National Republican., 1883-01-27

llStS, heterrlng TO the tarlN commission, no
said that number of its members were gem
tlemen interested in the perpetuation of this
system, by which the consumer was taxed for
the benefit Of the monopolist The commits
sion was o tribunal, the very advocates at
whose bar were the judges who sat on the
bench. This bill had gone to tho committee
on ways and means, and two of the members
had appeared before the committee, and one
of them very signally went back on the re-
port Of the commission, and the committee,
subscribing to his views, increased the duty
on wooden goods. All that the committee had
done was to increase duties, with very few
exceptions, over the commission bill Yes;
except on sugar and tin plates.
MT Haskell. And wire rods, and bar iron, and
sundries.
Mr.. Tucker. Particular the sundries.
Mr.. Haskell. Very large reductions were mado
by the committee from the commission bill.
Mr.. Tucker criticised the committee on
ways and means for coming into the house
with bill unpreparod to satisfy the inquiries
of members and the demands of tho country
to know what would be the effect of tho
measure.
Mr.. Kelley asked whether tho gentleman
ever saw tariff bill, the effect Of which upon
the revenue could be foretold by any man.
Mr.. Tucker thought that the committee had
shown itself inadequate to the task devolved
upon 1t, when il was unable to make even u
shrewd estimate of the effect of its bill.
Mr.. Kelley inquired whether the gentle
man, on behalf of tho minority of the COM
mittee could not give a shrewd estimate.
Mr.. Tucker replied that before the bill was
reported from tho committee tho minority
members had asked for delay in order to Sc
cure reliable information from the Treasury
department. That delay had not been ac-
corded to them, and he confessed that he had
not the means at his disposal for making esti-
mates, but he could show that the estimate of
the gentleman from Pennsylvania was utterly
delusive.
Mr.. Kelly asserted that tho bill had not
been reported to the house until the commit
tee had received all the information which
the Treasury department could give.
Mr.. Tucker called attention TO the fact that
the committee had not submitted the estia
mate in its report, and intimatcd that it had
not done so because il regarded the estimate
as unreliable. Tho minority of the commit
tee did not propose any radical reform in this
tariff system. They recognized the fact that
under tho protective system industries had
grown up, and capital had been invested
in such forms that il would not only be
wrong, but bad craftsmanship for any one to
attempt to break them down by changing
suddenly the protective system into n revenue
tariff system. All they had attempted to do,
all they would attempt to do,'was to diminish
the enormous profits of the manufacturing in
dustries of the country which they derived
from the tribute levied on the consuming
class. The burden of tho consumer was
double in its character. He bore the burden
of the tax levied on imports, but that
was burden which he bore cheerfully as it
wentto the support of his government, but he
also bore the burden which resulted from q
system of prohibitory duties, which, by pre-
venting importation, enhanced the price Of
home articles.
When the amount of diminution of taxation
proposed by the bill was measured, these two
burdens must be taken into consideration,
and il must be found not only how much tho
revenue was diminished but also how much
the tribute to the manufacturer was dinin-
ished. Take the duty on cotton ties They
come in now at a duty of 80 per cent, but the
pending bill proposed duty equivalent to 81
per cent. Under the present duty revenue
was collected by the government; under the
proposed duty there would be no revenue.
The effect would be that gentlemen would
say that they had relieved the south from
taxation by the hook of tho treasury, while
by the crook of prohibition the burden on
cotton ties would be doubled in the interest
Of monopolists.
Passing on to discussion of the relations
existing between labor and the tariff, he as
serted that the declaration that protection
had any effect on the price of labor was fall
lacy. So far from o high tariff being tho
was the cause of protection
Mr.. Tucker then proceeded to discuss briefly
some of the more important changes In the
bill, especially criticising the sugar schedule
The reduction Of duty on refining sugars was
at least 40 per cent, but the duty on all
sugars that went into consumption was posi-
lively prohibitory. Such legislation was not
only unjust, but viciously unjust, as it laid
the whole agricultural interests under con-
tribution to the few manufacturers of the
country.
At the conclusion Of Mr.. fuckers speech
for which he received the hearty applause OF
his party associates, the committee rose for
the purpose of fixing somo
TIME FOR CLOSING THE GENERAL DEBATE
Mr.. Kelley moved to limit the tmo to {
o'clock yesterday, but accepted an amendment
made by Mr.. Randall, extending the time
until to-day at g.
Mr.. McLane moved to make it Tuesday al
noon.
Mr.. McLane's motion was lost--yeas a.
| nays 143-and Mr.. Kelley's motion, as
amended by Mr.. Randall, was agreed to-
So general debate will close to-day at
o'clock.
The house then again went into
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.
Mr.. Kasson regretted that the house had
determined to have any general debate. lie
would have preferred to proceed to the direct
consideration Of the details of the bill, be-
cause every days delay was producing harm
in the country and Generalization of bust
ness. He defended the tariff commission
against the criticisms of the gentlemen from
| Virginia (Mr. Tucker), which reminded him
| of the criticisms of the man who wanted nc
| lawyer on the bench because il would not be
possible for him to be impartial in decisions
of points Of law. There were articles in
the bill in his opinion on which the
duty was unduly imposed. Duty was
placed on some articles on the basis of pro
lection of the more in1rm enterprises, in,
stead of ON the basis of tho maintenance Of
| the average interests throughout the United
States. If there be one poor lead mine and
other rich ones he did not think congrcs:
ought to base its schedule on those rates
which would protect the poor enterprise and
raise enormously tho profits of the greater
sources of wealth. The gentleman from Vir
ginia (Mr. TuclSor) had styled the creation Of
competitive establishments as monopolies
when the very creation of those establish,
ments was the destruction of foreign monop,
oily. He was willing to treat the world with
charity. lie was willing to send ships car,
| goes of food to the poor abroad but when
he stood to lcgislate he would logisatC
for the United States Of America, and not
| for tho interest of foreign lands The
| only practical question for congress was as IL
| the proper rate of duty TO impose on articles
which the United States produced in competi-
tion with foreign countries, in order to offset
the disadvantages of the location of our in
dustries, the cost of raw material and the cost
of labor. When that had been done, call il
protection, or call it tariff for revenue, an act
! =