The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1888-10-05

1H1 BOGUS MILLS 1lLL.
The Fort Scott Monitor publishes
the following:
The Baltimore American declares
that bogus copies Of the Mills bill are
coming from Washington and being
distributed by tho democrats to all
parts of the country. It says:
''The great notoEiety given the Mills
bill has created . general demand for
4 it throughout the country, and the
democratic managers announce that
they distribute It % their most efficient
campaign document. But they do not
let it be known that they are distribute
ing It in some sections shorn Of soKe
Of it's features; or, In other words, that
they are exercising an arbitrary dis
erection a. to the shape In which 1t goes
to the people. In the House. - Is we'll
known, the democrats adopted or re-
jected provisions, - they were calcu-
lated to influence votes. The demo-
cratic managers are eliminating from
the bill the features which they
think are calculated to make 1t appear
a. . free trade measure.
GAS many minor articles may be
stricken fromthe bill without attracting
general attention, they have been care
fully eliminated from those enumerat-
ed in the free list. This, 1t 10 under
stood, is to give the free list as appar.
emit insignlii.. .ace 40 possible. No
doubt, similar liberties are taken with
articles on which tariff reductions are
made, but the most remarkable audaci-
ty is manifested in leaving out entire
" one of the most important portions
Of the bill. Section 40 Of the Mills bill
~ 1t passed the House, Is entirely
eliminated. 1t reads:
"'SectiOn 40. That all clauses Of Sec
ton 3,244 of the Revised Statutes, and
all laws amendatory thereof, and all
other laws which impose any special
taxes upon manufacturers Of stills, re-
tail dealers in liquors, and retail deal
ers in malt liquors are hereby repealed
at is presumed that the objection to
this was the fact that 1t looked too
much like an effort to relieve the dis.
tillers and saloon keepers from the
burden of the special tax they now
pay. That was the intention Of this
section of the bill, but the committee
has evidently deemed it imprudent to
admit it, or, indeed, to mention it at
all, but the author or authors of this
bogus Mills bill, not satisfied with the
single elimination on the subject Of
whiskey, have gone further. Sections
SO, 81, SO aud 50 are also left out. They
relate to whiskey and amendato.
ry of the present law. Section SO was
intended to comfort the moonshiners,
and among its provisions are the fol.
lowing:
"The Secretary of the treasury may
exempt all distileries which mash less
than twenty-five bushels Of grain per
day. from the operation of the provis-
ions of this title relating to the manu-
facture Of spirits, except as to the pay
ment of tax, which said tax shall then
be levied and collected on the capaci.
ties of the distilleries and said distiller-
les may, at the discretion of said secre-
tary, then be run and operated without
storekeepers or 'storekeepers and guag-
ers.' Section 80, which is omitted, is
also, intended to benefit those moon
sinners who are SO unfortunate as to
have their property seized under the
forfeiture clause for failure to pay
tax. Under the existing law property
seized because of Illicit distilling is sub.
ject to destruction, but the Mills bill
provides that it shall be stored in SAFE
ty until sold. This is omitted in the
revised copy sent out.
"These are few of the provisions
which are modestly eliminated from
the Mills bill now being circulated as q
document. The democracy,
in view Of its declaration, is obliged to
circulate the bill, but evidently its
provisions in full are to be given as lit
tie publicity as possible.