New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-01-05

4 that its massage was assured whenever 1t
| sbould come to vote. They have urged 1t to the
front merely as al act of mercy to class of people
who by their thoughtlessness had placed them
selves in position of peril, and whose financial
| rnin would involve that OF business men who had
| dealings with them. This was the strong point.
and in fact the only argument Of the supporters OF
the bill
The enemies of the measure, and some who voted
for it. have been calling attention to the fact that
| exactly the same line of arg ument was adopted
when the bonded period extended from one
year to three. an extension which, 1t is now admit
ted increased the difficulties of the whiskey '''n-
dustry" by stimulating overproducton to
enormous extent; and they have
asked repeatedly what guarantee was
now to be given by the whiskey men that q
further extension would not still further heighten
the difficulty. To this question no sufficient answer
has been given. 1t has, to be sure, been urged In
reply that the wbiskey men, with the experience OF
the past year or two, and in view of the danger OF
their position at this time would not 80 on mcreas-
ing their stock In the bonded warehouses beyond
the wants of the market; but every amendment
proposed which had in view the limiting OF the
scope of the bill TO the whiskev now on hand or of
that manufactured puOr to some fixed date. was
voted down.
In short, the power of the whiskey men
to drive through Congress, under the plea OF
giving relief TO suffering and deserving
industry and in defiance of logic or propriety,
measure calculated to increase their advantages
and ultimately their profits has been forcibly llue-
trated by the action of to-day. Senator Hale took
the lead in opposition to the measure and III trying
TO amend IT. His first amendment proposed to-day
prov ided that the extension of the bonded period
should only apy to whiskey entered on or before
lie first day of January. 1881. His object, he said.
was to test the sincerity of the claim that the pas
sage of the measure would mitigate the suffering,
and perhaps serve to prevent the pTOstration, OF
large class Of business He said that under the
present laws whiskey entered since the date named
had two years time yet remaining within which tho
taxes couldlbe paid. and that the threatening con-
diton or affairs could only apply to that whiskey
which must il the relief was not granted, come ont
OF bond at once.
He was told in reply that the amendment would
the bill measure of merely temporary relief.
and that the whiskey men would be compelled to
come to Coz gress again Que or two years hence.
This reply, together with the vote by which the
amendment was defeated seemed.to be q sufficient
evidence vf the nslncerity of those who argued the
necessity for immediate relief to the whlskey men
as the only reason for the passage Of the bill Other
amendments having the same general obct III view.
were proposed and voted down. The bill was passed
by the following vote:
Yeas-Aldrich, Barrow, Beck Chilcott. DAVIS of
West Va, George. Gurmau, Groomr, Grover, Hamp-
of Nevada. Malone. Fendleton, Sherman Slater
Van Wyck, Vest Voorhees,, Wihams-23.
.,oys. Blair, Brown. Cameron Of Wis: Conger.
Edmunds, Hale, Hawley. McDill, Maxey Miller OF
Rollins salisbury. Sewell, Walker and Window
20.