Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-10-09
WASHINGTON.
Allison and Vance Discuss the
New Tariff Bill.
BLAIR MOUNTS A NEW HOBBY.
A Republican Breakdown on the Cam
paign Fund Investigation.
Notes.
Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD.l

Associated Press Dispatches to the HERALD
WASHINGTON, October 10.-In the
Senate to-day Blair offered
resolution 1aid over till Monday
calling on the President for infor-
nation as to the trial for treason, and
the conviction and execution, in Canada,
on tho 9th of November, 1885, of Louis
David Riel, who claimed to have been n
naturalized citizen Of the United States,
and whether the proceedings in the case
were according to due process of law, in
Guiding presentation of the fact of
Riel's claim to citizenship, and his de-
fense's claim of insanity.
The Senate then proceeded to the con-
sideration of the tariff bill, its reading in
full being dispensed with, and the Sem
ate substitute being ordered first consid.
cred.
Harris asked Allison to fix the time at
which the general debate on the bills
should close.
Allison said it was impossible to say
when the Senators would resign their
| right to take any responsibility respect
ing it. He concurred with the Senator
| i'll the desire that the bill should be pro.
ceeded with as rapidly as possible.
Harris remarked that there was rot>a
Senator who had not we'll defined am
fixed opinions as to the principle that
Wn1lH in o,d TO
phase and feature of the bill. If the
Senator from Iowa would agree, he
| (Harris) would ask unanimous consent
to close the debate on this bill in ten
days.
Allison-I would not like to consent to
that at the very beginning; it might be
found that we wanted eleven or twelve
days.
Allison then proceeded with his state
ment as to the bill. There was some-
thing which ought to be made clear in
the beginning of the discussion. There
were few salient points which ought to
be presented. One was that the Senate
bill proposed to reduce the revenue be-
tween $65 900, 900 and $4,000, 900. This
was the first opportunity which the SEN
ate had to consider the great question OF
the reduction of revenue since the revis-
ion of 1883. The House had occupied
eight months in the consideration OF the
question, but within little over sixty
days the Senate Committee on Finance
had produced the bill now up. The
House had spent eight months,
not for the purpose of strengthening the
industries of the country, but for the
purpose of greatly disturbing those in
terests. He regarded a reduction of
from $60,000,0 900 to $4,000, 900 of the
revenue as being az great a reduction as
could be safely made, and therefore he
trusted that no amendment would be
adopted looking to greater reduction.
He calculated from the report of the Sec
retary Of the Treasury for the first quar-
ter of the present fiscal year that there
would be reduction of $4,000, 900 in re-
ceipts from imports this year as COM
pared with last ear, and reduction of
$17 ,000, 900 as compared with the Secre-
tary's estimate. Taking all the
revenues OF the Government for
the first quarter of the current fiscal year,
the sum Of $5,000,000, as compared with
the first quarter of last year. He made
this statement for the purpose of show
ing that the enormous surplus in the
Treasury was not likely to be increased
by anything that was to occur during
the present fiscal year. By the provi-
sions of the Senate Tariff bill there
would be no surplus revenue unless the
sinking fund for this year were left
entirely out of consideration. The
Senate bill contemplated-and it might
as well be understood in the beginning
that for the current fiscal year and for
the fiscal years that are to follow
Immediately, there was not likely
to be surplus beyond the amount
necessary to redeem the ~ per cent
bonds falling due October l, 1891. He
could not understand why it was that the
surplus Of $96,000,00 was not used to
retire the ~ per cent bonds that were
presently to be paid off by the Govern
ment.
Passing on to the general features of
the bill he said that the Senate bill diff
fered from the House bill in the fact that
it proposed to deal with all the schedules
of the Tariff, while the House bill did
not. The House bill did not deal with
the tobacco schedule, silk schedule or
wines and liquors schedules, and had
dealt but lightly with the sugar schedule.
The Senate bill had been made up on the
principle of protecting American labor
and industry. That was it's aim and
purpose. The Senate Committee on
Finance had sought to care for every in
dustry in the country.
Referring to the question of tobacco,
Allison said that the only difference be-
tween the House bill and the Senate bill
in regard to tobacco, was that the Senate
bill made reduction of $3.50 per thou.
sand on manufactured cigars, and also
took off the tax Of 81 on retail dealers in
tobacco. The house bill reduced the
sugar duty eighteen per cent, and the
Senate fifty per cent. Even with the
latter reduction the duty on sugar would
remain at Al per cent. ad valorem. Sugar
was as essential in every household as
bread, and if there was any article that
should have low rate Of duty imposed
on it, it was the article of sugar. He
believed that whatever encouragement
there should be for the production Of
sugar from sorghum or beets it still left