The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-12-10

TO the Senate the Senate had no jurisdiction on
the subject It was at liberty TO debate IL, but
II had nothing to debate about except the reso-
luton OF his friend from Vermont, which was
merely an expression of opinion that it was bet
ter TO do nothing than to do what. on the basis
of the propositions made in the House last ses-
sion, the Democratic party would propose.
But, on the main proposition-that there was
an imperative duty resting ON Congress TO re-
duce taxation-he had proclaimed it year in and
year ont, and did now. The House of Repre-
sentatives was the sole organ of the people by
which taxes could be levied or could be reduced,
and why did ii not give the Senate chance to
vote on bill to reduce taxationY The Senate
had awaited the action of the House on that sub
ject for eight long, weary months last ses
sion, and had awaited in vain The PROPOSE
created such revulsion OF public opinion,
especially in the Northwest, that the majority
OF the Democratic party had been largely re-
duced. If the Democrats had been able to carry
one OF their measures through, their majority
would have disappeared in the air; therefore
until some proposition was made to the Senate by
the House of Representatives, It did not lie
in the mouth of the Senator from Kentucky to
complain or scold chide the Senate with
failure to reduce taxes. The Senator should call
his brethren together; and he blr Sherman ven
tured to say that when the House did agree
plan of reduction IL would be for the destruction
of American industry, not for the purpose of
duction. The first plan proposed by the Secre-
wpng out the greenback currency. How many
votes would such proposition get among the
people of the United States? The Senator from
Kentucky himself would be opposed to il. How
would he Mr.. Beck propose to reduce taxes2 In
general terms. that Senator was in favor of free
trade in its broadess and almost unlimited ex-
tent. The Senator would reduce the surplus by
removing the duty on wool from which rev.
enue of about So 900. 900 was derived. He would
abolish At once industry in which more than
q million farmers engaged. But. when he
was shown chance of reducing the revenue
nearly $l5, 900, coo by aboishing the duty on
sugar, he would not be in favor Of that
Was there any local. or sectional or party rea-
son for that? Was the Senator in favor of tho
repeal of the duty on sugar. He Mr.. Sherman
had not heard him give an answer TO that ques
ton. There was an opportunity for reducing
the revenue $50, O00, 600 year. But that was not
what the Democrats wanted. He and the Sena-
tor from Kentucky could sit down together and
In five minutes propose plan for reducing the
revenue. He Mr. Sherman would be in favor
OF voting bounty on sugar-as in Germany and
France-althoueh he knew that there was a
prejudice IN this country against such bounties
and nobody was bold enough to propose such
thing But the object of the Democratic party
was not to reduce taxes, but to tamper with the
great industrial system of the country. It was
against such action that the Republ party
stood like wall In conclusion, he said that
until the Democratic party could agree among
themselves and could present to the Senate
plan by which the Democrats were willing to
stand, they had no right to chide or complain of
Repu blicans. When they would send the Sem
ate bill, the Senate would show them that it
had the power to reduce taxes; and the Senate
would propose measure by which taxes might
be reduced without Gripping the industries or
decreasing wages
Mr.. Dawes obtained the floor and will speak
when the subject is next taken up.
Mr.. Dolph offered q resolution directing the
Secretary of War to examine and report as TO
the necessity and cost of the improvement of
Dalles, by the construction of a steamboat rail
way. Adopted.
Adjourned until Monday.