New-York tribune., 1870-04-19

M on that theory and system He did not onec1 ~ 10
gentleman from Pennsyysnia f sd t6e pockets
the gentlemen Of that State but every farmer ana as ,ne
a%ed tnSc 10 On enieS ae thee mee Of
Mr. sCHENCK ep, 0hol said that ne n,d,ns Wa himself
to particular and local interests he was tired OF TINS srS
of statement When gentlemen were AZ by saving
that the bill was got up this way and in ina. way as
by combinations duty OF % per , a cent en- N that be
IS per cent, and duty OF "a was y per csn' u
too ttle it ought to he increased dsnosne Of the
After further discussion and without rpgsss I'M
paragraph ON pig iron the Committee TOOK rc'oS' u"
EVENING SESSION: a.,
The Committee of the Whole reassgrotfiS reas,dnration
at "a o'cock and proceeded with the pio
Of the Tariff bin the paragraph under discussion peins
that Mr. SHBf S r1S em the reduction Of
the duty treating pig iron practically raw h'eia
Mr PAcRER Rep PENN favored is ncrease ito to sg
stating that the proposed reduction 10 - iooAo INV "
p q hf p MOI argued the
increase of duty He assumed the average S%st S tun
He cwes GRADE Sl Of foreign pgcot from
@ 9s sSyng % & TT1 TIC ae from sod at fram @
to $50 go averaging s3G per tun leaving an
Mr.! NEGIEY Rep, Penny advocated the increase OF Of
the duty to - per tun, and spoke OF he ~ free o
trade in England and France were not encouraging 10
that principle. France had been pohted by tne iLee
trade treaty only in the matter OF Wne In al oLhcr
respects She had been injured by it, and in England there
great complaints OF the BAD o. IT. er 70 stop
n
s Mr. re XiTsoN Is dep Iowa. favored the reduction Of
the duty on pgron and said in reply TO the statements
OF Mr. Kelley that from to 1861 the increase In the
production Of iron had been gradual healthy ana con %
tnuOus and that under what was denOlnnated ny tIe
Gentleman from Pennsylvania a free trade tariff lie
argued Therefore that reduction OF the duty "ouiu HUI
| be Injurious To the iron industry. . s., A..
Mr.. KELLEY CRep PENN asserted that to reduce the
duty iron or even @ 70 sS Ta % 70 fhg TnSr ~ was
to diminish the amount Of pig iron produceu ana wa
the 5dg ~ n xd OF hnd Sad the adangs Of
ness during the but it would affect the men rd Wdo
ana, Illinois, Tennessee, Missouri and oregon lie was
not speaking for Pennsylvania Her resources were 80
well developed that she could live and prosper under
auy tariff stem that any other state could i've unde
He was pleading that the farmers OF the west might
have market for their grain, and horses and mules
Mr.. MARSHALL Dem, ND favored the reduction red M OF
the duty s.. He thought that pig iron dd not nee1
any other protection than that afforded by the cost 2t
Transportation which S. p tun to the sea coast, He
that the farmers of the West had their own representa-
Mr. DCKEY Rep Penn favored the hig rate Of duty
on pig iron and reminded the gentleman from lihos
arshalD that all the farmers OF the country WeIe @ ho
in Illinois. He himself represented an u9
jured by the protection TO manufacturers
MIR WOODWARD Dfm EN- PENN e tS a9 hs Inc co"nry
much greater than that mentioned IN the dscnsGn m
that industry, directly or indirectly was near million,
and he in favor rather OF increasing than uinls-
ing ing G S on down 3 the low standard Of wages that
they did in England France GERMANY y aud
|
| they were prepared TO try that plan.
| Mr. BURDETT UIep., MOI declared that he shonld
support the bill of the Committee, and that In so DONG
he was representing the sentiments OF the great 0
State Of Missouri and also her farming population The
gentlemen who speculang on the ideas that the
people of the West were FreeIIaders were deeelVlng
| themselves most egregiously ..,
| MIR BURCHARD Rep., ILL argued in favor Of the re-
| ductiOn of the duty.
! Mr. TOWNSEND Rcp. PENN favored its increase,
and argued that the farmers could buy their agricultural
implements to-day cheaper than they could urder free
| trade tariff some years ago. . r.,
Mr.. SCHENK, at o'clock made another unsuccessful
| attempt to close the debate on the paragraph.
| Mr.. BUTLER Qsepq Mass) remarked that Pennsyl-
yana taxed interests largely Tor state pf
poses if she wanted to protect that interest enc
abolish those taxes II il not for the tlrlH on
IRON they could have Bessener steel rails In this country
at S4 per tun He thought there more danger oil
the iron furnaces being shut up than there was OF inc
production of bread stopping He desired to give Penn
syvana fair protection but he also wanted TO give 1ar
play TO the consumers. IN,
At length the discussion closed. The Committee
was brought TO vote the paragraph and the amend
| ments.
The first vote was on Mr. Cox's amendment, to make
| the duty girOn So IL was rejected. -
| The next vote was on the amendment offered by MT
Butler Mass, to make the duty s5, and II was adopted
| 20 TO o. ainid much eV eVcitement in the Hail.
| The Committee then rose. , ,.. ,,,,,.. ~,
MI l s-dored that Thursday, April 2s the
shall proceed to the consideration OF reports from the
| Committee on Public Lands
Without voting the motion, the House, at 10 o'clock
adjourned.