resolution was offered. I 

was told by what I considered to be good authority that one of the 

commissioners, for some purpose not understood, had received certain 

charges against the officer on trial which he declined to let that officer 

see, and there were some other thing:; in connection with it, some of 

which have been uttered in the public printsand othersofwhichhave 

been more or less talked about by persons ·familiar with the affairs of 

the District, which seemed to indicate that some little publicity in re- gard to the matter might be good, not only for the case at bar-if I 

may use that term-but for the purpose of the general consideration 

of the question which relates to the rnorganization of the police force 

of the District of Columbia and to the relations of the commi.ssionem, 

and more especia.ly the engineer commissioner, to that force as well us to the other operations of the District. If the Senator thinks no harm will come from the delay I have no objection to the reference, 

but I beg to say to him that if it is to re3ult in anything the resolution ought to be passed very soon. l\Ir. HA.RRIS. I desire to ask the Senator from Kansas if he is satisfied from the information he has received that an officer of the police 

force has been put upon his trial upon charges that he is not allowed 

to see and does not know what t.hey are. 

.. I 

·. 

., 

.- . 

,· 

... 

.; 
I• 

. •. 

-·' 

- .. 

·-

.· 

·• 

·-

::. .. ..... · .. _ ........ : - ~ ·-

8910 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

l\Ir. PLUUB. That would be the practical result ofit, as I understand. While it is true that he has been formally upon trial in regard 

to certain charges, at the same time certain other charges which are liable to hiJ.ve their weight in considering the charges upon which he 

is formally on trial have been withheld from him, and there is danger, 

according to my informant: who is a gentleman of high character, that 

the lieutenant may be impaled nominally upon the horns of the dilemma of charges upon which he is being tried, but really upon those 

which are withheld from him. 

Mr. HARRIS. My question looks to the confidence the Senator may 

ha>e in the information he bas received. If be is satisfied from the information which he bas that the fact as stated a moment since was proved, then I shall not ask the reference of the resolution. 

Mr. PLUUB. I was thoroughly satisfied with it at the time I 

offered the resolution, and nothing has occurred since to change my 

mind. 

Mr. HARRIS. I withdraw my motion. 

The PRESIDENT pro tern.pore. The motion t-0 commit the:resolution 

is withdrawn, and the question recurs upon agreeing to th~ resolution. 

The resolution was agreed to. 

SETTLERS ON NORTHERN P A.CIFIC RAILROAD INDEMNITY LANDS. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore appointed as the conferees on the part 

of the Senate on the amendmen~ of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 5839) 

for the relief of settlers on Northern Pacific Railroad indem'nitylands 

Mr. PLUMB, Mr. DOLPH, and 1\Ir. BERRY. 

THEODORA. M. PIATT. 

Mr. TURPIE. I am directed by the Committee on Pensions to report favorably the bill (H. R. 1284) granting a pension to Theodora M. 

Piatt. I ask unanimous consent that the bill may be now considered. 

Mr. HARRIS. J_,et it be read for information, subject to objection. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be read for information, 

subject to objection. 

The Chief Clerk read the bill. 

Mr. 'TURPIE. This bill passed both Houses of Congress at the lash 

session and for some reason did not reach the President or receive the 

Executive approval. A Senate bill passed the Senate two or three 

months ago and is still pending-in the Honse. The easiest way and the 

quickest way, under such circumst.ances, to relieve a case like this, and 

is very much needed, and it will relieve the relict of a very meritorious 

officer and afford relief to a very large family of children, is to pass the 

present bill. Then we can recall the Senate bill from theother Honse. 

I therefore ask the courtesy of the Senate to consider this bill. now. It 

is very brief. 

There being no objection, the bill (H. R.1284) granting a pension to 

Theodora M. Piatt was considered as in Committee of the Whole. It 

proposes to place on the pension-roll the name of Theodora M. Piatt, 

widow of Benjamin M. Piatt, late a captain and assistant adjutantgeneral of United States Volunteers, at $50 per month. 

The bill was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to 

a third reading, .read the third time, and passed. 

ADDITION AL CLERICAL FORCE. 

Mr. ALLISON submitted the following report: 

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 11380) ma.king appropriations 

for additional clerical force and other expenses to carry into effect the act entitled "An act granting pensions to soldiers and sailors who are incapacitated for 

the performance of manual labor, and providing for pensions to widows, minor 

children, anu dependent parents," from July 20, 1890, for the balance of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1891, having met, aflier full and free conference have 

agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows: 

That the Senate recede from its amendment numbered 15. 

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments of the Sen- ate numbered 1. 2, 4, 6, 10.11, 12, 13, 16, and 17, and &2'ree to the ea.me. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate 

numbered 3, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lie11 of 

the matter proposed to be inserted by said amendment insert the following: 

"Three clerks of class 4; three clerks of class 3; four clerks of class 2; "and the 

Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate 

numbered 5, and •:rree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of 

the number proposed inse:rt "138;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate 

numbered 7, aud a"ree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of 

the number proposed insert" 8;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Sen- ate numbered 8, and &6:'ree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu 

of the n nm ber proposed insert '' 12; '' and the Senate agree to the sa.me. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Sen- ate numbered 9, and a:rree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu 

of the sum proposed insert" $tu2,215;" and the Senate agree to the same. That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Sen- ate numbered 14.. and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Add at the end of said amendment the following: 

"And thechiefclerksof the several Executive Departments and of the various 

bureaus and onices thereof in Washington, D. 0., are hereby authorized and directed, on application and without compensation therefor, to administer oaths 

of office to employes required to be ta.ken on their appointment or promotion." 

.A.nd the Senate agree to the same. 

The report was concurred in. 

_ W. B. ALLISON, 

F. 1\1. COCKRELL, 

Managers on the part of the Senate. 

BENJ. BUTTERWORTH, J. G. OANNON, WM. H. FORNEY, 

Managers on the part of lhe Hott$e. 

MISSISSIPPI RIVE~ BRIDGE • 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. MOODY in the chair) laid before 

the Senate the amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill 

(S. 2979) to authorize the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi 

River at some accessible point between the mouth of the Illinois and 

the mouth of the :Missouri Rivers, which was, on page 1, line 3, to 

strike out the words ''assigns of." 

Mr. CULLO:U. I move that the Senate concur in the amendment 

of the House of Representatives. 

The motion was agreed to. 

REMAINS OF GENERAL GRANT, 

Mr. EV ARTS. Mr. President, I have received from the Grant 

Monument Association, in New York, a communication in the nature 

of a memorial, and considered so pressing in character that it is sent 

by telegraph. I a.sk, as it relates to a bill which has already passed 

this Honse and is pending in the other House, that it may be read, 

and thus go into the RECORD. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. TURPIE in the chair). 'l'he 

memorial presented by the Senator from New York will be read, if 

there be no objection. The Chair hears none, and it will be read. 

The Chief Clerk read as follows: 

Hon. WILLI.AM M. Ev ARTS, 

NEW Yoxx, August 20, 1890. 

Unitd States Senate, Washington, D. C. : 

Whereas the members of the Grant Monument Association deplore the re- cent action in the Senate of the United States, which if carried to the end would 

result in the removal of t.he remains of General Grant from the spot approved 

of by him, dedicated by the city of New York and accepted by his family as his 

final resting place; and 

Wherea.s this committee would respectfully call a.ttention to the faet that the 

remains of General Grant were formally and finally interred at the Riverside 

Park under the most impressive and solemn ceremonials, the President of the 

United States and the Army and Navy officially assistJng, it would seem that 

the people of the entire country would look upon any effort tending to the re· moval of the rnmains as a desecration of the grave of General Grant: Therefore, ..._ 

Be it resolved, That this committee, in the name of the Grant Monument Association and in behalf of the people of the State and city of New York, solemnly protest apinst this proposed action by Congress. Resolved, That a. copy of these resolutions be forwarded to the Sena.tors from 

the State of N~w ork and to each member of the Congressional delegation. W. R. GRACEt.!'resident. C. H. T. COLLu;, Chairman .Executive Committee. R. T. GREENER, Secretary. H. L. HOTCHKISS, Treasurer. 

THE REVENUE BILL. 

The PRESIDENT pro tern.pore. Is there further morning business? 

If there be none, that order is closed. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Honse bill 9416. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate, as in Committee of the 

Whole, resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. 9416) to reduce 

the revenue and equalize duties on imports, and for other purposes. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The reading of the bill will proceed. 

The Chief Clerk read paragraph 162, as follows: 

162. Files, file-blanks, rasps, and floats, of all cuts and kinds, 4 inches in length 

and under, 35 cents per dozen; over 4 inches in lenglh and under 9 inches, 75 cents per dozen; 9 inches in length and under 14 inche,,, $1,30 per dozen; 14 inches in length and over, $2 per dozen. 

Mr. COKE. Mr. President, I do not rise to discuss this particular 

paragraph, but to make some general observations with reference to 

the bill. 

The revenues for the support of the Government are derived ma.inly 

from duties paid at our custom-houses on foreign goods imported into 

this country, and the laws which fix and prescribe the rates of duty 

to be so paid are called our tariff laws. The tariff bill now before the 

Senate, which the Republican party proposes to enact into law, will, if 

passed, supersede and supplant our existing tariff laws and be the law 

governing the subject. Before going into the discussion I propose to 

present of the merits of this bill, in order to a proper understanding of 

the general subject I will read from a pamphlet of remarkable ability, 

published in 1843 by Governor James Whitcomb, of Indiana, one of 

the most distinguished men of his day and at the time of his death a member of this body. Says Governor Whit<lomb: 

WHAT IS A. TA.RIFF? 

It is a law of Congress which requires goods landed in our ports or b1·ought 

into our country to pay a tax, and this tax is called a duty. The itreat object of 

such a law is to raise money for the national Treasury, to pay the expenses of 

the Government. The goods, when landed, paas throu&h custom-houses at the 

ports, where they a.re examined, weighed, measured, or counted by the Govern- ment officers, who receive the amount of the tax. But this tax, although at first paid by the importer of the goods at the cwitomhouse, is at last paid by the people. Because the hiirher the tariff or tax is on a particular kind of goods, the higher must the whole.sale importer eell it &f~rwards to make a profit in his business. For instance, if the importer brin&s in 

cloth for which he gave SI a yard and be wants to make 10 per cent. profit on it, 

he must sell it for il.10. If the ta.riff duty, or tax, on it is 100 per cent.t t;iiat is 

another dollar on the yard, and Ill! he want.a to make 10 per cent. on all 1118 out- lay, he must sell it for $2.20. This he eells to the Indiana. merchant, and the 

latter also wants to ma.ke his profit of 50 per cent-., being one-third more. He will therefore have to sell it to one of our farmf\1'8 or mechanics for $3.30 a yard. Here we 11ee tha.t the importer in the flrat place paid only S1 a. yard tax In to the Treasury, but the dollar atlast comes out of the farmer or mechanic who buys the cloth for use, with the profit on it, making 60 cents more. Thus we aee that 

the importing merchant when he sells his goods not only charces the first cost and a profit on it, but he adds the a.mount of the tax at the custom-house and a 

-- -.. 
.... "" .. -' - .... ; 

;. 

8911 .. 1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 

profit on that also. And an additional profit is charged on both cost and tax by 

e"i·ery merchant through whose hands they afterward pass, until they are at last bought for actual use of the retail merchant, who charges his profit at, say, from 33 to 100 per cent. on the whole. In this manner it i.s clear that the tax caused by the tariff is always paid by the con:rnmer; and that, too, with the addition of the profits on the a.mount of the tax at every step. The further the consumer lives from the seaboard, the greater a1·e the pron ts which be is compelled to pay on the tax, besides refunding it. The ta x, therefore, is swelled much larger to the people of the new States than to those of the old. Hence it is clear that a tariff makes the goods just so much dearer to the peo- pleas the tax amounts to, with all the profits added to it. . That this is the nature and result of a. tariff, a.ll parties admit; and they are only mention ea here that what we may say hereafier may be fully understood by everyper1<on. It is our intention to guard the people against the deceptions too frequently practiced on this subject, and to enable them to be their own judges in a matter which so nearly concerns them. To apply this to our own State revenue. If the la.wof Indiana were to require that all the taxes should be pa.id by the merchants of the State for the privilege of selling their goods, it is plain that in selling their goods they would charge "' profit not only on their first cost and carriage, but on the taxes also. And if they charged but 50 per cent. profit, the purchaser or consumer would thus have to re fund to the merchant not only the taxes by him pa.id, but 50 per cent. or one-third more than the buyer would have bad to pay if called on by the col- lector. And this is precisely the operation of a tariff tax, excepting that in the latter case the goods genera.By pass through more hands before they are finally 

bought for use by the real tax-payer, and there is a fresh profit charged at every 

step. Every tax is an evil. But so iar as a tax is necessary to defray the expen!!es of Goverument, it is a necessary evil. When such expenses become extrava- gant, the additional tax thereby created is an unuecessary and unmitigated evil. It is the duty of Government, therefore, to cut down and retrench its ex- penditures as much as possible, so as to lessen the burden of the taxes. There has always been a ta.ritf lawin the United States, of some kind or other, Bince the first Congress under the Constitution. No serious proposition bas ever been made in Congress or by the Government to abolish it. The only contest has been between those who are for a high, or (as it is sometimes called) a pro- tective tariff, and those who are for a low or revenue tariff. 

The principles applicable to tariff taxation as expounded in this ex- tract are as pertinent to-day as they were when. Governor Whitcomb 

wrote in 1843. It will be seen from this clear and logical exposition 

of the su~ject that the censumers of imported goods, and, as will be 

hereafter shown, of the corresponding goods of domestic manufacture, 

pay a price for them enhanced not only by the duty paid at the customhouse, but by the profits added by every hand through which they pass 

before reaching them. 

While the duties collected in our custom-houses on foreign goods imported into this country are paid into the national Treasury, the price 

to our people of the same articles of domestic manufacture is tncreased 

to the exteut of the duty on the foreign article, swollen by_ the profits 

of all who handle them. The cost of the foreign article w~ the tariff 

duty added, as well as the intermediate profits, fixes the price of the 

corresponding home-manufactured article to the consumer. On this 

point I read from the celebrated report on manufactures, made in 1832 

by John Quincy Adams: The doctrin~ that duties of import cheapen the price of the articles upon which they are levied seems to conflict with the first dictates of common sense. The duty constitutes a part of the price of the whole ml'ISS of the article in the market. It is substantially paid upon the article of domestic manufacture as well as upon that of foreign production. Upon one it is a bounty, upon the other a. burden, and the repeal of the tax must operate as a.n equivalent reduction of the price of the article, whether foreign or domestic. We say. so long as the importation 

continu;s. the du~ must be raid by thc;,purchaser~_of the art!cle. * 

The incidental effect of competition in the market, excited, on the pa.rt of the domestic manufacturer, by the aggravation of duty upon the corresponding article imported from abroad to reduce the price of the article, must be transient and momentary. The general and permanent effect must be to increase the price of the article to the extent of the additional dutyi and it is then paid by the consumer. If it were not so, if the general effect ot adding to a. duty were to reduce the price of the article upon which it is levied, the converse of the proposition would also be true, and the operation for increasing the price of the domestic atticle would be to repeal the duty upon the same article imported- an experiment which · the friends of our internal industry will not be de~irous 

of makin~. We can not subscribe, therefore, t-0 the doctrine that the duties of import protective of our own manufactures are paid by the foreign merchant or manufacturer. 

During the fiscal year ending Jane 30, 1889, $223,832, 741.69 were collected under our tariff laws at the custom-houses on foreign goods 

imported into this country. This is the entire revenue realized by the 

Go'\'ernment from tariff taxation for that, the last fiscal year. By tbe 

census of 1870 it was estimated that $4,000,000,000 worth of manu- factured products were annually consumed in the United States. In 

1880 it was estimated that between five and six billions of dollars' 

worth of manufactured products were consumed. The estimate for 

1890 is that the annual consumption of manufactured products in the 

United States is not less than $7,000,000,000 worth, and probably more. All these manufactured products, except a little more tban 

$400,000,000 worth, which are annually imported from foreign coun- tries and on which the duties I have referred to are paid, are homemade or domestic manufactures, which I have shown are largely increased in cost to the people by oar excessive tariff duties, which 

increase is received by the manufacturers. 

What is the amount of this increase, this addition to the price of 

our domestic manufactures paid by our people and thus received by our 

manufacturers? While it is impossible to state exactly what it is, an 

estimate which shall approximate correctness is easily made. In order 

that the calculation may be indisputably within bounds, instead of 

assuming the entire seven billions of manufactured products consumed 

in the United States durin~ the last ye.ar, I will take fom billions as 

the basis, and, instead of 47 per cent., the average of duties under the 

· . . , 

existing tariff, I will e.stimate on the basis of 25 per cent. increase. 

These discounts will surely meet ::ill the offsets and drawbacks that can pos~ibly be claimed; and on this basis the manufacturers received an- nually under the tariff a. bounty on products oi domestic manufacture, 

collected from the people ot the United States of$1,000,000,000. On 

this basis for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1890, the results of taxation under the tariff and the distribution of its proceeds may be thus 

tabulated: 

Revenue received by the Government. $223,832, 741. 

Bounty received by manufacturers, $1,000,000,000. 

It follows, Mr. President, that for every dollar paid into the national 

Treasury under the operation of the tariff, about four and a half dollars go into the pockets of the manufacturers. This vast sum of money 

collected by American manufacturers under the tariff, amounting t.o 

nearly $3,000,000 for every day in the year, is bounty, is tribute, is 

royalty paid by six-sevenths of the American people to the manufact- , urers, who, with their employes, constitute the remaining seventh. 

The $1, 000, 000, 000 received annually under existing laws by the man- ufacturers as bounty, to be greatly increased if the pending bill is 

passed, is nearly three times as great in amount as the~annual sum nec- essary to pay all the expenses of every character and description, ordinary and extraordinary, of the United States Government, including· pensions, interest on the public debt, and all other liabilities. 

The great war debt of the United States, which reached its highest 

figure on the 31st of August, 1865, amounting at that date to $2,846,-

020,742.04, is not three times as great as the amount thus annually 

given as a bonus, a bounty under the ta.riff t.o the manufacturers, and 

this bounty is increasing as the population, wealth, and re.<iources of 

the country increase. The safety of those who receive this bounty 

lies in the fact that the money is not collected directly from the people 

by the tax-gatherer. If this vast sum was collected annually from the 

people and paid over to a class already the richest and most opulent in 

this country, its monstrous iniquity would be so apparent that its defeat would be assured. It is collected indirectly, but with absolnte 

certainty, in the increased prices paid by the people, under the operation of the tariff, for every article of manufacture used or consumed 

by them, without exception. No man can or does escape the payment of this tax. The Government may fail, by an eYasion of the revenue laws, by smuggling, by the dishonesty of officials, to receive 

its tariff dues, but the tax for the manufacturer's benefit is paid as certainly as a manufactured article is bought or consumed. 

A system of taxation producing results such as these is an anomaly 

under a Government like ours, which is based on the fundamental principle that all men stand equal before the law, and which bas for one of 

its maxims, "Equalrightsforall, specialprivilegesfornone." An equal 

and just system of taxation which shall distribute the burdens of Governmentfairlyandindueproportionamongthepeopleof the whole coun- try is the only system which accords with the genius, the spirit, the 

theory of our Government. A law which, like the existing tariff law on our statute-book and the still more obnoxious law proposed in the 

pending bill, makes so-called ''protection,'' that is, the payment of 

unearned bounties to manufacturers, the principal and the raising of revenues to support the Government a merely incidental purpose, is violative of every principle of free government, destructive of that equality 

before the law guarantied by the Constitution to American citizens, 

and subversive of the foundations of popular liberty, in that it enslaves 

the great body of the people to the unrequited service of the manufacturing class. 

Mr. President, in the construction of the pending bill, the controlling 

consideration seems to have been, not a careful conservation of all the 

great interests of the country, not an equal distribution of the burdens of 

taxation among all the people, not t-0 raise a sufficiency of revenue and no more than enouj?;h for the support of the Government, but, ignoring 

all these, tq so use the taxing vower of the Government as to build up, 

at any cost or sacrifice to the whole people of this country, the private 

and personal fortunes of that small proportion of the American people 

engaged in manufacturing. The tariff laws on our statute-book were placed there in obedience to reQu.irements for revenue of a great war. Its authors, as the congressional record shows, repeatedly as.sured the 

country pendin&: its passage that it was intended to be only temporary, 

while the pressure of war continued, and would be swept from the 

statute-book so soon as the great military and naval operations then 

ne~essary would permit. 

More than a quart.er of a century bas elapsed since the last gun of 

the war was fired, the great army disbanded, and the navy dismantled, 

since profound peace commenced her beneficent reign over our country; 

and yet the American Senate is now considering a tariff bill, already 

passed through the House, which raises the taxation of the war tariff 

from an average of 47 per cent. ad valorem to that of 51 per cent., 

which is increased to an average of 62 per cent. by the cust-0ms administrative bill. 'fhe legislative history of this country will be 

searched in vain for any parallel to this bill, not only in the-oppressfreness of the rates of taxation, but in discriminations against the 

laborine; people, the agricultural class, and the poor, the needy, and 

the humble, and in favo::: of the rich and powerful. From the first 

schedule in the bill t.o the last, this characteristic is found naked and 

undisguised. An examination of the bill will show universally, almost, 

,.... 

_, .: 

; 

. ' 

.· ... 

:. 

: 

-, 

--

·. \ 

... . -
·. 

> • 

·. 

' ·. 

. '• 

''. . ,,. 

.... . I 

8912 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. .AUGUST 21, 

that low-priced goods, such as are used by the poor and laboring people, are selected for the highest and most exorbitant rates of taxation. 

In proof of this, and as a fair portraiture of the bill in this respect, I 

will read from the statements of a number of importers and merchants, 

made before the Senate Finance Committee, all or nearly all of whom are Republicans and protectionists and all of whom are experts in the 

matters about which they testify. 

Here is the statement of James M. Constable, of New York, acting as chairman of the committee which appeared before the Senate Finance 

Committee. Following his statement is that of Henry W. Curtis, of 

New York. Speaking of silk, he says: 

We represent S500,000,000 of capital employed in domestic mills, and the em- ployment of thousands and hundreds of thousands of operatiyes, 

* * * • * It is a. well known fact to every manufacturer of silk that if a lot of raw silk is sent to the dyer for the purpose ot the productiQn of cheaper articles in silk goods, it will return, after tbat dyeing, from 28 to 30 ounees to the pound; 

whereas that same silk sent to the dyer for the purpose of the production of the finer grades of silk will be returned at 18 ounces to the pound. '.rherefore, thie bill imp.oses upon tho poor people, who use t.he lowest grades of silk, a difference in dut~ between 30 and 18 ounces to the pound, that difference being chemicals and dye-stuffs. In that feature alone the bill is most irregular and unjust.,. 

Statement of Mr. James H. Thorp. He says: 

I desire to call your attention to Schedule I., section 413. The article of silk plush used in the construction of furniture, upholstering purposes, box and album coverings, and in ''arious other ways, now pays the Government a duty of 00 per cent. ad valorem. The proposed change in the l\lcKinley bill will make the duty ·vary from 73 to 148 per cent., and the latter incre~e upon the lowest grades, which are used in the cheapest work. '.rhis will be prohibitory, 

giving the control of prices to two or three American manufacturers. 

1\Ir. Daniel l\IcKeever, of New York City, makes the following statement.: 

I desire to say a. few words to you on the subject of g·ooc!s for men and women's wear, Schedule K, section 39t Coa.t-liniugs nre CJne of thlj necessary things for people who think they have to wear a. coat. I present here, and will leave with the committee, two samples, both made of the same material and both costiug the same in England. They cost 10 cents a yard. They are 32 inches wide. The rate of duty is 78!- per cent. o.t 11resent.. One of the m·ti- cles they propose to r11.ise to 102 per cent.. and the other one, under the McKinley bill, to 15.5 per cent.; in one case 50 per cent. and the other 100 per cent. more than the present duty on precisely the sarue thing. Jn the summer, or in warm weather. we wear a lhrht coat and we want a. light lining. In winter time we want a hea,·y lining. One of the samples here weighs 3} ounces to the running yard aud the ot,her 3.8 ounces. The extra. weight is simply to give more warmth to tbe poor man, because gentlemen who can afford a. very tine coat will not buy a IO.cent article. '£his addition is made by making goods that are over 4 ounces in weight pay 44 cents and 20 percent. nd ,·alorem. There is no difference whatever in the samples except a slight difference in the weight, nnd both cost 10 cents a rur.ning ynrd. One is ad- Take the matter or silk: and cotlon. Silk nncl cotton \rel vet, costing 93 pf en- Ynnced from 7Sl to 102 per cent. and the other from 78;\- to 1:>5 per cent. Mr. nigs a. meter, pays 50 per cent. duty at the present lime, and will, under the l\Ic;KI~"LEY has evidently wade up bis mind that the poor man, if he wants to McKinley bill, pay 118 per cent. A silk velvet costing 8 frtlncs 25 centimes pays wear any clothing, shall pay very heavy for it. 

to-Oay 50 per cent., i.nd under the McKinley bill it will pay 5i per cent. This • " • * 3 • • 

illustrates to you the point. that the l\:IcKinlcy bill bears the hardest upon the The next question to which I wish to call the attention of the committee is 

people who can afford it the least. paragraph 31.8, relating to cotton corduroy. Of course yon gentlemen are aware Take the item of piece-dyed cotton-back satin, an article which is used almo:;t that there is no duty on cotton in this country i but there is a protection in this entirely by the poorest classes and gives the Sunday attire to our working girls, way: Cotton ltas got to be shipped away and reshipped hei·e manufactured, the poor woman's luxury. You tnke a sixteen cotton-back satin. costing 70 and that, together with the matter of freight, insurance, etc., equals a duty of 35 centimes to the meter, and to-day it pays 50 per cent. duty, while under this bill percent. on those goods. It is proposed to make a specific and ad valorem duty, 

It will pny 73 per cent. That is nn increase of 46} per cent. in the amount of that so that an article costing IH cents is raised froUl 35 per cent.. to iO per cent., an duty. · fl d Now, take another article in the same line, costing I franc a.; cent.ime:i to the increase o 00 per cent. a valorem. As we go along from goods costing 15} 

meter, and it pays 60 per cent. As you go up in value you go down in duty. cents to 17 cents we find that the duty is rai ed from 35 per cent. to 64 pel· cent. The same is t.rue of the 24-inch satin now paying a duty of 50 per cent., which These nre cheap goods. 'Vhen we come to something costing 36 cents, the rate 

would be ra.t11ed to 73f per cent., while the same good11, costing l franc 19 cen- is only increased from 35 per cent,. to 4t per cent. 

times, would pay 54t per cent. under the McKinley tnrift bill. ContinuinD' the discrimination a!l:linst the poor You take the ordinary gros-grain silk, selling for from 55 to 60 cents a yard, "" . • "' " . • costing I franc 80 centimes, and it will pay, under the McKinley bill, roper cent. .I now ~o~e to Sec~1on K. paragraph 41.:., relaLmg t-0 vel ,·els, plushes, or other duty. You take that same article, costing$1.25 a yard, and it will pay 56percent. pile fabric!! 111 the p1e.ce. These ar~ goods that. are used for women's clonks. 

duty under the MaKinley bill. So I might go on through this whole schedule. A wecham<: whose wife can not .afford !!' se~lskm. garment wants ~o have the It it is the pleasure of the committee, I can in a very few minutes have prepared I ~ext b~s~ thm~she can get. ~er~ is !ill article m which a A"Rrmentreta1ls for about for them another schedule covering the higher g·rades of silk, running from .,.15 <?r ,,lo. It isa. very good mutattonofregula! seal. The!!ompleted garment 

Sl.50 to $2 a. yard, which will show that this bill mises. in many instances, the I retails for about 515 or $16. Th~ cost of that rn .England 1s S!l.50 ~ yard, nud duty not nt all, and in some cases eyen decreases the duh-. the.present duty 50 per cent. It is proposed to raise that duty to 225 per cent., · an mcrease of 350 per cent. 

Again a question by Mr Vance· I • • • • "' • • t • • 'l'he duty is increased from 50 to 90 per cen~. in one case and in the other one "'Will you allow me to ask: you if you 118.\·e examined nil these schedules, and from 50 to 225 per cent. In other words, a.man or a woman who can only afford if the discrimination against cheaper goods runs all the way through? to buy a $15 cloak would be compelled to pay a 225 per cent. duty. Mr. CURTIS. Yes, sir. - Th · Mr. VANCE. The higher the price of tbe goods the lower the duty, and the en again: 

lower the price the higher the duty, nll the way through'? IIere is a.n article in astrakha11 goods, costing 50 cents a yard. Ilcomes under Mr.CuRTrs. Yes, sir. paragraph 392. 

Mr. Isador Straus, of New York City, addressed the committee. Ile Being worsted goods. 

says: 

By the .McKinley administralh·e bill, restoring the duty on packages, etc.-

That is speaking of China and glass and earthenwarethese industries receh·e an additional protectlon to that which they succeeded in procuring in the former tariff bill of from 11~ to I:> per cent., or, in other words, goods payin~ a duty of 55 per cent. to-Oay will have to pa.y from W. to 70 per cent., and goods paying 60 per cent. to-day from 68 to 75 per cent., the heavier rates in every CllSe falling on the cheaper goods used by the poorer closses. 

Again, on the same subject, he says: 

1Vhy a. specific duty should be levied on articles of the direst neces3ity which are not consumed to any extent by the richer people in cities who ha.Ye gas nt their disposal, but on the poorer classes in the city and the country who de- pend upon a. lamp for their light, ranging from 72 to 450per cent., certainly de- serves explanation. 

Again, says Mr. Strauss, speaking of silver glassware: 

' I have al ways referred to it as by the dozen. Here is anurticleof sih·erglass· ware which is only bought by the Yery poorest. people for the purpose of deco-

~~U~l~. tbeir mantels fo1· Christmas presents. It is a ridiculously low-priced 

llir. SHERMAN. What is t.hat worth? Mr. STRAUSS. That article costs to import it to-day 85 cents a dozen. It would cost to import it under the McKinley bill (provided we have interpreted it cor- rectly, and that is open to doubt, because it does not say whether it is net weight or gross weight upon which the duty will be levied, but we have fio-ured it both ways), if the duty of 10 cents per pound be on the net weight, that"piece will cost $1.72 in!ltead of 85 cents a dozen. 

Then he goes on to show that Ja.mp·chimneys used by the ooorer cla~ of people have an enormous duty placed on them under tiie McKinley bill. 

Statement of Mr. Ernest Werner: 

l\Ir. Hrscocx:. Are you a.woolen importer'? Mr. WERNER. No, sir; I am a dealer in woolen goods, domestic :ind imported. 

My remarks refer entirely to the importation of woolen cloth, cassimeres etc. The proposed woolen schedules (H. R. 9il6j will establish absolutely p~ohib­ itive rates on all goods for men's wear worn by the masses. T~e tarift'ofl883was practically prohibitiYe on woolen cloths, cassimeres, etc., 

costmg less than 80 cents per pound (rate 35 cents per pound and S5 per cent ad valorem), of which there were imported in round figures- ' 

~:!::::::::::::::::::::::::·:·:·:·::::·:::::·:·:::::: ir::a 1 ~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ]~~:~ paying an average rate of duty of 93 per cent., the importations of cloths eassimeres, etc., costing nbo,·e 80 cents per pound in >alue. ' 

.-

The present dutySays Mr. I\IcKeeverThe present duty on that is 74 per cent. I undel'stand that these goods are not made in this country. 

Mr. McKeever says again: 

'.fhey are very generally worn by the poor consume1·s throughout lWs country 

where they need warm garme1~~. They weigh from 24 to 25 ounces per yard'. 

They are a henvy, coarse fabnc. '.rhey have pa.id a duty heretofore as I say from 72i- to 74 per cent., and it is proposed to raise it to 160and1~. ' ' NowContinues l'tlr. McKeeverwhen you get inlo finer goods costing $2.50, also a heavy goods, but used by the better class of consumers, on which the duty to day is 61 per.cent., they propose to raise it to 100 per cent., thus discriminating again against the poor consumer. 

He says: 

I respectfully submit that the rate of duty provided in bill II. R. !Hl6 on plushes, etc., under section 34.8, is unnecessary, prohibitory in many instances and discriminates against the poor consumer. ' • • • * • • • At present the duty on this class of goods (section 318) is from 35 t.o 40 per cent ad vnlorem. which, in the proposed rates, will 1·un from 80 per cent. down to~ little o>er 30 per cent .. but here is where the discrimination comes in, because the lower rates would be assessed on the finer goods, while the higher rates would be leviecl on the poor roan. 

Again he says: 

I als'? call your attention to:samples of astrakhan, which I submilted, coyered by section 392. These goods are not made to-day in this country, althoun-h their protection is ,so i;>er cent., and it is proposed to increase this just I~ per0

cent. l'lus class of goods is used altogether by the labormg man, mechanic or fllnner, and the S!\me discriminations, previously referred to, apply here. ne'nce the present rate of duty should not be increased. I submitted samples of a silk-plush that are dutiable under section 413. The samples I submitted show that it is proposed to raise the r:ites of duty on the lower grade from 50 to 225 per cent., while the finer the good!! the less in proportion is t.he duty. You will observe here the same discrimination against the wol'kingmnu,nr.d I would respectfully submit--

He goes on to propose certain amendments to the section which I 

pause to say have not been made. 

Mr. P. B. Worrall, of New York City, speaking of the matter of 

dress-goods, says: 

This is what we call a cotton· warp cassimere and thff woof is made from woo). 

: 
-· ... 

.. : 

.' ·' ",•"" . -·· · .. ·= ,'· 

. •' " '-

. 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD---SENATE. 8913- ~ 

wbich is imported largely from Australia.. This is a piece of merchandise. It is 4.5 inches in width and at present costs 18l cents a yard. The present duty is 68 per cent. and the proposed duty is 104 per cent. ·That represents a very large class of merchandise that. is almost universally worn. 

Mr. VOORHEES, a member of the committee, said: 

These tremendous increases are a surprise t-0 me. What reason is assigned in the trade, that is, in the business, to justify them? Mr. Worm.ALL. It. is nothing but prohibition. It is not protection. 

This gentleman continues: 

Now, there is one exlract that I am going to read to you, gentlemen, made by a man who is our strongest competitor int.he manufacture of these articles in the United States of America. He stated t-0 hJs stockholders in the latter part of March, I think-I have no hesitation in giving you the name; it. is Mr. 'Vhitman, treasurer of the Arlingt-0n Mills. At a special meeting of the stock- holders held on the 29th or l\1arch, 1890, he said: "I have been your treasurer for a consecutive period of twenty years. Dur- ing this period the avcra2e earnings have been 20.8 per cent. upon the capital. The earnings of In.st year were nearly three and a half times those of the year previous, and there is every indication that the comin2' year will be one of the most profitable in the company's hist-0ry ." 

And yet, Mr. President, upon the goods manufactured by this :firm 

a great increase of duty was made in this bill. 

There is but one other articleSays Mr. Worrall-

! will speak about, and that is the article of French cassimere. You will find here the samples of the goods with the classification under the present rate of duty and that under the proposed rate of duty. On the lower grade of goods 

they are increased 32 per cent., and on the better class the duty is increased 20 per cent., and thie principle would seem t-0 run through the entire tariff bill. 

Mr. Vanhorne, of New York City, addre...ci.sed the committee on the 

subject of common window-glass, which this bill raises from 106 per 

cent. to 120 per cent., an article of universal use and consumption, 

and especially among the poorer and laboring classes of our people. 

Mr. Vanhorne further says: 

We pay better wages than any manufacturer, and employ our men twelve months iu the year, while no glass factory runs over ten months and few over eight months in the year. The glass manufacturer needs no further protection, as the present duty is more than the tota.l cost of labor. Under these circumstances we protest against any increase of duty or any further complication in the manner of collecting it. We ask, as American ciLizens, the privilege of embarking in any line of legiti- mate commerce, without having la.we enacted with the sole purpose of hampering us for the benefit of any other citizen who does not choose to display our enterprise, but who is content to do business only when protected from com- petition by the power of the Government. '\Ve ask that no article be taxed over 100 per cent. on its foreign value. 

Mr. John Gibb, of New York City, aJsoaddressed the committee" to 

protest a,,,<YB.inst the proposed increase in the rate of duty from 40 to 60 

per cent. on laces, curtains, and embroideries, as provided in the McKinley tariff bill, now before Congress." He says: 

In these goods there is no existing industry to be protected, au cl in the nature of things there can not be any for a. great many yea.1'!> to come. 

Mr. Gustav Blumenthal, representing the New York and Philadelpbia importers of buttons, says: 

These domestic manufacturers of buttons were, however, smart enough not to ask for an average duty of 250 to 300 per cent. on all the buttons imported, because this would show how outrageously high this duty would be; but by 

proposing a. line ofdnty of only 1 cent per line, which sounds small, and 25 per cent. ad valorem on all hard buttons, and4 cents per line on all pearl buttons, 

they have succeeded, nevertheless, in putting the average ad valorem duty on buttons, as now imported, from 250 to 300 per cent., if not wore. Of course I may n.dd that no one expects to import buttons if this bill shculd pass as it now 

reads. 

He continues: 

I have a button manufactured in France and on which the ad valorem duly from 18 to 24 line ayerages 640 per cent. Of course the proposed duty of 4 cent3 pP.r line will stop the importation of any pearl buttons of whatever kind or 

nature. · 

A number oflarge manufacturers ofclotbing and other articles, represented by a committee, appeared before the Finance Committee, from 

whom I will read. Alluding to the duties on spectacles and eyeglasses, 

raising tbe duties from 45 per cent. to $6 per gross and 35 per cent. 

ad valorem, they said: 

This will make the duties on- Articles costing 10 fran<!$ per gross, 335 per cent. instead of 45 per cent. Articles costing 15 francs per gross, 235 per cent. instead of 45 per cent. Articles costing 20 francs per gross, 18.5 per cent. instead of 45 per cent. Articles costing 30 francs per gross, 135 per cent. instead of 45 per cent. Articles costing 45 francs ver gross, 110 per cent. instead of 45 per cent. Articles costing 60 francs per gross, 85 per cent. instead of 45 per cent. 

Showing a regular rate of progression from the cheapest article, costing 10 francs per gross 335 per cent., down through the higher-priced 

articles, falling as it goes, the hi~hest-priced article bearing the lowest 

duty and the lowest-priced article bearing the highest duty. 

Mr. S. W. Thomas, who appeared before the committee, said: 

The range of duty is from 54 per cent. on the highest-priced goods up to 188 per cent. on the lowest priced. 

Anotber witness, referring to spectacles and eye-glasses, gave the same 

testimony that was given by the gentleman from whom I have just 

read. 

Pr;> test of New York importers and merchants against the McKinley tariff bill. 

Among other things they say: 

'Ve contend that the proposed tariff bill in almost all its sections provides for a. higher rate of duty on low-priced and staple articles nece.s.sary to the wellXXI-558 

·I 

being and comfort of the people, and thus materially increasing the cost or liv- ini;r, especially the poorer classes, placing the Ameyican artisan and producer at a disadvantage in the production of all kinds of commodities. We believe that the proposed legL;Jation would seriously impair the financial and commercial relations of our country with foreign nations, inviting retalia- tory laws and putting In jeopardy the sales of -0ur breadstuffs, provisions, and manufactures in the markets oft-he world, thus working an injury which would not be felt by the merchants alone, but as well by the banks, the business com- munity, the la.boring classes, and the consumers of the country at large. 

The subcommittee on woolens state to the Senate Finance Committee: 

In connection with the foregoing tabulated statement, we wish to say that the proposed woolen schedules will establish absolutely prohibitive rates on all goods for men's wear worn by the masses. 

And when these rat.es are ~tablisbed upon these goods worn by the 

masses of our people and foreitJ;n competition is excluded, then comes 

the inevitable trust and combination amon·2: the manufacturers to put 

the prices up and keep them up. 

The tariff of 1883 was practically prohibitive on woolen cloths, cassimeres, 

etc., costing less than 80 cents per pound (rate 35 cents per pound and 35 per cent. ad valorem), of which there were imported, in round figuresGiving a table which I shall not read. After reviewing this subject 

the subcommittee say: · • 

Thus it appears.that the cheaper grade of goods will suffer the worst from the proposed bilL Its provisions will bear with greatest weight on the labor- ing classes and will lay its greatest burden on the poor man. 

The subcommittee on hosiery, among other things, state: 

The claim has been for a. tariff sufficient to offset the lower wages paid in Europe. The rate propo~d in the bill in question is more than the entire orig- inal cost of the material, waste, wages, mill and other expenses of the domestio article of average value. An increa.seSay theyof the duties on all these goods will produce possibly higher prices !or the stock on hand for a. short while or perhaps for a. longer period of time, if the great manufacturers here form a trust excluding all new mills, and preventing 

them, by reducing their owu goods under cost for some time, from prospering. The members of the trust, say ten or twenty, will make handsome profits, per- haps ~50.000 each a year, which would put at best $1.000.000 into their treasury. which with most of them is overflowing already. For this one million cowing to at most twenty men, the whole population of the United States, men, women, and children, would be taxed from 25 to 40 cents a head a year, say 60,000,000, 

supposing that 10,000,000 do not wear any stockings, SL5,000,000 to S24,000,000. 

Only twenty men in a concern now interested in this manufacture, 

and a tax of from 25 to 40cents a head per year is levied on 60,000,000 

people to put into the treasury of these twenty men from :fifteen to 

twenty-four million dollars per annum! 

Mr. President, these gentleme~ from whose testimony I am reading 

are experts. They know what they are talking about. They are manufacturers; they are importers; they are wholesale dealers~ they are 

merchants of great capital and great experience in trade and commerce, 

and I have been reading what they have said af>out this bill. 

Mr. GRAY. What page is the Senator reading from? 

Mr. COKE. I have been reading from a good many pages, but this 

partfoular one is page 116, at the top of the page. 

Another gives the rate or per cent. of duty on buttons. He says: 

Pearl buttons (No. 3) which have been~ per cent. on theproposednewta.riff, have now, according to an amendment which passed the House, been put down at 4 cents per line, button measure, thus making the following rates of duties on the most important item in the butt-On business. On a 20-line button of the following five qualities, of which the largest quantities are sold, the rates of 

duty would be as follows: Per cent. 

Superfine, white, two-bole pearl button................................................... 10 Fine hvo-hole pearl button....................................................................... lfl Three-quarters fine, white, two-hole pearl button...... ..... ...................•.... 170 Half fine, white, two hole pearl button ....................................... :............. 222 Third quality white, two-hole pearl button............................................. 500 

It is thus, Mr. President, and I challenge any man to deny the asser .. 

tion, that we find in every schedule of this bill the very highest prices 

placed upon goods which must be consumed by the poorest people in 

this country. 

The subcommittee appointed by the body of merchants from w horn I 

have been reading, in reporting on the subject of braid and braid yarns,. 

among other things, say: 

The rates as set forth in the proposed bill are entirely prohibitory on manu- factured bra.ids of the heavier and lower-priced qualities. 

On the heavier and lower-priced qualities the rates of du.ty are prohibitory absolutely, they say, and what does that mean? It means 

that foreign competition being excluded, the poor people "'110 consume 

these articles are deliberately bound band and foot to the trusts and combinations of American manufacturers. 

The rates as set forth in the proposed bill are entirely prohibitory on manu- factured bra.ids of the heavier and lower-priced qualities, which a.re used en- - tirely for low-priced goods for the poorer and working classes; the lighter weiJ?hts of fine goods are not advanced to any extent to compare with the lower grades. 

And the committee file a table with their report to verify what they 

say. 

The enOI"mity of the proposed tariff strikingly appearsSays this committeein an item like that of silver vases-in the above table. A glass vase, silvered to resem blo a fine china article, will be taxed under the new tariff 334 per cent., 

wpile ftne china vases will come in bnder a. duty of only 60 per cent. Moreover, 

•. 

·. 

'· 

-· 

\I• 

I 

.-. 

'. 

.... 

-·f 

; . 

· t . "' 
.>. 

,: 

.~ I• 

........ ·• 

-. 

..... 

·. 

• < 

,· 

-. 

.. ~ _ .. ..: •: ... " ' . ... ; ... "- -" 

8914 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21; 

the specific duty is calculated on the net weight of goods. If collected unde~ 

the gross weight, as, under the indefinite language of the bill, may be the ca"e. the rate may be vastly increa ed. Thus it will appear that the poor man will be specially injured by the change. 

The subcommittee, reporting again on spectacles and eyeglasses, says: 

It will be seen that the cheaper articles; not made in this country, and used by the working classes, will be taxed to an extent nearly trebling their cost. and prtthibiting their sale, whilst as the prices increase the wealthy buyers are taxed 

less. 

The committee for the Wholesale Hardware Association say, among 

other things: 

Permit us to call your attention to the discrimination between the "weapon of the wealthy'' and the shotgun of the masses. The fine hammerless guns from Birmingham and London, costing $60 to ..,200, will pay from 38 to 45 per cent. duty, as against 70 to 100 per cent. on the cheap but reliable breech-loader. 

On tin-plate there is an ~ncreac;e, say this committee, of over 125 per 

cent. in the amount of duty to be paid, with not one pound of tin-plate 

ever manufactured for sale in this country and not a manufactory of 

tin-plate in the United States. I mean that not one pound of the tin 

metal has ever been dag out of the earth and placed in shape for sale 

and exposed to sale in the United States, and there is to-day not a manufacturer of tin-pl~te in .the United States. One hundred and twentyfive per cent. duty is to be paid on tin-plate, and then we are informed 

by the Senator from Rbode Island that a duty of 4 per cent. is to be 

added on the importation of block-tin. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Would I trouble the Senator if I interrupted him 

at that point? 

Mr. COKE. Not at all • Mr. ALDRICH. I wish to ask him what authority he is giving for 

the statement that the duty on tin-plate would be 125 per cent. 

Mr. COKE. That is what this committee say. It is an increase, I 

should ha>e said, of over 125 per cent. 

Mr. PLA.TT. On the present duty? 

.Mr. COKE. That is the increase over the present rate of duty. 

'Mr. ALDRICH. That is not mathematically correct, evidently. 

Mr. COKE. That is the increase over the present rate of duty. 

Some pnt it at 120 and others at 125 over the present rate of duty. 

There is not a manufuctory of tin-plate in the United States and not a 

tin mine that has ever been worked in the United States. 

There is not an article of more universal consumption on the tariff list, 

Mr. President, than this article of tin, and this dnty upon it, which 

throws the consuwersoftin into the bands of combinations in the United 

States to put up and keep up its price, is a direct blow at the agricultural and all other interests of this conn try. There is no article so universa1ly used in this tariff lis~, as I said before, as tin. Every poor 

family in this country uses it. There is not a family in the United 

States, I presume, which in some form or other does not directly or indirectly use tin vesl!eJs of some sort. Our meat canneries, fruit and 

vegetable canneries, and fish canneries nse immense quantities of it, 

while it is a material of the first importance for roofing and guttering 

throughout the country. Yon tax it to exclude foreign competition 

so that the monopolists can put their price upon it. Yon tax every 

man, woman, and child in this whole country; yon tax every interest 

in this country, in this tax on tin. This report says: 

It seems that the t~x of l cent per pound i·s to be retained until the 1st of July, 

1891, and after that time all gauges from 25 to 29 are to be taxed 2i cents per pound, and, as nearly all tin and terne plates come within those gauges, sub- stantially that will be the rate of the whole product. Without any increa1m in the consumption, this difference would make an addition to the tin-plate duty of ~.750,000 per annum, which would make a total tax of S5,750,000 per annum for the tin·plates needed for this country's welfare, and, judging from the past increase in the consumption, the amount must be L1 rgely in excess of e\'en these enormous figw:es. This amount is lo be drawn from the pockets of the people without being needed for Government expenses, and upon the sole proposition that by it we shall be enabled to establish a new industry, and eventually sup- ply ouraelves with tin-plates manufactured in this country. Now, multiply this amount by the ten, twenty, thirty years or moro that these duties will be de- manded by the manufacturers, and judge if it be wise to buy the industry at sucb. a price. 

The report further says: 

The present duty on tin and terne plates is 1 cent per pound, yielding the Government from S7,000,000 to $8,000,000 annually. This large amount is taken from the pockets of the people unjustly, there being not a box of tin or terne plate manufactured in the United States and not one dollar in"V"ested for its manufacture. 

In the summary of the objections to the bill by one of the committees which appeared before the Finance Committee of the Senate it is 

said, alludpg to the Hom;;e bill then before the committee: 

Third. It is unjust. The provisions of H. R. 9416 directly discriminate in fu'"'or of the ricl .. against the poorer classes. This is apparent in almost evei-y schedule. Take, for instance, low-priced dress goods. The proposed duty is 120 per cent., and tbe cheapest grades of hosiery would pay about double present rates. The farmer and the workingman would be heavily taxed for the benefit of a com· pa.ratively few manufacturers who produce more goods than this country can consume, but not eheaply enough to sell to other countries. Fourth. It handicaps our trade. 

And it goes on and shows in what way it does this. 

There is a great deal more in this pamphlet that I shall not detain 

the Senate to read. 

Mr. President. the extracts I have read from the statements of these 

experts give a fair sample of the general tenor of this bill in respect to 

its enormous and, for the most part, prohibitory rates of taution, and 

in respect to the outrageous discriminations in piling up these rates 

upon goods used in the daily life of the masses of the people1 and es- pecially of the poorer classes of them-least able to bear the oppression. The paradox in this bill is that the only pretext relied on in 

justification of the unprecedented rates of taxation it imuoses is that 

they n:re necessary for the protection of American laboring people, 

when rn truth these same laboring people are more mercilessly fleeced 

and robbed under its provisions than any other class. Senators who 

support this bill utterly refuse to give any reason for this feature of it, 

and stand mute under the charge made and reiterated daily in this debate that it loads down the poor with taxation while its burdens on the rich are comparatively light. • 

· Mr. President, the assertion that the American laboring people are 

the beneficiaries of the high tariff duties is the most transparent preten e, the most groundless and baseless fabrication, ever invented in 

the interest of greed and avarice. For every dime received by labor 

under the tariff capital receives one dollar. The rich, and not the 

poor, rece.ive the ~riff bounties. The increased cost of living by rea- son of tariff taxation more than consumes every penny received by the 

toiler under the provisions of the tariff. This has repeatedly been demonsirated in this debate on the highest official authority and remains 

unanswered. 

As a fair illustration of the operation of the tariff in this regard, Mr. 

Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner of Labor, a most thorough, exact, 

and eminent statistician, a gentleman of the highest character, a Re. 

pn blican and protectionist, appointed from the State of Massachusetts, 

where he held under the State government the same responsible office 

he now holds unaer the Federal Government, who was charged by act 

?f Congress with the duty of investigating and reporting upon this subject, has reported, after an exhaustive investigation, that all the wages 

paid in the production ofa ton of steel rails to labor is $1.58, while the 

tarif!'d~ty ~s$17 per ton. Thuswhilelaborreceivesthe pittanceof$1.58 t~e capitalist who employs the labor receives $15.42. In the pending 

bill the duty on steel rails is reduced to $11 per ton, and if it becomes 

law the Jaborer will receive$1.58, while capital will receive $9.42. In 

woolen manufactures the average duty under the existing tariff is 60l 

percent. ad valorem, which is increased through the entire schedule an 

average of more than 50 per cent. in the pending bill, while labor receives aM wages in this industry an average of only 18 per cent. 

In cotton manufactures, the average duty being 35.64 per cent. ad 

valorem under existing law, it is increased to an average of 38.~8 per 

cent. in the pending bill, while labor receives in wages 21.62 ner cent. 

only. • 

In metals and the manufactures thereof, the average ad valorem 

duty under existing law being 3 .24 per cent., is increased to 51.06 

per cent. in the pending bill, and labor receives 18.77 per cent. in 

wages. 

In silk manufacture , as was to be expected, as these products are 

almost entirely for the use of the rich, we find in the pending bill the 

smallest increase made in any schedule in the entire tariff list·, being 

from 49.61 average ad valorem per cent. under existing law, to 51.01 

per cent. In this iadustry labor receives 22.84 per cent. in wages. 

The figures showing the amount of wages paid in the industries named 

are taken from official . ources, as I will presently show. These leading schedules of this bill are mentioned a.s illnstrativeofthe character 

of the bill throughout, and the simple recital of the facts and figures 

I have given exposes and refutes the pretense that its purpose is to 

protect American labor, and shows conclusively that it is a. bill framed 

with an eye single to building up the private interests and personal 

fortunes of the owners of capital engaged in manufacturing. 

Indeed, Mr. President, in the discussion of this bill it has been 

boldly announced by those having it in charge that the purpose of the 

bill is to check importation, to exclude foreign goods from competition 

with American products, and that the raising of revenue for the support of the Government js a mere collateral incident, that protection 

is its prime moving purpose; and the English and meaning of this is 

that the American manufacturers, combined intotm ts which destroy 

competition at home and protected by the tariff against foreign competition, are left free to compel the payment. by our people of any 

price they may choos~ to place on their products, and to dole out to 

their laborers such wages as their pleasure may dictate. 

Not a day lias passed since this bill has been under consideration that 

Senators on the other side of the Cham her have not been warned that 

when the high and for the most part prohibitory duties of this bill shall 

(as they necessarily will) exclude foreign competition, our people who 

consume manufactured products will be left at the mercy of soulless 

trusts to be plundered at will; but they have been deaf to argument, 

logic, and entreaty alike. as tbey have adopted paragraph after paragraph of the bill in the interest of trusts and monopolies. Non-consuming labor-saving machinery, the most perfect in the world, admitted 

to be greatly superior to any in Europe, turns out 951 per cent. of our manufactured products, while only 41 per cent. of them is the product 

of manual labor; yet 62 per cent. ad valorem is the average rate of taxation under the tariff and the customs administrative bills, which we are 

informed by the advocates of this bill is levied for the protection of 

American labor against the pauper Ja.bor of Europe. 

A continuous stream of this same pauper labor is now and has been 
'. 

. - -· -. -~ p .. 

.. • . :.. I --

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. · - 8915 

for years pouring through oor ports at the invitation of our manu- facturers to compete in our mills and factories with Amerif',an labor, 

until the American laborer is a rare exception among the workers in 

these indnstrie . While Jree trade in labor exists to the fullest and 

fretst extent, tariff duties are piled mountain high upon foreign goods 

for the protection of American manufacturing capital. Not one dollar's 

worth of foreign goods can come into this country from abroad without 

paying an exorbitant ta.riff tax, but laborers by the hundreds of thousands to displace American laborers pour in. The exclusion of the 

competition of foreign with American capital, while foreign labor is 

free to come in, enslaves not only labor, but all the consumers of 

manufactured goods, to the owners of American manufacturing capital. 

I will read some extracts Jrom a speech made by me in April, 1888, 

in this body on the subject of the wages of labor, which I think will 

show conclusively the fa1sity of the pretense that this tariff is con- structed for the purpose of protecting American lJtbor. I will com- mence with a table furnished me by Hon. William F. Switzler, then 

Chief of the Bureau of Statistics, as follows: 

-

I ; 

Table of specified manufactures, showing amount of capital, value of materials, amount of wages, and value of product, with the per cent. of material .... - ~ 

and wages, also tlte average ad valorein rate of duty on similar importations for the fiscal year 1887. 

[Compiled from the United States census of 1880.] 

1\Ianufactures. Capital. Value or materials. 

Total amount paid in wages during the year. 

Value or products. 

Percent of- Ad ve.lo- 1 ________ ,rem rate or 

duty on 

l\Iaterials. Wages. imports, 

1887. 

Per cait. 

Cotton manufactures ..................................................................................... . $219, 504, 794 $113, 765, 537 $45, 614, 419 $'210, 950, 383 53.93 21.62 (().17 - Cotton manufactures {specific) ..................................................................... .. 208, 280, 346 102, 206, 347 42,040,510 192, 090, 110 53.21 21.88 •t5.49 Glass ......................................•....••.................................................................. 19,844,699 8, 028, 621 9,144, 100 21, 154, 57l 37.95 47.95 59.H Iron and steel manufactures .......................................................................... . 230, 971, 884 191,2n,150 55,476, 7&5 296, 557' 685 64.50 18.77 ((). 92 

Hosiery and knit goods ........•...................•..•................................................ 

Silk:. and silk goods ....................•.................................................................... 

15,579,591 13,210, 951 6, 701,475 29, 167, 227 52.15 22.97 { rs2.so 

39.37 19,125,300 22,467, 701 9, 146, 705 40,033,045 56.12 22.S4 50.00 Woolen goods ................................................................................................. . 96,095,564 100, 84.5, 611 25,836,392 160. 606, 721 62.79 16.08 Worsted } 67.21 goods ............................................................................................... . 20,374,043 23,012,628 5,683,027 33,549,942 68.59 16.94 Mixed textiles .. ..................•...................•....................................................... 37, 996,057 37,227, 741 13,316, 753 66,221, 703 56.22 20.11 e:;4.20 Wooten and worsted goods ............................................................................ . 116, 469, 607 123, 858, 239 31,519,419 194, 156, 663 63.79 16.23 67.21 

134, 091, 621 I 138, 073, 352 39,153,145 226, 828, 424 60. f!1 17.77 ~60. 70 154, 465, 664 161, 0&5, 980 44, 936, 172 266, 378, 366 60.47 16. f!1 gGl.31 

Woolen goods and mixed materia.11:1 ......................................................••..•.... Woolen goods. mixed materials, and worsted goods ............ .......................... . 

*Cotton cloths. tWoolen hosiery. 

TREASUllY DEPARTME~"T, B"CREAU OF STATISTICS, January 25, 1888. 

Hon. RrcllARD .COKE, United States Senate, Washington Oity, D. 0. 

The figures given in this table may be relied on as being as nearly perfect in their accuracy as they can be made. They are compiled from the Census of 1880 which was taken by Republican officials under a Republican administra· tion'· and, as is well known, the reports of that census were, so far as manufact- ures 'were concerned, furnished by the manufacturers themselves in the differ- ent branches of manufacture, just as experts in all other forD18 of industry furnished similar reports. The table embraces the leading articles in the principal manulacturing schedules, and fairly exemplifies the average operations of the tariff . . What .do these well-verified figures furnished by the manufact- urers themselves show? By comparing the per cent. of wages in each of the specified articles of manufacture with the ad valorem rate of duty on similar articles of foreign manufacture, as exhibited in the two right-hand columns of the table, it will be seen that the per cent. of tariff tax or duty on the foreign article is from one and a half to four times as great as the per cent. of wages expended in the manufacture of the domestic product. If, as is unquestionably true the duty on the foreiga article is added to the price of the corresponding dom'estic product when sold to our people, then the capit11.list, the manufact- urer, the men who hire and employ labor realize through the tariff from one and a half to four times as much as the laborer receives. They become rich, 

while the laborer remains poor. Take the article of cotton cloth, the second item in the table just read-wages 21.88 per cent. and the tariff duty 45.49 per cent. A lot of cotton cloth of the prime ccstof $100 would represent for the wages pai·l out in its manufacture s;2l.8d, while the tariff duty on the corresponding foreign article would enable the owner to put the domestic product on the market at ... 145.49. Again, take iron and steel manufactures. As stated in the table, wages are 18.77 per cent.; 

duty on the foreign article 40.92 per cent. A lot of iron and steel, or either, of the prime cost of SIOO would represent, according to these figures, Sl8.77 for the wages paid out for its manufacture, while the tariff' duty on the foreign article of the same quality would enable the manufacturer to sell the domestic product at $14.0.92. 

So with woolen goods and worsted goods: per cent. of wages 16.08, tariff duty on foreign article 67.21. '\Voolen goods of the cost value of SlOO would repre- sent Sl6.08 of wages paid out for their manufacture, whiie the tariff duty on the foreign article would enable the owner of the domestic product to price it locus- tomers at $167.21 ; and so on through the more than four thousand duty-paying articles on the tariff-lis.t we find the per cent. of duty on the foreign article, 

whie:h fixes the price at which the correeponding domestic article is sold to our people, from one and a. half to four times, running as high frequently as seven or eight times; as great as the per cent. of wages expended in the manufacture of the domestic product. I repeat that the figures from which these conclusions are drawn were furnished to the officials who took the last census by the manu- facturers themselves, and can therefore not be charged to have come from an un- friendly source. I have before me a table made in 1878 by Hon. H. 0. Burcharll, then a di'>tin- guislled member of Congress from Illinois, and afterwards Director of the Mint, and a life·long Republican, which places the per cent. of wages paid out in the manufacture of the following products as follows: 

"'.rextiles, 19~; cottons, 22; woolens, 17?,; silk, 16; steel, 17." The table (urnished from the Bureau of Statistics which I have commented on, although compiled from the census reports of 1880, it will be seen is almost identical in its statements of the per cent. uf wages in manufactured products 

with that of l\Ir. Burchard, made two years before the census of 1880was taken, a fact thoroughly corroborative of its accuracy and correctness. There is no rule of reason, no principle of right, no consideration of expe- diency which under any theory of government or political economy, without reference to the question of revenue, would justify, for-protection of manufact- urers, an average of tariff duties greater than the difference between the wages paid by American me.nufacturers and those paid by their leading principal 

competitors in Europe. And it is upon the proposition to so adjust the tariff duties as to enable the manufacturers to pay t!Jis difference that the hight.a.riff people have planted themselves in their discussions of the question be- fore the country. Our firsttarifflaw, passeJ in 1789, withe.n average ad valorcm 

duty of 8t per cent., the average raised to 11 per cent. by an enactment of the following year, and in 1792 to 13t per cent., was confessedly predicated upon the idea of simply making up to our manufacturers the difference between 

t Cotton hosiery. ~ Estimated. 

WM. F. SWITZLER, Chief of Bureau. 

American and European wages, and the successive increases of the average from that day to this simply represent the success which organized greed al- ways achieves through log-rolling processes in legislative bodies. When our ea1·ly tariffs were passed our indu!itries were in their infancy. We had neither CRP.ital, machinery, nor skilled labor, and were surrounded by all the hard con- ditions which usually attend infant beginners, yet average duties of St. 11. and 13t per cent. on foreign imports were considered amply protective of our then incipient industries in affording to our manufacturers abundant means of reim- bursing themselves for the difference between the high American and low Eu- ropean wages. Since that time all the conditions have changed. Our industries have grown into the most robust and vigorous maturity. In 1880 it was admitted by the London Times that the aggregate value of American manufactured products ex- ceeded the a.ggregat~ of British manufactures by more than one thousand mill- ions of dollars' worth, and the proportion must be much greater now. The con- centration of capitnl in the United States is now confessedly as great as in England, and greater than in any other country in the world except England; and this means that the productive capacity of our people, that is, of oar lahor, is the greatest of any country in the world. and while nominally higher wages may be ,paid here than elsewhere, that capital reaps a greater reward here than in any other country, because the labor is the most efficient and produces greater results than any other ifl the worlct. In a letter written by Hon. '\VILLtAlll M. EVARTS, then Secretary of State, and now a distinguished member of this body from New York, dated May 17, 1879, 

transmitting the reports of American consuls on the state of labor 1n Europe, the honorable Secretary, in an enumeration of bis conclusions drawn from these reports, on page 36, says: "9. That the average American workman performs from one and a half to twice as much work a.s the average European workman. This is so important a. point in connef!tion with our ability to compete with the cheap manafa.ctures of Europe, and it seems on first thought so strange, that I will trouble you with 

somewhat lengthy quotations from the reports in support thereof." The honorable Secretary then proceeds to quote at leni,~-th from the various consular reports in support of his propo'lition, and establishes it conclusively. The conclusion of the Secretary is broad and sweeping1 and embraces every branch and character of industry. On the same line and Ill veri.'lcation of the opinions of Secretary EVARTS, I read from the letter of Hon. James G. Blaine, 

introductory to the report of consuls in Europe on the cotton-goods trade of the world, dated June 25, 1881, when Mr. Blaine was Secretary of State. He said, on page 95: "In commenting on the strikes then imminent in Manchester, Consul Shaw, in the report transmitting the foregoing table, says: "•The plea that the factory operatives are now receiving higher wages in proportion to the time they work than American operatives is urgently made by manufacturers here, and tbis, together with increasing financial distress among mill-owners, is gradually allaying the discontent among operatives.'" 

Again the honorable Secretary says: "The hours oflabor in the Lancashire mills are 56, in the l\Ia.ssachusettsmill:i 60 per week. The hoursofla.bor in the mills in the other New England States, 

where the wages are generally less than in Massachusetts, are usually 66 to 69 per week. 

"Undoubtedly the inequalities in the wages of English and American opera- tives are more than equalized by the greater efficiency of the latter and their longer hours of labor. If this should prove to be a fa.ct in practice, a.~ it seems to be proven from official statistics, it would be a very important element in the establis!Jment of our ability to compete with England for our share of the cotton-goods trade of the world. "In the two }>rime factors which may be said to form the basis of the cotton manufacturing industry, namely, raw material and labor, we hold the advantage over England in the first, and stand upon an equality with her in the second. 

"Having the raw materials at our doors, it follows that we should be able to convert it into manufactures, all things else beingequal,with more economy and facility Ulan can be done by England, which imports our cotton and then manu- factures ib in her mills. The expense ot handling, transportation, and commis- sion must be an important item in this regard as compared with our turning in the fiber from the eotton-fields to our millilandshipping it in the advanced form 

• I 

~. 

, .. 

I' 

'-

~-

... 

~ 

f> 

.... 

.... 

. ./ 

" .. = 

i'· 
. ..;, 

·'' 

', 

\. 

-. 

t, 

t I 

,. 

·. 

I. 

.• .: 

8916 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

of ma1rnfactured goods. Add to this the secondary fact that it costs us no more to hand lo and manufacture the same than it costs in England, and we stand on an undoubted equality thus far in the race of competition." 

And yet, Mr. President, this bill imposes, I believe, an average duty 

of 50 per cent. ad valorem 'Upon the importation of cotton goods. I ask 

the Senator from Iowa if that is not true? 

Mr. ALLISON. On cotton goods? 

Mr. COKE. On cotton goods. 

l\Ir. ALLISON. On some few classes. 

Mr. COKE. I think it is an average of 50 per cent. 

Mr. ALLISON. No, I think not. I think it is not so high. 

Mr. COKE: 

These opinions of Mr. Blaine, as well as those of Mr. Ev.ARTS, both high pro- tectionists, a.re elaborated in letters exhaustively reviewing the statistics of labor in Europe furnished by consular experts under their immediate super- vision and control. It does seem that the testimony of these great Repnblican 

leaders, possessed of the highest o.ud most authentic information, ought to be conclusive as to the point on which they speak. The superior intelligence, 

alertness, and efficiency of American labor are confessed frankly in Europe, and nobody, either in Europe or America, controverts the fact that in a given number of days' or houl"S' work the American la.borer produces for his em- ployer much greater results than the European la.borer. This fact being borne in mind in determining the difference between European and American wages, it will be seen that in many instances the difference is in favor of the European wages. 

The instance given by Mr. Blaine in the cotton-goods manufacture is only one of hundreds that can be cited to the same effect, and it is the deliberate judgment of many thoughtful men who have given great study and investiga- tion to this subject that, judged by its value in the products it turns out and the time for which It is pai(i, American labor, on an average, is no better paid than the English. Wages in England, whence comes the only competition feared by our manufacturers, are stated by Mr. David A. 'Vells,and the statement was indorsed as correct by General N. P. BANKS, of l\Ia!!Sachuset.ts, and l\Ir. Burch· ard, of Illinois, both distinguished Republicans and protectionists, to be lower than the wages paid in the United States br from 25 to 50 per cent. - While I believe this statement utterly disproved by the testimony already read of Secretaries Blaine and Evarts and much other testimony that can be produced, aud notably by that of Robert Iloward, of Fall River, Mass., an expert of the highest character, intelligence, and experience, and that of Will- iam Mather, of l\lanchest.er, England, who was in this country on the authority of the royal commission on technical education prosecuting inquiries into the facilities of our people for industrial training, both of whom were examined by the Senate Committee on Edu('Qtion and Labor in 1885, nnd whose testimony may be found in the tllird volume of testimony published by that committee, I will for the purpose of this argument assume it to be true. Recurring to the table froln the Bureau of Sta.tli!tics, 21.62 per cent. of the entire cost of cotton manufacture.s represents the wages paid out for labor expended in the manu- facture. IC this sum is 50 percent.greater than is paid in England for the manu- facture of the sa.me goods, then one-half of that sum, or, discarding fractions, 11 per cent.of the entire cost of the goods would pay the difference between the American and English wages. By the same table 18.77 per cent. is represented to be the proportion of wages paid in the manufacture of iron and steel. If this proportion of wages exceeds the proportion of wages paid in England for the manufacture of iron and steel by 50 per cent., then one-half of that per cent., or, discarding fractions, 10 per cent. would pay the difference between American and English wages. The proportion of wage@, as shown in the same table, to be paid out in the manu- facture of woolen goods being 16.08 per cent., one-half of that per cent., or 8 per cent. of the value of the goods would pay the 50 pe1· cent. difference be- tween English and American wages, and so throui;ch the tariff-list. It is per- fectly clear that a tariff averaging lO per cent. would abundantly reimburse our manufacturers the alleged ditterence between American and European wages. A tariff of J5 per cent. average would be highly protective, while a tariff aver- aging 20 per cent. would pay back to the manufacturer every dollar he pays out for wages and more, besides equalizing in the matter of interest American with English capital, if not already equal. If the testimony of two such eminent ministers of state as were l\Ir. Blaine and Mr. Evarts, both speaking against the interest of theii: party and against the policies which o.s high protectionists they advocated before and ha;e advo- cated since, is worth anything, there can be no question that my conclusions are greatly more favorable to the manufactm·ers than they should be; and these 11how that of the 46 per cent. average t.ax p!lid by our people under our tariff the American laborer receh·es at the furthest only 10 per cent., while the manufact- urer pockets the other 36 per cent. The laborer who consumes his wages in living and never:has anything left. over at the end of the year, while he receives 10 per cent. of the tariff subsidy, finds the cost of his living increased 46 per cent. by the tariff. 

• * * * * $ • 

In estimating the difference between American and European wages, it must be borne in mind that only 4! per cent. of our manufactured products are made by hand labor, the balance being made by l!lteam and machinery. England is the only country in Europe making the same low per cent. by hand labor, while Austria makes 29 per cent., Italy 34 per cent., Spain 23 per cent., and Portugal 42 per cent. by hand labor. It is admitted on all sides t.hat we are twenty-five years ahead of the most ad- vanced nations in Europe in mecha11icalappliancesand labor-saving machinery, 

through which manufactures are so much cheapened. Nor must the fact be overlooked, adverted to a moment ago, that England is the only other country in the world possessing an equal concentration of capital with this. I read on this point from Wealth and Progress, by Mr. George Gun ton, a recent publica- tion of great ability and merit, o.s follows: "In this country and in England, where the concentration of capital is the greatest in the world, the productive c::ipacity per capita is nearly, two and a half times that of the average in continental countries, ti ve times as large as that of Italy, Spain, and Portugal, and twelve times that of China and India, and the income per capita is about thirteen times as great as that of India and China, six times that of Italy, Spain, and Portugal, and more than twice that of the average on the European Continent, and the general mte of wages in England is ten times that of Asia, and nearly double that of continental Europe, while in this country it is about fifteen times that of Asia, and within a fraction of ·three limes that of the average ou the Continent." 

Mr. President, England's wages are ten times those of A1:1ia, nearly 

double those of continental Europe, while ours are fiitetin times 

tho e of Asia, and within a fraction of three times the average on the 

Continent. England scours all the seas of the world for her raw ma- terial and carries it home in her ships. She sends to America. for our cotton, she searches the world for the bread and meat to feed her opera-

•I 

' 

tives, and pays the wages I have stated in the midst of the pauper 

labor of Europe, and undersells all Europe in their own markets. 

The same author says that in India, with wages at 60 to 70 cents a week, the capital invested in production is only a.bout S35 per head of the population. In Russia, with wages at $>.60 per week, it is 8190 per capita. In AU11tria, Italy, 

Spain. and Portugal, with wages at $3. 76, it is $350 l?er capita. In Germany, with wages at S3.84, it is $540 per capita. In France, with wages at S5 the capital in- vested is about $1,010 per capita: and in Enghmd, with wages at 87.74 per week, it is 81,300 per capita. England lives under absolute free trade, pa.ya the high- est wages of any country i11 the worl<1 outside of the United States, and by reason of her concentration of capital and her machinery, in the first. of which she is fully equaled and in the la.st greatly surpassed by the United States, in- stead of asking protection ai:nlnst the pauper labor of her neighbors, undersells them in their own markets. 

In 1880 the London Times admitted that the manufactured products 

of the United States exceeded those of the United Kingdom more than one thousand millions of dollars' worth annually, and this excess must 

since that time have doubled or trebled, yet the Republican party con- tinues, on the false and fraudulent plea of a necessity for the protection 

of American manufactures against European competition, to raise our tariff duties higher and make the prices of all manufactured products 

dearer to the American people who are compelled to buy them. The 

"infant industry" argument, through which for one hundred years 

Government bounties to manufacturers were sustained, having become 

palpably absurd in view of the undenied fact that this is the greatest 

mauufacturing conn try in the world, the advocates of a high tariff next 

fell back upon the position that high protective duties were needed t.o 

reimburse the manufacturers for the difference between the alleged high 

wages paid in this country and the low wages paid in Europe; and when 

met upon that ground with indisputable evidence that average duties 

of 15 per cent. would more than make good this difterence, and that a tariff of 20 per cent. average duties would more than pay back all the 

money paid out as wages by our manufacturers, boldly throw off the 

mask, and claim the right to make a prohibit-0ry tariff to exclude the 

competition of foreign goods and subject the whole population of the 

country to the unrestrained power of manufacturers and their combinations and trusts, which destroy internal competition, to make such ex or bi tan ta nd extortionate demands for manufacture'd prod nets as they see fit to dictate. 

Securely intrenched behind the power to extort from the American 

people unearned tribute of more than one thousand millions of dollars 

annually, rolling in wealth of which they have robbed the people un- der the forms of law, the manufacturing plutocracy have been able 

with their enormous gains to furnish the money with which the ballot 

has been corrupted, the will of the people overthrown and suppressedl 

and the party which legislates in their interest has been maintaineC1 

in power. It is believed that the history of the world shows no instance in which the powers of government have been so perverted to 

the enrichment and aggrandizement of a favored class and the spoliation and opprei:;sion of the great mass of the people so open, so glaring, so defiant as this. In defiance of that ~reat maxim of free government, that no tax can be lawfully imposed except for a public purpose, 

the manufacturers are made gatherers of taxes without limitation as to amount from the wholo people for their own private and individual benefit. They claim the right and assert the power, which a Republican Congress yields nn hesitating Iv to them, to tax all the people 

of the United States for their own enrichment and to insure the suc- cess of their private business. 

In order to exclude foreign goods and prevent any interference with a monopoly of what they call their ''home market," at their demand 

Congress has by tariff legislation built a Chinese wall around the . conn try, and the pending bill is intended to make that wall higher, so that it can not be scaled. They claim that American people are ''their 

own," that the right to sen manufactured products at such prices M 

they choose to put on them to the 65, 000, 000 of people in this coun- try belongs of right and inalienably to tnenr, and is not to be interfered with by foreigners who weuld sell our people ~heaper goods. 

The tariff wall built around this country, while keeping foreign goods 

out, at the same time keeps our productions in. In order to sell we must buy, and if we would buy we must sell. International com- merce is barter, is exchange of commodities. It would drain the richest country on earth of its money and leave it in a condition of financial collapse to have to pay for its imports from other countries with 

gold and silver, because the gold and silver, the money in any named 

country, is just what its own people need in domestic commerce. Hence the necessity, if we would sell our products, that we must be . willing to buy something of what we need from others. Oar tariff forbids this in a great degree, for it is in many respects prohibitory. It 

does not permit us to barter or exchange products with other countries. 

If a ship-load of cotton or corn or wheat is sent, say, to Liverpool, we 

mnstsellfor money, because, if we exchange for English products! when we bring them home we must pay a penalty of 62 per cent. ad valo- rem at om· custom-house before we can land them. We can not afford 

the loss this would entail, and therefore would have to demand money, 

which would not be paid if it were possible for the Englishman to get 

along without our produce, or if he could find anybody else having 

such produce for which be could exchange or barter his own products. 

Our tariff legislation makes barter or exchange between our country 
. '. •I 

.. . 

'• 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8917 

and other countries in great part impossible. The high-tariff advocates 

not only admit hut boldly declare that they seek to check importation 

of 1oreign goods, and have constructed the pending bill with an eye 

single to this purpose. 

So flagrantiy apparent and obvious is this, that all Europe, in every 

possible manner, is devising ways and means of retaliating upon us, 

because the pending bill is universally regarded as a declaration of 

commercial war against the worid, of non-intercourse with the other 

nations of the earth. There is not a nation in the world tbn.t is not 

now and bas not been, since the imposition of our hi~h and almost prohibit-0ry war tariff, straining e\ery nerve to make itself independent 

of us for bread and meat and other agricultural supplies, and the success of the effort is seen in the constantly decreasing amount of our 

agricultural exports and in the low prices they command in the markets of the world. Between 75 and 80 per cent. of our exports are 

a~ricultural products. For all they buy the farmers are compelled to 

pay prices advanced by 47 per cent. under existing tariff taxation, and 

if this bill is pa ... sed this advance is to be increased to 62 per cent.; and 

while thus fleeced at home their products alone bear the whole brunt 

of European retaliation brought about by the high protective tariff. 

Is it wonderful that unparalleled depression should exist in the prices. 

of farm products and the value of farm lands under conditions Jike 

these? The manufacturer may with perfect impunity declare commercial war and non-intercourse with the world, for he has his "home 

market," where be holds with his trusts and combines an undisputed 

monopoly, where under this bill his products may be marked up to 62 

percent. above all cost and a reasonable profit on that; but the farmer, 

the price of whose surplus product in the torei~n market fixes and es· tablishes the price of that sold in the home market, is very differently 

situated, as be has long since discovered. '£he manufacturer profits 

by the misfortunes of the farmer, whose products he has by the high 

tariff in a great measure cut off 1rom a foreign market and thrown back 

on a glutted home market, in having cheap food furnished his employes and their families; and while he gains on all sides by the tariff 

the farmer loses on all. Compelled as he is to sell bis prod acts in competition with those of the lowest-priced labor in the world and not permitted to buy except in the highest-priced market in the world, the 

farmer finds himseli bowed down with btudens almost too great to be 

borne. 

Mr. President, the robbery of a high tariff and that of silver demonetization, both perpetrated and maintained by the Republican party, 

have together reduced the American farmer from bis former high position to the hard conditions which now surround him. The silver bill 

passed at this session of Congress, which distinctly completes the de· 

monetization of silver in repealing all law providing for its compulsory 

coinage and relegates silver to the condition of a commodity to be 

bought and sold in the markets and stored in warehouses, and this 

in defiance of a universal demand by the American people for its free 

and unlimited coinage into moue.v to impart value t-0 property and all 

the products of labor, together with the pending tariff bill about to be 

passed, is a bold avowal that the American farmer is to remain in bis 

present condition of vassalage, and continue to raise cheap food for oar protected manufacturing nabobs and their employes, and that, however overstocked and glutted tbe home market may be with his products, he is to be forbidden to carry them to a foreij?;n market. Let the 

farmers of America listen to what the report of the Senator from Rhode 

Island accompanying the tariff bill of 1888, made by direction of the 

Senate Finance Committee, bas to say on the subject, and answer if I 

have overstated the deplorab_le results to follow the line of policy being 

pursued towards them. I read from Part I, Tariff Testimony, Finance 

Committee United States Senate, 1888-'89, page 2-t, as follows: 

The competition in wheat-growing which has been developed in India., South 

America., Australia., and in the British possessions in North Americ.i. is likely to make unprofitable the production of this cereal for exportation by our peo- ple, and to ca.use the wheat-grower of the Northwest to look to an enla~ement 

of the certain and remunerative home market. Thi!! enlarged and profitable market can only be secured by increasing the number of people engaged in other than agricultural pursuits and by furnishing to all increased employ- ment without diminution of wa.ges. To cripple our manufacturing interests and reduce the purchasing power of our workingmen will result in augmenting the number of competitors in the field of agricultural production, and the increased supply could in that event only find a. market in Europe by enforced competition with India at ruinous prices. \Vheatcan now be laid down in Liverpool from the central provinces of India at as Iowa. cost for transportation as from Chica~o. and Indian wheat can be delivered in New York at less cost for transportation than from the wheat-fields of Dakota.. It is for the highe!lt interests of the American farmer that the number of our food consumers rather than of food producers should be increased and that the genera.I prosperity of all should be semued. It is true that. the decline in prices of agricultural products has been very great, but the valueofthese whenmefLs- ured by the value of clothing, farming utensils, or other necessaries of a. farmer's life is much greater now than in any of the yea.rs preceding 1860. 

This deliberate dec1aration of the Finance Committee of the Senate 

needs no comment. It throws up the sponge for the American farmer. 

It says there are too many of them; that they overproduce; that wheatraising is unprofitable; that our farmers can not stand the competition 

of South America, Australia, India, and the British possessions of 

North America, where there has been of late great development in 

wheat-growjng, and declares that India can furnish wheat in New York 

at a. smaller cost of transportation than can the magnificent wheat-

, 

fields of Dakota. It declares that the days of wheat exportation to 

foreign markets are numbered, and that American farmers must look 

hereatter only to the overstocked home market for the sale of their 

surplus wheat, and this means that they mast pay 62 per cent. average 

advance apon all the manufactured products used by them and raise 

food products for the mannlacturers at prices far below the cost of production. 

As it is with wheat, so it must logically be with corn and beef, pork, 

etc. Our meats are on one pretext or another virtually tabooed in 

England, France, and Germany through the onerous and almost prohibit.orv restrictions imposed upon their importation. The Legislative 

Assembly of France within thxee months past bad pending before it 

and under discussion (with what result I am not informed) a bill imposing a heavy duty on corn meal; and has now under discussion, as we were informed by the press, a bill virtually prohibiting the importation of our pork and beef. Everybody knows that the crowded populations ot the European states need our meats and breadstnffs, and instead of prohibiting and hindering their importation, as they are now 

and have for a number of years past been doing, would encourage it in 

every possible way if we were willing to make fair exchanges with 

them. 

Our n eighboring Republic of Mexico, in which a fine market for agricultural as well as manufactured products has been growing up, in consequence of the illiberal tariff policy of oar Government under the 

present Administration in respect to the admission of her lead ores so much neP.ded by our smelters, which policy is reaffirmed in the pending bill, has retaliated upon us, as we are iulormed by the public press, 

by the imposition of prohibitory duties upon our aJ,tricultural prod acts. 

No country in the world will take oar agricultural surplus, our meats, 

and breadstuffs, badly as they are needed, unless driven to it by inexorable necessity, while oar prohibitory tariff establishes almost an em- bargo on all importations from abroad. 

The unprecedented development of wheat production in India, Australia, South America, and the British North American poss~ions 

in the last fifteen years, reforred to in the report of the Senate Finance 

Committee, is one of the direct results of oar high-tariff policy, which; 

while our country was the granary of the world, ruthlessly sacrificed 

the interests of our farmers, and drove from our shores the ships which 

came to take at high prices all their surplus, and compelled their customers to seek what thev were bound to have in other countries. Our 

high tariff and the demonetization of silver, both passed in the interest of the capitalistic and manufacturing classes, made possible and 

rendered a necessity the independence ot the world of our farmers for 

food products. India, whose wheat-prodncin~ developments is so conspicuously mentioned in the report I have read from, never exported a 

bnsbe1 of wheat to England until 1874, one y"'ar after the demonetiza-· 

tion of silver in the United States, and then less than 100,000 bushels. 

The United States was then exporting more than 150,0UO,OuO bushels 

of wheat at an export value of $1. 20 per buc:;hel; whereas India now 

exports 50,000,0UO bushels annually, while the wheat exports of the 

United States have fallen to about 44,000,000 bushels. at an export 

value of 90 cents, and are still decreasing. The superiority of-the 

wheat prod need in the United States over that produced in India and 

South America, is such that under the equal conditions which would 

be brought about by a tariff constructed for the sole purpose of raising 

revenue for the support of the Government our farmers would at once 

regain their former precedence in the markets of the world. If the 

embargo upon the exportation of their products created by our excessive and oppressive tariff legislation were removed, and fair trade and 

friendly exchange with foreign countries restored as they existed under 

Democratic rule, and oar farmers given a chance to reap in the markets 

of the world the just reward of their labors, their old-time prosperity 

and independence would return to bless and build up our country and 

distribute more equally its wealth. 

The formers are gravely informed in the Senate committee report 

from which I have read that they overproducE:. Do not the manufacturers overproduce? Do they not every year, in order to prevent a. red action of prices in the market from overproduction, cease operations 

for sixty or ninety or a hundred and twenty days, and frequently more? 

Do they not combine and agree to produce far short ot their capacity 

for the same purpose? Is it not notorious that the excess of their production over the demands of the home market is constantly shipped 

abroad and sold largely under the prices exacted from the American 

people? If these tbin1?s be true-and nob-Ody doubts them; they are 

admitted to be true-why continue tu tax the people oppressively to 

encourage still fart.her and more excessive prod action of manufactures? 

Why not reduce the tariff tax and give the farmers a breathing spell? 

The farmers are ad vised in the report referred to that they are not able 

to compete with foreign count:rie.<J in wheat-growing, and their only 

hope is to rely on the '· home market." 

Coming from a political party whose tariff and money policy com- bined has utterly destroyed the farmers' foreign market for that portion 

of his production which the home market can not consume and will 

not take, this ad vice reaches the very climax of audacity. The ''home 

market " has for fifty years been the broken promise of high-tariff advocates, and seems as far off as ever. Under the restrictive and exclu-

._,. 

I ; 

- i· 

". 

. '·--

· .. · .. 

-· 

. ' . 
.' 

7 

. . 

-"' 

I ·-

•· 

. ·-

... : . ..... ' ...... -

8918 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

sive t.aritr policy of the Republican party, if it is ever realized, it will 

be at some indefinite time in the dim and distant future, after the 

farmers have been stripped of their possessions, after farm mortgages 

have been foreclosed, and their lands have passed into the hands of the 

tax-gathering plutocracy and their sons have become mere tenants on the broad acres thE:y should have inherited from their fathers. Ask 

the farmers of New England, of New York, Pennsylvania., and New 

Jersey, surrounded b_y and in the midst of every form o~ mannfac~uring industry, what tlie "home market" of the b1gh-tanff protectionists means. They will point you to land values decreased from 25 to 

50 per cent., to mortgaged farms, and in the New England States to 

farms which can not be sold for the cost of the buildings on them-to 

farms with the best of improvements on them which are vacant and 

untenanted, and ca.n not be sold at any price. 

Let our American farmers read the official reports of the condition of 

agriculture in New England, and remember that the farmers there were delurled with the hope of a. home market while being taxed to 

build up and support manufactures, exactly as our farmers are being 

deluded no"l, and after fifty years of high protection the manufacturers are found in possession of all the wealth of the country, while the impoverished farmer is eking out a bare subsistence, or has been forced to 

go West, leaving his farm vacant, because nobody wants it and he can not sell it. It gives me no pleasure, l\Ir. President, to refer to these 

wen-verified facts, but justice to the people of our country requires 

that they be known. The policy which through the forms of law systematicn.lly takes the bard earnings of six-sevenths of the people and 

bestows them as bounty upon the remaining seventh is rapidly transferring the property and values of the country from the many to the 

few; and, if adhered to, as the Republican _party proposes shall be done, 

will eventuate in the destruction of our republican form of government 

and placing the great mass of our people under the iron heel of an or- ganized moneyed aristocracy, which through the corrupting power of 

money will debauch the ballot and control the Government. 

Already vast sums of money are expended in our elections, especially 

the Presidential elections, and it is easy to see that in the near future 

the immense accumulations of wealth in a few hands, which is progressing every day under the tariff, will control the elections, and con- trol them in the interest of the party which will legislate for the benefit of capital and the continued spoliation of the people. The safety 

and perpetmty of our Government and the preservation of the liberties 

of our people have their stanchest security in an independent, thrifty, 

and prosperous rural yeomanry, whose great con~vative influence 

counteraets the corrupting elements al ways found in the la1·ge and populous cities. It is this great class which the tariff policy of the Republican party is making war on and driving to desperation. These are the people who by enormous taxation and the wicked destruction 

of the market for their surplus products abroad are being made ''hew- ers of wood and drawers of water," and their eyes are being opened 

to the causes which are oppressing them. 

These people are in a condition of unrest, in an almost revolutionary 

frame of mind, such as they have never known before; and it will be a sad day for the country-if it shall come to pas.9 that this great class: 

the mainE1tay and support of our Constitution, our Government, and our liberties, of social order and material prosperity, are cl riven by oppreimon and legalized robbery to seriously doubt the beneficence and 

capacity for good of our form of government. 

Mr. !'resident, I make no apology for reading here an able and 

thoughtful editorial from the New York Commercial Bulletin on this 

subject: THE CHIEF CAUSE OF AGRICULTURAL DEPRESSIOY. 

[New York Commercial Bulletin.) 

In current attempts to account for Lhe existing dangerous impoverishment of the agricultural class, the main element in the question &eems to have been almost entirely overlooked. In the broadest social view of the problem the farmer is a party to a joint copartnership with a.II other producing interests. He exchanges his products for those of Lhe clothes-maker, the booi,..maker, the implement;maker, the carpenter, the grocer, and every other producer. So long as he can make his exchanges wilh those on whom he is dependent for his nec- essary supplies npon fair and free conditions he is in a position to protect him- self against unequal bargains, and it is his own fa.ult if he does not succeed. But so soon as unequal conditions of exchange a.re enforced against him by ex- traneous authority, be is at the mercy of his copa.rtners in the communHy of producers, and can only expect to be fleeced. The last twenty-seven years of ta.riff policy has put the agricultural interests in ju3t that position. The aim and the whole effect of that policy has been to create an artificial elevation of prices, as compared with those that would have prevailed in the absence of the tariff. It. has in that relative sense increased the cost of living and the.reby correspondingly advanced the rate of wages, so that the prices of all products, except those whose value is determined by the markets of export, have undergone an advance predominantly corresponding to the simuJtaneous increase of the customs duties. It bas proved to be a pos- sible feat to very largely ad>ance the prices of thousands of millions of domestic productions by putting an average duty of 45 per cent. upon some 5500,000,000 of imports. 

U is this achievement in behalf of t.be mannfa.cturiog industries, extending over a quarter of a. century, tha.t bas put the farming and planting interest in the position in which it sta.ndR to-day. Had the farmers been able to force an advance in their orotlucts equal to the relative rise that has taken plaC'e on do- mestic manufactures they couJd have paid the higher cost of all they had to spend their earnings upon without any detriment, and their exchanges with other industries would have been entirely equitable. But there has been no possibilit.y of insuring them that form of protection. Of nearly all farm prod- ucts there is always a large surplus over the wants of the home markets, and lhe price that surplu~ will bringin the foreign markets determines the value of the entire home product. · 

I' • 

·' .. 

The farmer is therefore put in this crushing dilemma, that he ha.! to sell his products at the lowest world's prices, while he has to supply his wants and tq hire his labor at much the highest scale of prices existing anywhere on the globe. His industrial copartners get his products at the lowest norrual cost ex· isting anywhere, whilst they charge him in return the hlghest artificial prices that can be exacted under the most excessive customs duties ever enacted. This grossly inequitable relation betw~eo one-half of the community and the other is the greatest marvel of incongruous legislation perpet.rated under the boasted enlightenment of thls nineteenth century. The injustice of the un• pa1·alleled mulct, however, is not its worst fault. The wrong can only end in the ultimate virtual ruin of the farming industry of the United States, when the "pPOtected" mulctors will find little to feed upon but the fieshless carcass ot the victim industry. Let us inquire, with as much closeness as the imperfection!! of the data may permit, what is the measure of the impoverishment thus arbitrarily inflicted on the agricuJtural class. In attempting the estimate we have to depend mainly on the data of the census of 1880, with due allowance for the subsequent increase of population. 

In 1880 the total population employed in" gainful occupations," as the census phrases it, was 17,392,0W; of which 4.4.l per cent. was credited to agriculture1 23.4 per cent. to professional and persona.I eervices, l0.3 per cent. to trade ana trausportation, and 22.2 per cent. to manufacturing, mechanical, and mining 

industries; the remainder of the population consisting of children or those who could not be considered as engaged in productive or otherwise gaintul occupa- tions. It will thus be seen that.the farming industry, with its direct dependents, covers within 6 per cent. of one-half of our popuJation. To what extent are this class consumers or domestic manufactures? Below we append a statement of the value of the productions of seventy-four of the principal branches of home manufacture, not including agricultural products nor raw materials, but mainly completed productions in the form in which they are ta.ken by the consumer. They are the most staple kinds of articles, and the farmer takes his due share of them. The total value of these seventy-four prod- ucts in the year 1879-'80 was 83,153,371,000, whilst the value of all the mechanical and manufacturing industries was 55,369,579,000. Assuming the increase of the population for the last ten years to have been 30 per cent., which il!I a low esti- mate, it would follow that the value of the like se'f'enty-four products for the past year would be Si, 100,000,000, or probably considerably more. As a rulehthe cost of this mass of products has been, relatively, largely en- hanced by t e operation of the taritf.. What the measure of that increase may be there is no data to show with entil-e exactness. We shall assume it to average not. less than 25 per cent.; and for the reasons, first, that our rate of wages, which in the final analysis constitute nearly the whole cost of produc• 

tion, is even more than that percentage above the rate current in the best organized industries of competing foreign nations; and, second, because the currentavera!le rate of 45 per cent. duty on our dutiable imports is affirmed by our manufacturers to be necessary, under the existing cost of labor, machinery, and ra.w materials, to er.able them to compete with forei&"n producers; a fact ""hich would seem to justify even a higher ratio of estimated relative a.rtiftcial enhancement of prices Lhan we ha'f'e adopted. 

Assuming, then, that the cost of domestic products bas been relatively in- creased, on the average, 25 per cent., through the direct and indirect operat.ion of the tariff, it wouJd follow that of the $4,100,000,000 va.lua.tfon of the current production of the seventy-four enumerated articles no less than '820,000,000con• sists of artificial inflation due to these ca.uses. or thiB spuriousenhancementof cost 44 per cent., or $360,800,000, is the share falling upon the agricultural inter- ests, that being the proportion of that class to the whole population. It must be kept in mind, however, that this estimate is limited to the seventy-four se· lected industries above referred to, and that the figures would be very much larger (probably at least Sl00,000,000) if the estimate rested upon the $5,869,597,- 000 valua.t.ion of all our mechanical and manufacturing products. In addition to this burden upon the farmers and planters must be reckoned their due share of the duties on imports, which, upon last year's customs rev- enues of ~lS,701,000, would represent about $96,000,000. 

Beyond these items there is a. fixed indirect tax upon farming industry, aris- ing from the cost of our ra.ilroad!I having been increased probably 40 percent. by the oppressive duties on iron and steel and by other bearings of the tariff, for which the roads compensate themselves by higher rates of freight, which have to be pa.id by the producer and not by the consumer. Taking, however, no note of this item and confining our estimate to the seventy-four lea.ding items, it Is evident beyond reasonable question that the agricultural interest paya upon its annual consumption of the home manufactures and Imported products a.hove referred to inflation of cost a.mounting to $457,000 000, directly or ind.i- rectly consequent upon the tariff. If it be so.id that other classes pay a like rate of increased prices, the answer is that those other classes recoup themselves through correspondingly increasing their charges for their services or their products, whilst the agricuJturist is deprived of all remedy, from the fact that the price of his products is determined by the normal prices that prevail in for- eign markets. If, however, we make allowance for the large mass of domestic manufactures not included under the foregoing estimate upon seventy-four articles, it will be safe to conclude that the farmers and planter~ are now paying an annual tax of about $550,000,000 as the direct result of the tariff, against which they obtain none of those compensations that are received by the other classes subject to the like burden. It is therefore J iterally the fact tha.t tills 44 per cent. of our population is subjected to this enormous mu let merely to support a purely artificial inflation of values; and this result is the less excusable from the fa.ct that ii can bring no real industrial advantage to the mulcting party, because protective duties, a.s a rule, increase the costs of production in the same proportion as they enhance prices . 

This annual sacrifice is more than equal to one and a half times the 'l"'alue of the largest cotton crop ever raised, anti equivalent to tha.t of two wheat crops valued a.t the point of production. Is it then a. matter of wonder that farmers have made no progress, that their farms are mortgaged to the point of bank- ruptcy, and that they are in a generally impoverished condition ? Had they not been favored by natural conditions far surpas!ling those environing the hesb situated farmers of other countries, they must have been ruined Iona- since; but now that they are being pre sed by newforeiirnsources of competition, they c:an no longer support these burdens and live. The only alternatives are relief 

or ruin. 

VALUE OF PRODUCTS OF SEV'ENTY·FOUR• LEADD\G ARTICLES OF DOll.ESTIO l!IANUFACTURE IN 1880. Agricultural implements ....................• : ........................................... . Bagging and bags ............................................................................ . 

:~~c~~~J~~:1o~~·a;;,~1·~-~p~i~i-;;ji·~~~::.:::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Boots and shoes (rubber) ........... ....................................................... . Baking-powders .......................................•................ .......•............... Bdck and tile .......................... .......................................................• Brooms and brushes ...................................................................... . Carpentering ...... ........................................................................... . Oarpets ........................................................................................... . 

2f~1i:~·;;;;;;;_;~·:::::.·:.·::.:···::.·.·:.·::::::::.·.·:·::.·.·::.·.·.·.·:.·:.·.: :·.·:.·.·.:·.·.·.::·.·.·.·.·:::.:·:::::.·::.::.·. 

Clothing, women's . ..................... .................................................... . 

t. -. 

$~:~:~ 43, 774,000 

193, 126, 000 !), 705,000 

4, 760,000 

32,833,000 

10,M0,000 

94, 152,000 

31, 79'.!, 000 64, 951,000 

209,548,000 

32,004,()()() 
.... . \ .· 

-. . " 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8919 

VALUE OF PRODUCTS, ETC.-continued. 

~~s:;~~~d·t·;i~~::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::.::: 

8~~~~~1~:~a·g:;t~·~1~:·::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·:.::::::::::::::::::·.:::::::::::::: 

~!~lfl'i:~~.~~~~~~~.~~::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Fire- rms ........................................................................................ . Foundry e.nd ma.chine-shop products ............................................. . Furnishing goods ........................................................................... .. Furniture ........................................................................................ . Glass .............................................................................................. . Gloves .............................................................................................. . Glucose ............................................................................................ . Grease and tallow ...................................................................... ...... . Hardware ....................................................................................... .. 

I:tTe~~~':lk;;it·g:~·~<l~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Iron forgings .. ................................................................................. . Iron pipe ..... .. ................................................................................ .. Jewelry ......... ................................................................................... . Lamps .............................................................................................. . Lime and cement ............................................................................ .. 

~~~~~~: ~~!\~.~~~::::::::::::.:-.·:::::.-.:-.·::::.-.-.::::··::::::::::::.-.-.::::·:::::::::::.-.:::·:.::-.-.-.: Lumber ............................................................................................ . Masonry .......................................... ................................................. . !tlatches ........................................................................................... . Mattresses and spring bede ................................. ............................. . Millinery ........................................................................................ .. l'tiixed textiles ................................................................................. . Musical instruments ....................................................................... .. Oil-cloth .......................................................................................... .. Painting and paper hangings ............. : ........................................... .. Paints ..................................................................... ........................ .. 

~:r:~·i·~~dl~i·;.;~ :::::.::::.::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::: :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Plated ware ..................................................................................... . Printing and publishing ................................................................. . Roofing and materials .................................................................... . Rubber goods ................................................................................ . Sa<llllery and harness ..................................................................... . Salt ............................................................................................ .. Sa.sh, doors, etc ................................................................................ . Shirts ............................................................................................. . Bilk guods ................................................. ................................... .. Soap and candles .......................................................................... . Straw goods ..................................................................................... . Stationery goods ............................................................................ . Stone and eiutben ware .................................................................. . Sugar and molasses ........................................................................ . Tin-ware, copper-ware, etc ............................................................ . Tobacco and cigars .......................................................................... . Tools .............................................................................................. . Umbrellas ....................................................................................... . 

~t!>e~l~~i;:ii·~·g:·:::.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' .. '.:·::.::'.·::.::::::·.:::·::::.·:.:·::.'.'.'.'.'.:'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. .. '.".".".·::.:::·::.:'.'. 'v ire and wire-work ....................................................................... . Wooden ware .................................................................................. . Wool hats ........................................................................................ . Woolen good!! ................................................................................. . Worsted goods ................................................................................ . 

S33, 714, 000 

12,4.92,000 

210, 950, 000 

11,661,000 

38,173,000 

23,650,000 

5,736,000 • 214., 378, 000 

11,506,000 

77,844,000 

21,154,000 

7,370,000 

4., 551, 000 

13, 730, 000 22,653,000 

21,303,000 

2>1,169,000 

6,4.92,000 

13, 292,000 

2:?, 201, 000 3,357,000 

5, 772,000 

41,063,000 

101, 058, -000 

270, 07Z, 000 

20,586,000 

4,66'l,000 

5,283,000 

9,577,000 

66,221,000 

18,4.00,000 

4, 752,000 

22,4.57,000 

23,390,000 

55, 109,000 

14,682,000 

8,596,000 

90,7 9,000 

6,227,000 

13, 75lr000 38,081,000 

5, 191,000 

13,.863,000 

20, 130,000 

4.1, 033, 000 

26,552,000 

9,345, 000 

5,898,000 

7, 94.2,000 

15.5, 4.84, 000 48,096,000 

16, 772,000 

4,236,000 

6, 917, 000 

1, 15~,ooo 

18,892,000 

19, 964,000 

5, 235,000 

8,516,000 

160, 606, 000 33, 550,000 

----- Total ......... ................................................................................. 3, 153, 371, 000 

Total of all domestic manufactures .......................................... 5, 369, 579, 000 

Mr. President, thirty-two years ago 80 per cent. of the carrying trade 

of the United States was done in American bottoms and under our na- tional flag. Now the American merchant marine is only a reminiscence, is a thing of the past, is absolutely extinct. The commerce of 

this country is carried in foreign vessels and under alien flags, and oar people pay $120,000,000 per year for carrying it. American shipping 

Jaws, American restrictive and obstructive policy, as bas been well said, 

has "protected" the .American merchant marine out of existence and 

no vestige of it is left. American genius and aptitude for the sea, 

which in the earlier days of the Republic, in naval warfare and commercial enterprise, filled the world with the fame of its achievements, 

has been repressed by national legislation for the "protection " of 

American ship-builders, until American sailors could not now be found 

to man American vessels if we had them. 

Ships are the necessary instmmenta.lities of commerce, and we have 

none of them, for they can not live under the American flag and Ameri- can legislation. As well may the mechanic attempt to build a house 

withoa t tools, as for a nation to compete among the nations of the earth 

for commerce without ships. To the Republican party and its policy 

belongs the responsibility of having arrested in its splendid career and 

wantonly destroyed our merchant marine, the right arm of the national 

defense in war and the guaranty of commercial greatness in peace. 

The same malig;n policy which bas operated so destructively on our 

commerce is doing its fatal work on our great agricultural interests, 

and prod acing the depression which by commol)consent and admission, 

if not removed, bids fair to bankrupt our people engaged in agricultural pursuits. 

The pending bill in its obstructions to commerce through excessive 

duties, which will go far towards clo:-.in~ our ports to importations from 

foreign countries, which have been the heaviest buyers of our aaricnltura.l products, will aggravate instead of removing the burdens0

on our farmers, in depriving them of the limited market they now have for 

their surplus. Thus does the manufacturing plutocracy, whose wealth 

wrung from an overtaxed people enables them to control all the departments of the Government and dictate legislation, make war upon 

·. 

the other great interests of the country. Agriculture, commerce, and 

manufactures are the great factors whose harmonious and co-operative 

action is essential to the healthy growth and development of the country. 

The interests of these great forces when iμ a natural and normal condition of growth and progression, each being being helpful, indeed indispensable, to the other-the three when working; each in its own sphere 

under just and equal laws constitute the great developing and propelling power of national progress. 

In the earlier history of the country, and rl'otably under Democratic administrations and low-revenue tariffs from 1846 to 1860, agri.-

cnl ture, commerce, and manufactures prospered and flourished together, 

and progressed with equal pace in unfolding and developing national 

wealth on both land and sea, and the sun has never shone on a happier, 

more contented, more independent, more prosperous or a thriftier people than were the people of the United States of that era. Our farmers rejoiced in abundant harvests for which they reaped golden returns. 

Our merchantmen roamed every sea and were the carriers of the products of every clime and rode at anchor in all the ports of the world, 

flying at their mastheads oar national flag, now almost unknown out 

of sight of our own coast. Our manufactures were healthy, and while 

they did not command exorbitant profit as now, they made sound and 

steady progress and afforded an opportunity for highly remunerative 

investment. 

The wealth of no country in the world was ever distributed more 

equally among its inhabitants than was that of the United States. 

With the breaking out of the civil war.came the change. High tarifi' 

taxation was necessary to produce revenue to meet the tremendous expenses of the greatest war of modern times. As the debates of that 

period show, no thought was had or men ti on made of ''fafan t industries,'' 

of the ''protection of American labor," but tariff rates were made to 

raise revenue, and revenue only. Then it was that the manufacturers 

obtained the vantage-ground, which they have stubbornly held to this 

day, maintaining war-tariff rates and in the pending bill seeking to 

heavily increase them. The "equal protection of the laws," under 

which agriculture and commerce prospered in common with manufactures, no longer exists; and instead we have tariff legislation, which 

oppresses all the people of every class and vocation in order to pay subsidies and bounties to the already inordinately rich manufacturing 

class. 

Commerce, which under the protective policy can not own or run 

ships under the American flag, lies prostrate; and agriculture, the bedrock and foundation of all prosperity, is in the very lowest stage of depression, while the class who manufacture are rolling in wealth and 

developing millionaires by the tens of hundreds. The Andrew Carnegies, who count their incomes by hundreds of thousands and millions1 

are the men who are behind this bill clamoring for an increase of taxes 

in order that they may become still richer, while the masses of the people who pay the taxes are daily becoming poorer. Hundreds of syndicates of foreigners, tempted by the almost fabulous wealth to be realized from the system of bounties paid to manufacturers under our tariff 

laws, are baying the manufacturing plants in this country at enormous 

prices, and tor whose protection and to add to whose profits our farmers 

and other producers, so much overburdened already, are to be still further taxed, they to become in turn the advocates of yet higher tariff 

taxation, and to succeed in the lobbies of Congress those from whom 

they bought. 

In 1789 the first tariff law was passed with an average ad valorem 

duty of 8~ per cent., avowedly ''to give our infant industries a 

start," and limited in its operation to 1796; and now, in the year of 

our Lord 1890, when this has grown to be not only the greatest manufacturing, but in all other respects the most powerful, country in the 

world, the American Congress is in the act of passing a tariff bill 

which, in conjunction with the customs administrative bill already _ 

passed, will carry an average ad valorem duty of 62 per cent. Has a 

manufacturer ever demanded a redaction of duty? Never that I have 

heard of. Has a manufacturer ever failed to demand, when be speaks 

at all, an increased duty? Never that I know of. With the vast 

power in the hands of this class, with the subserviency of the dominant 

party to its demands, with its ag~ressive organization backed by unlimited wealth and a large proportion of the best ta.lent ot the country 

at its command, in view of its past who can fix the limits of its con- quests in the future? 

Who can say when the taxing power of this Government shall no 

longer be wielded for the enrichment of the manufacturing class, and 

be used only to ra.ise the revenues necessary for the support of the Government? What body of men, in trenched in power a.~ these are, ever 

vol nntarily surrendered it? History tells of no instance of it. Armed 

with the taxing power of the Government and licensed to levy and 

collect for their own private and personal benefit from 65,000,000 of 

such people as oars, inhabiting such a country as this, bountie.s without limit except that imposed by the last penny of the ta.rif duty .which 

exclndes foreign competition, the manufacturers will gorge themselves 

with plunder as long as the people will submit. The history of tariff 

legislation in this country shows a constant, unremittingstruggleforthe 

imposition of higher and higher and still higher tari.fttaxes as the wealth 

and resources of the country increase. and I am justified by the ex-

.' !'. 

- a•..: .11: 

.· 

- ·~ .. '· 

..... _ .... 

..... •,; -r 

'_::._ 

· .. ·-

~ .. 

- - J 
. ,. 

.· 

.· 

·, / 

, 'I 

•' 

· .. 

: . '. . ' r"' • • ., •· _. 

. i 

8920 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

perience of the past in sa~ing that the day will never come when the 

beneficiaries of that tax will let up, will release their hold, will cease to clamor for increased and higher taxation, until a great popular uprising shall overthrow them. 

We have a ,grand country and it is inhabited by the most masterful 

people in the world, our manufactured products annually exceeding 

those of our great rival England $2,000,000,000 worth. We have the raw material for every variety of manufactures in marvelous profusion. 

We are twenty-five years ahead of the most advanced country in Europe 

in labor-saving machinery. We have a greater abundance ofcheap food 

for our operatives than any other country, and our la.boring people are 

conceded to be the most active, intelligent, and effective laborers in 

the world. We have untold millions of capital se~king investment at 

3, 4, and 5 per cent. We have the protection of over 3,000 miles of ocean between us and the so-called pauper labor of Europe, and in addition to all this a tariff constructed solely to raiie revenue for the 

Government would give incidental protection far beyond the difference between American and European labor. 

With all these advantages, it is a libel on the America.n people to say 

that they would be unable to meet foreign competition in their home 

mnrkets without a tariff averaging 62 per cent. for their protection. 

With these advantai;!;es, if all protection except that incident to a strictly revenue tariff were withdrawn and the manufacturers were left, 

as all our other people are, to take care of themselves, the reduced cost 

of their products would enable them to hold not only the home market, but to meet successfully the competition of the world in foreign 

markets. The false and fictitious prices placed on our manufactured 

products by reason of the fact that everything entering into their com- position and into that of the machinery which makes them bas been 

unnaturally increased in cost by our tariff tax-prices which prevent 

the exportation of our goods to foreign markets, where products are not inflated by taxation as ours are-would come down t-0 a normal and 

natural level, opening the markets of the world to our manufactures, 

decreasing the cost of living to our laborers·, and thereby increasing the 

purchasing power of their wages and insurin!! them the constant employment which the markets of the world, rather than a glutted home 

market, would open to their products. , The vast consuming mass of our people, who, if they have any right 

to the consideration of Congress, are entitled to be relieved of the burden 

of taxation levied not for the support of the Government but for the en- richment ot private mdividuals, would breathe a new economic atmosphere, and their splendid energies would give new life to all other avo- cations and pursuits. Our deal! commerce, as if touched by a magician's 

wand, would again spring into life and reassert the supremacy of the 

American flag on American ships over the oceans of the world; while 

our farmers, with the markets of the world open to their products and 

ships to carry them wherever needeJ, would again rejoice in a return 

of the old-time prosperity to which they have so long been strangers; 

and agriculture, commerce, and manufactures, prospering alike under 

equal laws, would contribute with common effort, each in its fullest and 

unhindered development, to the national greatness and prosperity. 

Mr. President, this grand consummation can only be reached l>y a return to thetnndamental principle that no tax shall be levied except for 

public purposes, and an overthrow of the class which cl aims and exercises 

the right to tax all the people of this country for its private benefit. 

To accomplish this we must and will again appeal to the intelligence, 

the patriotism, the sense of justice, and the manhood of the American 

people. 

Mr. FAULKNER. Mr. President, I engage in the discussion of the mea..sure now pending before the Senate fully realizing its vast import- ance not only to the people of the State which in part I represent, to 

the sixty-four millions whocolllpos~ our population and yield obedience 

to our Jaws, but also to those who, though alien to its institutions and 

beyond tbe limits of il:.s territorial jurisdiction, have watched with 

amazement the marvelous progress and unexampled development of our country, and who, recognizing it as one of the leading nations of the 

world, will be influenced by its declared policy touching the ·great 

economic questions involved in this measure. It is not my purpose to question the wisdom of Washington, who 

advised his countrymen that "the great rule of conduct for us in re- gard to foreign nations is, in ex tending our commercial relations, to have 

with them as Ii ttle connection as possible," but to urg;e upon the Senate to preserve the distinction made by him in that memorable address, 

and while a voiding all en tangling political alliances with foreign nations 

to go no further in a direction that will tend inevitably to restrict and 

weaken our commercial relations. 

Our interests as a people will induce us to avoid political alliances 

with powers whose institutions, customs, habits, an<l destinies are con- trolled and directed by influences which have nothing in common with 

the aspirations of the American people; but the interests of a favored 

class, small in numbers, powerfulj.n wealth and organization, have, 

during the la.st thirty years of our national existence, so shaped our legislation and controlled our foreign policy that we have lost the rank we formerly occupied among the commercial nations of the world, un- til_ to-day there are bnt one or two lines of steamers engaged in the foreign trade that carry the American flag. 

, ' 

' 

This is a humiliating admission to be made in the presence of the 

American people~ but it is nevertheless true. 

This humiliation is intensified when we recnll the fact that as far 

back as 1823, with a population of only 9,633,8~2 people, Congress and 

the country were electrified by that famous message, which declared 

to the allied powers of Europe that "We owe it, therefore, to candor 

and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and 

those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their 

part to extend their system t..o any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety,'' and which, without treaty obligations 

placed the Government of the United States before the civilized world as assuming a protect-0rate over the Western hemisphere. 

It is true we did not question the right of the parent country t-0 en- force obedience in its colonies to itR decrees. but we boldly and firmly 

announced to the combined monarchical governments of Europe that 

any a..."ISistance offered to the parent country to enforce its laws in the 

colony, or any attempt by those governments, singly or together, to 

conquer colonies that had declared their independence of the mother 

country would be regarded as an act ''dangerous to our peace and 

safety.'' 

The broad views of public policy and the foresight of the wise statesmanship which dictated this messaj:!;e ·gave to the United States, 

among the nations in the Western hemisphere1 a commanding and influential position. 

Gradually, as they have asserted their independence of the mother 

country and organized independent governments, they have been influenced by the position occupied by this country, and have modeled 

their constitutions from our organic Jaw, and declared the rule of action 

for their citizens by laws based on our legislative enactments. 

From the Rio Grande to Cape Horn republican forms of government 

have been established, and the present year witnessed the representatives of all those rapidly developing countries a"sembled in the Federal c:.tpital to deliberate upon the means that would best promote 

the commercial relations and bind more firmly the interests of the people of all these countries. 

No longer bound by the shackels which for so many years had paralyzed their energies and smothered their aspirations, we should recognize that in the great national conflict for supremacy we can not 

afford by unwise laws, passed for the benefit of a privileged few against 

the interests of the common mass of our people, to retard the growth 

of any industry or set an example to our southern neighbors that; 

would encourage the formation of classes among their people resting 

upon the unnatural development of a single great tJ.dustry that with 

others goes to make up the wealth of a nation, and encourage the establishment of a fiscal system that would tend to exclude our own exports. 

Mr. President, I am impressed deeply with the belief that the fiscal 

laws which we formulate for tlie government of the people subject to 

the jurisdiction of the Congress of the United States will not only promote the prosperity or retard the development of our own people, but 

will have a strong influence in shaping the policy, in determining the 

material development, and in hastenin~ or retarding the commercial 

intercourse between this country and those republics south of us who 

have watched with confidence the practical workings of our la we, and 

have attributed the marvelous development and growth of our country 

to the wisdom of the statesmanship which has guided its course for more than a century. 

We can not afford, through the operation of bad la.ws, to segre~ate 

our countrv from the commercial nations of the world as China did 

for centuri~s. The interests of our people demand tbat we shall take 

advantage of the position conceded to us by the nations of both hemispheres, that the vast and varied resources which we possess may be 

developed, our general prosperity promoted, and all of the g;reat industries of the country encoura~ed, not by concentrating its wealth in the 

bands of one in every five hundred of our population, but in diffusing 

it among the great mass of oar citizens, recognizing that the strength 

of a people is measured by their peace, good ord~r, and contentment, 

and not by tbeluxuriousrioting of classes in the ill-gotten gains wru.ng 

through unjust and inequitable laws from the brain and muscle of 

the toiling millions. 

IS A TARIFF FOR PROTECTION, REGARDLESS OF REVENUE, CONSTITUTIONAL? 

Mr. President, to enable us to consider the pending measure in the 

spirit which its importance demand~ we must immolate the spirit of 

greed-which is generally the life and vitality of such a bill-upon the 

altar of justice and ta1r dealing; we must extend the horizon of our vision beyond the mere boundaries of our personal locality and interests; we must realize that when the Government assumes to control and regulate the natural rights of the citizen, tbat power only extends to the 

point of promoting the general welfare and not to the extent of advancing the interests or increasing the wealth of a. segregated few in 

the community. We must consider the needs of a public service, ana- lyze the estimates on which appropriations are asked, and limit the ex- penditures to the needs of the Government economically admini tered, 

and in the extent of the exercise of this Federal power we must :find our authority in the law of its creation. 
. •\ 

·' 

.... ' 

... ""' . , : 

·. 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. 8921. 

Mr. President, I appreciate the fact that a constitutional argument 

against any measure proposed is frequently considered by members of 

this body as a useless and unnecessary consumption of time; but, sir, I am not willing to yield to such a criti<'ism in the discharge of the important duties of the office which I have the honor to hold. The Constitution is our chart, and in reference to every measure which is 

brought before Congress for its consideration it should be our wiide, as in lo.wit is the limitation of our power. I prefer to follow in such a 

case the sound advice of Cicero rather than to acquiesce in that sentiment which seeks to extend the powers of the Federal Government 

by disregarding those limitations which the wisdom of the fathers imposed when they created this governmental structure. He said: 

It is necessary for a senator to be thoroughly acquainted with the cons ti tu ti on; and this is a knowledge of the most extenl!live nature, a matter of science, of diligence, of reflt'. ction, without which no sehator can possibly be fit for his office. 

What a contrast, sir, between this utterance, which has survived its 

author nearly twenty centuries, and that of the distinguished Senator 

from Kansas, made upon this floor, that the Constitution ot the United 

States means anything which a majority of the people want it to mean. The sentiment of the Roman orator and statesman is worthy of perpetual remembrance, while that of the American Senator merits forgetfulness and oblivion. 

Mr. President, I shall assume in the discussion of this measure that 

it is the settled policy of Congress (with the exception of the revenues 

derived from the internal-revenue laws and from the sale of public 

lands) to raise the means necessary to meet the expenditures of the 

Government by duties on imposts, levied under authority conferred by 

the first clause of the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, thatThe Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; to pa.y the debts and provide for the common defense and general wel- fare of the United StatPs: but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. 

To comprehend fully the scope of the eighth section it is proper to 

refer to the seventh section of the same article, which provides thatAll bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of R epresentatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments, as on other bills. 

These sections must be construed together to enable us to clearly 

understand the purpose and intention of their insertion and the limitation upon the power granted to Congress under the eighth section 

of the first article. When the seventh section is read in connection 

with the eighth -e find that the framers of the Constitution have placed 

two limitations upon the exercise of this grant of power: First, it limits the right to originate such bills to the popular branch of Congress, 

which, by reason of biennial elections provided for in the Constitution, 

makes its membership more directly and immediately responsible to 

the people than the Senate is; and, secondly, it specifically defines the 

object for which the expressed power may be exercised, and limits it 

to bills the object and purpose of which is the raising of revenue. As 

the Federal Government is a governmentoflimited powers, exercising 

suchon1yasareexpresslyp-anted, incidentto,ornecessarilyimpliedfrom 

those expressed, we can not, as in other forms of government, seek 

authority for a given act ot Congress by referring to the inherent powers that usually reside in all governments, but must trace our authority to the express grant or satisfactorily show that the power sought 

t,o be exercised is necessarily implied from that expressed. 

This limitation, found in the seventh section, in fact declares nothing more than the general common-la'ff principle which is universal in its 

application under all forms of constitutional government. Its meaning 

is that the granted powers of taxation shall be exercised for public purposes in promoting the general welfare, and shall not be employed with a view of advancin~ private interests. 

Mr. President, this construction of the Constitution is strengthened 

when we remember the,limitation imposed by the fifth amendment to 

that instrument upon the right of the Government in exercjging its 

sovereign right of eminent domain, which limitation is the expre fon 

of the common-law principle and made a part of the organic law of the 

country. It providesNor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensa- tion. 

This fundamental declaration, contained in the bill of rights of almost every State in this Union as a restriction upon the inherent rigb t of 

government, conclusively shows that when those great principles of the 

limitation upon the arbitrary powers of absolute government were formulated, and at a time when constitutional governments originated, the 

thought had never been conceived by those who then guided and controlled the destinies of nations that there existed either an inherent 

or other governmental power by which private property could be taken 

forprivatense. Consequently we find that the only limitation upon the 

exercise of this sovereign attribute is, that just compensation shall be 

paid when private property is taken for public use. As a result, sir, of this 

construction, if there exists such a power in this Government, or that 

of any of the States, to take private property for private use,'we have 

the strange anomaly presented in both State and Federal Governments 

that, although there is a restriction upon the power when exercised for 

> • '• .· 

public purposes, yet there is no limitation upon those governmental 

exactions when exercised for private objects. 

I can not, for one, sir, con .,ent to ·the proposition tbat would be involved in so absurd a constructfon, but prefer to follow the expression 

of opinion of the learned court in 50 Maine, 590, which declares: 

No pubUc exigency can require private spoliation for the private benefit of favored individuals. If the citizen is protect.ed in his property by the Constitu- tion against the public, much more is he against private rl\pacity. 

This, Mr.President, is no longer an open question. Both the State and 

Federal courts have with absolute unanimity applied the common-law 

principle, under the constitutional guaranties, m favor of the citizen, 

and denied the power of taxation as an incident to the powers of government, when exercised to promote private interests. The courts 

have gone further, and have met the arguments advanced by those who 

assert the doctrine that because the establishment of manufactures is a public benefit, therefore the Government is authorized, in the exercise of its taking power, to levy a tax to promote the enterprise, and 

in clear and vigorous language, illuminated by illustrations so con- vincing that he who runs may read, have denied the existence of such 

a power. In the case of the Loan Association vs. Topeka, 20 Wall.~ 

657, Judge Miller, in announcing the opinion of the court, says: 

If it be said thtlta benefit r esults tot.be local public of a town by establishing manufactures, the same may be said of any other business or pursuit which em- ploys capital or labor. The me rchant. the mechanic, the inn-keeper, the banker, the builder, the steam-boat owner, are t'qually promor.ors of \he public good, and equally deserving the aid of the citizens by forced contributions. No line cn.n be drawn in favor of the manufacturer which would not open the coffers of the public Treasury to the importunities of two-thirds of the business men of the city or town. 

And in speaking fnriher on the general power of taxation he uses this language: 

The power to tax: is, therefore, the strongest., the most pervading, of all the powers of the Government, reaching directly or indirectly to all classes of the people. It was said by Chief-Just ice .Marshall, in tlle case of McCulloch t•&. '!'he State of Maryland, that the power to tax i1:1 the power to destroy. A striking in- stance of the truth of t he proposition is seen in the fa.ct that the existing tax of 10 per cent. imposed by the United State!!! on the circulation of all other banks than the national banks drove out of existence every State bank of circulation within n. year or two after its pa.s!>age. This power can xs readily be employed 

against one class of individuals and in favor of another so as to ruin the one cla.es and give unlimited wealth and prosperity to the 6ther if there is no implied lim- itation of the uses for which the power may be excercised. To lay with one hand the power of the Government on the property of the citizen and with the other to bestow it upon favored individuals to aid private enterpri86S and build up private fortunes is none the less robbery because it is done under the forms of law and is called taxation. This is not legislation. It. is a decree under legis- lative forms. Nor is it taxation. "A tax," says \Vebster's Dictionary, "is a rate or sum of money assessed on the person or property of a citizen by government for use of the nation or state." "Taxes are burdens or charges imposed by the legislature upon per- sons or property to raise money for public purposes." Coulter, J., in Northern Liberties vs. St. John's Church, says very forcibly: "I think the common mind bas everywhere taken in the understanding that taxe5 &re a public imposition, levied by authority of the government for the purpose of carrying on the government in 11.ll its machinery and operations-that they a.re imposed for a public purpose." 

If possible, however, a more striking judgment in its application to 

the measure now before the Senate has been rendered by the supreme 

coprt of Maine. Under the constitution of that State the Legislature 

may submit to its supreme court questions of law for its adjudication, 

and in conformity with that constitution the following propositions were propounded to the court: 

Has the Legislature authority under the constitution to pass laws enabling towns, by gift of money or loan of bonds, to assist individuals or corporations to establish or carry on manufacturing of various kinds within or without the limits of said towns? 

The answer to these propositions may be found in 58 !Iaine, 590, 

from which I quote: 

Taxes are the enforced proportional contrlbution of ea.ch citizen out of his 

estate, levied by authority of the State for the support of the governmffilt and for all public needs. They a.re the property of the citizen taken from the citi- zen by the government, and they are to be disposed of by it. There is nothing of a public nature any mo · e entitling the manufacturer to public gift.s than the sailor, the mechanic, the lumberman, or the farmer. Oar Government is based upon equality of rights. All honest employments are honorable. The State can not rightfully discriminate among occupations, for a discrimination in favor of ooe branch of industry is a discrimination adverse to all other bra.aches. The Stat e is equally to protect all, givin~ no undue advantage or special and exclusive preference to any. 

The same court, in 60 Maine, in the case of Allen vs. The Inhabitants of Jay, bad their attention directed again to this question, and 

the opinion delivered by the chief-justice, who states briefly a number of cases, fully sustains the principles announced in 58 Maine. 

The judge said in that case: 

Taxation, by the very meaning of the term, implies the raising of money for public uses, and excludes the r a ising or it for private object"' and purposes. "I concede," says Black, C. J., in Sharpless vs. Mayor, 21 Pennsylva.nla,167, "that a. b1w authorizing taxation for any other than public purposes Is void." "A tax," remarks Green, C. J., in Camden vs. Allen, 2 Dutch., 839. •·is au impost levied by 

authority of government upon its citizens or subjects for the support of the State." 

"No authority or even dictum can be found," observes Dillon,O.J., in Han- son vs. Vernon, 27 Iowa, 28, "which asserts that there can be any legitimate tax- ation when the money to be raised does not go into the public tre1LSury, or is not destined for the use of the government or some of the governmental di vis· ions of the State. "If there is any proposition a.bout which there is an entire and uniform weight of judicial authority, it is that taxes are to be imposed for the use of the people of the State in the varied and manifold purposes of government, and not 

. , 

.· 

., . 

·~ 

·. 

• J 

-. _ .. 

·-

I• 

; 

.. _., 
., 

::.• 

-. 

8922 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

for private objects or the si)ecial benefit of individuals. Taxation originates 

from and is imposed by and for the State. 

''The idea seems to be that thereby capital would be created. Butsnch is not the co.se. Capital ia the saving of pa.st earnings ready for productive employ- ment. The bonds of a town may enable the holder to obtain money by their 

transfer, o.s he might do by that of any good note. But no capital is thereby 

created. Ct is only a. transfer of capital trom one kind of business to another. 

"The industry of each man and woman engaged in productive employment is of 'benefit' to the town in which such industry is employed. This can be 

predicated of all uaeful labor, of all productive industry. But because all use- ful labor, all productive industry, conduces to the public benefit, does it follow 

that the people are to be ta.xed for the benefit of one man or of one special kind 

of man ufacturin~? . .. The sailor, the farmer, the mechanic, the lumberman, are equally en tided to the aid of coerced loans t-0 enable them to carry on their business with Messrs. Hutchins & Lane. Our government is based on equality of right. The State ca.n not discriminate among occupations, for a discrimination in favor of one is a. 

discrimination adverse to alJ others. While the State is bound to protect all, it 

ceases to give that just protection 'vhen it affords undue advantages, or gives 

f!Pecial and exclusive preferencea to particular individuals and particular and 

special industries at the cost and charge of the rest of the community. 

"Where is the difference between the coerced contribution of the tax-gatherer to be loaned to individuals for their benefit and those of the conqueror from tha 

inhabitants of the conquered country?" 

11-Ir. President, if these decisions, made by the highest courts, both 

ofFedeml and State jurisdiction, mean anything, they announce clearly 

and distinctly the doctrine, that the power of taxation conferred upon 

the Government constitutionally extends no further than the right to 

exact from the citizen forced contributions for the purpose of meeting 

governmental needs with a view of carrying out the public purposes 

for which they were created. 

In the light, therefore, of these decisions it may not be unprofitable 

to direct the attention of the Senate to the declaration of principles on this st1bject made by the two great political parties seeking the as- cendency in this country. 

The Chica.go convention of 1888, ignoring these just and fundamental principles of governmental limitation, in behalf of the Republican party declared: 

The Republican party would effect all needed reduction of the national reve- nue by repea.lin&- the taxes upon tobacco, which are an annoyance and burden to agriculture, and the tax upon spirits used in the a rts and for mechanical pur- poses, and by snch revision of the taritfla.ws a.swill tend to check imports of such 

articles as are produced by our people, the production of which gives employment to our labor, and release from import duties those articles of foreign production, 

except luxuries, the like of which can not be produced at home. If there shall 

still remain a. larger revenue than is requisite for the wants of the Government, we fa.vor the entire repeal of the internal taxes, rather than the surrender of any pa.rt of c.ur protective system at the joint behest of the whisky ring and the 

agents of the foreign manufacturers. 

In this plank of that platform the Republican party announced to 

the American people that, rather than surrender any part of the protective system, ita policy would be to repeal the entire internal rev- enue tax upon tobacco and whisky, and in the revision of the tariff 

laws seek to reduce the revenue trom customs imposts by increasing 

the duties, and "check imports of such articles a.s are produced by our people." No other limitation upon this vicious, unconstitutional 

system of taxation wa.s made in that platform. 

Whether the article was one of luxury or one of prime necessity, 

entering into the daily consumption of the great mass of the people, 

in both instances, if either or all came in competition with home production, their costs were to be increased that their importation might 

be decreased. Ita pledge to the country was, that if placed in power 

it would formulate a bill the foundation of which would be protection 

per·sl', and not one having for Hs object the raising of revenue with 

incidental protection to A.merican industries. In other words, that the 

legislation of Congress should be framed for the sole purpose and object 

ofad vancingthe interests of one-thirteenth of the population of the country, imposing upon the other twelve-thirteenths the burdens of forced 

contributions in the interest of a favored class of our citizens. 

The Democratic party, through its chosen representatives, did during 

the same year, in the interest ot the whole people, announce those 

principles which have for a century given vitality to ita organization, 

and which have been the cohesive power that enabled it to meet defeat 

without disintegration, and to use its victories in promoting the interests of a common country. It declares: 

Knowing full well, however, that legislation affecting the occupations of the 

people should be cautious and conservative in method, not in advance of public 

opinion, but responsive to its demands, the Democratic party is pledged to re- vise the taritf in a. spirit of fairness to all interests. But in making reductions in taxes it i!f not proposed to injure any domestic 

industries, but rather to promote their healthy growth. From the foundation 

of this Government taxes collected at the custom-house have been the chief source of Federal revenue. Such they must continue to be. Moreover many industries have come to rt>ly upon legislation for successful continua.nee, 'so that e.ny change or law must be at every step regardful of the labor and capital thus 

involved. The process of reform must be subjoct in the execution to this plain dictate of justice. 

All taxation shall be limited to the requirements of economical government. The necessary reduction in taxation can and must be effected without depriv- ing A.~erican labo.i: of the ability to compete successfully with foreign labor, 

a.nd without impoRmg lower rates of duty than will be ample to cover any increased cost of productfon which may exist in consequence of the higher r a te of wages prevailing in this country. Sufficient revenue to pay all expenses of 

the Ferleral Government, economically administered, including pensions inter- est ai;id principal of the public debt, can be got, ur;der our present system of 

taxation, from custom-house taxes on fewer imported articles, bearing heaviest on articles of luxury and bearing lightest on articles of necessity. ·we therefoi:e d.enounce the abuses of the existing ~riif, and, subject to the 

precedin&' limitations, we demand that Federal taxation shall be exclusively 

for public purposes, and shall not exceed the needs of the Government, ec<r nomically administered. 

Mr. President, the platform of the Republican party of 1888, on the 

subject of tariff taxation, was a departure from the declared principles 

which have guided and directed its policy from its organization to tha~ 

time. It in terms repudiates the platform of 1872, which announced 

thatThe annual revenue, after pa.yinir current expenditures, pensions, and the 

interest on the public debt, should furnish a moderate balance for the reduey ticn of the principal; and that revenue, exce pt so much as may be derived 

from a tax upon tobacco and liquors, should bl' raised by duties upon import& 

tions, the details of whic'-1 should be so adjusted as to nid in securing remuner· ative wages to labor and promote the indus'. ries, prosperity, and growth ot 

the whole country. 

At this time we find that it distinctly declares that tobacco and 

whisky shall be two of the sources of revenue, and that the growth 

and prosperity of our great manufacturing interests shall be promoted 

by giving to them that incidental protection which a fair adjustment 

of the details will secure. Its platform of 1876 rests upon the same constitutional theory: 

The revenue n ecessary for current expenditures and the obligations of the 

public debt must be largely d e rived from duties upon ·importations, which, so far ae possible, should be adju'lted to promote the interests of American labor 

and advance the prosperity of the whole country. 

And that no doubt should arise or misconstruction exist of the declaration made bi it in 1876, in 1880, after four years of reflection, its 

convention declared: 

We reaffirm the belief avowed in 1876, that the duties levied for the purposo of re venue should so discriminate as to favor American labor. * * * 

l\fr. President, for the first time U:l the history of our Government a political pariy in 1888 announced to the American people the conetitutional power of Congress to so frame a revenue bill that protection 

should be its object and revenue a mere incident. 

The reasons which induced so radical a change of policy by a party 

that had controlled the destinies of this country for twenty-seven years 

must have been very potent. A reference to the political condition 

which confronted the Republican party at the time of that declaration 

may throw some light upon the influences which dictated it. 

The Democratic party in 1884 had elected Grover Cleveland upon a platform that demanded a wise and conservative revision of the tariff 

and a reduction of the Federal revenues. A Democratic House of Representatives had framed a bill in the spirit of that platform, which, 

while reducing the taxes of the people $72,000,000, would not have 

impaired or injuriously affected the prosperity of American industries. 

The record of the Democratic administration was marked by ability, 

purity, economy, and patriotism. 

The Republican party realized the condition that confrontro it and 

app1·eciated the necessity of making an issue which would bring to ita 

support not the popular sentiment of the country, but the powerful 

organization and the unlimited means of a small but influential class 

ot citizens who, prompted by self-interest and etimulated by a promise of higher profits, would turn the tide in favor of ''Republicanism 

and protection" by imposing more onerous burdens than then existed 

upon agriculture and other unprotected laborers. 

PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN TH.Ji: REPUBLICAN PARTY AND MANUFACTURERS. 

M:r. President, with this object in view the Republican party, which 

had originiited in sectionalism, chose rather to rely upon a cla.ss for its 

support than upon those governmental principles which would com- mend it to the approval of the bodfof the people. Ignoring ita history 

and traditions, made during the thirty years of its brief life, it deliberately entered into a partnership with the representatives oftheml\nufacturing interests of the country in consideration of liberal contributions, which were to be used to defeat the purity of the ballot; to reverse the honest sentiment ofa majority of the people; to shake the 

confidence in popular soverei2Ilty and universal suffrage; to disgrace a Government whose foundation must rest upon the intellig:ence, inregrity, and incorruptibility of the people, and to place in high und re- sponsible executive position in the public service men bearing the ineffaceable stains which disfigure the character of those through whose 

agency the ballot is debauched and the suffrage of a free people corrμpted. 

The fact that this partnership exists is sufficiently proven by the 

legislation upon all of these great economic questions which has characterized the proceedinJ?S of a Republican Congress. It is also a matter of general reputation, easily susceptible of proof, but being circumstantial in its character I prefor to rely upon the free and voluntary 

confession of the parties in interest rather than to detain the Senate 

by welding each link in the chain of circumstantial proof. 

In the light of this evidence the Republican platform of 1888 is 

easily understood and should excite no surprise. 

I will call to the stand the editor of the Tariff League Bulletin, 

whose paper represents the great protected industries of the country, 

and which I am informed is scattered broadcast throughout the land 

by the :iid of funds furnished throngh an association composed of these 

pampered favorites of class legislation. 

This editor, 'in criticising the language of the "confidential circular" 

' " -~ 

.. 
- - ·. - ..... ~ 

_ .. .... 

1890. ', CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8923 

sent to the manufacturers during the campaign of 1888 by the Republican League of the United States, observed: 

These charges, when stripped of tbeii: discr~ditable verbiage, are, first, that the "campaign which we &re a.bout to enter will concern more than anybody else the manufacturers of the country," "men who are getting practically the sole benefits or at lea.st the most directly important benefits, of the taritfl&ws ;" and second • .. that while reaping the fruits of the ta.rift' policy ther have bee.n very laiz:~a.rd in their contributions to the Republican cause." The~r co?duct is called ,r-oravenal parsimony," The New England manufacturers, it lS said, have been somewhat less parsimonious than the others; but of Pennsylvania man· ufacturers it says, in language both vigorous 'and picturesque: 

"If I had my way about it I would put them under the fire and fry all the fat 

out of them." . 

This extract shows the honest indignation of this true representative 

of monopoly, who recognized, however, that the specific cJ:farge made 

by the authorized agent of the Republican party demanded trom him a specific reply. He did not attempt to repudiate the obligations which 

had been assumed by those · he represented; he virtually admits that 

they had agreed to furnish the cash capital, and the other partner the 

experience, in manipulating elections and in enacting laws in their interest; he realized the great demands made upon the social assets, and 

that unless the treasury was replenished bankruptcy would be inevitable and the inordinate anticipated profits would not materialize. S~lf-interest suggested a prompt response, and while his employers 

hurried to their counting-rooms to sign their checks in favor of the 

treasurer of the Republican League of the United States, this honest 

and trusty, but indignant editor, sought the privacy of his sninctnm, 

where he might pen a few plain truths in vindication of the conduct 

of those silent partners. 

In the following terse and pointed languag:e be answers the allegations of the ''confidential circular:" 

But while manufacturers derive no greater advantages from protection than other clas es in proportion to the magnitude of their ent~rprises, they never- theless do contribute far more than all other classes to its support. The records of the Republican party prove it. Those who have been engaged in collecting funds for its defense will testify to it. 'Ve therefore deny the assertion of the Senator whom the Republican League has ch sen for its mouth-piece, and we allirm that more than three-fourths of all the money used in support of Republicanism and protection has come from men directly or indirectly engaged in manufactures. 

The next witness which I shall call t.o the stand to sustain the proposition that the representatives of the Republican party upon the Finance Committee of the Senate interpreted their platform as pledging 

them to the doctrine of a. prohibitory tariff in the interests of the manufacturer is the distinguished Senator from New York, Mr. HrscocK. 

In a colloquy which occurred on the floor of the Renate between him 

and the Senator from Kansas, Mr. PLUMB, he frankly admitted that, 

in arranging the details of the bill, he voted on the rates of dnty imposed ''without the slightest regard to whether it would increase or 

decrease the revenue," wherever he" believed that the effect of the duty was to create or foster a healthy industry here and give a market for 

our own manufactures.'' 

The colloquy refers more especially to th~ duties imposed upon tiles 

and bricks, but was made general in its application by a question propounded to the Senator from New York by the Senator from Kansas, 

which was as follows: 

l\Ir. PLUMB. I notice that with reference to paragraph 95 the committee use the same expression: "The proposed specific rate in place of the present ad valorem is thought to be no more than is necessary to protect domestic indusu-y." 

Now, if that is the theory, then of course if there is any revenue derived from the imposition of the duty the committee will be disappointed. Mr. HISCOCK. I shall be, yes; but I trust there will be no occasion for such ~QP~~m~~ . Mr. PLUMB. The idea. is one of exclusion, but if we get revenue we shall just be that much ahead. Mr. H.rscocx. I beg the Senator's pardon. On this subject of exclusion I would be entirely gratified and pleased, if it be the fact.-a.nd I hope tha.t; will be the fact-if we shall be able to supply the home market by our domestic pro- duction; and if it has that effect I grant that the effect will be rather to reduce than increase the'revenue. J.\1r. PLUMB. Then, if it should happen that in the imposition of duties the foreign manufacturers should continue to bring in products and pay the duty, while we should be that much a.bead it. would not be what the committee an- ticipated, and we should have failed of our purpose in excluding foreign man- ufactures. 

Mr. Hrscocx:. We should have failed to accomplish our purpose in transfer- ring the industry wholly and completely, so farr as the supplying of our domes- tic wants is concerned, to this country. Mr. PLUMB. Well, Mr. President, it becomes e'\'ident that, so far as these ideas are concerned, they do not. relate to the general subject of revenue resulting from the imposition of ta.riff duties. Is the Senator willing to state whether that was the 1dea which obtained with him in other cases where a similar rea- son is urged for the imposition of higher duties? l'r!r. H1soocx:. I say very frankly to the Senator that, speaking for myself, in all cases where I believed that the effect of the duty was to create or foster a healthy industry here and arive a market for our own manufactures, I voted for the rate of duty that would accomplish that; and believing, ~ I do, that that always ha<1 the effect to reduce the price, I voted to accomplish that without the slightest regard as to whether it would increase or decrease the revenue. 

Mr. President, the Republican party has been shown by direct as well as circumstantial evidence to have surrendered unconditionally 

to the direction and guidanr.e of those whose intere t.s are identified 

with the protected industries, and who are seeking, by an increase of 

rates of duty, to put it in the power of grasping monopolies, through 

trusts and combines, to control the markets in which the people are 

bound to purchase. These ties of reciprocal interest have grown so strong that but little hope can be entertained that they can ever be 

severed. 

The energies of the Republican party are directed, its aspirations are stimulated, and the wisdom of its statesmen is guided by those who 

have contributed more than three-fourths of all the money used in the 

support of "Republicanism and protection." This arrogant, aggressive, and domineering partner, in consideration of the personal emoluments and private benefits which were to follow success, liberally con- tributed to the fund to be used in selecting, controlling, and voting 

those ''blocks of five" that victory might cement the bonds of this 

"unholy alliance." Through the sacrifice of cash and principle that 

party to-day controls every branch of the Federal Government. 

The partnership thus formed has been temporarily successfu]; the 

cash partner now demands a settlement of the partnership and a. re- demption of the outstanding promises. The bill now before us for 

consideration ts an eviiience of good faith on the part of the partner 

whose capital was experience and promises. The pledge then made 

must he redeemed, though in doing so the Constitution be violated. 

The tariff must be revised, not with a view to raise revenue, bnt ''to 

check imports of such articles as are produced by our people." Territories with a population one-third less than sufficient to entitle them 

to representation in the Honse of Representatives must be admitted 

into the Union and clothed with all the functions, privileges, and 

powers of a State, that the fruits of this compact may be indefinitely 

enjoyed. In a few days we will witness the final consummation of 

this agreement, which will bind the arms of labor more tightly and 

leave the interest of agriculture in a more deplorable condition than we find it to-day. 

REVIEW OF TARIFF LEGISLaTIO~. 

Mr. President, a review of the tariff legislation since 1857 must con- vince the most incredulous that the revenue laws framed by Republican Congresses have been so designed that the interests of the great mass of our people, who represent the consumers of all the various 

products of this country, have been forgotten or purposely ignored in 

the bterest of those few who have reaped the benefit of those laws 

which have discriminated again t labor and in favor of accumulated 

capital. 

The average ad valorem rate under the revenue tariff of 1846 did not 

exceed 24 per cent., which average was reduced by the tariff of 1857 to - 19 per cent. The Morrill tariff otl860 was introduced with the avowed 

purpose of restoring the average ad valorem rates of the tariff of 1846. 

In 1862 the rates were increased to 32 per cent., and in 1864 there was a further increase to 47 per cent., and from that period until the general revision of 1883 there were numerous acts passed which affected 

particular subjects embraced in the several scheduJes of the tariff, but none that materially changed the ad valorem average under that tariff. 

In 1882 the popular clamor for a revision and reduction of tariff taxation became so strong that the advocates of a high protective tariff 

found it necessary to apparently yield to the wishes of the people by 

the appointment of a commission composed of the representatives of 

protected capital, some ot whom had large pecuniary interests invested 

in American manufactures; and yet, sir, they were forced to_admit in 

their report, found on page 5 of the first volume, thatEarly in its deliberations the commission became convinced that a substrui- tial reduction of taritf duties is demanded, not by a mere indiscriminate pop- ular clamor, but by the best conservative opinion of the country, including that which has in former times been most strenuous for the preservation of our na- tional Industrial defenses. Such a reduction of the existing tariff the commis- sion regards not only as a due recognition of public sentiment and a measure of justice to consumers, but one conducive to the genera.I industrial prosperity, and which, though it may be temporarily inconvenient, will be ultimately bene- ficial to the special interests affected by such reduction. No rates of defensive duties, except for the establishment of new industries, which more than equal- ize the conditions of labor and capital with those of foreign competitors, can be justified. EJ1tcessive duties, or those above such standard of equalization, are positively injurious to the interest which they a1·e supposed to benefit. * * * Excessive duties generally, or exceptionally high duties in particular cases, discredit our whole national economic system and furnish plaW!ible arguments for its complete snbveYSion. • • • It would seem that the rates of duties under the existing tariff, fixed for the most part during the war, under the evident necessity at that time of stimulating to its utmost extent all domestic production, might be adapted, 

through reduction, to the present condition of peace, requiringno such extraor- dinary stimulus. And in the mechanical and manufacturing industries, es- pecially those which have been long established, it would seem that the im- provements in machinery a.nd processes made withiri the la.st twenty yea.rs, and the high scale of productiveness which has become a cl';iaracteristic oftbeii: establishments, would permit our manufacturers to compete with their foreign rivals under a substantial reduction of existing duties. Entertaining these views, the commission has sought to present a. scheme of tariff duties in which substantial reduction should bethedistinguishingfoature. Tbe average reduction in rates, including that from the enlargement of tbefree- list and the abolition of the duties on charges and commissions, at which the commission has aimed, is not less on the average than 20 per cent., and it is the opinion of the commission that the reduction will reach 25 per cent. The re- duction, slight in some cases, in others not attempted, is in many cases from 40 

to 50 per cent. • • * If the reduction reaches the amount at which tl...e com- mission has ::limed, and if there is any truth in the allegations of the opponents of the prel'<ent economic system that a duty on articles such as are produced in this country, whether in manufactures or agriculture. enhances the price to the conl'<umcr not only of what is imported, but of the whole domestic production, to the amount of which the duty is a measure, the reduction proposed by the commission would benefit consumers to the extent of hundreds of millions of 

dollars. 

. · 

. -

, .. 

I• 

-- .. 

'\ 

' ' . ·. 

.-

. '. 

· . . : ·. 
. ·-

,· 

.... I 

. 

': 

·•I 

.. 

.. 

-. 

•· I'• 

! • 

8924 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

1tfr. President, the recommendation of the commsision that the reduction should on an avei:age equal from 20 to 25 per cent. had but 

little influence on Congress, as the reduction made by that bill as it 

passed Congress was bot 4 per cent. less than the war ta~ff of 1864. 

Many of the most important schedules, such as those relatrng to cotton 

cloths, ready-made clothin~, ~nd ~ron, .were materially increas~d. . The work of this comm1ss1on is entitled only to such credit as 1s 

usually given to the evidence of witnesses wl;lo testify against their own 

interests. It was constituted for a particular purpose, and represented 

but a single interest to be affected by its recommendation~. 

This criticism is not only warranted by the results which have followed their recommendation, bot its influence upon Congress is clearly 

illustrated by the following observation made by the distinguished 

Senator from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON], who on February 3, 1883, said: 

N6w I want to say one word in regard to the Te.riff Commission report upon the cotton schedule. The truth is that the Tariff Commi!5sion did not examine 

this <'otton matter at all; it may as well be said on the tloor of the ~ena.te; nor did they make this ~chedule that is called the Tariff Commission report schedule. It was made by a cotton manufacturer from Boston, with an expert ap- praiser in New York and the Tariff Commission accepted it. When the knowledge of the.t fact ca.n;;e to me I ho.d no particular faith in th~ Tariff Commission 

report on this cotton schedule, an~ therefore I examined it as .best I could for 

myself, bearing the witnesses, rea~nii the; testimony, and ~earmg people who 

I supposed knew somethini: a.bout it and m whom I had faith. 

Ju this, as in all other instances in which the public have been taken 

into the confidence ot those who have manaJ?:ed and controlled the 

policy of our tariff legislation, we find that the arrogant demands of 

the representatives of those int.erests, and the agents employed by them, 

are the instruments which dictate the details which fasten upon the 

people this bnrdensome taxation. 

Mr. President again the public sentiment which demanded a reduction of taxation' was defeated by the manipulations of those in the 

interests of the protected industries. For seven years the people have 

borne this onerous taxation; the accumulations ot their labor have 

been taken from them by forced exnctfons under authority of law when 

the public needs did not require this sacrifice; an enormous surplus was 

anu!lally being accumulated in the vaults of the Treasury, until the 

administration, with a view of restoring to the circulation of the country 

the money unnecessarilywithdrawnfrom it, was forced, in addition to 

the amount required for the sinking fund, to purchase at a premium 

bonds that were not due or payable, and which could only be obtained 

by the payment of the price demanded by the holders. 

For twenty-ft ve years, sir, the powers of this'G<:lvernment have been 

used by a small minority of its citizens to check by artificial means 

the growth, prosperity, and development of agriculture in the interest 

of the manufacturers of the country. 

The taxes paid to the Government by consumers of the imported 

articles and the bounties paid to the manufacturer by the consumer 

under the tariff rates for this period would average over a billion of 

dollars annually, and furnishes sufficient explanation why the great 

agricultural industry is now in so "deplorable a condition,'' why those 

great agricultural States of the West have their lands plastered with 

mortgages, and why the wealth of the country has been transferred 

from that class of its people and concentrated in the hands of a few 

in the great. manufacturing States of the East; and yet the greed of 

these cfasses, who have been the pets of class Jegislation and the pampered favori les of this undemocratic system, is not satisfied. 

Perhaps there is a Providence which is controlling this grasping 

spilit in the interest of the people. I hope at least that the philosophy of the poet may be true in this case, that ''whom the gods destroy they first make mad," for we find in the bill now before us for 

consideration that the Republican party, actinit under the influences 

which I have heretofore de.scribed, through its Committee on Ways and 

Means of the Honse, have, by its provisions, increased the hurdens of 

taxation on the prime necessities of life by an average ad valorem duty 

of 20 per cent. in excess of that paid upon similar articles under the 

tariff law of 1883. 

Mr. President, if the statement of the Tariff Commission to Congreas 

is true, that a reduction of from 20 to 25 per cent. (which they recommended) would "benefit the consumers to the extent of hundreds of 

millions of dollars," will not the reverse proposition be equally true1 

that an increase of 20 per Cflnt. will injure the consumers to the extent 

of hundreds of millions of dollars? 

This, however, is not the only bill which has been passed by this 

Congress with a view of protecting American industries and increasing 

ta_xation. No allowance will hereafter be made for damages to goodsil 

wares, or merchandise imported into this country. Hereafter ''a 

cartons, cases, crates, boxes, sacks, and coverings of any kind, and all 

other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise 

in condition, packed ready for shipment, will be required to pay a duty," 

which increases the ad valorem rates upon imported articles from 5 to 

15 per cent., making the ag~egate increase ot taxation under the two 

bills from 25 to 35 per cent. in excess of the tariff of 1883. 

The following recapitulation of the thirteen schedules by the Finance 

Committee of the Senate will fully sustain the position I have taken as to the increase of taxation under the provisions of this bill: 

Importations for fiscal year 1889. Estimated duties under pro- posed rates by- Equivalent ad va.lorem rate 

underArticles. 

Values. Senate. Exist- H.R. 

ing law. 9-116. Duties. H.R.94.16. Senate. 

Per cent. Per CH?l. Per cent. A Cbemi£als, oils, and paints.................. ........ ............... .................. Sl5, 028, 766. 89 S5, 466, 'i02. 96 $5, 553, 892. 70 ~. 554, 577. 92 36. 69 37. 30 37. 05 B Earths, earthen ware, and glassware............................................. 18,420,634. 57 9,410,603. 64 9, 717,467. 49 9,314, 387. 04 51.09 52. 75 50. 56 

~ ~~1:~8a~ndd::0°u~~~~~~~~si/::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::· ~::n:~~:~~ N~Ng-;:~ ~:~U~:~ ¥:~:~~:~ ::~~ ~~:~ ~U~ 

: ~~f!~~~·;·;,_·~d·~·;;,_-;;;;(~~·i;;~~~·;,·r::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 13, ~:: i~: ~ il, m: ~:: 20, ~: ~~: g 20, ~: ~~: ~ ~¥: ~ 1~~: ~~ 1~~: ~ G Agricultural products and provisions.......................................... 46, 119,072. 60 ll,319, 797.84 19, 838, 600. 88 17,387, 705. 25 2'.54 40. 39 35. 40 H Spirits, wines, and other beverages.................... .................. ...... 10, 480, 344. 77 8, 104, 770. 39 8, 130, 198. 25 7, ll87, 611. 69 77. 33 77. :>8 75. 26 

I Cotton manufactures.................................................................... 20, 287, 543. 3.5 7, 230, 434. 50 7, 722, 207. 44 7, 766, 013. 61 35. 64 38. 06 38. 28 J Fla.::ir,hemp, a.ndjute,and manufacturesof.................................... 40, 098, 45.5. 38 13,437,235. 62 16, 959,022.12 15, 9M, 162.64 33. 51 42. 36 39. 79 

! ~1~ ;~ddeii:::d~t~~~.~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::: ~: ~g~: ~: ~ ~~:ill: ~i: ~ ~: :g: ;~: ~~ ~: ~: ~~: ~ ~g: :~ ~~: ~ ~~: M M Pulp, pa.per, and books.............................................................. .. 6. 906, 160. 68 1, 370, 104.38 l, 627, 506. 43 1, 627,506.43 19.84. 23. 57 23.57 

N Sundries ........................ ................................. ............... ...... ...... ... 52, \J84, 301. 98 13, 909, 495. 25 13, 791.169, ~ 13, 666, 300. 96 26. 25 26. 02 26. 82 

Total dutiable ........................................................ - ............. 390,437,117~ 161,408,M6.49 206,344 977:n 201.~,mos~1~~ 

Mr. President, an examination of this measure will develop these I ton goods from $3fi. 64 on the $100 to $38. 28; on all woolen mann.Uictfacts, that, with the exception of sugar and molasses, the articles trans- ures, from $58. 98 on the $100 to $78. 41; on paper boxes, etc., from $19.84 

ferred to the free-list under the provisions of this bill, have yielded a on the $100 to $23.57, ruaking an annual increase, based upon the im- revenue of only $4,841, 122. 71 and consist of acorns, books in languages ports of 1889 upon those articles which enter into the daily use and 

exclusively other than EnJ?;lish, feathers and down, currants, dates, consumption of the people, of $40,281,060.59. 

opium unmanufactured, green-house plants, paintings in oil or water As an example of the great increase under the McKinley bill I will 

colors, and statuary, other articles transferred bein~ such as are used quote from the statement of Gustav Blumenthal before the Commitin the manufacturing industries of our country. The free-list under tee on Finance of the Senate, who, after making a full statement of the 

this bill tends to reduce the cost of manufactures. while the dutiable effect of the provisions of that bill upon the tariff on buttons, said: 

list is formed with a view to in~rease the protection of the manufact- Ii:i concl!Jsion, I herewith hand you a statement of a small invoice of but!ons 

ured products It puts no article of universal use and absolute neces- which arrived yesterday and ~as. entered at the custom-house at New 11 o!'k . · . . . to· day, the mar1tet value of which is 1,600.80 and the present duty$100.20, while 

s1ty upon the free-hst, bemg more generous to the rich than to the poor figured at the rates as proposed the duty on the same invoice would amount to 

in allowing them to import their, greenhouse plants and their paint- ~a,187.60. 

ings and statuary free of duty, while it requires tbe laborer to pay an l\Ir. :I. W. Riglander, referring to the increase of duty on spectacles, 

increased tax: upon his blanket, his tools, tin-bucket, knives and forks, gives the following table: 

woolen goods, etc. Upon every article that enters the country, used _, 

by the j?;reat body of the people, it demands from the agricnltarist and 

the laborer and from every other consumer a higher boanty aod a more 

onerous tax than the present tariff. 

Instead of 

45 per ceut.-

On all articles' composed entirely or in part of iron or steel, it increases the rates of duty from $38.24 on the $100, to $51. 76; on all cot10 francs per gross ................................. , .......................... ,............... 335 per <'en t. 15 francs per gross ............................................................................ 235 per cent. 20 francs per gross ................. ., ......................................................... 185 per cent. 30 francs per gross ............................................................................ 185 per cent. 

45 franC":J per gross ............................................................................ llO per cent. 60 francs per gross............................................................................ 85 per cent • 

. . ~ • . : • f --
. . . . . 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN.ATE. ·' 8925 

Mr. Walter Fletcher shows the increase of duty on cashmere shawls 

under this bill to be aa follows: 

These goods which I now show you are what we call cashmere shawls, and 

they are very cheap. Here is an article that costs about74 cents. There is already 71 per cent. duty on it now. Under the present bill they propose to make 

it a hundred more per cent. It is pretty much the same thing all the way through this line of goods which I have indica..ted in the table. There is abont 

33t per cent. Thes6 goods are not ma.de in this country at all. 

And Mr. John Egington, in referring ta the increase of taxation on liquid extracts of beef, which are manufactured only to a. limited degree 

in this country and which are used largely as a medicine, said: 

On a late invoice this would show a difference of ~03.55; proposed duty, 

$1,202.55, old du~y $399.55, or nn advance of 200 per cent. 

THE CONnITIO:s' OF THE COU:STRY, ESPECIALLY AGRICULTURE. 

Mr. President, it may be true-and it is not my purpose to question 

dinary bill bnt the one frankly admitted by the distinguished Senator from New York) that the purpose of the committee in framing it was to fix the duties so high as to give the American market to the 

American manufacturer? 

Mr. President, when we compare the demands on the Treasury at the 

end of our great civil war and those which we now have to provide 

for, it is almost impossible to believe that there is any justification for an increase of taxation on those commodities which are essential to 

the comfort and well-being of the people. 

In 1866 our annual expenditures amount.ea. to ------ _ $519, 022, 356 

The interest account included in this sum was.------ 133, 067, 625 

Leaving the ordinary expenses --------------- 385,954,731 

the fact ~erted by Senators during the progrOO? of this debate-that In 1889 our annual expenditures were-------------- 281, 996, 615 

the business interest of the country is prosperous and that no fears are Including interest aeconnt 0 r_ _____ ------·---- _ ------ 41, 201, 484 

entertained of a change of this conditiomof affairs. This is not true, 

however, of the greatest of all our industries, agriculture. The low 

prices of agricultural products and the enhanced cost of all articles of 

prime necessity is affecting most injuriously this large class of onr population, and as a result the value of the farms bas depreciated, 

large indebtedness has been accumulated, hopes that were entertained 

that relief would be given by at least reducing the burdens of taxation 

have been disappointed, and if this clasa is not in a deplorable condition 

those engaged in it fully realize the fact that, in the settlement of the 

annual balance of de\>it and credit, each succeeding year finds them in a worse condition than they were at the end of the preceding year. 

The magnitude of the agricultural industry must be appreciated 

when we recall the fact that at least forty millions of our population are dependent on that pursuit; that the value of the annual product 

reaches over two and one-half billions of dollars, of which amount 

nearly $2,000,000,000 worth is consumed in this country and over .$500,000,000 of its product is exported. 

With these facts fully understood and known by the lea-Oers of the 

Republican party, who ha.Ye controlled the legislation of this country 

for thirty years, no effort has been made by them to advance the development or promote the prosperity of this the greatest of all industries. The legislation which they have formulated and the laws which 

thP,y have enacted, which in any way could affect it, have operated as restrictions upon its growth and of limitations upon its expansion. 

The bill under discussion furnishes no hopes of relief, although the 

chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House admitted, in reporting it to that body, that there was a "widespread depression" in this industry, and yet its provisions but tend to aggravate the evils which have produced the conditions under which it is 

now suffering. Th~ir appeals to Congress for the passage of fair and equitahle laws 

have been unheeded; the arrogant demand of the capitalist, the manufacturer, and the mouopolist, and the persistent working of their rep1·esenta.tives in the corridors ot this Capitol, whose cry is always give, 

give, give, have been promptly heeded, duly considered, and favorably 

answered by the Republican majority by the introduction of a bill in· 

creasing the burdens of the agriculturists from 25 to 35 per cent. and 

enhancing the value of the products of the manufactories in almost 

the same proportion. 

I know, sir, of no consolation that can be offered to the farmer or the la.borer, so long as the Republican party controls the destinies of 

this country, but the philosophy contained in the old Italian prover.b, 

'' You can't strip two skins off of one cow.'' 

Mr. President, the Republican party in 1883 refru:ed to give t-0 the 

people the relief they demanded from the burdens of war taxation. 

It refused to surrender more thau 4 per cent. of the war taxes. It attempted to deceive by a revision and not a reduction of tarift duties, 

.and again in 1888 the same influences defeated the relief demanded. 

To-day, every department of the Federal Government is controlled by 

that party, but the obligations assumed during the last campaign were such that even the unrest of the people has failed to impress upon them 

the necessity of listening to their appeals. •.raxation must be increased 

Leaving the ordinary expenses ---·· ---- _ ------ 240,795,131 

The public debt in 1866 was------------------------ 2, 773, 236, 173 

The public debt, .Tuly 1, 1890, less cash in the Treasury, was--------------------------------------- 876,386,113 

Amount of ·debt paid in twenty-four years. ____ 1, 896, 850, 060 

SU:, our annual ordinary expenses between 1866 and 1889 have decreased $237,029, 741, our debt has been decreased $1,896,850,060, 

and yet it is proposed to increase the average ad valorem rate of 

taxation 1rom $41.34 on the $100 to $51.97 on the $100. But, Mr. 

President, our friends on the other side of the Chamber will claim that 

in the course of the last twenty years they have reduced the revenue by relieving certain subjects that were formerly taxed. This is true; 

but in repealing those taxes they but illustrate the policy which has 

controlled the Republican party when legislating in reference to this 

subject. 

In 1866 the internal-revenue receipts from taxes on capital, luxuries, 

whisky, etc., amounted to $309,226,863; in 1889 tbey amounted to 

$130,881,513, leaving an excess of internal-revenue taxes in 1866 over those in 1889 of$178,34fi,350; in other words, there has been a reduction of taxation on capital, luxuries, and whisky, of$178,345,350, while 

at the same time there was an increase of taxation from fUStoms duties, 

within the same period, of $44, 786, 089. 

The extent of the burden transferred by a repeal of taxation under 

the internal ·revenue laws to the shoulders of the laborer is more fully 

shown by a recapitulation of the amounts, contained in. a letter from 

the former Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Mr. Miller, addressed 

to Mr. BRECKINRIDGE under date of May 2, 1888, in which he shows 

that, taking into consideration the growth of the country, the loss ot revenue in 1888 by the repeal of these laws amounted to $247, 703,452. 

Recapitttlation of taxes repealed under the foregoing-named acts. 

Taxes repealed onl\Ianufactures and products ........................................................ . Gross receipts ............................................................................ . Sales ........................... ................................................................ . Special taxes not relating to spirits, tobacco, and beer ...•...••...... Income ....................................................................................... . Legacies and successions ............................................................ . Articles of luxury kept for use ................................................... . Slaughtered animals .................................................................... . Passporti,i ................. , ................................................................. .. 

Total aboli<1hed ................................................................... . .Add stamp taxes reduced ........................................................... . And for incrense on gas from 1866 to 1872 ................................... . 

And for increase on raw cotton from 1866 to 1867 ....................... . 

Total repealed and reduced ............................................... . 

.Amount. 

8127, 230, 609. 00 11, 262, 430. 00 8, 837, 395. 00 14, 144, 418. 00 J 

72, 982, 159. 00 3, 091, 825. 00 2, 116, 674. 00 1, 291, on. oo 

31,149.00 

2(0, 988, 230. 00 ~66. 722.00 

989,076.00 

5, 359, 424. 00 

247, 703, 452. 00 

in the intere t of those who contributed three-fourths of the fnnds for The Senator from Rhode Island, who had charge of the Senate bill 

"Republicanism and protection." in 1888, which was oftered as a. substitute for what is known as the 

~""EcESs1TY FOR A..."< INCREASE oF TAXATION. I "Mill!! bill," on the 5th day of October of that year, in advocating 

Sir, I would ask those who are responsible for the administration of that measure, advanced the argument that, had the rates of duty in 

.the Government whether the public necessities require that additional force prior to the act of July, 1870~ been applied tothe importations of 

burdens shall be laid upon the labor of the country. 1887, the amount of duties collected would have exceeded the receipts 

The Democratic Administra.tion left your tlnances in a healthy condi- of that year from customs by $139,596, 693. Even assuming, Mr. Presition. Your balance-sheet showed a large surplus subject to the draft dent, that this estimate of the distinguished Senator is correct, what 

of your Treasurer when l\fr. Harrison was inaugurated. Has the ex- does it prove? Simply that a Republican Congress has relieved capitravagance of the Rt:publican party, during eighteen months of its ad- tal, luxuries, and whisky of taxation to the amount of5101,106, 739 more 

ministration, rendered it nece.3Sary that the duties should be raised from than they have taken from the shoulders of agriculture and labor. 

25 to 35 per cent.? Is it true that the appropriations of the presentses- COMPARISON OF STATE AND FEDERAL TAXATION. 

sion will exceed, not only the estimated receipts, but the surplus of the l\Ir. President, in considering so important and far-reaching a measpreceding year and the $54, 207, 975. 75 of trust funds covered int-0 the ure as ibis, the proctical operation of which affects indirectly every citi-

'.rreasury under the act of .Tuly 14, 1890? zen of the country, it may not be unprofitable to call attention to the 

lfsuchwasteofthepublicfundshasbeentheresultofplacinginpower aggregate of direct taxation imposed upon the people for State and a Hepub1ican administration and Congress, the country should know it. county purposes, with a view of comparing the cost with that of the 

Unless_ you fear a deficit, can any reason be given for this extraor- Federal all.ministration • 

. - -. .· 

'f • 4 .. ' 

' ~ j ,,; 

'· I 

,.. . 

...... 

= 

·. 

.· .... ' 

..... I • 

•. 

,_ 

' \ 

f. 

.. 
.. ,- -

.. 

:·-

... - I,.·-

8926 ... CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

We find to some extent that even under the system of direct taxation in the States an inequality exists in the imposition of taxe upon 

the wealthy and those in medinm cll:cumstances. Under the Federal 

system the poor pay as much as the rich, as taxes are paid upon con- sumption, and not upon wealth. In the States it is paid upon wealth 

bya tax upon real and personal property, but even in thisease, sir, ~h.ere 

are thonsancs 01 wealthy men who, as the owners of personal securities, 

non-taxable bonds, etc., avoid that equality of taxation which should 

exist in every system which provides n. revenne for public purposes. 

A comparison of taxation for these purposes will reveal a vast extravagance of Federal expenditures: 

Estimate of State tax paid per capita---------------------- $1.10 

Estimate of county tax paid per capita ______ ---- ---------- 1. 41 

Aggregate for State and county purposes------------------ -- 2. 51 

For a family of five persons-------------------------------- 12. 55 

Assuming the population of this country to be 64,000,000 31nd the 

annual expenditures for 1890 to reach the snm of $460,000,000, it would 

be$7.19 per capita, or $35.95 per family of five persons, which is within a fraction of three times as much paid to the Federal Government as -is necessary to defray all the expenses of State and county administration. 

Assuming the population of West Virginia to be 775, 000, the people 

of that State would, under that estimate, pay in Federal taxation annnally the sum of $5,472,~0. 

This estimate of the cost per capita of taxatian for the support of the 

Federal Government does not include that immensl\sum paid in bounties by the consumer to the manufacturer of articles so highly protected 

by Federal legislation, and which, under the estimate of the distinguished statistician, Prof. Arthur L. Perry, amounts to the snm of 

$869,159,572, almost $14 per capita of popnlation, in addition to the 

$7.19 per capita contributed for the support of the Federal Government. 

COl\""DITION AND PROFITS OF MAl\'UFACTUitES. 

])fr. President, is it surprising that, after thirty years of legislation 

framed and administered in the interest of a single class in our country, 

all should concur with perfect unanimity in the admission of the fact 

that there is a "widespread depression" in the agricnltural indnstry 

that has been made to bear these bnrdens for so long a time? or is 

it surprising that the admission is made with equal unanimity that 

the great manufacturing industry, the pampered favorite of this class 

legisiation, is in a prosperous and growing condition? 

With these two admitted facts confronting us, I would ask, isir, 

whether it is the part of wi dom or the evidence of a patriotic statesmanship that we should by our legi Iation further widen the breach 

between these two great ind nstries of our country by artificially stimulating the prosperity and profits of the one, while by the same meas- ure we increase the burdens and restrict the markets of the other, thus 

extending this already "widespread depression." 

Were our manufacturing industries prostrated, as agriculture is, at 

least a plausible excuse could be offered in justification of this unpardonable injustice to three-fifths of our population; but such is not the 

case; no such plea can be advanced by the advocates of this bill. The excuse for its passage can rest upon no higher ground than that given 

by the plunderer having the desire to ~ppropriate his neighbor's property and the power to carry into execntion that inclination. Congress 

is asked to give its sanction to the transfer of the property of the con- sumer to the vaults of the Treasury in the one case and to the coffers 

of the manufacturer in the other. 

To show, sir, that the manufacturing industry of this country is not a subject of charity, let us examine the statistics furnished by the censns of 1880: 

~:~~: ~: ~~t~~~f~i·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·:::::·53;3!id40;029 ;;5, 369, G67, 7oa 

Value of annual wages.................. ............... ............ 947, !>19, 67'1 ------ 4, 342, 259, 703 

Excess of Yalue of product, OYer material and wages............ 1, 027, 408, 003 

As the capital invested in this industry aggregates $2,790,223,506 

and the receipts exceed the cost of wages and material $1,027,408,003, or 37 per c"nt. upon the capital invested, from which are to be deducted 

taxes, insurance, wear and tear, etc., in comparison with the profits on agricnltnre we find it would leave an exorhitantannual dividend, the 

result of ineqnitable laws, which permit excessive prices to be charged 

by destroying the natural competition of trade. 

To illustrate more particularly the high profits received by these 

bentficiaries of an unconstitutional and unjust system of legislation, I 

will take the liberty of reading an extract from the able speech deli vered by the Hon. BENJAMIN F. Srrn-ELY, of Indiana, in the House of 

Representatives on M.ay 16, 1888. He said: In an equity suit brought by some of the stockholders of the Jackson Iron Mining Company, in the Lake Suoerior region of Michigan. in 1883, the secre- tary of that company was put on the witness stand and under oath admitted that from the organization or th<' company in 1863 up to that time they had de- clared a sum total of dividend~ of 1,785 per cent.; that the original capital stock was saoo.ooo; that the dividends declared amounted to $5,35.5,000: that the plant was in 1883 worth H,500,000. An average annual dividend of S9t per cent. for twenty years and an addition of 400 per cent. to the value of the orjginal plant In the same time show the languishing condition of an "infant industry," 

which all this time was clamoring for protection against the pauper labor of Europe. 

-.. 

Tbe Quincy Copper Mining Company, of l\llchigan, paid an average annual dividend of 50 per cent.for the ten years preceding 1881, and the Calumet and Hecla Mining Company paid in dividends last year ~2,250,0W on nn investment of less than U,000,000. It will be rem em be red in this connection that copper had a war tariff of 2 cents per pound and now enjoys a pPl\Ce tariff of 4 cents per pound. A member of the Edgar A, Thomson Steel Works, located at Brad- dock, Pa., admits to a. member of the Committee on Ways and Means of this House that he drew out of that estnblishment as diviciends inn. single year the sum of ~l,500,000, or$',000per day, to say nothing of the umlivided profits. This firm is protected by a tariff of~l7 per ton on steel rails and $27.50 per ton on steel beams, and yet their works a.re at this h<>Ur surrounded by a. cordon of Pinker- ton's brass-buttoned mandarin to protect imported foreign labor inside, shoot the life out of struggling American workmen outside, and guaranty absolute free thde in labor! 

IS LABOR BENEFITED BY TIIE TARIFF? 

Mr. President, the advocates who seek to perpetuate this system of 

legislation, appreciating their inability to arouse the intere.<it or stimulate the philanthropic sentiments of the American people in behalt 

of the beneficiaries <>f this J?;reat public wrong, endeavored to divert 

attention from the trne reasons which prompted their zeal in behalf 

of protection for protection's sake, by assuming the disinterested role 

of the champions and protectors of American labor against the low· 

priced pauper labor of Europe. 

Such an appeal, coming from the source that it does, should excite 

suspicion. The experience -0f tte pa.st has demonstrated that there are but two members that compose this partnership. Labor is not one of 

them. 

The power of the Republican party results from the magnificent or· ganization, the cohesive force of mutual interests, and the unlimited means of the protected manufactnrers. So long as its policy is con- trolled by the Cllpitalist it can not champion the cause of labor. 

The value of this argument in the political market is rapidly depreciating in recent years. Education, exr.erience, the study of these 

economic questions and their practical operation, are rapidly convincing 

the American laborer that between him and capital there is snch a conflict that, in the language of the Republican John Jarrett, before 

the Senate Committee on Labor and Capital, " wages of labor can only 

be maintained at a living standard by the workingmen belonging to 

laboi: organization!". The ad·rnnce in prices did them no good; the 

manufacturer took it all." 

The Republican party, t.hrough whose legislation these great mo· nopolies have been enabled to concentrate the wealth oftbe coantryin a few States in one of its sections and who are the authorized repre· 

sentatives of the wealthy ancl creditor classes, which division among 

the people of the nited States has been the natural outgrowth of the 

policy enforced during the last thirty years by that party, can not con- vince the American laborer that his interest is safe in its keeping, by 

declarinp: that high cu tom-dnties must be imposed upon commodities 

of prime necessity, that labor ma_y be fully and justly rewarded. 

The statistics of the increase of the valne of labor during periods ot 

high and low tariffs conclush·elydemomtrate that labordoes not reap 

the benefits tbat should fiowfrom the sacrifices made by the consumer 

(of which he is the largest element), and none know this better than 

those who Cl"J the loudest for protection to American labor. 

1\Ir. President, experience teaches all who will stop to reflect upon 

this subject that there are two gre:;i.t questions entering into and deter· 

mining the price of labor: First, the demand and supply and, second, 

the efficiency of the labor. 

It would be useless to consume the time of the Sen.ate in discussing 

the first of these propositions, that the extent of the demand and the 

number of efficient laborers seeking employment must to a great ex· tent be the measure of the valne of the services rendered. The history 

of the price of labor in all the great and varied industries throughout 

the len_gth and breadth of our country, from Maine to California, con· clnsi vely shows that these two elements, more than any other questions, 

tenrl to e tablish the value of labor. 

The difference in price for the same class oflaborers between the North 

and the South and between the East and the West fully snstains the 

correcb1ess of the fir.:;t propo ition. 

That an increased value to lapor is not given by an increase of 

customs duties, even to the workmen in protected intlustries, is 

clearly shown by the hnreau of statistical information of the State of 

Illinois: 

Weekly wages. 

Protected occupations. 

1880. 1886. 

-----------------------!---- -----

Brush-mo.kerS ................................................................... . Cloak-ractory 'vorkers ....................................................... . Coo.I-miners ........................................................................ . Confectioners .................................................. .................... . Iron and steel 'vo1·kers .................................... ................... .. Iron-n.1.olders ...................................................... ................. . 

~~~~~~!N:~';:~~ti·~~~·.::::::::·::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Salt-laborers ...................................................................... . Shoemakers ........................... ........................................... .. Tinnere ............................................................................... . Zina-factory men ............ ............................. ................ ~ ..... . 

Sl2. oo $10. so 14. 75 11. 75 12.02 8.02 18.86 12.14 41.10 36.50 16. 43 14. 41 11J.CO 12.00 12.00 10.05 

13.20 12. 00 12.30 9. 90 12. 90 11. 25 

25.00 18. 75 

The above table shows an average decrease of 18 per cent. 

5 

20 · 

33 

33 

11 

12 

20 

16 

9 

19 

12 

25-
"'•:"' ·- ' . ' -· .. ';" .. 

-. ... ",,...,.. 

1890. , :..· CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8927 

This view is more conclusively demonstrated to be correct when we 

find from the same source of information that, whereas there was a decrea e between 1880 and 1886 in the price of wages in protected occupations, there was a lan~e increase of wages during the same period in 

the unprotected occupations: 

Unprotected occiwalions. 

• 

Weekly watres. 

1880. 1886. 

- - - - -------- -----------!-'--------

ious and careful consideration to the effect of the tariff on wages than 

the laboring masses. The organizations which have sprung up throughout the whole country have tended to educate those directly interested 

in the subject in the practical effects of its operation. The day has 

passed when the American laborer can be misled by tp.e catch-words, 

" Protection for American labor." 

The address issued by the ·Workingmen's Tariff-Reform Association 

of Philadelphia to the workmen of the United States shows a keen 

app1·eciation of their relations to a high tariff and boldly proclaims 

who in fact are the beneficiaries of this legislation. It declares: 

LABOR'S SHA.RE. 

Bricklayers and stone-masons .. J. .. .................................. . EJect rotypers ............................. .. f ... .................................. . Hod·carriers ... ·············-··········· ......................................... . Slate-roofers ...................................................................... . Press-feeders ...... ................................................................ .. Stair· builders ...................................................................... . Stea1n-fittcr helpers ................................ , ........................... . Stone-block: pa.vers ........................................................... . Stone-cutters .................. ..................................................... . Street-railway employes ..................................................... . Wooden-bloc~ pavers ......................................................... . Wood-turners ..................................................................... . $19.05 

18.50 

9.00 

U.25 

7.00 

13.50 

9.00 

18.00 

18.00 

10.25 

18.{l() 

12.00 

S2(>.10 

19.15 

ll.50 

15.75 

8.50 

15. 75 12.00 

it.CO 

21.60 

13.01 

23.50 

14.25 

14 The wages of labor in the manufactures are but little more than 17 per cent. 44 of the product. In other words, the amount that falls to labor out of the t-Otl\l 27 value of the products is only U7 out· of every SlOO. Now, does it not stand to 10 reason that if a. tariff be at all necessary an average tari.tf duty of 17 per cent. 21 would he amply sufficient to protect American labor against foreign labor, even 17 if the latter got no wages at all? Yet the average of tariff duties now is 47 per 33 cent., although Lhe d lfference in the wages between this and ot.hercountries is not 33 5 percent. calculated upon the relative productiveness of labcr. Why, then, is 20 this extra 30 per cent. put on? We see it can not protect labor. It does protect 'l:l the manufacturers not merely against foreign competition, but most effectually 30 against all our efforts to compel them to treat us Justly. It is this 30 per cent. 19 extra. that secures to them all the benefit from protection and makes it impos- sible for us to even wring from them a. share of it. It makes them free from competition and fortifies them against our just demands, and it yet leaves them free to draw their labor freely irom the markets of the world, and the inevit- able and natural result is cheap labor and dear goods. 

This is an average increase of 24 per cent. 

The Commissioner of Labor concurs in this view in his report of 1883, 

in which be stateS that "in 1875 the per cent. of wages paid to the 

value of production in over two thousand establishments was 24.68 

and that in 1880 it was only20.23, a decrease of one-sixth in five years. 

It is equally true that in considering the value of labor we should 

t.ake into consideration its efficiency, or, in other words, its capacity to 

increase production. 

A superficial examination of the relative cost of labor per day in 

America and England would at once suggest the conclusion that the 

price of labor is much higher in this country than abro!ld; but when 

we take into consideration the efficiencv of the American laborer and 

compare the relative value in price, measured by the value of the product of the two, we at once realize that there is litUe it any difference. 

Mr. EVARTS, then Secretary of State, in presenting to Congress the 

reports of the United States consuls in relation to the state of labor in 

Europe, in a letter dated May 17, 1879, sums up the information embodied in these-numerous reports, and in referring to the relative value 

of work performed by the American and European workmen he says: 

The average American workman performs from one and a. half to twice as much work in a given time as the average European workman. This is so important a p oint in connection with our ability to compete with the cheap- labor manufactures of Europl'" and it seems, on first thought, so strange, tbat I will trouble you with somewhat lengthy quotations from tbe reports in sup- port thereof. 

And on page 37 he suggests the reasons for this difference in efficiency 

in favor oftbe American workman. He says: 

The re is something in the Republic which gives au individuality to the peo· ple of tile United States po essed by no other people to such a degree. Our in- ventive genius in mechanical appliances is original and a.t least twenty-five years. ahE'.ad of Europe, Our people accept innov~ion, a.re prepared for it ~Y 

anticipation. Europea.r.s do not. One workm11n m the Umted States, as will be seen from the foregoing extracts, does as much work as two workmen in most of the countries of Europe; even the immigrant from Europe attains this pro.,.re "'ive spirit by a. few years' association with American workmen. We hav';i no oppressed and stupid p easa n try, little more intelligent than the tools they handle. All are self-thinking, s elf-acting, and self-supporting. • 

Mr. Blaine, while occupying the same position, in transmitting similar reports to Congress, relers to the subject of wages in the cotton factories i~ the following language: 

Undoubtedly the inequalities in the wag es of English and American operatives are more than equalized by tbe greater efficienc y of the latte r l\nd their longer hours of labor. If this should prove to be a fact in practice, as it seems to be prove n from official statistics, it would be a very important c lement in the estab- lishment of our ability to compete with England for ours bare of the cotton-goods trade of the world. 

Mr. Frelinghuysen, in transmitting a similar report, in referring to 

the cost of labor for weaving and printing cloths in England, remarks: 

Your readers will gather from the figures given in the foregoing table of costs that, in the matter of wages, America is as cheap as Eng land. 

The correctness of the conclusions reached by an analysis of the reports of our consuls in Europe is confirmed by an examination of the 

estimates as to the number of hands employed in the manufacturing 

industries in England and America and the value of the product turned 

out by them: 

I United Stutes. JGre:it Britain. 

Han ___ d_s_e_m-pl_o_y_e_d-.. -.-... -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -... -.. -.-... -.. -. . -.. -.. -.. -.. -.. -.... 1 5, 250, 000 0, 000 

Value of product .................................................. : $8,000, 000,000 $4,000,000,000 

The utt.erances upon this subject to which I have referred are the 

mature judgment of leaders of the Republican party after a careful 

investigation of the facts, and made in their official character to Congress upon a subject that would necessarily enter into its consideration 

in framing le~islation bearing upon these economic questions. 

No element that composes our great population has given more an.x· 

• 

~. 

Mr. President, manufacturers should not present themselves to the 

public as philanthropists; if they do, the facts of history would overthrow the claim. Until a Democratic Honse originated a la.w which 

prohibited it, they hesitated not to import the pauper labor of Europe, 

by contracts made abroad, with mortgages upon its future earnings, 

place it side by side with the American labor, with no other purpose in 

view than to reduce it8 value. 

Before the passage of this law, strikes were far more numerous than 

now. Then, the laborer was in the power of the capitalist; he could 

be turned out of employment.his family reduced to a state of starva,... 

tion, and himself to that condition of desperation that would make him 

yieltl to the demand of his employer; for, if he refused to accept the 

wages offered, the markets of Europe were open, and they could be 

drawn on to supply his place. Thanks to a Democratic House of Representatives, this can no longer be done, and labor may now treat with 

capital upon a more equal footing. 

The information furnished us by the Government shows that the 

view taken by the Workingmen's Tariff Reform Association as to the 

per cent. of labor in the protected manufactures is true; and those statistics lnrther show a serious depression in the value of labor under the 

protection given to the manufactured commodities since the war. 

The census of 1880 shows that the value of the manufactured produ ct of this country in 1860 was $1,885,861,676, and the wages paid to 

produce those commodities amounted to $~78,878,966, or 20 per cent. 

.of the product. We learn from the same authority that in 1880 the 

value of the manufactured products was $5,369,667,706 and the value 

of the wages paid was $9-17,919,674, a fraction over 17 per cent., after 

twenty years of high protection. The wages in 1860 under one of the 

lowest tarifis this country has ever known, it being Jower than the 

rates fixed by the revenue tariff of 1846, reaching only $19 on the $100, 

were 3 per cent. higher than those paid during the period of twenty 

years when a high protecth·e. tariff was in force, the low tariff during 

that time enabling the manufacturers to keep wages at the higher 

figure. 

In considering the value of wages for workmen in England and 

America, the question is suggested whether the higher prices paid for 

lahor in this country are not neutralized by the increased cost ofliving, 

caused by the enhanced prices given to articles ot universal use, by 

the high duties imposed upon their production or importation by the 

tariff act. 

We must not forget, sir, that the laborer is a consumer, and one of 

the largestclass of consumers of those commodities which are highly 

protected. He consequently pays his full share of Federal taxation, 

and far beyond his equitable proportion of the bounties to the manufacttμers. Every article of clothing purchased by him or by his family, whether it consists of woolen or cotton goods, the tools of bis trade, 

the china, crockery, and gfassware used in his kitchen or placed on his 

table, his knives and forks, the stove on which he cooks bis meals, the 

skillets and pots in which they are prepared, the tin-bucket in which 

be carries bis dinner, every article that adds to his comfort is taxed 

from thirty-eight to eighty dollars on the $10U. This necessarily re· 

daces the value of his labor, which is sold in a free market with no assist.ance by artificial means of increasing its price. 

In estimating therefore, the value of labor between two countries, 

the cost of living is an essential element, and between England and 

the United States it is one that tends largely to equalize wages. 

HAS THE TARIFF BENEFITED THE FARMER':' 

But, l\Ir. President, has the high tarift froml861 to the present time 

been beneficial to that largest class of our population, those who are engaged in and are dependent upon onr agricnlto.ral industry? Have 

the accumulations of the farmer been as rapid in proportion to the 

capital inve1rted as thosf' of the protected classes? 

I .. ' 

~ .. , 

-' 

'·. 

.... 

;.. 

: 

.. ., 
-· ... ""· '\ ...... ·' .... 

.-

I• .·. ,, 

, . 

., 

8928 -. dONGRESSION.Ai REOORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

These questions have been frankly answered by the Committee on 

Ways and Means of the Honse in the negative. It must therefore be 

assumed as an admitted fact, in the discussion of this measure, that 

the agriculturists, composing three-fifths of our population, are not 

keeping pace, in growth, wealth, and development, with those engaged 

in our other great industries, but are in fact yearly losing the position 

they held when the Republican party assumed control of this Govern-· 

ment in 1861. 

Including the value of farms, ~tock, implements, and machinery, 

there is inveRted in agriculture the enormous sum of $12, 104,085,440. 

The magnitude of the investment and the number of people depending upon it for their support demand of those who are commissioned 

to frame legislation that may affect its prosperity the most careful 

consideration; and yet, sir, "the most critical analysis of the provisions 

of this bill will disclose no effort made by its framers to remove the 

depression which now rests upon it, but, on the contrary, a familiarity 

with its declared policy must convince the most biased and prejudiced 

that in arranging its details there has been apparently a deliberate 

purpose and intention to increase the excessive burdens under which 

it labors. This evidences neither a spirit of wisdom nor patriotism 

on the part of those who are responsible for it. 

Mr. President, those £.ngaged in the occupation of fanning lead the 

most laborious lives of any of the citizens of the Republic, at work 

before the rays of the morning sun gild the eastern horizon and found 

guiding the plow through its farrow when the twilight of evening 

blends into the darkness of night. Though the largest in numbers 

and the most influential in the exercise of political power, if once or· 

ganized, they have bad no paid lobby to urge the consideration of their 

interests or to threaten political destruction to the party that failed 

to respond to their demands. 

Congress has shamefully and cruelly, in the legislation which it has 

formulated, betrayed their interests, assisted in prostrating their industry, and heaped burden after burden upon them at the demand 

and under the dictation of a haughty, arrogant, and pretentious class, 

until at last patience has ceased to be a virtue, and you witness for the 

first time a powerful, indignant, and aggressive movement of this great a~ricultural class, whose potent influence will hereafter be felt in sbap· 

ing the course of Federal legislation. 

It was once the proud boast of the farmer, that "~e who plows his 

land and tends cattle spins gold," but, sir, that was in the days of 

equal rights to all and special privileges to none, when the voice of 

the pe'>ple was reflected in the laws that were enacted, before the influence of Wall street fashioned and directed the financial policy of the 

Government, before the party which now controls the destinies of this 

country yielded to the baneful influences which first sought to quiet 

opposition, then to convert, and afterwards to guide and control. 

For thirty years the protected producers have dominated the legislation of Congress on all great economic questions. Its aggressiveness 

has overcome all obstacles and placed on the statute-books most unjust and inequitable laws. 

Stimulated at la.st into vigor and energy by the consciousness of impending financial ruin, this great army of "workers "has aroused itself 

to action. It has formulated a platform, the fiffh plank of which declares: 

Believing in the doctrine of equal rights to all and epecia.l favors to ncne, we demnnd that ta:xation, national or State, shall not be to build up one interest or clMs at the expense of another. 'Ve believe that the money of the country 

should be kept as much as possible in the bands of the people, and hence we demand that nll revenue. national, State, or county, shall be limited to lhe neces- sary expenses of the Government, economically and honestly administered. 

The demand of the peaple, as expressed in that platform and as heard 

through nominating conventions, bas at last attracted the attention of 

the country and we find already its influence manifesting itself in the 

Federal ha~i of le~islation. As its power is more fully developed its 

influence will become more potent, and I am satisfied that before long 

its voice will be heard, its counsels heeded, and its reasonable demands 

granted. 

Mr. President, the object of this measure, when considered in its effect 

upon the American farmer, is most iniquitous. His appeals are heard 

with contempt and his interests are treated with a cool brutality that 

is the offspring of unnatural greed and unexampled selfishness, which 

finds a parallel in no other period of t.he history of tariff legislation. 

The language of the Tariff Commission in its report to Congress aptly 

expresses what will be the popular judgment of the measure now pending before this body when its provisions are fully understood and 

their effect fully comprehended. It said: 

Excessive duties 1?enerally, or exceptionally high duties in particular cases, djscredit our \Vhole national economic system and f!Jrnish plausible arguments 

for its complete subversion. 

It is the means through which you seek to destroy'the international commerce of the country; to build high the wall of exclusion and non- intercourse; to close the foreign markets to our exports, 73. 24 per cent. 

of which consists of agricultural products; to force still lower the price 

of the products of the farm by compelling the producer to sell in the 

home market, already glutted with his products, and to suffer an an- nual loss of over $500,000,000 which heretofore has been received in 

exchange for his products; for is it not true that with no increase of 

•, ,,. . 

production it would require at least ten million additional population 

to consume the yield 1rom our farms? 

The Republican party no longer aspires to be national in its policies 

or in its aspirations. It is content, like its prototype, the Tory farty of England, to rest its hopes for future power upon the approva of a 

small element of the citizens that compose the population of this great 

and rapidly expanding country. It is warmed into liie and vigor by 

the flames of sectionalism, and will pass from the arena of national 

politics when the patriotic impulses of the. people of the common coun- try, forgetting the bitterness of the past, shall realize that their future 

safety depends upon the enactment of laws that will b~ just in their 

operation and equitable in the burdens imposed. 

Mr. President, the contributions of the farmers to the Treasury of 

the Government or to the cofters of the manufacturers can not be less, even under the existing law, than $450,000,000 annually. This drain 

upon their resources is gradually but surely surrounding them with 

conditions that will compel them to take advantap;e of the bankrupt 

law (which our Republican fri£:nds are urging shall be passed) to re~ 

lieve the distress which their unwise legislation is producing. 

Mr. President, the year 1890 will not soon be forgotten by the agricultural classes. The recklessness of the public servants of the people in their efforts to pass the measure we are now considering, united 

with the impenetrable dispensation of Providence, which is now bearing so heavily upon thl'm in almost every section of the country, will 

sorely test their fortitude and shake their confidence in their ability to 

meet the imp.ending losses which threaten them. 

Prices liave fallen; the seasons have been unpropitious; indebted- ness has accumulated. Nothing, sir, but that spirit inherent in the 

American character bas enabled him to overcome all natural obstacles 

and to resist the influences of an unwise policy which for thirty years 

has made him the burden-bearer of a class of ''infant industries," 

the petted and pampered favorites of Federal legislation. 

Mr. President, a knowledge of the facts to which I have referred 

will, to some extent at least, prepare the mind for the startling reve- lations disclosed .by the official statistics of the Government, showing 

the gradual yet unchecked decline of the agricultural industry from 

the hour that the Republican party was placed· in power and a Republican Congress framed a revenue measure the essential olement of 

which was an unjust and inequitable discrimin~tion in favor of the 

manufactured products of the country. 

From that period we can: trace the rapid decline in the relative 

wealth of the agriculturist. 

It was bone and sinew, honest toil and daily sacrifice, competing in 

the race for supremacy with the power of aggregated capital stimulated 

into unnatural activity and unhealthy development by the artificial 

encouragement of Federal legislation in the interests of a class. In 

such an unequal contest tJ1e result could easily be predicted. Fortunately, we do not have to rely upon prophecy. The recorded facts of 

history leave nothing to speculation. Statistics show that the value 

of the wealth of the country in 1850 was $7,000,000,000, and of this 

amount the investments in the agricultural industry amounted to $4,-

000, OOQ, 000. In a period of ten years, under a purely revenue tariff, 

between 1850 and 1860, the value of the wealth of the country had 

increased to $16, 000, 000, 000, of which sum the farmer still owned one- half, or $8, 000, 000, 000. From 1860 to 1880, a period of twenty years 

of1iigh protection, the value of the wealth of the country bad increased to $43,600,000,000, of which amount the farmer owned but 

$12,104,085,940, or a little less than one-fourth of the wealth of the 

country. 

These figures, Mr. President, furnish food for reflection. They clearly 

indicate that the great agricultural industry which in 1860 occupied 

the .tront rank is rapidly losing the position it then held. Its energies 

have been paralyzed, its growth retarded, and its accumulations checked 

by the policy persisted in by the Republican party, which ignored it.s 

claims in the inauguration of an economic system, the object and pur· 

pose of which was to build up one section at the expense of the other 

and to create an aristocracy of wealth in the States of the East. 

An examination of the report of the Comptroller of the Currency 

will strikingly illustrate the injustice to the great agricultural States 

of the West and South of the fiscal system which has been persisted 

in by the Republican party at the dictation 1tnd in fear of the threats 

of the money power of the East. These figures will further show the 

inequality in the distribution of the wealth of the country and the 

terrible drain which has been. made upon the resources of the agricultural States. 

The capital and deposits in the nine manufacturing States of Maine, 

New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, 

New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania aggregated $3,378,295,000, 

and in all the other States and Territories but Sl,823,376,000. This 

gives to the nine manufacturing States per capita $198, whereas the per 

capita in the other States and Territories amonnts to but $40. These 

nine States, with not over one-fourth of the population of the country, 

possess three-fifths of the banking capital and deposits. It is true 

that a. larger portion of the capital in the agricultural States is invested in farms, etc., than in the manufacturing States, but it is equally 

true that the real property in those States is heavily mortgaged to the 

• 

. , . 

' 

, , 
...... _; ... ,. -- ... -- • I 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8929 

capitalists of the East, and that a large proportion of the annual profits 

of the farmer in tbe West and South is required to pay the annual interest upon this mortgage indebtedness. 

This indebtedness is estimated by The New York Times at $3,422,-

000,000; by the St. Louis Republic at $4,531,000,000; by the Missouri 

Republican at S4,521,000,000. These estimates, made by reliable public journals after thorough investigation, we must hope a.re exaggerated, but their acctuacy, however, has not been disputed by the presentation of any evidence sufficient to overthrow them; we will have 

to wait until the returns of the present census either verifies or denies 

tllem. 

In speaking of the Western States especially, the Missouri Republican closes an article upon this subject in the following strong and vigorous language: 

The Western States are, in fa.ct, being bled to death. Western farmers are a.dually be<!oming poorer and poorer every year. As a body they do not make a living, and t.he convincing proof of this fact is that their farms are fast passing under mortgage to the money-lending, manufacturing States of the East. 

Twenty-five yeal'l!I ago these mortgages were few in number and small in 

a.mount; now they number millions and oover an aggregate value of thousands 

of millions, and all bear 6 to 8 per cent. interest,. The v-,r est does not own itself. It is owned by the industrial States. Twentysix yea.rs of the malign, sectional, and oppre!!sive policy of high tariff has done 

the work and done it etfectually. The industriai States of the East, enriched 

beyond estimate by the annual tribute of $600,000,000 exacted for a quarter of.a 

century from the other States under the false pretense of building up home 

manufactures, own all Western railroads, telegraph lines, and bridges, nnd 

hold mortgages on nearly all farms, their cities, and towns. 

Mr. President, the grnat mllSS of the pectple of the country who re- ceive none of the benefits of protection, including those engae:ed in • agriculture, those performing professional and personal senices, and 

those employed in trade and transportation, but who bear all of its 

burdens as consumers, have at last awakened from the lethargy which 

for thirty yearn bas enabled this iniquitous system of unne~sary taxation to be continued, not for the purpose of meeting theexpenditures 

of the Federal Government, economically administered, but with a Yiew 

of increasing the inordinat.e profits of a few, for political purposes. 

Though Democracy was defeated in the campaign of 1888, and a ma- jority in the electoral college was cast for the representatives of Republican principles, that great educational campaign will in afteryears b~ regarded as an epoch in the political history of this country. 

For the first time in forty years, the great underlying.principles involved in a. bill similar to the one before us for consideration were fully 

and elaborately discussed before the people. Organized labor promptly 

showed their appreciation of the eftorts of the Democratic party to re- lieve them from some of the burdellilimposed upon them by a war tariff, 

by rallying to its support. The agriculturist, by reason of that conservative spirit which has always been one of the characteristics of the 

American farmer, failed then to tally realize the importance to him of 

this great reform movement, and many wern misled by the plausible 

arguments advanced by the representatives of class legislation; but, sir, 

the leaven deposited in the body politic has at last demonstrated its 

vlt.ality and potency. From a disorganized mass has sprung, in the 

South and West, a disciplined and organized army, whose union is 

cemented by the strongest ties of self-interest and whose object and 

purpose is to throw its power and influence in favor of those tme principles of governmental exactions which have given vitality to and preserved the existence of the Democratic party during a century of our country's history. 

The declaration of principles announced by the Farmers1 Alliance 

and the Knights of Labor in their national convention, and by the 

Grange organization, furnishes convincing proof that they now fully 

understand the limitations on the power conferred upon the Government through which it may extort contributions in the form of taxation from the citizen. 

Like the appeal for the protection of the American la borer, it has been 

worn threadbare, and before an intelligent audience will excite sentiments of derision and contempt. 

The question is not narrowed down to whether the American farmer 

would prefer to purchase a.high-priced ''American tin eagle" oralowpriced ''British tin lion.'' It involves far graver considerations, es- pecially to the American farmer. It involves the propositions whether 

he will approve that policy which will still further restrict and limit 

his opportunities to dispose of his surplus product.a in the world's markets of distribution; whether he will approve that system of legislation 

the tendency of which will inevitably be to stimulate the international 

commerceofthc civilized world, with countriesotherthanhisown, and 

the practical effect of which would be to deny him the opportunity of 

exch:>.nging his surplus products for the product<; of other nations, and 

compel him to either reduce the sum of production or helplessly stand 

by and witness the decomposition of his annual surplus stored in his 

barns and cribs. 

Mr. President, the iniquity of the present measure could not be more fully illustrated than when considering it in its relation to the agricultural industry. ·with an impertinence tbat would be grotesque, 

were it not for the serious results which will follow, a small but organized band of now highly protected citizens demand that there shall be 

paid an increase of taxation of from 25 to 35 per cent. beyond the 

present war rates by the farmers, who compose the largest element of 

the productive classes of our country, while in the same breath the 

advocates and promoters of this class of legislation tell him that he 

must confine the sale of his products to the American market, although 

his annual production exceeds the demands of that market by $530,-

000,000; in other words, sir, the American farmer is told that the 

economic theory of the Republican party which they intend permanently to establish as a part of the domestic fiscal policy of this coun- try, shall give to the manufacturers the right to compel the American consumer to purchase his commodities at a price to be fixed by hiinself, and at the same time deny to the American farmer even the poor 

privilege of selling his annual surplus of production in the markets of 

the world's distribution in competition with the low-priced labor of 

Egypt, India, and Russia. . The Republican majority, by the passage of this measure, boldly declare to their constituents that the excessive and inordinate profits upon 

the investments in a single industry must be increased, and that the 

value of agricultural production must be decreased to an extent equal 

to the difference between the home demand and the surplus now produced, or that the value of the surplus must be a total loss to the agri· 

culturist, by excluding his exports from the foreign market. 

Mr. President, I have not exaggerated the results which will flow 

from this policy should it be adopted by the American Congress. It is in 

its power by legislative favoritism to stimulate the abnormal growth 

and to increase the excessive profits of one of these branches of industry, 

that with others compose the wealth of the nation; but the friends of 

this system, in doing so, show neither wisdom nor prudence. Especially is this true when the effect of such legislation is to hamper and 

paralyze the energies of that large element of the population tbatl de· - pends upon our agricultural inqustry for its support, its comforts, imd 

its happiness. 

If the demands yon made were reasonable and the necessities oif the 

country required the sacrifice, the patriotic sentiments of the American 

people might be successfully appealed to; but, sir, this bill presents in 

all its naked deformity, without the slightest attempt at concealment, 

the true object of those who framed it and justifies a suspicion that 

the motives which prompted it originated, not in a desire to promote 

the public welfare, but rather to redeem a promise given in a moment 

of political desperation. · HOllE MARKET. Mr. President, the agricultural exports since 1870 have exceeded on Mr. President, the advccates of excessive duties on imported articles an average $500,000,000 annually, and you offe! 1.he farmer, in ex- find it necessary, with a view to divert the attention of the consumer change for the foreign market which has purchased and consumed 

from the consideration of the unjust and inequitable principle on which these products, a home market. Has not the home market during 

such a bill must rest, to invent some phrase that will tickle the ear these twenty years been amply supplied, and only the surplus has 

and even appeal to the patriotic instincts of the citizen. They tell us sought a sale beyond its limits? If agricultural production did not 

that these onerous burdens and shameful extortions upon the labor of increase, but remained stationary, would it not require over ten millihe country must be borne that the ''American home market" may ion additional population to consume this surplus? If the legislation 

be pre.served for Americans. you propose to enact tends to restrict these agricultural export.a, will it 

We might par!;ially answer such an argument by calling attention not result in overstocking the home market and in still further re- ~-0 the fact that it is not the American manufactnr~r who, in all cases, ducing the prjce of agricultural products? 

is protected under these laws. It :IB a part of the current history of the Sir, the increase of production in this industry has for many years 

country that English capitalist.a are investing in all of our manufact-1 been in excess of the increase in population. Under these circumuring industries immense sums of money,. knowing that should this stances how do you propose to increase home demand, to keep pace 

bill now under c.~msideration become a law this country would fur- with the increase of production? It is to be hoped that it is not your 

nish an opportnmty for the largest profits upon the investment made purpose to violate those wise provisions of the law which originated 

of a;iy country in the world. Prices are offered for manufacturing inaDemocraticHouseofRepresentatives,anditspassageinsistedupon 

plants by these English capitalists far in excess of their actual or real in a Republican Senate by an earnest, united Democractic minority, 

value, relying, as they evidently doi upon the Republican majority in supported by the power and influence of organized labor, which pro• 

Congress to enact such a law as will enable them to compel the Ameri- hibits the importatmn of laborers under contract to work in these in- can citizen to pay tribute to British investors. dustries, and thus to increase population; nor will it be claimed that 

This appeal, in t~e interest o~ greed, to the highest and noblest im- the simple transfer of the rural laborer to the manufacturing centers 

pulses of th~ American people, IS nqw fully understood by them, and will increase the demand for agricultural productions. The stifling 

when heard m the present campaign will fall upon unsympathetic ears. air of the manufactory, the fetid atmosphere of the crowded t~nementXXI-559 

\ -

--

-· 

·- . -

: 
•I 

1· 

• I 

. ·. 

·;,· 

8930 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

bonse, the price of wages, when balanced against the cost of living, 

will not tend to stimulate the appetite or increase the ability of this 

class of our deluded population who snrrender the purity and contentment of a rural life to the fascinations and temptations which are found 

in a manufacturing city. 

This neither increases the demand nor enlarges the population. We 

have the same months to feed, the same backs to clothe, the same feet 

to be shod, and the same heads to cover. To the farmer a home mar- ket in this connt.ry would mean a loss of over $500,000,000 annually, 

the absolute prostration of the agricultural industry, and the transfer 

through mortgage sales of the home of his family to the possession of 

the Eastern creditor. To the manufacturer the home market is not a 

delusion, but a reality. So long as the product of our mills is not 

equal to the consumption ·by our people of their production, prohibitory duties will ena.ble them to fix the price of their commodities and 

will continue to increase their accumulations. 

Although protection can not benefit in any way the farmer who is 

compelled to sell his producta at the price fixed in the free markets ot 

distribution in competition with the lowest-priced labor known to any 

other ind us try, yet be has not complained that other citizens of his country received the benefits which must necessarily resulttrom the passage 

of a tariff bill the object of which is to raise a sufficient revenue for the 

economical ad ministration of the Governuient, but he does deny the right 

of Congress to discriminate against his industry, le sening the value ot 

his products by imposing excessirn burdens upon the value of his labor, 

done, not for the public welfare, but to promote the private interests of 

individuals or corporations. 

In the campaign of 1888, organized labor repelled the pretended 

sympathy offered them by the Republican party, and to-day the farmers of the country fully realize that the prosperity of their industry depends and that the value of their labor will be enhanced by opening 

wider the doors of commercial intercourse, by repealing our unwise 

and restrictive navigation laws, by minimizing the limitations on oar 

international intercourse, and by redncing our excessive and prohibi-

. tory duties. They are looking forward with hope to the hour when an 

American Congress will recognize the wisdom and the patriotism of the 

suggestion made by the distinguished Secretary of State, in favor of entering into treaties for the exchange of the products and manufactures 

of this country with those of the Central and South American Republics 

and the Tuland of Cuba. 

No stronger argument .could be addressed to the public in favor of a foreign market for agricultural products than that penned by the most 

distinguished leader of the Republican party. He fully realizes the 

fact that a glut in the home market could only be relieved by throwing down the barriers and removing the restrictions now J>a!alyzing 

the trade of the country. From a party standpoint he showea a wise 

appreciation of the iniquities of a bill that imposes such onerous burdens upon the farmer and which does not seek to mitigate its injustice 

or attempt to offer him any relief. He sums up the effect of the provisions of the bill under consideration upon the interests of the farmer 

in the following terse but comprehensive language: 

There is not a section or a line in the entire bill that will open a market for 

another bushel,of wheat or another barrel of pork. 

Mr. President, the statistics of our Government furnish the strongest 

evidence to overthrow the appeal of the protected industries that a 

home market which builds up their enormous profits is in any way 

beneficial to the agricultural interest. The loss in the values of farms, 

animals, implements, and machinery in the manufacturing States of 

New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania in the decade between 1870and1880aggregated 

$517,000,000, and as shown in the remarks of that distinguished Representative from Texas, Mr. MILLS, made during the present session, 

the loss in value by reason of the depreciation in price of agricultural 

J>roducts, based on the crop of 1889, aggregated the enormous sum of 

$1,570,629,118, while, under the influence of a high protective tariff 

that furnished to the manufacturer a home market for his products, 

the manufacturing industries of the country rapidly developed and 

ihose interested in them amassed great wealth. 

During the same period the value of agricultural products was steadily falling; beef fell from $9 per barrel to $7; corn from 44 cents 

per "bushel to 35 cents per bushel; flour from $3.60 per barrel to $1.80 

per barrel, and wheat from $1.10 per bushel to 78 cents per bushel 

This fall in the price of agricultural product.s has npt resulted from 

overproduction. The wheat crop of 1 80 amounted to 459,479,565 

bushels, with a population contained within the limits of the home 

market of 50, 000, 000. The crop of 1888 amounted to only 415, 868, 000 

bushels, while the population contained within the home market had 

increased to 62, 000, 000. These figures disclose the fact that, although 

we produced in 1888 43,611,000 bushels less than we did in 1880, and 

the demand in the home market was increased by the addition of 12, - 000, 000 consumers, yet the price fell from $1.10 to 78 cents per bushel, 

which shows a loss to the farmers of this country on the wheat crop 

of 1888 of $133,077,760. 

Mr. President, the l\>ss suffered by the farmers by reaon ofthisfall 

in price of the single article of wheat was not ca.used by overproduction. It resulted from the competition in the markets of distribution, 

, . 

and this active competition that has reduced the price of breadstuffs in 

those markets has been fostered nnd stimulated by the unwise policy 

of exclusion of foreign commodities from the American market. England has been our heaviest purchaser, the balance of trade with her 

being largely in our favor. Her statesmen have watched the growing 

tendency on the part of the Republican party, in the interest of a few 

of the citizens of this country, to frame our revenue laws with a view 

of excluding the products of her manufactories; and this conviction 

upon their part bas induced them to lend encouragement to the development of the great wheat area of India and to stimulate the production of this article by extending the lines of transportation further into 

that territory. 

They did not intend to be dependent for their breadstuffs upon a 

country whose avowed policy it was to endeavor to exclude the products of other countries. Through her commercial supremacy on the 

seas she has been enabled to foster the development of agricultural 

product.a in other nations who are willing to trade with her, and the 

result of this policy has been that, whereas in 1879 the Argentine Republic exported no wheat, in 1889 she exported 4,000,000 bushels; In· 

dia increased its export from 2, 000, 000 to 42, 000, 000 bushels, and 

Russia, from 36, 000, 000 to 126, 000, 000 bushels, thus increasing the 

world's supply in the markets of distribution 134,000,000 bushels. 

With these facts staring us in the face we should not be surprised 

that our exports of wheat, which in 1879 amounted to 122,352,936 

bushels, in 1888 fell to 56,563,675 bushels, and the loss to the American farmer on that singl6 crop in the foreign market aruounted to the sum of $74,4591 611. 

Tbenigh tariff and unwise navigation laws passed by Republican 

Congresses have turned over to England the carrying trade of this country by destroying our merchant marine. In 1860 American vessels carried 66 per cent. of that trade. •.ro-day but 13 per cent. is carried in 

American bottoms. The Republican party, through its legislation, is 

responsible for England's supremacy upon the seas. It has been her 

most active ally in building np her commerce and baa been the most 

persistent and inveterate foe to the development of the American ship· 

ping industry. 

With a country who&e resources are unequaled by ~ose of any other 

nation, a population larger than that of any other of the rich and progressive countries that meet us in competition, a people whose robust 

energies, inventive genius, and marvelous promptness in adapting them· 

selves to all innovations have excited the interest and commanded the 

admiration of the world, with all these advantages possessed by the 

American people, and with a fair lead among the commercial nations, 

they have found it impossible to surmount the obstacles and break 

down the barriers which a vicious system of legislation in the interest 

of a class (who sell their products to the American farmer from 10 to 

30 per cent. higher than they do in the foreign markets) had placed in 

the path of their onward march for supremacy. 

To-day, with numerous ports on two great seas and with a coast;.. 

line covering thousands of miles, the humiliating admission must be 

made that our foreign carrying trade in American bottoms no longer 

exist.s. It, like all of our other great industries, has been forced to 

succumb, that a higher tribute may be levied on the intelligence, 

genius, inventive skill, and- the labor of a whole people, that one· 

thirteenth of the population may be made richer, more arrogant, and 

more pretentious. 

DOES THE TAB.IFF REDUCE THE COST OF THE ABTICLE? 

Mr. President, the advocates of high protection and·prohibitory du· 

ties attempt to convince the people that the tendency of such legiala .. 

tion is t-0 reduce the cost of the manufactured article. They tell us first that it is necessary to impose these 'duties to protect American 

labor against the pauper labor of Europe and in the next breath they 

inform us that by imposing these high duties the .American consumer 

will be enabled to obtain these commodities at a lower price than they 

can be furnished by this European pauper labor. 

These arguments being inconsistent, the one answers the other. The 

theory upon which the proposition rests is that high protective duties 

encourage capitalists to invest in protected manufactures, and that com- petition between home producers lowers the price of the article. 

This view of the question fails to take into consideration the prompting of self-interest which suggests a remedy that will enable two or more 

to defeat and control the natural and usual course of trade. Experi .. 

ence has demonstrated that through the assistance of the tariff this 

difficulty can be met and successfully overcome. Trusts, combines, 

and combinations are formed by those engaged in producing similar 

article3 under agreemenfi3 which it is almost impossible to reach 

through tbecourts. Thevalueoftbeplantsisestimated; trusteesareappointed. tom.anagethe interests of the se>eral owners; trust certificates 

showing the interest of each in the aggregzrte business are issued, and 

an executive committee regulates the production and controls the price 

of the commodity; competition is destroyed and a monopoly created. 

The only restriction that influences the price of the article is the duty 

imposed on the competing imported article. 

If of equal quality with the foreign production the value can be fixed on the domestic commodity within a. fraction of the cost of the im· 

portation after paying all cllarges, costs, transportation, and duty • 
··~ f I I " . • . .-

1890. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 8931 

Without the protection to the home manufacturer the price could never exceed on the same quality of goods the cost in Europe plus the costs, 

charges, .and transportation to the port of entry. To this extent the 

tariff is a. potent factor in· encouraging these unlawful combinations 

and in protecting the guilty conspirators from that free and equal com- petition which under the laws of trade would otherwise restrain their 

selfisb greed. 

This method of conducting business in the diversified industries of 

the country that come within the influence of our high protective tariff 

is the rule, and not the exception. The following table, which shows 

the trusts that have been formed and the protection extended to each 

class of commodities manufactured, will fully illustrate the correctness 

of this statement: 

Salt trust ......... _ ....................... .. Earthenware trust .................... . Bessemer-steel trust ................ .. Plow-steel trust ........................ . General steel trust .................... . Nail trust ................................. .. General iron trust .................... . Copper trust ............................. . Zinc trust ............................. ..... . 

Peret. 50 

56 

84 

45 

45 

45 

45 

24 

52 

Tin trust ................................ . Lead trust ............................. . Glass trust ............................ . Soap trust ............................. . Linseed-oil trust ................... . Rubber-shoe trust ................ .. Envelope trust ...................... . Paper-bag trust ................... .. Cordage trust ........................ . 

Per ct. 

32 

74 

55 

26 

54 

25 

25 

35 

25 

Mr. President, the argument that the tariff reduces the price of the 

protected article must strike those who are familiar with the occnrences which happened within this Capitol as exceedingly ludicrous. If it be 

true that such is the practical effect of a high prot.ecti ve tariff, w by is it 

that wnenever this subject is under consideration by Congress the cor- ridors of this building are filled with skilled experts and able representatives of our great protected industries? What motive influences 

them to besiege the Committee on Finance and seek to impress upon 

individual members of Congress the importance of giving to each particular industry the highest possible protection? 

Genera.Uy these representatives a.re liberal livers and generous entertainers. Their salaries are high, their expenses great. 

Is this extravagance upon the part of those whose products.are to be 

protected the result of an earnest and anxious desire to reduce the cost 

of the manufactured article in the interest of the consumer? If, sir, 

this is the pure and patriotic motive which influences their expenditures, the unjust and unfounded opinion of the people should be cor- rected. If the fortunes amassed in a few years by these public beneficiaries are the result of their business sagacity, and should not be 

attributed to that system of legislation which, the people understand, 

has within the last thirty years divided our population into classes, 

the delusion should be dissipated. If such is the true character of the 

beneficiaries of a high protective tariff and these the motives which 

have induced their generous expenditures, the country has not appreciated these estimable philanthropists and unselfish patriots, bat bas 

misunderstood the noble impulses which prompted such sacrifices in 

the interest of the people. 

The advocates of this system base their confidence of its permanent success upon the credulity ot the people, but even they should remem- ber that their cause will be weakened should they continue to insist 

that there exists in the practical affairs of liie a being that could exist 

Only in the domain of imaginaqon. 

Mr. President, those who advance this argument ignore the facts of 

history and discount too heavily the skill, intelligence, and inventive 

genius of the American workman. They fail to appreciate the great 

strides which have been made in the application of steam, and in the 

improvements of machinery in the methods employed in production, 

and must be totally oblivious of that marvelous displacement of labor 

which has occurred during the la.st thirty years. 

During that period the whole labor system has been revolutionized. 

From the bureau of statistics in Berlin we learn that the power of the 

steam machinery in existence in 1887 was equivalent to 46,000,000 

horse-power, representing 1,000,000,000 laborers, which is estimated 

by Mr. Wells to be "three times the working power of the earth." 

This same able writer discusses with wonJerful lucidity and with rare 

~bility the causes which l:iave tended to reduce the cost of oroduction th~ mos~ poten~ of which has been the ingenious application of tna~ chinerym the dISplacement of labor. He gives numerous illustrations 

of its marvelous ill crease of production resulting from improved methods 

and machinery and the increase of intelligence of the workmen. He 

says: 

In 1840 a.n operative in the cotton mills of Rhode Island, working thirteen to fourteen hours a. day, turned oft' 9,600 yards of standard sheeting in a. year· in 1886 the operative in the same mill made about 30,000 yards, working ten bC:urs a day. 

The report of the United States Commissioner of Labor for 1886 furnishes the following additional illustrations: 

In the ma.nufa.cture of agricultural implements specific evidence is submitted, 

- ' 

showing tha.t 600 men now do the work that fift.een or twenty years a.go would 

have required 2,U5 men, a. displa.cement of 1,545. 

The manufacture of boots a.nd shoes offers some very wonderful facts in this 

connection. In one large a..nd long established fu.ctory the proprietors testifY 

that iL would require 500 persons, working by hand processes, to make as many 

women's boots e.nd shoes as a hundred persons now make with the aid of ma- chinery, a displacement of 80 per cent. Another firm, engaged in the manufacture of children's shoes states that the 

iu troduction of new machinery within the pa.st thirty years ha.s displaced a.bout 

~i:s t~~ ::du~:do~~!-~~fr~d-la.bor required, and that the cost of the product 

On another grade of goods, the facts collected by the a.gent of the bureau show 

that one man can DQW do the work which, twenty years ago, required ten men. In the manufacture of flour there has been a. displacement of nearly threefourtbs of the manual labor necessary to produce the same product. In the manufacture of furniture, from one-half to three-fourths only of. the old num- ber of persons is now required. In the manufacture of wall-pa.per, the best evidence puts the dlspla.cement in the proportion of 100 to 1. In the ma.nufa.cture 

of metals and metallic goods, long established firms testify that machinery has decreased ma.nna.l labor 33t per cent. In 1845 the boot and shoe makers of Massachusetts made an average produc- lion, under the then existing conditions of manufllcturing, of L~2 pairs of boots 

for each working day. In 188() ea.ch employe in the State ma.de on an average 4.!:l pairs daily, while a.t the present time in Lynn and Haverhill the daily aver- age of each person is seven pairs per da.y, showin" an increase in the power of 

production m forty years of 400 per cent. Ju the manufacture of jewelry one skilled workman, paid at the rate of S2.50 to $3 per day and working according to ante-ma.chine methods in use a. few 

yea.rs ago, c?ald make up three doze?- pairs of sleeve-buttons per da.y. Now, one boy, paid 55 per week: and workmg on the most modern machinery, can make up nine thousand pairs in a day. 

In other words, in the time of Adam Smith it was regarded as a wonderful 

achievement for ten men to make forty-eight thousand pins a da.y, but now three men can make seven million five hundred thousand pins of a vastly su- perior character in the same time. 

Mr. President, in the opinions of many of the advocates of the protective system, these causes are entirely lost sight of. They refuse to 

credit these marvelous results to the skilled workmen and inventors. 

They are not content that this mighty revolution in the capacity to 

multiply production should be attributed to any other cause than to 

the cold, lifeless, and unintelligent enactment commonly knoWil as the 

tariff, but technically designated as a bill to reduce the revenue by 

increasing taxation, and for other purposes. 

Sir, with the purpose to deceive, they point the people to tbe reduc· 

tion on those commodities which in the la.st thirty years have been 

highly protected, but they fail to call their attention to the fact that 

throughout the civilized world, both in free-trade and highly protected 

countries, the price ofalJ commodities has fallen. They ingeniously con- ceal the real causes which have. produced this decline. They give no 

explanation that is satisfactory to the intelligent mind why the cost 

of the article has fallen while at the same time the value of labor has 

risen by reason of increased production, resulting from a larger con- sumption. 

The illustrations which I have given furnish a full explanation why 

those contradictory facts exi':lt. The reduction in the cost of production 

has solved the problem in the interest both of the consumer and the 

laborer. 

Human labor, the most essential element in the cost of production, 

has been displaced by machinery to an extent that can only be realized by careful analysis of the statistics on that subject. Indifference 

to the local tastes and idiosyncrasies of the consumer has given place 

to a skillful and intelligent course of industrial training, by which the 

popular demand is supplied. Car essness and extravagance in methods 

have yielded to sagacity and economy, and the cost of transportation by 

land or sea of the raw or finished article has been marvelously reduced. 

These, sir, among others, have been the principal causes which have 

produced the decline in prices throughout the world and which have 

been fully taken advantage of by the intelligent workmen and tho.roughly educated business men <>fthiscountry. Competitionmayhave 

contributed to some extent in producing this result, but its influence 

has been so slight-as to be almost imperceptible when contrasted with 

the causes which I have mentioned. The higher the protection, the 

less influence will competition have in the reduction of the value of the 

article, for as you increase the duties on the imported article you furnish an additional incentive to the producers of that class of commodities to form trusts and combinations, which will limit the production 

and regulat9 the price, thus eliminating one of the elements of value, 

the influence of competition. 

As stated by Mr. Hoyle, in his work on Our National Resources and 

How They Are Wasted, in referring to the displacement of labor and 

the development of the capacity for productionOne individual, aided by the machinery of the present day, will produce as much yarn as 750persons could ha.ve done a.little over one hundred years ago, 

COYCLUSION. ; 

Mr. President, neither the Democratic party nor the great body of consumers in this country have asked that its business interests shall 

be imperiled or that the artificial stimulus given to its manufacturing 

industries during the last thirty years shall be suddenly withdrawn. 

They realize that such leJ;tislation, in view of the history of the past, 

would cause a prostration of those industries and a paralysis of all 

those business interests so intimately connected with them; but, sir, 

the Democratic party and that large class of consumers whose interests 

it has espoused recognize that the time has now come when the in· 

terests of the farmer, la.borer, and consumer must be considered by the 

I/' 

' .. ; , . .-

.. 

,, . 

.· 

, . 
..... ...... 

.• 

- ' 

,. 

... 

"' · -

8932 CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. · AUGU&r 21, 

Conj(l'esS of the United States in the arrangement of ihe details of a rev- enue measure, and not solely the interests of the manufactm:er and the 

importer; that, instead of increasing the war taxes which now bear so heavily upon labor, with a view of giving to other interests increased 

protection and higher profits, there shall be not only a revision, but a 

conservative reduction of the onerous burdens of tax:ation which now press so heavily upon the consumer. - It is agreed by all parties that it is the settled policy of this Government that the principal part of its revenue shall be collected "by 

the tax upon imports, nnd no change in this policy is desirable;,' but, as declared by President Cleveland, in his rues.sage of December, 1887: 

In readjusting the burdens of Federal taxation, a sound public policy requires that such of our citizens as have built up large and important industries under 

present conditions should not be suddenly, and to their injury, deprived of ad- vantages to which they have adapted their business; but, if the public good re- quires it, they should be content with such consideration as shall deal fairly _and cautiously with thelr Interests, while the just demand of the people for 

relief from needless taxation is honestly answe1·ed. 

A i·easonable and timely submission to such a demand should certainly be 

possible without disastrous shock to any interest; and a cheerful concession 

sometimes averts abrupt and heedless action, often the outgrowth of impat.ieuce and dela.ycdjustice. 

Mr. President, the Democratic part,y, through its authorized representatives, has at all times denied the constitutional or moral right of 

Congress to use the power of taxation for the purpose of creating or establishing an industry by so adj usting tho details of a revenue meas- ure us to prohibit the introduction of the foreign commodity; or, in 

other words, it denies that there exists the power in Congress to frame a tariff bill the object and purpose of which is protection, with reve- nue simply as an incident. Recognizing its power and authority to 

frame a measure for raising revenue, it has al ways sought in the adjustment of the details of similar bills to furnish to American industries such incidental protection a.s would encourage their development 

and equalize the difference in cost in production between this and otbe1· 

countries. 

To ask more than this is unfair to the consumer, unnecessary in the 

interests of the laborer, and tends to build up in our country favored 

classes, who are educn.ted to look to the Federal Government, not for 

the permanency and success of their business enterprises, but for an inordinate and excessive profit on their investment, which they know 

will follow class legislation. 

Such a system ignores the rightrs of the great body of the people, 

tends to produce corruption in the body politic, and encourages unlaw- ful combinations which affect injuriously the interests of the citizen. 

The Democratic party insists t.bat only such taxation shall be imposed as will yield a sufficient revenue to meet all the ordinary and 

current expenses of the Government, including a reasonable annual re- duction of the public debt and tlJe payment of fair and just pensions 

to the disabled veterans of our wars. It further demands that the rev- enue so raised through taxation shall not be squandered, wasted, or extravagantly used, but that in the administration of the affairs of the 

Government honesty and economy shall dictate and control the atipropriatious of such funds. 

Mr. President, the refusal of the Republican party in the present 

Congress to meet these fair, just, and reasonable demands may con- tinue for a time the burdens now imposed upon the people and those 

additional ones which it is the puqtose and intention of that majority 

to inflict under the provisions of the bill now before us for consideration. That majority hns the power as it has the inclination to add to 

the wealth of those capitalL<:ts who were its friends, and through whose liberal expenditures it succeeded in the election of 1888, but, sir, permit me to say t-0 the advocates of this vicious economic system which 

they are forcing npon the country, that the passage of this bill will not remove this vital issue from the arena. of politics. 

The victory secured through corrupt means and methods two years 

ago will not silence the demands of the farmer and the laborer for 

equal and exact justice and an equitable adjustment of those rates in 

the interest of the whole people; for, sir, so long as the Democratic 

party shall be true to the principles which gave it birth; so long as it 

is faithful to the interests of the great ma_ss of the people of this country; so long as it is influenced by its traditions and its history, and so long as it follows the teachings of its founders and those whose records furnish the brightest pages in the history of American statesmanship, it 

will keep before the public mind this great economic question, the intluence of which is felt in the marts of tradQ and in every rural district 

throughout the length and breadth of our country-yes, sir, in every 

home and hamlet in the la.nd; for on its proper solution depend the 

material prosperity, the wealth, the contentment, and the happiness, 

not of a petted and pampered few, but of the great body of the American people. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I ask that the reading of the bill may be continued . 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The reading of the bill will be con- tinued. 

Mr. McPHERSOK Do I understand that paragraph 162 has been 

read? 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It bas been read. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I then desire to offer an amendment, which! 

send to the desk to have read . 

.:. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from 

New Jersey will be stated. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I desire to strike out the whole paragraph and 

substitute for it what I send to the desk. 

The CHIEF CLERK. It is proposed to strike out paragraph 162, on page 140, and insert in lieu thereof the following: 

Files, file-blanks, rasps, and floats of all cuts and kinds, 50 per cent. ad valorem. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not know but that is a very high rate of 

duty, and I will reserve the right to alter 50 per cent. ad valorem, and 

make it less in case I shall so decide. 

I wish to say only a few words in respect to this paragraph. It will 

be noticed that the description which is found in this paragraph is: 

Files. file-blanks, rasps, and floats, of a.II cuts and kinds, 4 inches in length and under, 35 cents per dozen. 

A file-blank, which is simply a piece of steel made in correct form for 

cutting as a file, is subject here to exactly the same rate of duty that it 

would be if the file was completed. In other words, the labor that is 

to be employed in completing the file is to receive no measure of pro· 

tection whatever, because the file may be brought in just as cheaply as the file-blank. 

I have some few statistics with reference to that matter which have 

been obtained from actual invoices. 

Piles, file-blanks, rasps, etc., 4 inches in length and under, 35 cents 

per dozen. The ad valorem in Senate column is deceptive and is based 

upon the average of63! cents per dozen. 

Files are sold in this country of 3 inches in length at 30 cents per 

dozen on them, duty 35 cents per dozen, an equivalent of 116.66 per 

cent; 4-inch files worth 75 cents pe1· dozen, at 35 cents per dozen, 

eq ual to 4'3.66 per cent. ad va.lorem. 

To test the real value of that column, free from deceptive percentages, it is necessary to make a calculation including the lowest as well as t he highest grades. 

Files. 

__ L_e_n_g_th_._---''-1 Yal ued at- l ____ n_u_t_y_. -_ __ ,_E_q_u_a_i_to_-_ 

I Per cent. '.l in ches .................... 25 cents per dozen ..... ~cents per dozen..... 140_00 

. ;"IE::::::·.··::::··:· .. · 'i~;~·E[U~~~:: ... 1··::.:n ::•::::::::::•::::::•:::: l~·r File-blanks, cast-steel, shape of a file, smooth surface, in fact an un- cut file: 

Length. Valued at- Duty. 

2 in ches ....................... 20 cents per dozen ...... 35 cents per dozen ... .. ;; inches ........... .................. do ................................ do ....................... . 4 inches....................... 25 cents per dozen ............ do ....................... . 1 inches or less ....••..••• SO cents per dozen ........... do ....................... . Do ··----······· .. ······ 50cents per dozen ...... ...... do .................. .... . 

Equal toPer ce1it. 175.0 

173.0 

140.0 

116.6 

70.0 

From ihe aforementioned tables and the general average of invoices 

from 20 cents per dozen to 75 cents per dozen in file-blanks, it will be seen that the uncut files, mere east-steel in forms of files, in fact uncut 

files, under thi.s 35 cents per dozen duty pay a higher ad valorem duty 

than the cut files. Here, too, as soon as labor comes upon the field of 

usefulness the percentage of ad valorem decreases. 

File-blanks worth 20 cents per dozen are when cut worth 45 cents 

per dozen, yet the importer who brings infile-blanks to be cut herein 

this country pays 35 cents per dozen or 175 percent. ad valorem, while 

the importer who brings them in cut and ready for use and on which 

25 cents' worth of labor has been expended pays no more, namely, 35 cents or 77 per cent. 

Mr. President, I am in receipt this morning of a statement made by 

a gentleman with whom we are all familiar in the Senate. I speak of 

Mr. Saxton, of Alfred Field &Co., who has furnished the Senate very 

much valuable information touching many paragraphs in this bill. 

His letter is a very valuable contribution to this schedule and I desire 

that the Senate shall pay careful attention to what he says. He writes 

as foll ows: 

DEAR SIR : I inclose you some tables which show the present stalus of the 

foreign files as compared with the American·IDllde files. You will see by one of these tables that the Amet·ican files are selling very considerably less than 

the cost of foreign files on the other side, a.nd this is from a comparison of the 

~~f c~~~:u~~ 1!1;r~s;r~~iy ~:~:~~~~~~= l11t!~~:;! ~~1ft~,~it~rdt!~r~c8e uld be much greater in favor of the American files. There can be no fair information obtained as to the ad valorem rotes on many goods in the metal schedule from the imports, because in most cases the great bulk of imports are shut out, and only a limall portion of imports upon w hicb. 

the tariff' bears the least heayily. Take chains, paragraph 158-

I call the attention of the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Y .A.NCE] 

., .-
.- • ~. •'I_. ........ ·. 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SEN .ATE. 8933 

to this criticism upon a paragraph we have passed over, and he will not 

forget the discussion upon the paragraph as we passed itTake cha.ins, paragraph 158. The Senate bill made the a.d va.lo.rem rate equiv- alent to about 41 percent., whereas if general imports of chains were allowed the rate would be nearer 100 per cent. 1werage ad valorem. Take cut tacks, paragraph 171-

Which we have not yet reachedTake cut tacks, par graph 171. The ad valorem rate given in Senate bill is, say, 23 J>4::1' cent. ad valorem, whereas the fa.ct is the proper ad valorem rate on these goods, if they could be imported, would be over 100 per cent. I think the average is exactly 110 per cent. 

I think the average is exactly 110 per cent. 

Take screws, para.graph 178. The actual ad valorem rate of all sizes impo1·ted 

would be over 100 per cent., and so it is on most paragraphs in the metal sched- ule. 

f'aws, files, and screws are to-day being exported In competition with the En- glish-made goods, and there is no question that if these goods we1·e put on the free-list not a dollar could come in. 

Regretting that I am unable to give you more information at this time, which 

I should be exceedingly glad to do if in my power, I am very truly yours, A. H. SAXTON. 

This gentleman sends me a. table--

Ur. PLATT. Whom is the letter from? 

Mr. l\IcPHERSO~. From Mr.Saxton. Hesendsmeatablegiving 

descriptions of files sold in the United States of English manufacture. 

They go by the following trade designations: 

Leading descriptions of files sold in tlte United Btates. 

FLA1', FLAT WARDING, HALF ROUND, MILL, SQUARE, AND ROUND BASTARDj FLAT 

AND HALF ROUND WOOD RASPS; HORSE RASPS. 

English 

cost in 

Sterling American 

currency, Duty, per Advalorem list, per per dozen, dozen. duty. dozen. at discount 

ize. 

of 50+5 per cent. 

s. d. qents. Pe1· cent. 3inches ................................ . 4 9 $).5414 35 65 4 9 .5414 35 65 4 9 .5414 35 6.5 3! inches ............................... . 4 inches ................................ . 4~ inches ............................... . 5 3 .5986 75 125 

5 inches ............................... .. 5 9 • 6.554 75 114j 

6 inches ................................ . 7 0 .7980 75 94 

7inches ................................ . 8 6 .9700 75 77 8 inches ........................... ..... . 10 6 1.2000 75 62t 

'J'.\PER SAW-FILES. 

2l inches ... ............................. 4 0 .4560 35 76! 3 inches ................................. 4 0 .4560 35 7ft 3t inches ............................. 4 0 .4560 35 76! 4 inches ................................. 4 6 .5130 35 68t 41 inches .......................... ...... 5 0 .5700 75 13H 5 inches ................................. 5 6 . 6270 75 119t 5t inches .......................... 6 6 .7410 75 lOlt 

6inches .................................. 7 6 .8550 75 87t 7 inches .............................. ... 9 6 1.0800 ';5 69-,\-

Mr. Saxton states in an appendix to this t~ble as follows: 

The above English files are W.&S. Butchers' make,Sheffield,which we consider much superior to the American. There are files made in England that fairly compare with American quality that are sold at 60 + 10 per cent. discount from above sterling list. 

If you were to take 60 and 10 per cent. discount from the above sterling list instead of 50 and 5 per cent. the result would be that the ad 

valorem rate of duty would be very greatly increased. 

Therefore, Mr. President, this whole paragraph, like all the other 

paragraphs which we have passed in this bill, is deceptive. The imposition of the apecific rates of duty here is intended and can be intended 

for no other purpose except to get the highest possible rate of duty for 

the manufacturers, and we are left here to seek and to delve and find 

out somewhere as to the market value of the goods upon which this 

du.ty is to be levied. 

Here is a gentleman engaged in this occupation. He is an importer. 

He represents the manufacturers abroad, I confess it boldly and openly; 

but he gives here 1Jie market values of the goods abroad and he sells 

them to agents, to the public, and he is an agent himself. Here is the 

advertised rate which is translated from sterling money into American 

money, and then the discount is taken off, and then your specific rate 

of duty is applied. This gentleman states that these goods are of the 

highest character of goods both in Great Britain and in America, for 

none but goods of the highest quality and character could be imported 

at all under the present rate of duty. 

We here show them from a regular invoice of goods covering five or 

six different varieties; in short, all the sizes mentioned in paragraph 

162 of the bill. 

It is unnecessa1·y, l\Ir. President, for me to pursue this matter any 

further with r08pect to these paragraphs. I will ask leave to insert in 

the RECORD the table which bas been furnished me as well as the letter sent to me by Mr. Saxton. · 

'. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair bear~ no objection. 

Mr. CARLISLE. Mr. President, the paragraph under consideration 

proposes to make a slight reduction in the rates of duty upon two classes 

of the articles embraced in it, leaving the other two to bear the rate 

imposed by the existing law. It may be considered that this is not a very important matter, but it must be remembered that these are tools 

which every worker in iron or steel is bound to ha.ve, and in wood too, 

for that matter; or at least one of them, the rasp, is to a large extent 

used by workers in wood. They are t-Ools which, according to my information, the mechanic or workman furnishes for himself, because I 

believe the rule in our shops and factories is that the mechanie shall 

furnish his own kit of tools. Therefore, it is of some importance to 

him at least that be should get these articles as cheaply as possible 

and that a condition of affairs should not exist which would enable 

the domestic producer to put up the price whenever be saw proper. 

Now, I submit to the Senator from Rhode Island that the rates of 

duty proposed in this paragraph are not necessary either for the pur--

pose of revenue or for the purpose of protection. The Government derives in fact but very little revenue from the importation of these articles, and nearly the whole of what is received is collected upon the 

two classes first mentioned in the paragraph; that is, 4 inches in length 

and under, and over 4 inches and under 9 inches. On the first class 

there was collected during the year 1889 nearly $26, 000 and on the second class·nearly $26,000. 

It is true, as stated by the Senator from New Jersey, according to 

the best information I can obtain, that the American file is selling here 

for less than the foreign file can be purchased for; I mean to say files 

of the same length and purporting to be of the same character; and we 

are actualiy exporting files and selling them abroad. I have on my 

desk a letter dated Caverbill Building, St. Peter street, Montreal, 

July 2, 1890, from Caverhill, Learmont & Co., hard ware dealers in 

the city of Montreal, in which they say: 

We handle almost equal quantities of American and English files, and abou' four times the quantity of both alone in Canadian-ma.de files. 

Showin~ that the manufacturers of these files in the United States 

can send them to Canada and after paying the Canadian duty upon 

them can sell them in that market in competition with the English 

files; and yet this bill proposed to give them in one case a duty of 55.20 

per cent.; in the next, 65.62 per cent.; in the next, 47 per cent., and 

in the next, over 53~ per cent., to enable them to sell their :files in their own home market in competition with the same English files. 

:Mr. President, the listsofprices for which the American manufacturers of files sell their goods in this country show that if files were absolutely free of duty the English file would not compete with th~m in 

this country as to prices. I concede thata few English files are imported, as shown by the statistics, and are sold here with the duty 

paid, but it is because some of our mechanics prefer that class of files, 

not because they get them cheaper than they get the American file, for 

they do not, but simply because they consider it a better tool than 

that produced in this country. I submit that the mechanic ought to 

have the right to make the choice for himself, especially when by making the choice and purchasing the Englll>h .file he is not bringing down 

the price of the American file to the extent of a single cent or a single 

mill, b~cause he pays more for the English file than he would pay for 

the American file, and he will continue to buy and pay the duty simply 

because in his judgment Hi is a more useful tool for him in the prosecution of his work. 

The duty upon these articles, in my opinion, ought not to be more 

than 25 percent. ad valorem, and, aslhavealreadysaid, it would work 

no injury whatever to the American manufacturer if they were absolutely free. 

I have here a table, which I shall not trouble the Senate to read and 

shall not ask even to have inserted in the RECORD, because it is somewhat 

lengthy, showing that on every class of these :files and on every size, 

beginning with the paper-saw files, single-cut, mill, and round ba8tard 

files, the fiat and square bastard files, including, as I say, every size of 

these different kinds of :files, they could not be brought here from 

abroad and sold in this market in competition with the American file at all, our prices on one class, I think on the paper-saw files, single:-cut, 

being from 40 to 61 per cent. lower than the foreign price; on the mill 

and round bastard files ranging from 17 to 72 per cent. lower than the 

foreign price; and on the fiat and square bastard file.'3 ranging from 5 

per cent. to 42 per cent. lower than the foreign price. So the importation of foreign files does not injuriously compete with the domestic prod: 

uct by bringing down the price for the reason that the foreign file 

sells for more, which would have a tendency, if it could have any effect 

at all, to bring up the price of the article in this country. 

Now, sir, on behalf of the mechanics and laborers in the factories and 

shops who a.re compelled to purchase these tools for themselves: and 

who in my judgment have a right to purchase an English file if they 

think it is the better tool, and pay a higher price for it than they pay 

for the American, I appeal to the Senator from Rhode Island to allow 

this duty to be placed at 25 per cent. ad valorem. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I wish t-0 modify my amendment by striking 

out the word "fifty" and inserting ''twenty-five." I would prefer 

;-. 

. . .. ... .-

'· 

. -. ..-.: . - ' .. -- .... 

--

I ;. 

.. 

.. ·.'.· 

J ' 

,; -, 
-· 

T • 

,,.... 

. ·,,. • I '' : ," .. .. ... . . 

8934 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

to pla.ce files on the free-list, bat I despair of having any success in 

moving an amendment any more radical than the one that I do now. 

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The amendment will be stated. 

The CHIEF CJ.ERK. Strike out paragraph 162 and insert: 

16'.!. Files, file-blanks, rasps, and floats, of all cuts and kinds, 25 per cent. ad 

valorcm. 

The PRESIDENT pro temporc. The question is on the amendment 

of the Senator from New Jersey. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I call for the yeas and nays. 

The yeas and nays were ordered. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President, I do not intend to prolong the debate upon file8, but I wish merely to remind the Senate that this rate was placed upon files in 1883 on my motion, and I then made a statement and promised that if this specific duty was placed upon small 

files the file-manufacturers of the United States would not only take 

the market, hut would reduce the price of file~ to the American me- chanic. Both of those promises have been kept beyond any expectations of mine. The amount of importations was reduced from $240,-

493 of value in 1883 to $65, 107, and the price of.files has been reduced 

upon all sizes. The price at this moment is lower on the larger sizes 

in tba United States than it is in Great Britain. 

Mr. CARLISLE. Will not the Senator from Rhode Island admit 

that if the American mechanic now desires to bny an English file for use in the pro ecution of his work he will be compelled to pay:, without dutv at all, a higher price for it than he would pay for the American file? And, it that is trae,wbyimpose a duty and compel him to pay 

thnt in addition? Why fine him, in other words, for purchasing this 

better tool, or a tool at least which in his judgment is better? 

Mr. ·ALDRICH. I deny in the first place that any American mech:rnic desires to buy the English files. 

Mr. CARLISLE. He does buy them. 

Mr.ALDRICH. He buys them because he may be able to buy some kinds of fine files cheaper there to-day than we can make them. There are some kinds of Stubb's files, some of the very finest files for jewelers 

and other uses that even now, owing to the vast amount of labor that 

goes into them, the En~lish producer can make cheaper than we can. Why are the gentlemen on the other side so anxious to have this 

duty reduced? Why is Mr. Saxton here with this long harangue 

which the Senator from New .Jersey has read? Why are all the importers so anxious about this matter if we can make files cheaper than 

the English can? If this duty does not hurt anybody, let it remain. 

If we make files cheaper than the Englis'h can, why do they show this 

great anxiety upon the subject? The fact is, as T said before, upon 

some of the smaller sizes--

Mr. VANCE. If the Senator will allow me to ask him a question, 

I should like to ask him why the manufacturers show this great anxiety to have the duty put up. 

Mr. ALDRICH. We are not asking to have the duty put up. 

Mr. VANCE. Why do you keep it up? 

Mr. ALDRICH. We are proposing to reduce the duty. 

Mr. V ANOE. Why do you keep it so high? Why not take it altogether away? 

Ur. ALDRICH. Because we are satisfied with the present conditions and because I am not ready, if the Senator from Kentucky and 

the Senator from North Carolina are, to say that the people of this 

country shall have a right to buy English files or English manufacturf>.s 

·of any kind free of duty. 

Mr. VANCE. Why is the Senator satisfied with the present conditions if the tax does not do him any good? ~Ir. ALDRICH. I am satisfied with the present condition of things 

in this country, but the manufacturers of files in this country are willing to have the duty reduced. The Senators have been looking for a long time for a manufacturer willing to have duties reduced. Here is 

a case where they are willing to have the duty reduced and we propose to reduce it. 

Mr. VANCE. Why not change the lanp:uage and say the American 

mechanic has not sense enough to judge of files and declare that no English files shall come in? 

llr. ALDRICH. Ifwe weremakingupon thissideoftheCbamber a. tariff bill to allow Americans to buy any products without duty, we should do th!lt, but we are not making up a tariff bill from that standpoint. 

Mr. VANCE. So I aminformed, thattbatisnotwhatyou areafter. 

I understand that very well. 

Mr. CARLISLE. The Senator from Rhode Island says the manufacturers are willing to have the duty reduced, and therefore the bill 

proposes to reduce the duties upon two classes of these files; but if 

Senators will look at the bill and at the _table submitted they will find 

that there are no importations of any consequence whatever of these 

two classes, the whole duty collected on both amounting to about $4,-

000 per annum. Mr. ALDRICH. It is not the purpose of the committee to increase 

importations. We acknowled_ge that very freely. 

Mr. CAHLISLE. Bat the Senator says that this duty hurts nobody 

and he concedes that at present it helps nobody. Now, I differ from 

him in his statement that it hurts nobody. It certainly hurts these 

. · 

people who buy the first and second classes of these files and pay the 

duty upon them, paying for the file it.self without the duty more than 

they would have to pay for the American file. So their purchase of 

that file does not hurt the American manufacturer a particle; it does 

not bring down the price of his product, as I said before, a single cent or a single mill; it is a higher-priced article than he makes which they 

purchase. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Does the Senator from Kentucky mean to state 

that the mechanics of this country pay more for an English file than 

the same grade of an American file can be bought for? 

Mr. CARLISLE. I do; that is my information. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I deny that statement most emphatically, and I 

challenge the Senator to bring any proof. I will not accept as proof 

the statement of an agent of a foreign house in this country; I will not 

accept Mr. Saxton's statement upon that or any other su~ject; but if 

the Senator will bring me here the testimony of any unprejudiced, intelligent witness, I shall be very glad to modify this paragraph in ac- cordance with his suggestion. 

Mr. CA.RLISLE. My information is-and I will repeat it, so that 

the Senator can understand the statement-that there are importations 

of English files of the same class as the files made in this country, and 

they are purchased at a higher price than the same size and the same 

class of files can be purchased here, simply because there is a prefer- ence for a certain brand made abroad; and that we all know, the Senator as well as I, is frequently the case. It is a matter of taste. It 

runs through all your woolen goods, and your silks, and your cottons, 

and hundreds of other things embraced in your tarift~ where a higher 

price is actually paid for an arLicle which may be not a particle better 

than the American :uticle, but simply because tbe party prefers a cer- tain brand or a certain fashion, as the case may be. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I repeat that in 1883, when this specific duty of 35 

cents a dozen was put upon files less than four inches in length, the 

English and Swiss manufadurers had the entire American market; 

there were no files produced in the United States of the kind to which 

I am now alluding. All the jewelers' files, all the fine files of every 

description, were made by foreign manufacturers. Under the stimulus 

which was given by the duty imposed. in 1883 the American manu- facturers have to-day more than three-quarters of the American market, 

and if this duty is allowed to continue, as I am sureitwill be, :five years 

from now they will have it all. 

There is no such thing as a preference given to the English makers 

of files. There may be some people yet who are buying Stubb's files and 

Swiss files paying possibly slightly more than the American price, but 

their number is diminishing day by day, and the American mechanics 

by their skill, by their industry, by their energy, are fast conquering 

the American market. 

Mr. BUTLER. The Senator from Rhode Island made a most re- markable statement a moment ago. If I understood him correctly, he 

said he would not take the statement of Mr. Saxton or any other importer upon this question or any other question involving the rate of 

import duties. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I confined mv staiement to Mr. Saxton. 

Mr. BUTLER. The Senator said he would not take Mr. Saxton's statement, and yet the Senator takes as gospel truth every statemen .. made by manufacturers in regard to these schedules. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Oh no; that is not so. 

Mr. BUTLER. Well, I have not yet beard the Senator once question a statement made by a single manufactnrer in regard to this tariff bill; 

and yet he says that Mr. Saxton is unworthy of belief. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Oh, no. Mr. PLATT. He does not a&y that. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Oh, no. Mr. BUTLER. Mr. President, this is most extraordinary. The 

Senator says "Oh, no;" "Oh, no." He stated a moment ago that he 

would not take Mr. Saxton's statement upon this or any other question. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Affecting the rates ofdutyuponmerchandisethat 

he is importing. 

Mr. BUTLER. That is not what the Senator said; but that of itself 

is a pretty serious charge. That Mr. Saxton is going to come before 

the Senate of the United States and perpetrate a deliberate fraud and 

mislead the Senate deliberately is a pretty serious chn.rge. It is a pretty serious charge to make against anybody. 

Mr. PLATT. He has not made it. 

Mr. BUTLER. The manufacturers, like the Father of His Country, are incapable of telling a lie or of making a misrepresentation, but the 

importer, however honorable he may be, however above reproach he 

may be, is not to be believed in this Senate when be makes a statement 

about this schedule, for that is practically what the Senator from Rhode 

Island hns said, and what the Senator from New York bas said over and over again. 

Sir, I do not know Mr. Saxton. He appears to be a very intelligent 

man, and I take it for granted the Senator from New Jersey would not 

produce a statement made by him unless he was aware of the fact that 

be is a credible witness and entitled to be believed before any jury 

in this country upon any subject; nnd'I can not quite comprehend the 

philosophy of the position of the Senator from Rhode Island. As has 

. \ 

·' • .. .. ' 

, 

. / 
.: . ' . 

'· " .... (. 

1890. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. · 8935 

been-suggested, I should be very glad if the Sena.tor from Rhode Island 

would point out a single witne~s who has contrad.ided Mr. Saxton in 

any statement be has made . .:Mr. ALDRICH. The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT] pointed 

out several yesterday. 

Mr. PLATT. 1\Ir. PresidentThe PRES1DENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from South Carolina yield to the Senator from Connecticut? 

Mr. BUTLER. I yield to the Senator from Connecticut if he will 

answer that question. 

1\lr. PLATT. I rose simply with reference to the statement which was made;) by the Senator from Rhode Island and the construction put 

upon it by the Sena.tor from South Carolina. I do not see anything in 

the statement of the Senator from Rhode Island which justifies exactly 

the criticism which the Senator from South Carolina has made. I un- derstood the Senator from Rhode Island to say, upon a point which was made by the Senator from Kentucky, giving Mr. Sax.ton as au- thority--

Mr. CARLI8LE. The Senator from Kentucky did not give Mr.Saxton as authority for any statement he made. I made no statement based 

npo:1 any information derived from Mr. Saxton. 

Mr. PLATT. It was while the Senator from Kentucky was on bis 

feet. The Senator from Rhode Island said he would not take the testimony of Mr. Saxton or that of the agent of an) other foreign house as decisive on this subject, but if the Senator from Kentucky would 

bring him the evidence of disinterested persons be would modify the 

rate of duty. Now, that is what he said. He simply spoke of Mr. 

Saxton as an interested witness in the matter. 

Mr. BUTLER. Mr. President, an interested witness can tell the 

truth. I should like to know if a manufacturer is not an interested 

witness. .Adopting the standard of the Senator from Connecticut and 

the Senator from Rhode Island, the mannfactnrera are not entitled to 

be believed in this body or anywhere else where they are interested. 

It bas been the case throughout this entire debate that whenever the 

statement of an importer has been wesented to the Senate it has at once been assailed by Senators on the other side. 

Mr. HISCOCK. The Senator--

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from South Carolina yield to the Senator from New York? 

Mr. BUTLER. Yes. 

Mr. HISCOCK. The Senator from South Carolina awhile ago said 

that I over and over again had stated that these importers were not to 

be believed. 

Mr. BUTLER. Not exactly in that language, but impliedly. 

Mr. HlSCOCK. I have no recollection of ever having questioned 

their statements. I do not recall now when they have been under re- view by me in that way, except that incidentally I pointed out that 

the tables which they had made were not always quite disingenuous; 

that is, showing that, where there was a chance to make selections in 

figuring out the rate, they had made selections to give the highest 

rate. I do not think I have ever questioned their statements. I rose, 

however, also for this purpose--

Mr. BUTLER. I can not hear a word, Mr. President. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I rose also to ask the Senator this--

Mr. BUTLER. I can not bear a word. 

:M:r. HISCOCK. Is the Senator acquainted with Mr. Saxton? 

Mr. BUTLER. I do not hear the Senator. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Is the Senator from South Carolina acquainted with 

Mr. Saxton? 

Mr. BUTLER. I do not know that I ever heard of him before. 

Mr. HISCOCK Is he an importer? Where does he live? 

Mr. BUTLER. I am not informed on that subject except what I 

get from the Senator from New Jersey. He stated that Mr. Saxton was an importer, and read a letter from him and a statement; and I 

supposed--

Mr. HISCOCK. Does the Senator from New Jersey know where he 

resides? 

Mr. McPHERSON. I do; and I will give--

Mr. HISCOCK. Do you know him personally? 

Mr. McPHERSON. I know him, and I know the firm with which 

he is identified, the firm of Alfred Field & Co., and I will tell the Senator who they are. :Mr. HISCOCK. Where does he reside? 

Mr. McPHERSON. They are'' exporters, manufacturers, and importers of Birmingham, Sheffield, and German hardware-cutlery, 

guns, chains, anvils, and metals." Their place of business--

Mr. HISCOCK. He is not a citizen of the United States? 

Mr. McPHERSON. Yes, sir. Their place of business is 93--

Mr. HISCOCK. Does the Senator know that he is a citizen of the 

United States? 

Mr. McPHERSON. • I do not know that he is. I assume that he is. 

Mr. HISCOCK. The firm that he represents is a foreign firm. 

Mr. McPHERSON. If the Senator from New York has got into that 

particnJar strait that he ha.s to deny or attempt to deny that the man is a citizen of the United States to determine the question as to his 

reliability, then he is in a pretty narrow compas.s. 

, j 

Mr. illSCOCK. I was a little curious in respect to this gentleman, 

Mr. Saxton, and I was a little curious to know in respect to this particular--

Mr. McPHERSON. The Senator has asked me a question. Will 

he please wait and let me answer it? Now, I will proceed to answer his question, if be will permit me. The place of business is 93 Chambers street and 75 Reade street, New York City. It was established 

in the year 1836. They are the ''agents for Isaac Greaves, sheep and 

garden shears, etc. ; Joseph Elliot &Sons, celebrated razors; Eley Bros., 

limited, caps, wads, etc.; Western File Company, the best American 

files made; Webster & Horsfall, steel wire of every description." 

Mr. HISCOCK. Will the Senator gratify me by giving the place of 

manufacture? 

Ur. McPHERSON. They are importers, manufacturers, and ex- porters. I will assume from this that they have a factory upon the 

other side; and so far as I know to the contrary on this side as well. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Does the circular state where they manufacture? 

Mr. McPHERSON. It states where their place of business is in this 

country? 

Mr. HISCOCK. Does it state where they manufacture? 

:Ur. McPHERSON. Ob, no. I am reading their letter-head. 

l'tlr. HISCOCK. I am asking for information. 

Mr. McPHERSON. I do not know as to that; but this states cer- tainly all the Senator can require to know, because they are a firm es- tablished in the city ot New York. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I inquired of the Senator if it stated the place of 

manufacture. 

Mr. McPHERSON. It does not. It says that they are "exporters, manufacturers, and importers of Birmingham, Sheffield, and Ger· man hard ware.'' 

Mr. HISCOCK. That is right. That is wha.t I wanted to know. I 

wanted to know precisely who was appearing here now on the floor of 

the Senate with re3pect to this tariff, who the client was in this particubr instance. 

l'ilr. McPHERSON. This gentleman's t.able appears here upou the 

floor of the Senate with a list of sizes of files which are described in 

this bill. He begins with a file 2~ inches in-length and runs up to a file 16 inches in length. He gives the sterling English cost of that file, 

and he is willing to sell, I suppose, all that the Senator from New York 

may want to buy at the prices he gives here. He translates that English sterling cost into American cost in American money, giving the 

discount, which is upon the tables that I have read, which is 50 and5 

per cent. He states here in a note aμpended to his table; 

The above English filesWhicb be here advertises and is ready to sell at those prices unquestionablyare W. & S. Butchers and Sheffield. which we consi<ler much superior to the 

American. These are files made in England that fairly compare with American 

quality that n.re sold at 60 and 10 per cent. discount from above sterling list. 

These are then considered superior to the American file and they are 

sold at the prices named; and tbe ad valorem rate of duty upon the 

rates you impose here in your specific rates in the bill are almost double the rate yon have carried out here as the average ad valorem rate. 

Therefore there can be no mistake about it. 

I do not know any higher authority to go to than the man who has 

the goods for sale, engaged in that business, who desires to sell them• 

and tells exactly what they cost in England and what they cost here 

and tells what the duty would be when your tariff bill comes to be applied to the goods. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Mr. President, the point that I was making was to 

find out who this witness was who was being paraded here in the interests of our oppressed industries, and taxation upon the masses, and 

the oppression ot the people generally. I assumed as a matter of course, or I had a right to assume, that it was some one of those oppressed 

subject.s of the Republic for whom the Senators on the other side were speaking, and I was curious to verify what I bad a right to suppose. 

Therefore it was that I attempted to fix the domicile of this gentleman 

that so much had been said about, and who was so strongly indorsed, 

and of whom so many good things were said, and who claimed so much 

attention from the Senate of the United States. 

For that reason, if I may add further, I sent to the Senator from New 

Jersey and he very courteously sent me this communication that he 

has, and from which, of course, it appears that a foreign manufacturer 

is making his argument here before the United States Senate in favor 

of the reduction of duties. That is the spectacle that is presented. 

1\Ir. McPHERSON. He is obliged to come here to tell the truth to 

the Senator from New York. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I do not care why he is obliged to come here; it is 

certainly a fact which is worthy of note that a house that is simply the 

agent of a manufacturing industry upon the other side finds two sneh 

able spokesmen as the distinguished Senator from Kentucky and the 

distinguished Senator from New Jersey, and they need not wonder if, 

upon this question, we represent the American manutacturers. It is 

quite as respect.able, I trust, to represent an American manufacturer as an English manufactnier. L<i it not? Then, when their interests 

.. •' 

I • 

'. 

.· 

'· 

··. 

·. 

, "' ' ... 

. . ~ 

·-
\ . ·.~ 

... , 

... 

... ,. : .··· 

-. 

;_ 

·. 

.. 

;. 

; , .; "'., ... 

·. , .... ·. • •• •·. "4-

8936 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

are brought in conflict in this way, it is extremely proper that we should 

call for some proof besides the bare statement. 

l\Ir. CARLISLE. Mr. President, it is no part of my duty, and I 

sball not assume the task of defending 01· in any manner vindicating 

Mr. "'axton; but if it will add anything to his credibility in the estimation of the Senator from New York I will state that he is the president of the Wholesale Hardware Association at New York. 

Mr. BUTLER. American? 

Mr. CARLISLE. Yes, sir. He seems to have enough reputation 

among the gentlemen who are engaged in dealing in that character of 

goods to be selected for that position by them. 

Mr. HltiCOCK. I desire to inquire of the Senator from Kentucky 

if he is sure that he is anything else than the president of a wholesale 

importers' as ociation, with all of their manufactured goods made upon 

the other Ride. 

Mr. CARLISLE. All made upon the other side? Does the Senator 

make that statement? 

Mr. HISCOCK. I ask the Senator the question, if he has any information bearing upon the subject, whether the goods which they offer 

and which they put upon the market are not all made upon the other 

side. I ask where they have a factory. 

Mr. CARLISLE. Let me see. if I understand the Senator's question. 

I understand the Senator to ask me if I do not know that all the goods 

offered for sale by the Whole.sale Hardware Association, of which this 

gentleman is president, are manufactured in a foreign country. 

Mr. ALDRICH. No, no. Mr. HISCOCK. What is that? 

Mr. CARLISLE. The Senator asks me if I do not know that all the 

goods offered for sale by the Wholesale Hardware Association, ofwhich 

Mr. Saxton is president, are manufactured abroad. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Oh, no; I did not intend to ask that. 

Mr. CARLISLE. What is the Senator's question, then? 

Mr. HISCOCK. I did ask this: I asked where their factory is. 

Mr. CARLISLE. Where whose factory is? 

Mr. HISCOCK. Where the factory of this association, where the 

manufacturing establishment of this association is; 'If here there is one that is located in the Hepublic. 

Mr. CARLISLE. The Senat-0r assumes that this hardware association represents but one factory or one house. It is an association con- stituted, as I understand, of a great number of the wholesale dealers 

in hard ware in this country, and Mr. Saxton is their president. Where 

all their wares are made of course I can not tell. Some of them are 

made abroatl doubtle..'18. In fact I know they are from information 

upon which I can rely. Other parts of their good~ are made at home. 

These wholesale hardware dealers in the United States buy and sell 

both imported and domestic goods. They deal in all kinds of hardware, no matter where it was made, if they can buy at a price and sell 

it at a price which will yield them a reasonable profit. 

Now, sir, I have no prejudice against manufacturers. I have never stood here or elsewhere and disputed a statement made by a gent.le- man simply beca,use he was engaged in any particular kind of legitimate business. I would believe the tatement of a reputable gentle- man engaged in manufacturing just as soon as I would believe the statement of a reputable gentleman engaged in any other business. Of course we must sometimes make an allowance for the bias produced by 

self-interest; but! respect and admire these enterprisinggentiemen n.ll over the country who have invested their money in manufacturing and 

mining industries and who have by that means developed the natural resources of the country and contributed immeasurably to the comfort 

and prosperity of the people. 

I have no prejudice against them. On the contrary, I want to see them prosper; but I want to see them do it, if possible, by means of 

their own honest efforts, and not at the expense of the other people in 

this country. I want them to have a fair chance, a. fair and open field for 

competition in the production and sale of their goods; and if any advantage is to be secured by law to any cla...qg of producers, I want that 

advantage to go the American pro:iucer, and not to the foreign one. That is my position upon this subject; and when I advocate t.herednclion of duties here I do it because, in my opinion, the interests of the consumers relJ.nire it and the manufacturers wtll not be injured by it; 

or, if it does diminish their profits, it is simply taking away from them 

a p:.ut of their gains which they have no right to claim at the expense 

of other people. 

When Senators rise upon this floor and declare that they will not 

believe the statement of a gentleman simply because he is engaged in a particular kind of business, a business as honorable and as reputable 

and as legitimate aR the business of manufacturing, I confess I can not 

appreciate such a sentiment. I can not appreciate that feeling which 

prompts gentlemen to denounce the statement of a man simply because 

he is engaged in a particular business or has an interest in a particular 

matter in controversy, without showing that the statement is in some l'eSpects false. 

~ir. VEST. Mr. President, in 1888, when the last tariff debate occurred in this Chamber,an attack similartothatmadeto-day was made 

upon Ur. Saxton. He was charged then with having been engaged in a disreputable transaction as to nndervalnation. He made the proffer 

,-

immediately, as soon as he heard the charge, that he wonld pay $10, 000 

to any man who would offer the proof that his firm or himself had ever been engaged in any transaction which reflected upon him or his :firm 

in the slightest degree. · 

Anticipating the attack that has been made here to-day, Mr. Saxtou 

sent me some weeks ago (for I have a very pleasant acauaintance with 

him) a number of affidavits and statements from the la~rgest hardware 

and cutlery establishments in the United States, including the Sim· moos Hardware Company of St. Louis, the members of which I know 

personally, all testifying to his high character, his unquestionable integrity, his standing as a bmliness man, equal to that of any other man engaged in any business in the United States. There is not one particle of foundation fot any of the charges that have been made against 

Mr. Saxton here to-day. The statements to which I refer are among 

my papers at my residence, and I shall take occasion to place them before the Senate. They come from houses of unquestioned respectability, American houses. 

The intimation that Mr. Saxton is a foreigner is absolutely false and 

without foundation. He was born in this country. His father was born in this country. His grandfather was born in this country. The 

family has been here for generations. There is not one scintilla of 

proof of any such statement as has been made here. If it be a crime 

to be a. foreigner, he is not guilty. He is as much a native of this country as the Senator from New York or myself, and comes from as good a family as his or mine, and is as reputable a man as the Senator from 

New York or myself; and I am prepared to show all this by absolute 

proof. 

Mr. IDSCOCK. Have I said anything a'1;ainst Mr. Saxton? Have 

I challenged Mr. Saxton's assertion? Have I said that he belonged to a poor family, or a low family, or a good family, or a high family? I 

do not know when. · 

Mr. VEST. I understood the Senator from New York, although my 

attention was distracted to some degree--

Mr. HISCOCK. I have not said a word about his family. 

Mr. VEST. I understood th~ Senator from New York to state, at 

least by implication, that he was a foreigner; that he was acting in the 

interest of importers alone, and he went on in an eloquent intimation, 

if nothing else, that we on this side were engaged in defending this 

foreign interest., represented by a foreigner, against domestic manufact;.. urers. 

l\lr. HISCOCK. I did this: I inquired of the Senator from New 

Jersey, in connection with the paper he was reading from, what manu- facturing establishme.nt the gentleman repre.<1ented, where he lived, 

and all of that, as I had a right to do, for I did not know. I did it 

without a single insinuation that be was not, as compared with myself, 

in point of ability, respectability, honesty, and integrity, immeasurably above me. I did not put my character or that of the Senator from 

Missouri against bis. · 

l\1r, BUTLER. But the Senator from New York can not have forgotten not only his own statement in regard to Mr. S:u.ton, but the 

statement of the Senator from Rhode Island in reply to--

Mr. HISCOCK. But the Senator - .Mr. BUTLER. Wait one m:>ment. He can not have forgotten the 

statement in reply to an obserrntion that I made, in which one of those 

Senators remarked that this gentleman was an interested witness, and, 

if not in terms, at least impliedly, the intimation was made that he was unworthy of belief because he was an interested witness. 

Mr .. ALDRICH. I did. I belie,~e that Mr. Saxton is himself not 

only an interested witness, but the most interested witness in my opinion upon this very question now before the Senate. 

l\Ir. BUTLER. That Mr. Saxton is? 

Ur. ALDRICH. Yes, and he will admit it himself. 

l\fr. BUTLER. Precisely; nobody has denied that. I did not deny 

that. I do not know Mr. Saxton; but what surprised me, and what 

surprises me now, is, when a. Senator rises in this Chamber and upon 

his own responsibility reads a letter from a citizen of this country, that 

he should be assailed, by innuendo at least, if not directly, as being a man unworthy of belief. I would submit to any impartial jury in the 

United States that that was the import of what was said by the Senator from Rhode Island and by the Senator from New York. As the 

Senator from Misoouri has remarked, the Senator from New York went 

further and said that this foreign house was being represented upon 

this floor . Mr. HISCOCK. Certainly. 

Mr. BUTLER. By Senators. 

Mr. HISCOCK. That I do not withdraw. 

Mr. BUTLER. That this foreigner was being represented by Senators on this floor. 

Mr. HISCOCK. That I say, and that I do not withdraw. 

M.r. BU'l'LER. Mr. President, all I can say in reply to that--

1\ir. HISCOCK. What I meant was precisely this-my explanation 

should go with my statement: It has been the custom in the course of 

this debate to speak about the rapacity of the manufacturers, the monopolists, the greedy iron men and steel men, whom we represented on 

this side. 

Mr. HOAR. '' The robber bardns." 
I "-,,, .. ' I • .- ·, 

1890. CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD-SENATE. 8937. 

.M:r. HISCOCK. "The robber barons." They have coined and uttered phrases constantly over them, and when this subject was up a little while ago I thought it was an extremely good occasion to dis- cover to the Senate and the country who fo.rnished the literature, and 

the ideas, and the arguments, and the facts, and I may add the pictures and the fictions--

Mr. VEST. I hope the clerk of the committee will make no suggestion. 

Mr. HISCOCK. All those things which the other side use in the ~urse of this argument; and I asked where their manufactories are, 

for I believe these people Mr. Saxton is associated with are practically 

a syndicate or board of importers, com mission merchants of forei!(D. goods 

in this country. I say again to the Senator from .Missouri that! haYe 

not the slightest doubt about the highly respectable character of the 

family of Mr. Saxtc;m. 

Mr. BUTLER. The Senator from New York says he did state that 

foreigners were represented on this floor by Senators in this debate. I 

want to say to the Senator from New York that so far as that remark 

applies t.o me it is not true. I do not know any importer who is a 

foreigner; and the Senator has made a statement which is not sustained 

by the facts. 

Mr. HISCOCK. Now, if the Senator will allow me-- The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from South Carolina yield? 

l\Ir. BUTLER. Not for the present. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I only want--

The PRESIDENT pl'o tempore. Senators on the floor can not be interrupted without their consent, which must be first obtained by addressing the Chair. 

Mr. BUTLER. I am on the floor by the courtesy of the Senator from 

Missouri and simply desired to make that statement. All that I have 

done and all that any other Senator bas done in regard to Mr. Saxton or Mr. Anybody-else is to present facts or statements to the Senate; and 

I would suggest to the Senators on the other aide that the legitimate and 

courteous manner of conducting this debate, so far as those statements are concerned, would be to produce proof in rehuttal of those statements 

rather than by assailing the witnesses who are presented and indire::Uy 

assailing the Senat-0rs who represent them. 

That to me, sir, would seem to be the better manner of conducting 

this debate. The Senators from Rhode Island and fr<>m New York 

have not vouchsafed to anybody on this side any information which 

they may have acquired by reason of their connection with the Committee on Finance, and have dismissed with a sneer almost every inquiry, and have thrown themselves back upon their own infallible position on these subjects, the great "I ams" of finance, who say," This is 

correct," and therefore it must. be correct! 

The Senator from New York very modestly suggested that he had 

been controlled and influenced by exalted statesmanship. I have not 

the slightest objection to the Senator from New York complimenting 

himself in that way, but I do submit that when Senators make statements upon the authority of respectable people, whether they come from abroad or from America, it would be rather more becoming, if I 

may express an opinion, that those st~tements should be met by coun · ter statements instead of by intimations of improper conduct. 

Mr. VEST. Mr. President, there is no necessity for any excitement 

about this matter. It is simply a question of evidence. If the Senator from New York has made no attack upon Mr. Saxton, there is no issue before the Senate as to that gentleman. I should be asha.med of 

myself--

Mr. HISCOCK. I do not hear the Senator. 

Mr. VEST. I said if' you have made no attack upon the character 

of Mr. Saxton, there is no issue before the Senate as to that matter. 

Mr. HISCOCK. I say to the Senator that I do not recall that I made 

any attack whatever upon :Mr. Saxton or his family or any one associated with him. So far as I know, they are all eminently respectable. 

Mr. VEST. Now, I simply want to dismiss another statement of 

the Senator in the calmest and most dispassionate way. .Any intimation or assertion that I represent any interest here except that of the consumers is absolutely false. I am here representing my constituents, 

who are consumers, and I am representing the people of the United 

States, whether importers or manufacturers. Every man, woman, and 

child in this country, as a Senator of the United States, is my constituent as to this bill, and I do not propose by any sort of innuendo or attack from the Senator from New York or his a<ljutant-general, the clerk 

of the committee, to be deterred from doing what I conceive to be my 

duty; and I will do it. 

Now, .Ur. President, as to Mr. Saxton's business connection, if the 

Senators had simply turned to the evidence taken before the Ways 

and Means Committee they would have found this statement which 

disposes of that matter, I take it: ' 

The ORAmXAN. I do not remember that you stated your. business. 

c?!~i.SAXTON. I am an exporter and importer of hardware, and general mer1\Ir.BA YNE. Do you belong to tho American Wholeeale Hard ware Association? Mr. BAXTOY. To the Wholesale Hard ware Association; yes, sir. There are so many American associations we did not want to get mixed up with them Mr, BA YMil. How many firms are in there? • 

.. 

Mr. SA:X:TO~. There are about twenty. It is simply a local organization jn New York. l\Ir. BA~""E. All in New York? Mr. SAXTON. AU in New York. The organization is simply for the purpose of stating our status in reference to the tariff. Mr. BAYNE. For no otJier purpose? 

:\Ir. 8AXTON. For no other purpose whate\·er. We ha.ve these original affi- davits in this book. 

This gentleman made that statement openly before a committee of 

Congress; he was there for no surreptitious purpose; and yet, as I 

stated the other day, he was treated as if he had been almost a criminal or certainly a suspicious witn~s; and if Senators will turn to the 

testimony they will find what I stated to be absolutely true. He had 

testified but a short time when the chairman of the committee said: 

The CHAIRMAN. There a.re a number of men who wish to be beard here this mornil!g, o.ud, although l do not wish to hurry you, we should give them a. chance to be heard. If you have a. written statement you can have it printed. 

And so on. 

l\fr. l\hLLS. I recollect the Barlow knife used to be very good metal. 

This was about the second questiou afterwards, 

The CHAIRMAN. Have you concluded your statement? Mr. SAXTON. I was trying to illustrate that the great body, the great number of dozens and grosses are largely ma.de up of little boys' knives that come in thousands of grosses a.nd that ma.ke no point at all. They occaslona.lly go to work and make a great lot of those and then a. great many of them will be handled because- The CHAIR~AN. I would remind l\Ir. Saxton that. we ha\•e a great number of 

gentlemen here who wish to speak to-day. Mr. BRECKINRIDGE. I do not think the gentleman should be hurried, as he is 

speaking by the consent ofa.11 the gentlemen pre.sent. We did nothurrytbose who spoke on the other side, and there is plenty of time yet. 'l' he CHAmMAN. You understood that these hearings were closed long ago. 1\Ir. BRECKINRIDGE. Yes; but these gentlemen have been granted a hearing 

to-dny, and I think the ~entlema.n should be permitted to proceed. The CHAIRMAN. They had an opportunity to be heard before. 

Then, again, in a minute afterwards: 

1\Ir BAYNE. He is simply going over former statements put in b; them [readingl "selling at Sl.65, per affidavit well known buyers." Mr.SAXTON. We are simply refuting their statement. 1\Ir. BAYNE. But yon are simply reading your own argument. IIIr. SAXTON. Here is their statement," eost51.90per American manufacturers." Here is our state·ment, "selling Sl.50 per affidavit of well known buyers." Mr. BAYNE. But this has all been put in before. Mr. SAXTON. Yes, in a written form. 'I'he CrrATR.lIAN. You have already submilted this whole thing in writing. 

!\Ir. SAXTON. Yes, sir; but I am endeayoring to show you gentlemen how this thing is. Mr. BAYNE. You haye stated all these facts before and you are now dilating on them. 

Mr. LA FoLLE'ITE. He Is expanding nnd explaining his statement. l.\Ir. FLOWER. These samples of knives are very instructive to you gentle- 1.nen. Mr. SAXTON. Our statements are all backed up by affidavits, and we do nofi a.sk you gentlemen to take these unless they a.re so backed up. 1\Ir. BA Y:rn • .A.re the affidavits in print? Mr. SAXTON. Yes, sir; they are all in print. 

:\Ir. FLOWER. You have invited these gentlemen here, and if this ls llistasle- ful to you you ought to hear it; this is an object lesson you haven't had. The CHAllt:liAN. Is there anything now which you wish to say which is not printed? 

And so on. The whole of this statement shows that this man was treated as if 

be were a hostile witness, representing not an American interest and 

not there as au American citizen, but as if he were an enemy to the 

AG:lerican people and was entitleu to no other consideration than would 

be given to a suspicious witness in a police court. 

.I 

Mr. ALDRICH rose. Mr. VEST. Does the Senator want to interrupt me? 

Mr. ALDRICH. When the Senator has concluded I shall have some remarks to make. 

Mr. VEST. I shall take occasion, if there is anydonbt in regard to 

the character of this gentleman, to bring the affidavits here: which I 

stated are at my residence, which he sent me beC3use I happened to 

take a prominent part in the debate of 1888 when the charge was made 

against him to which I have alluded of undervaluation. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President, I certainly have made no charges 

against Mr. Saxton, nor have I made any attack upon Mr. Saxton. I 

have no doubt that Mr. Saxton's family is good and I have no doubt 

that he is a man of respectability-and a reput.able man; but Mr. Saxton is the president of the Hardware Association of New York, a com- bination of importers of hardware for the purpose of breaking down 

the American tariff and destroying American industrie.9, and nothing 

else. It has no other purpose. He is the leading spirit in the org::mization. He is the most active, persistent, and I do not think I shall 

overstate if I say malignant opponent of American ruanufa.ctmers of 

all kinds of bard ware. Now, I say for myself that I require some collateral evidence about some statement which he makes where his own interests are concerned. 

That is all I have said, and that I now repeat. 

Mr. McPHERSON. .Mr. President, I wish t.o say a. word in vindication of l\Ir. Saxton, whom I think the Senator from New York liid 

not treat very courteously, although I make no charges in that respect 

except this: If the Senator from New York did not intend to cast some discredit upon Mr. Saxton he was very unfortunate in his language, in 

his manner, and in his emphasis. 'l'he simple inquiry that he made as to whether Mr. Saxton was an American citizen, or a ·subject of Queen 

' . ~ 

. , .·J 

.... 

·· .. -:,. 

: ... ~ ':' 

' . 

; ,· 

.. t • 
·, 

...... 

'I ,o 

.-

,. , 

~· 

, .. I '. .._ • I 

8938 . - CONGRESSIONAli RECORD-SENATE. AUGUST 21, 

Victori~, or something to that effect was sufficient of itseit' to show I that c6mmerce bas been the cause of greater wealth and ~rosperity to 

that be was insinuating what he was ashamed to charge openly. the people of the United States than any other-thing connected with 

I wish to say for .M:r. Saxton that he if! not before the Senate to-day our whole financial and commercial condition. 

with this letter by his own volition. It is not a volunteer act of Mr. So I believe, in virtue of the example we have set to ourselves and 

Saxton that this information bas been vouchsafed and presented to the which we have practiced with so much success, a commerce that is as Senate. Some two weeks ago I caused a letter to be addressed to Mr. little obstructed as is consistent with the support of the Government 

Saxton asking for some information with regard to this metal schedule. of the United States by a proper revenue system is the best commerce I received his reply this morning, apologizing for his delay, and stat- that we can have. 

ing that he had been. ill at home for. two weeks and ha~ ~een unable In that line we ar~ having the support now of one great Republican 

to attend to any busmess, and submitted to me a table givmg the En- statesman of the Umted States, who proposes to have an unrestricted 

glish cost-price of files in o:der to .aid me in arriving at a just con~eption reciprocal commerce with all t~e South American States and very many 

of what the proposed specific duties would. be when trans~ted mto _ad other States. In that connection we also have the bright example of 

valorem duties. He gave me the translat10n of the Engluih cost-price General Grant, whom I regard as one of the wisest men who ever be. 

into American currency, and then stated what the discount would be. longed to the Republican party and one of the most patriotic. 

He gave me the American cost in dollars and cents, and then showed Mr. HOAR. Or any other? 

what the ad valorem rate of duty wo~ld be as compared with the rate Mr. MORGAN. "Orany other "-oneof the most wise and patriotic 

of duty proposed by the Senate committee. men who ever belonged even to the Democratic party. General Grant 

l\Ir. President, there is something more of this case than has been came before the Congress of the United States with a treaty that he 

prese~ted h~re. It will be no~iced tha~ the lowest-size file wh_ich is and Mr. Trenholm negotiated with Mexico, which very much enlarged 

mentioned rn paragraph 162 IB ~ file 4 mches in length. TurD:mg to the freedom of comi:ierce between these two contiguous Republics, aud 

the table pr~ented b~ the c~mmittee you seethatnearlytwo-th~ds of I have not a doubt, m fact I know from bis own personal expressions 

all the files imported mto this country last year were files of 4 inches to me, that he would have been very glad to see the provisions of 

and under. that treaty, or something like it, extended to Canada, and there are When you come to take a file of 3 inches in length, 2 inches in length, other liberail-minded men who rank as statesmen in this country who 2t inches in length, or 1 inch in length, a dozen fil~ 1 inch in length feel that the time bas arrived when there shall be greater reciprocity 

will hardly cost as much as a dozen files 4 inches in length, and as they and greater liberality. are governed entirely by the lengths as to the amount of duty they are The treaty which Mr. Arthur negotiated with Spain was a treaty of 

to pay (because the file 4 inches in length may be almost as :fine as one an great liberality and reciprocal interchange of commercial goods. I 

inch in length) and ina<>much as the bill makes no difference between have regretted that the Senate of the United States did not have an the file itself and the file-blank, which is nothing in the world but a opporlunity to pass upon that treaty, because if we had it would not 

piece of steel an inch long or 2 inches long, as the case may be, and not have been necessary for Mr. Blaine at this day to suggest, after a cut at all, therefore it is that there can be no a.rgument urged upon that tariff bill had been matured and had come from the House of Repside in support of the proposition they have made. If a dozen files 1 resentatives to the Senate, that that tariff bi11 in none of its provisions 

inch long cost as much as a dozen files 4 inches long, then there might would make room for the sale of another bushel of our corn or wheat 

be some reason in the proposition of Senators upon the other sido; but in any part of the world, and that it was necessary in order that we 

it is not true. should secure to our people the proper a<lvantages of a reciprocal trade 

:rilr. HISCOCK. Mr. President, I wish to say one word in reply to that we should have reciprocal arrangements with foreign countries. 

the Senator from South Carolina and the Senator from Missouri, who I regarded the suggestion of Mr. Blaine as coming a little late, bedeny that they represent here the foreign importers or the foreign man- e&~ ;:; e be has had a year and a half in which to make reciprocity treatufacturers. ieo, and I am not informed that he has made any effort to get them at 

It is a fact well known that this tariff bill is regarded with great all. Perhaps with due diligence upon his part we might have had the 

hostility by the manufacturers abroad, because it will be a curtailment treaties here ready for ratification, and after ratification we should then 

of their market; and so hostile are they to it that it has eYen been have had the high duty, and the noble opportunity, too, of enacting 

talked of that there may be reprisals, and it has been talked of on the laws for carrying those reciprocal arrangements into effect, which of 

other side of the Chamber that foreigners would decline to buy of us, course we must do before they can have any effect. 

and so on. Therefore I do not feel at all embarrassed when any one accuses me The manufacturers abroad are hostile to this bill. The importers of desiring to have a large, free, liberal commerce with the people of 

here, pure and simple, represent them, and we find this spectacle pre- this world. I should feel very much embarrassed and I should feel 

' sented of the agents, the representatives of foreign manufacturers upon mean if I were to advise the farmers of the United States to shorten 

the floor of the Senate, furnishing the evidence upon the floor of the the production of cotton and to shorten the production of wheat and 

Senate that this bill in its effect will cripple foreign industries, because corn and pork and provisions of different kinds in o.rder that we might 

it will foster American industries. That is the issue which is fairly raise the price, preying upon the necessities of even the paupers of 

presented as between this bill and the present law. other countries. Besides this, I should feel mean if I were to bring 

It will strengthen our industries-they concede it upon the other side forward a suggestion of that kind, for I should think that I was flying 

of the water-and ib will weaken and cripple their industries to the ex- in the face of a merciful and all-wise Providence, who has given the 

tent that they now enjoy our markets; and they are here fighting it earth as an inheritance to man, and whose command to him in the 

persistently and furnishing the ammunition-I will withdraw that re- very first instance was that he should go forth in the fields and earn mark-furnishing the testimony, the facts and :figures, all that are his bread by the sweat of his face. 

available, I will not say in the hands of their friends-not by any So, Mr. President, I have nothing at all to conceal, nothin~ at all to 

means-but all that are available with which to put down, if possible, deny in respect to my being liberal-minded upon the subject of internathis bill and to defeat it. That is the attitude, and that is the issue tional commerce, and I feel just as comfortable in the company of the depresonted here. ceased patriotandhero, General Grant, and of the presentleading,promi1\Ir . .MORGAN. Mr. President, there are various reasons, I ha.ve no nent, influential, powerful, the most powerful man in the Republican 

doubt, which have influence with the manufacturers abroad to try to party, Mr. Blaine, who at last has seen that it has become necessary 

break down this tariff; and if I were a foreign manufacturer I think that the people of the United States should have larger trade, freer 

I should feel interested in trying to break it down, particularly-when trade, in order to promotetheirown prosperity. I am in as goodcomthis bill proposes to give a drawback to the American manufacturer of pany in that regard as if I were tied or chained to the Senator from 

99 per cent. of the duties that are paid upon imports into this country Rhode Island and the Senator from New York, and had to keep com- on all material used here in the ma~ufacture of articles exporteil abroad pany with them all my life, and I should feel more comfortable in that 

for sale. They have an interest, of course, in keeping our manufact- situation, I have no doubt, than any one would suppose. ures out of competition with them in the foreign markets, and I do not But in the debate on this question they took occasion to say to the 

wonder t.hat they assail this tariff. They are like all the people in the Senator from New Jersey that this gentleman, whi> they assumed 

world; they like to make money by trade and commerce and enter- was a foreigner and is conducting foreign trade, was his client. I 

prise; and it is very natural, indeed, that they should be opposed to regretted very much to bear that said here. That is not a worthy 

this tariff; and if this tariff is enacted I expect that our commercial way to present a question to the minds of the Senate of the United 

intercourse with foreign countries will be very much obstructed by it. States. Who is my client? Who does not know who my client is? 

That is not an idea which snits my fancy or gratifies my taste or even Turn your eyes to those people in the South who make $300,000,000 

my patriotism, for I like to see as unobstructed a. commerce with foreign of money annually out of a single crop for the benefit of your com- countries as is compatible with the weltareof our own, for I believe that merce. They are my clients who are now ruaking irons cheaper and a very unobstructed commerce is more compatible with our welfare better than they can make them in England. They are my clients 

than when it is very much obstructed. The example is found here in who get the timber from the only yellow-pine belt in the world and 

the contiguous States and in all of these forty-four States and four convert it into commerce. They are my clients, they are my constituTerritories that we have now in the American Union, covering a coun- en ts, my friends. Not one of them bas ever been consulted about this 

try very nearly as large as all of Europe and a third of Asia. tariff. No man here ever thought of turning his eyes from the chamWe have an unobstructed commerce between the people of the United her of that committee to the Son th and inviting any man to come here 

States, and that commerce is greater, perhaps, by five or six times than to ask him what the South needed or wanted upon this question. 

the commerce with aU the countries of the world that we conduct, and We are used to being tabooed. We are not hurt or insulted about 

.· . \ 
i 

., .. .. . 

.. 1890. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN~TE. 8939 

it. We bave got our natural resources and we have got the resources 

of genitLc:i that are quite equal to any which are possessed anywhere 

else, and greater, for, when we had sent into the field 600,000 troops in 

the South and every port in the country was blockaded, we went to 

the mines and dug the ores that made our guns, and cut the willow 

switches from the sides of the streams and made the charcoal, and dug 

the saltpeter from the caves, which made our powder, and we improvised in our laboratories the stuff that made the fulminating powder 

for the caps, and we obtained mixed metal for the caps and made them. 

We built artillerytmins, vast numbers ot wagons, bridges, railways, all 

built. by a merely agricultural people during a time when every man's 

house had to give up at least one or more of its members into that 

army. 

Our genius improvised the whole. business and we succeeded in keeping two millions of the enlisted soldiers from the North, with all the 

resources of war, four years in deadly conflict, and our material was 

dug out of the ground with which we did it. Do not mistake yourselves when yousupposetbattbet>0ople of the South have not got any 

genius for industry, enterl)rise, and invention. Go to your pat.ent lists 

here and you will find that some of the best inventions of the whole 

country come from the South. So you need not have disdainfully 

turned your attention away from those people. I do not complain of 

it, for they will prosper in spite of you. But none of them have been 

called here to ascertain by this committee what it is that they need or 

bow their prosperity might be advanced. No man turns bis attention 

to that great region ot the land which, after all, supplies the true 

wealth to the commerce of the United States and enables you to buy 

from abroad that which you could not buv without it. 

I regret that the debate up in the Northern States amongst Senators 

who represent New Jersey, New York, and Rhode Island, the focal 

point of commercial prosperity, importation, and exportation, where 

we all have to make our exchanges from our part of the country-I 

re~et that these Senators should find themselves by the ears in quarreling over the private character of one of their own constituents. I 

have not any interest in that quarrel, except that it is an unpleasant 

thing to find any party driven to the necessity of rising npon the floor 

of the Senate and in the person of a Senator from some great State, 

for instance, an empire State, making a question as to the veracity of 

a gentleman who has been for many, many years engaged in business 

in the very city the Senator represents. That looks to me, Mr. President, as being unnecessary, unwise, unkind. 

The Senators on the other side are in a dilemma, and let the country 

understand it, for in fact they can not conceal it from the country. 

There are two great propositions which they have had to confront in 

the last twenty-four hours of debate which they are unable to answer 

except by making an· assault either upon Senators or upon gentlemen 

who come here to give their statements and testimony in regard to existini:t fact& 

The first of these points was suggested by the Senator from Kansas 

[Mr. PLUMB]. He suggested it three weeks ago. He dwelt upon it 

then and he elaborated it still more fully yesterday. That was a proposition that there must be an understanding between the importers 

and the manufacturers whereby one part of the market is given up to 

the importers and another part is occupied by the manufacturers in order that they shall not come in competition in their products and in 

their imports, and that fact accounts, as no other fact can account, for 

the large importation from abroad. 

The Senator from Kansas has twice brought this to the attention of 

the Senate, and the honorable Senators on the other side who feel concerned about the attitude that they occupy toward the country would 

do very much better to attack that proposition and statement than they 

would by attacking the private character of any man who happens to 

come here as a witness, either a manufacturer or an importer. 

The country will not permit these gentlemen to try this case upon 

a side issue. They must have the real issue joined, and t},ley must 

have the facts that bear upon it. ~ow, take issue with the Senator from 

Kansas; he is a Republican and you are Republicans; he is a broad, 

big-spirited man, and so are you. He represents a va.st and growing 

constituency; you represent a shrinking ane, one that is losing every 

day--

Mr. HAWLEY. Who? 

Mr. MORGAN. You. 

Mr. HAWLEY. I represent a State that has increased 122,000. 

That is doing pretty well for a small State. 

Mr. MORGAN. How does that compare with the growth ot Kansas? 

Where is your percentage? Of course you are shrinking. I am sorry 

for it. I wish that Connecticut and all New England could grow very 

much more rapidly than they do, and then their people would stay at 

home and they would not go off to pester other people. [Laughter. J 

But the Senator from Kansas has made that issue, and I invite gentlemen to meet it, and the country invites you to meet it, and you 

have got to meet it, or else you have got to retreat, one of the two. 

What is the next dilemma. you are in? Ah! that is too sad. Ithas 

been ascertained that your manufacturers in the United States, in very 

large numbers and in a great divemity of manufacturing interes~, sell 

th.eir goods to foreign countries at from 30 to 70 per cent. cheaper than 

.• 

I 

they sell them t-0 the people of the United States. The newspapers 

came out-The New York World came out and presented these facts 

months and months ago and challenged contradiction and challenged 

proot-the proof that we hear about it; and the contradiction that we 

hear so far is only that urged bythe Senator from New York a moment 

ago, when he referred in a derisive way to the fact that we were producing picture-papers here. 

Yes, sir; we produce picture-papers. That great historian, the photograph, does not ten any lies. It can not tell a lie, thank God, and 

it is about the only instrumentality that conveys an idea in the United 

States left to-day that can not tell a lie. I think every man ought to 

worship at the shrine of the photograph, so far as the truth is con- cerned. That instrument, the photograph, was applied to the machines 

and knives and the various instruments of commerce which are sent 

from here to South America and other countries, and it took a faithful 

copy, and one copy is printed in the American paper of the same date, 

edited and issued and sold and given out by the same company, and 

another copy is printed in Spanish as a supplement of that same paper 

on the same date, printed on the same press and both containing the 

photograpbs, and not only so, but the photographs have not translated 

the English names into Spanish of the trade-marks upon these productions, butgive the raw English or the raw American to show its truthfulness. 

Here is an unimpeached and an unimpeachable witness. There is 

not a Senator on this floor who would dare rise and risk his reputation 

upon the proposition that that photograph lied about the business. 

They will accuse one of their own constituents doing a thing of that 

sort, but they will not accuse a photograph of it. 

So the fact has been established by incontrovertible,irrefragable proof 

introduced here four weeks ago or nearly that long-quite a long while 

back-by the Senator from Missouri, who explained the pains he had 

taken to have a copy of these price-lists sent from Buenos Ayres to him 

in the United States and his getting one in the city of New York and 

comparing them together, and there they stand and there they tell the 

whole undeniable truth. 

Now, that is either a fact or it is not a fact. If it is a fact, these 

very manufacturing companies whose names are given and places of 

residence, have had weeks, yes months, in which to contradict it; these 

Senators who represent the people of the United States upon that lofty 

Committee on Finance have had the right and the opportunity to contradict it, but they have not dared to attempt to do it. They can get 

up here and make remarks of a sinister character calculated to bring 

down the weight of their contemptuous disdain upon facts like these. 

I would say to the honorable Senato:rs that they can no more laugh 

these facts out of the Senate than they can laugh the people of the 

United States into good humor with them for concealing from them 

what they know to be true. 

There is that dilemma. The Senator from New York said that that 

probably could be answered upon the proposition that there was a 90 

per cent. drawback in favor of the manufacturer who brought his material from abroad and manufactured the goods here and sent them 

abroad and sold them there. That is a mere su.ggestion from the Senator from New York. There is no fact to sustain it; there is no evi· 

dence or statement presented to the Senate to show that any manufacturer of the goods w bich are sold at these low prices in for~4tn 

countries has imported the material from aoroad and manufactured 

that material here and has exported the product from this country and 

has got the drawback. 

Now, there are four facts in concatenation that have to be made out 

to establish the suggestion of the Senator from New York. Well, it 

would not stand a second before a. negro justice of the peace in the 

South. Every man of ordinary common sense in the world knows that 

that is a subterfuge. Those goods that are sent to South America are 

manufactured out of American wood and iron and steeJ and rivets and 

wheels and bands, and the like. If they were not it could have been 

shown here, and that excuse would have been given for getting back 

the 90 per cent. drawback, and getting the opportunity t-0 sell the goods 

cheaper abroad than they are sold in this country. No; that is not 

true. The country will not accept it from the Senat.ors as trne. There 

is no use of trying t.o stuff that down their throats, for they will not 

believe it and can not believe it. 

The Finance Committee, representing the people of the United States, 

would honor themselves and the Senate of the United States if, instead of quibbling and chaffing about the reputation and respectability 

of witnesses, and instead oJ presenting insane suggestions-for they 

are scarcely less than that-upon a matter of this kind, they would 

come out and say: "Yes, that is true; our manufacturers of certain 

goods in the United States are able to export their goods to foreign 

countries and coming in competition with manufactures from Europe 

they are able to sell on a parity with them or even to undersell them,'' 

and when you add the peculiar skill of American genius applied to 

manufactures you will find your goods will float in the markets where 

German, English, and French goods will sink. I would feel pride in 

a statement of that sort. Would to God that that day could come when 

Senators on this floor could so far forget the chains that bind them to 

their pnrty policy as to be able to lay before the American people an 

• I 

: 

- -J 

I '~ 

' . 

:~ 

.: 

. \ 

~· 
... 

~· 

·. 

.: 

'· 

/ 

·, .. 

·. 

•' 

'•'1" 

-. 

·.,- . 

, J • 

8940 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. · ..AUGUST 21, 

honest, square, fair, undeniable statement of facts upon which we have 

got to legislate. 

How am I to vote upon a proposition of this kind, bow is any man to cast bis vote in the ballot-box upon a propo!;ition of this kind, when 

Senators can not deny and can not disprove what the Senator from 

:Missouri has established by incontrovertible evidence? We must have 

the facts to vote on or else we are deceived and wronged, for whoever 

undertakes to cause me to legislate upon a statement of facts which 

is not true causes me to violate my duty to my country. 

Now, here are these two dilemmas. This tarift bill has progressed 

in debate until w~ have come across these things, and when we bring 

the proof up gentlemen fly off on all manner of side issues, and every 

man's character who happens to have been before a committee is 

brought in here and he is put on trial as if he were being tried as a thief in the Tombs court. 

That is the situation the Senate is in to-day in trying this great 

question of tarifL Come out, Senators, and say, "Yes, that is true." 

You know whether it is true or not that our manufacturers can sell 

cheaper to South Americans than they will to the people of the United 

States. You know whether that is true or not. Come out and say. 

If it is not true, dispro>e what the honorable Senator from Missouri 

has staked bis reputation upon in producing these facts before the Senate. He does not hesitate; he comes up with bis proof; he submits it 

to the Senate and the country, and the country is going to read and 

look at it. 

I have been told by a gentleman who is very familiar with this book 

bound in Russian red or whatever it is [indicating the bound report of 

the Committee on Finance)-! have been told that when we reach the 

wool schedule the suggestion made by the Senator trom Kansas on these two occasions that I have referred to will come out in the proof 

very strong. 

Am I not entitled to know, asa Senator on this floor, from those who 

represent manufacturers and live amongst them and those who are familiar with their business to that degree that they are actual experts 

upon every question you can state-am I not entitled to know whether 

it is true that the importers of goods are given the right of way upon 

certain articles, while the manufacturers take charge of certain other 

articles of very like de..qcription, almost the same in appearance, and 

the uses being generally the same, and that the importers come into 

the United States and bring masses of goods here and take the home 

market that they are taxing the people so heavily to pay for? I think 

I have the right to know it. 

When the Senator from Kansas presents this question to the consideration of the Senate of the United States, it is not a child playing 

with a toy or a bauble; it is a full-grown man handling great and strong 

and terrible facts, and they are not to be escaped either. 

The other dilemma which we are approaching just now, and getting 

into the twilight of that subject, is the 99 per cent. drawback upon 

exportation. We have had no indication yet of the personal opinions 

of Senators upon a qnestionofthat kind. But now let me put to you 

and to the country this proposition: A manufacturer in the United 

States is permitted to go abroad to buy material and bring it in under 

duty. He pays the duty on the material and be is permitted, of course, 

to manufacture it in bis own shop along on the seaboard and coU"rnnient to the transportation of coal and the like, to water, and possibly 

cheap land. He then is permitted to export that product to a foreign 

country and to get 99 per cent. of the duty refunded to him that be 

had to pa.y upon his material in bringing it in. 

Let me ask the question, what else is that than a bounty paid to 

him out of the Treasury of the United States? When he brings his 

material in here, he pays the tariff duty upon it. He can not enter it as a consumer or in any other way without paying the duty, and tbut 

goes into the Treasury and it is 100 per cent.; it is a full dollar upon a particular given article or a particular quantity of an article. After 

it has gone into the Treasury he. takes his leisureaboutmannfactnring 

it. It may be eight months, or ten months, or a year, or two years, 

whatever the law or the regulation may be in that regard. When he 

bas made up his articles out of this impo>'ted material and shipped 

them abroad, he comes to the Treasury of the United States and says, 

"Pay me 99 cents of that dollar out of the Treasury." What for? 

He calls it a drawback. It is a bounty. Whatever you may call :it, it 

is a bounty to that man to take bis money and pnt it into an establishment and import bis material from foreign countries, manufacture it, 

and send it out and sell it somewhere else to some foreign country. 

That is a bounty and it can not be proven to be anything else but a bounty. 

is all on account of the bill, for God's sake let us pass it! Let us get 

through with it. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I want a vote. Is the Senator willing to take the 

vote now on this proposition? 

Ur. MORGAN. Not instantly-not until I get through. I will get 

through with you first, and then I will yield the floor. I want to know 

from the Senator from Rhode Island and from that committee why it 

is that they pay a bounty of 99 per cent. on all the tluties that have 

been paid on all the raw material brought in to make a certain article, 

and it does not make any differ~nce what it is. • Why will they do that, except that they want to enable their man- ufacturers in the United States to go abroad and compete with Europe 

in prices? When you go to the Treasury to get your bounty, you go 

to money already paid in. You do not take out a part of the money 

that yon paid into the Treasury, but you come to me and ask me to con- tribute out of my taxes, to pay 99 cents bounty to that man because 

be ships an article that he has made in the United States of material 

which he imported from a foreign country. That is the whole story. 

Mr. President, how can we say that we are treating American citi· zens fairly, the consumers, the producers, or any other class of the peo• 

ple of the United States who have any sort of need for articles of wear, 

and shelter, and food, and the like-how can we say we are treating 

them fairly when we are merely enabling the manufacturers under thiS 

99 per cent., the drawback feature, to go into foreign countries and sell 

their goods to foreigners, to say the least of it, that much cheaper than 

they can afford to sell them to the people of the United States? 

Mr. RIGG INS. Will the Senator allow me to make a motion to go 

into executive session? 

Mr. MORGAN:- If I yield at all, I shall yield to an adjournment. 

We ought to go home. 

I do not wish to keep the Senate here, Mr. President. I was jesting with the Senator from Delaware. I wanted to put these facts on record, and when we meet again in debate I want Senators on the other 

side of the Chamber to bring up something to refute the evidence 

brought here by the Senator from Missouri and refute the statements 

made by the Senator from Kansas, because, if you can not do it there 

is a desperate, desperate mischief in this act, and the people ought to 

know it. You can notcover itup. !fit betrne, ashe states here and 

proves, as I think he has established, and it can not be answered, then, 

Mr. President, there is a fatal infirmity in the very bony and system 

of this whole bill of tariff legislation. 

Now I yield the floor. 

EXECUTIVE COI\IMUNIC.A.TION. 

The PRESIDENT pro teinpore laid before the Senate a letter from 

the Secretary of Agriculture transmitting a report on the preliminary 

investigation to determine the proper location of artesian wells within 

the area of the ninety-seventh meridian and east of the foot-hills of the 

Rocky Mountains; which was referred to the Committee on Printing 

with the accompanying maps. 

HOUSE BILL REFERRED. 

The bill (H. R. 3715) to amend an act entitled ''An act authorizing 

the construction of a bridge across the Red River of the North," approved July 16, 1888, was read twice by its title and referred to the 

Committee on Commerce. 

EXECUTIVE SESSION. 

Mr. HIGGINS. I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. 

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. After two minutes spent in executive 

session the doors were reopened, and (at 6 o'clock and 5 minutes p. m.) 

the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Friday, August 22, 1890, at 

10 o'clock a. m. 

NOMINATIONS. 

E.vecutfre norninations received by the Senate tlie 21st day of August, 1890. 

U:NITED STATES COKSUL. 

William E. Sim!!, of Virginia, to be consul of the United States at 

Colon (Aspinwall), vice Victor Vifquain, recalled. 

REGISTER OF WILLS. 

Levi P. Wright, of the District of Columbia, to be register of wills 

in the District of Colombia, vice Dorsey Clagett, resigned. 

RECEIVER OF PUBLIC MONEYS. 

Mr. ALDRICH. Is the Senator willing to yield? I should like to Wright P. Hall, of Susanville, Cal., to be receiver of public moneys 

I know what he at Susanville, Cal., vice Allen Wood, deceased. get a vote on this proposition. 

Mr. MORGA.N. The Senator wants to adjourn. 

wants to do. 

Mr. ALDRICH. I should like to get a vote on the pending proposition, and then I shall make a motion to adjourn. 

Mr. MORGAN. I am pushing this bill through. I am told there 

is a great state of a~itation in New York City about it and that the 

money market there to-day is per hap~ 169 ver cent. per annum. There 

is great agitation, and I want to get the bill through. If the agitation 

·. 

CONFffiUATION. 

Executive nomination confirmed by the &11.ate August 21, 1890. 

UNITED STATES CONSUL. 

William G. Riley, of Virginia, to be consul of the United States at 

Puerto Cabello. 

. ' .· 

. '·