National Republican., 1888-06-09
SHALL SAT- BE FREE
An Animated Discussion in the House
on Saline Products.


tee on merchant marine and fisheries, re-
ported back his resolution calling upon the
Secretary Of the Treasury for information as
to whether any order is now In force by
which vessels from United States ports are
required to pay less tolls in passing through
the Welland and other Canadian canals
when they pursue their voyage by way Of
the st. Lawrence and Montreal than when
they pursue their voyage by way of Lake
Ontario to American ports, and whether
additional legislation is necessary to author
ize the Secretary Of the Treasury to impose
additional tolls upon vessels passing through
the Sault Ste. Marie and st. Clair flats canal
bound to Canadian ports in case the Domn-
ion authorities continue discrimination
against vessels bound to American ports.
Adopted.
The tariff bill was then taken up in COM
mittce Of the whole, the salt paragraph be-
ing under consideration.
Mr. Gfosvenor, of Ohio, said that his was
q great salt producing district. The tax on
the people on account of salt amounted TO
about six cents per capita, and II that small
protection was removed salt could not be pro-
duced in the United States, and to Ger
tainty the works In his own district and In
that Of Mr.. Ilogg, Of West Virginia, would
be closed, and the employees driven TO other
business or to starvation. The profits on
the capital invested in his district did not
exceed one-fourth of per cent. annually.
The effect OF, the passage of the bill would
not he to cheaper salt, but would be to
crush the industry here.
Mr.. Cox, of New York, pleaded for cheap
salt in the interest Of the dairymen and the
farmers. They were now subject TO a direct
tax, for they needed the best grade of salt,
and that could not be produced in this
country. Why should Congress discrim-
mate against the ,dairymenn and in favor of
the fish packer of New EnglandP
Mr.. Belden denied that such was the case,
and added that Mr.. Cox did not know what
he was talking about.
Mr.. Cox replied that he had good authority
for his statements. He wanted to reduce
the surplus and to reduce the cost Of the
breakfast table.
Mr.. Adams, of Illinois, wanted to know
whether he was willing to cut off the sugar
duty.
Mr.. Cox replied that he could. not be
caught by such questions. Yes, he would
favor reduction of the sugar duties.
Mr. Burrows supposed thai 1t had been
determined in caucus by the Democrats to
pass the bill Just as it stood, and naturally
they were indifTerentto any facts that might
tional Butter and Cheese Association had
awarded the majority Of prizes to users of
American salt, which seemed to meet the
charge that the United States could not
produce the best grades of salt, especially
when taken in connection with the fact that
the great western meat packers used Ameri-
can salt. To put salt on the free list would
be to surrender portion OF our market to
foreign producers. In Louisiana was the
purest salt mine on the globe. Three COM
panies had become bankrupt trying to de-
velop the mine because every time they
tried 1t English capitalists cut the rates on
salt, only to put them up again when they
had compassed their object of destroying
competition.
Mr.. Whiting, of Michigan, although a
salt manufacturer, did not feel justified in
opposing the movement to reduce taxation.
He asserted that large quantities of English
salt were sold in Michigan for $225 per
| barrel, although the native product could be
had for GO cents. The dairy people wanted
| II.
Mr.. Burrows asked if the gentleman's salt
| was not fit to pack butter.
Mr.. Whiting replied that 1t was, and he
shipped half Of his product TO the Atlantic
seacoast IN competition with English salt
| and held his own. If American salt makers
choose to make good salt they could retain
their market.
Mr.. McKenna, of California, asked why
| prunes and plums should be protected at
the expense Of wool.
| Mr. Biggs, Of California, defended the
| bill and thanked the committee on ways
| and means for putting sacks on the free list
| Mr. Tarsney, Of Michigan, charged that
the Republicans struck the first blow which
brought down the salt industry in Michigan,
| In support Of which he quoted utterances
| and votes of former and present Republi
can members of the House-llale, Hiscock,
Burrows, and Reed--in favor of free salt fol
packing meat and fish.
Mr.. Brewer, of Michigan, said his col
league (Nr. Tarsney) had forgotten to tell
the House and his constituents whether he
was in favor or opposed to free salt. lie
defended the gentlemen named for voting
| for free salt to be used for curing meats and
fish, declaring that It was in accord with ex
isting statutes at the time which admitted
everything else free which was to be used il
preparing articles for export. He de
ciared that, protectionist, as he was If he hat
been in Congress then he would have voted
with them.
The people. of his state had an interest il
building up this great industry and he pro
posed to defend II against those who CAM
here to attack it.
Mr.. Breckenridge, of Arkansas, said tina
the salt duty was class legislation pure ant
l
ners of Is no5%st, should be deprived Of tn
cheap safich" he is subJec..be N"iT gng,:,r.
fishermen. Winfield, Kan. Sat the bpS
Mr.. Rayner,S g. railroad. gary el
course Of his r. my tn
price of salt in MENTION. Eolled b.
the Michigan Salt A. dr. Whit
ing, of Michigan, decLBuil1at the gentle
man was wrong-that mis- statement wa
not true.
| Mr.. Rayner, with all due Difference to tn
gentleman, preferred to take his answe
from some one who was not a member o
the trust.
Mr.. Whiting instanced large salt manu-
factory in Michigan which was not a mem
be of the association.
Mr.. Rayner replied that his authority wa
the Michigan Salt Association. He insste,
that the salt trust existed, and asked II
had been the practice of trusts to reduc
prices.
Mr. Whiting said that the association di,
not control prices. BY union 1t got lowe
freights and storage, and prevented los
sometimes by the collection of bad debts
1t would be glad to raise prices, but !
could not, because New York state was no
In the trust
Mr.. Kelley declared that free salt woul,
be the death blow to the salt manufactur
in this country.
Mr.. Peters, of Kansas, pleaded in fayo
of the promising industry in Kansas.
Mr.. Gay, Of Louisiana, was willing an
anxious TO reduce taxation even II 1t shou
operate against the Louisiana salt mines.
Mr.. White, of Indiana, pointed out th
enormous reduction in the price Of salt tina
had ensued solely through domestic con
petition.
Messrs Sawyer and Belden, Of New York
as representatives of great salt producin
districts, maintained that the present dut
lID1