Peninsula enterprise. [volume] (Accomac, Va.) 1881-1965, 1888-07-28


chel, Quay and Riddleberger.
-
The House of Representatives on
Saturday passed the Mills tariff
bill by a vote of IG2 in the affirma
tive to I40 in the negative. -Four
Democrats voted against the bill
and two Republicans and three In
dependents elected by Repnbll-
cans voted, for 1t. The average.
duties of the existing tariff bill ar
47.10 per cent. Hhe Mills bill re-
duces them to 1910 per cent, in
stead of 40 per cent. as originally
inteudel. The issue between pre-
lection and tariff reform is n0a'
Joined. The Democrats through
their representatives say thel
want re duction on the necessarle>
of lfe-the Republicans oppos'.
and want instead free whisky. /
remains for the voters to say whic!:
they will have. The bill now goes
to the Senate and how that body
will DISPOSE of it no one Knows
The tariff question being one c.:
such gel eral interest, our editori;.:
space is surrendered to the speecl.
Of the patron of the bill, which We
especially commend to the perussl
of every one wishing light on tn:
question. Mr.. Mills closed the dc
bate in the following speech:
Mr.. Mills proceeded to take u.
and discuss in detail the variou
schedules of the bill, beginnin-
with the schedule dealing wit.
chemicals. The present dnty o.
chemicals, he said, was 32.S7 pc
cent. The proposed bill placed j
at 2S.17, a reduction of a little owe
81 in 500. Gentlemen called thu
free trade. The next was the eartL
enware and glass schedule. Tn.
duty under existing law was $50.
So in every 500. The bill fixed ii
S52.17. That was free trade, too.
be supposed. II $50 OF taxation ~
every 500 was free trade, in Cod
name would some one tell him wha
was meant by the term protection
Sugar was found at a duty c
S78.15, and the committee reduce,
it to s62.3l. There was nobod.
making much fuss about the enor-
nifty of flat reduction. The bill
cut down the revenues from sugar
S11,759,0O0. This was next to the
largest reduction made in any
schedule of the bill. 1t had beer
constantly charged that the bill
was sectional, that it barely touch
ed sugar and that the committee
on Ways and Means threw IFS arr
around the sugar industry to shield
j.; yet the reduction in sugar was
only second to that in the wooleii
schedule. There ought to be q
high duty OH sugar, because Dem
ocrats believed that taxation wa
tribute required from citizens for
the support OF The Government,and
because they believed that in lay.
ing taxation it ought to he so laiG
as 10 be as little burdensome as
possible.
THE TARIFF ON SUGAR.
By the tariff ON sugar the Gov.
crnment GOT S5S,OOO,O with sc,
OOO,OU0 protection. In order to
get SOS, 900, 900 into he pnblc cot
tiers it cost S6,U00,0O0 of protec-
tion to sugar planters. But in or
der TO get s5S,OU0,O0O into the pub
lie treasury from iron and steel anG
wollen goods it cost the people ov
ct s4OO, 100000. Why, then, shoul,;
the duty on sugar he repealed il,
order to leave a more hurdensome
tax at higher rate on wooden aud
cotton goods and iron and steele
The duty on provisions under ex-
listing law was S24.33. The com :
mittte left it at S23.39. Yet it was
charged that this was a free trade
measure. The existing duty or
cotton was S39.99. The bill fixed
it at S39.G7.
Where did free trade come in OH
that9 The Sl1,00O,0OO revenue
from cotton had been reduced only
S227000. The duty on hemp, jute
and fax was at present $3.50. 1t
was lett at S2l.94. This reduction
of only Sc was brought bout to a
great extent by the putting Of a
large amount Of jute and hemp anG
MANILA Oh the Tree list. The pres