The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-12-20

loss be difficult to distinguish between the cotton
remaining in the hands of the producers and what
had been sold; but he believed that very large
proportion still remained on their hands. That
some persons would be inordinately benefited by
the repeal or could commit frauds, was no argu
ment against the repeal. 1t was just to the pro-
ducer to remove the tax, and he contended that
immediate action should be had In order to enable
these producers to meet their obligations.
Mr. Frelinghuysen said he had received letters
from tho South and from his own State concurring
in the view of the Chairman OF the Finance Com
mittee, Mr.. Sherman. tax on cotton hero was
premium ON cotton in India. Cotton was sold for
all purposes Of expectation This tax of one-fourth
of the yalue effects the black as well as the white,
the West and East as we'll as the South; because it
disabled the cotton grower from meeting his obli-
gations. The objection to the suspension OF the
tax was the uncertainty to which it gave rise. II
would take away the capital required for the next
crops. He doubted whether any conclusion could
be drawn from statistics Of cotton for four or five
years back in the uneasy state of the markets du-
ring that time.
but argued that if the crop were unduly stimulated,
the exporter would have to pay the tax, while 9TH
erwise the importer paid it; instancing coffee and
other articles as some upon which the importer
paid the tax. 1t would be striking blow ut the
South to repeal the tax. He denied that specula-
tors should be remunerated for their ignorance or
inexperience in removing tho tax from cotton re-
naming unsold.
MIR. johnson, alter referring 10 the paSb aCIlOu
of Congress upon the subject, SAID he had believed
at first that the tax was unconstitutional, alludng
to the prohibition in the Constitution from taxing
imports. Since the war, with the immense bur-
dens it entaied, it was necessary to consider how
to make these burdens as light as possible The
cotton tax was ruinous The universal testimony
was that cotton could not be grown under
such tax under the present system OF PAID
labor. If it was important to renstatc cotton
into its former condition, then it was the poll
cy of the government not to discourage 1T, but
rather to give a bounty for its production.
The negro laborers generally were paid IN
shares, and the intelligent among them knew that
25 per cent. Of their wages went into the united
States Treasury. They were dissatisfied, and as
anxious for the repeal as were those whom
Senators called ''rebels of the South" He thought
it would be best to remove the tax altogeth-
er. He warmly seconded the desire of MIR. Ere
liuphuysen to see the South rsiDstated in every
thing except slavery. They should not impose
upon one portion of human labor tax, not laid
upon another The various votes here and IN the
other House proved that the tax should be repeal
ed He had moved to amend by including the
crop us 1867 in the provisions of the bill. Many
OPPOSED this that would not object to removing
the tax from cotton in the hands OF producers, and
he would modify his amendment accordingly. One
portion of the amendment offered by Mr. Will
iiams had no practical effect in his opinion. II the
tax was unconstitutional they could not prevent
claims from being paid.
Mr.. Conkling moved to so amend the Dill as 10
mako it applicable only to the year 1868.
On motion of Mr.. Conness the Senate then held
short Executive session and soon after ad-
ourned.