The Portland daily press., 1888-06-01
UNDER THE FIVE MINUTES RULE.
Five Lines of the Tariff Bill Receive
Consideration.
Maine Congressmen Make an Una
vailIng Effort
To RepuIse the Democratic Assault
on the Lumber Industry.

on the Lumber Industry.
WASHINGTON, May 31.-The House today
resumed consideration of the mills bill in
committee of the whole.
Chairman Springer announced that the
bill would be considered for amendments
under the five minutes rule.
Mr.. Adams of Illinois offered an amend
ment to make the bill take effect JAM I'd
next. instead Of July 1st. Mr.. Adams said
the House should have a regard for the i'm
mense vested interests of the country, and
afford them an opportunity to prepare for
the changes proposed He meant the amend
ment to apply only to the first section, or the
free list
Mr.. Breckenridge of Arkansas maintained
that ample notice had been served on all
persons interested, and the greatest consid-
Grafton had been shown the interests affect
ed.
Mr.. Adams attacked the committee for
placing brick on the free list, and pointed
out the probable effects of Canadian compe-
tition on the Chicago brickmakers. Without
the change OF date proposed by him, the in
dustry would be seriously interfered with in
| the middle OF the season.
Mr.. Kelley spoke for the Southern lumber
interest, as he said no one on the Democratic
side cared to do It. ftepisaded with the
House not to impoverish the poor people of
tennessee and South Carolina, and decrease
the value of their splendid timber lands by
making lumber free.
MIR. Weaver Of Iowa protested against any
action that would fasten lumber trust upon
the farmer and rob the consumer.
Mr Reed of Maine said the gentleman
from the prairie State (Mr. Weaver had got
ten himself into state of mind over trusts.
Figures would show there was no possibility
OF decreasing the cost Of Canada lumber by
making IL free. The tariff woul1 go into the
pockets OF the Canadian lumbermen, and the
only effect OF 1.-THE reduction would be to in
\ lure the American industry, without lower
ing prices. He asked why planed lumber
snouid De protected and not sawed lumber.
Mr. weaver declared that the lumber trust
! was the most unconscionable trust ever in
| existence; that it absolutely limited produc-
ton, and controlled the price of lumber. Its
operation was criminal proceeding. twas
Ior TINS trust that the appeal was made by
the other side.
Mr.. Morrow of California said that even
| IL tRere was lumber trust, which he did
not admit, the effect of this legislation would
be to transfer it across the line into Canada,
| where 1t could not be reached by our laws
He, urged, in behalf of the vast carrying
trade engaged in the lumber traffic, that the
GATE OF the operation of the free list be
made Jan. I'd next.
Mr.. Wilson of Minnesota, said that If the
the free list wouldlnot reduce the price, he
tailed to see how the carrying trade would
be affected He had seen more millonaires
spring up in the lumber trade than any
Wnere else, while the wages Of labor were
not reduced. The lumber tariff was legal
lied robbery.
DR.. Parker of New York, offered
amendment proposing November 30th, 1889
ior the date given in the section, and ad
dressing himself to the lumber clauses, said
their frst effect would be to reduce the price
OF lumber until our producers were ruined
and industry destroyed, when prices would
go up again.
Mr.. Mills read a newspaper statement of
an interview with Chicago lumber man to
to the effect that he was protected 10y the
tarlli put not the lab0rer, whose wages were
regulated by the laws of supply and demand.
III. farkers amendment was rejected, so to
Mr.. Boutelle proprosed to make the date
IN the Adams amendment 1890 instead of
1889. lie said the result of the lumber tariff
was SHOWN in the fact that lumberman on
tnls SIDE OF the line received from % to 40
per cent. better wages than on the Canadian
side.
Mr.. Lind, of Minnesota. did not believe
tne removal Of the tariff would cheaper lum-
Der or AFFECT trusts, but urged that the tariff
caused the cutting of timber to be confined
tslAmerlcan soil. Any law that tended to
Dasten the destruction of our forests was not
wise.
~. Doulcho maintained tnat the modern
lumDerman was the strongest conservator
OF forests. There was more lumber in Maine
today than twenty years ago. Mr.. Bou-
teiie's amendment was rejected.
Mr.. breckenridge, of Kentucky, had read
an extract from a speech delivered by Mr.
Blaine, in 1868, in which he said it never had
been the policy of the American government
TO tax breadstuffs or lumber, representing
the needs OF working men for lumber. This
was received with applause by the Demo
cratic side.
Mr. Mckinley, of Ohio. asked if Mr.
Blaines remarks had not been directed to in
ternai taxation, and not to imposts.
Mr breckenridge said Ee did not know
wnlcn, put the speech was directed against q
tax on lumber.
Mr.. Mckinley replied it was directed
against tax on American lumber, and not
on foreign Jumper. Republican applause,)
MI. Milliken, OF Maine, said that sugar and
rice paid double. revenue duty, yet no one
proposed to cut them.
MT Outhwaite, of Ohio, presented statis-
ties to show that the cutter of Maine got
Sl.7O per annum and the capitalist $2S5 upon
every $1,000 invested in lumber.
Mr.. Reed of Maine, said Mr.. Cultivate had
forgotten to apply to the figures the logic of
his own good sense. ANY mans good sense
must tell him such profits were preposterous,
yet the Democrats had no better sense than
to applaud such statements.
Mr.. Dlngley Of Maine asked how the other
size justified themselves for maintaining a
duty OF 20 per cent. on coal, crude material
anu raw sugar, while trying to remove the
lowest duty in the whole list, that ON manu-
factured lumber. Nothing protected the
forest as much as a duty on lumber, for 1t en-
lands.
MI. Bayne Of Pennsylvania held that the
Dill had been drawn on sectional lines, and
was INFINITELY worse than the Morrison bill
Mr.. Mcmillan denied the charge, and said
tne committee on ways and means had in
view only the good of the whole country. He
did not envy man so shriyel-souled that ne
could see only through sectional spectacles
lie asked whether the Maine lumber men did
not import Candian labor to cut timber
Mr.. Milliken-No.
MT. McMillan-YOu say what is not cor
rect. You are misinformed.
Mr.. Boutelle-Why does the Canadian la
him?
Mr.. McMillan--Climatic influences [De-
isiye laughter.
Mr.. Boutelle wanted to inform the gentle
man (Mr. McMillan) that if Canadians did
come over the line lit was because they got
better wages.
N, Mr.. Anderson of Iowa-Why then don't
Maine depopulate Canada?
Mr. Boutelle-She is doing so, as fast as
law allows.
Mr.; Gear of Iowa, maintained the tariff
should be fair to all section. 1t was not
right TO protect sugar with a 6S per cent du-
ty, and rice almost as much, while cutting off
the lower duties on the products of other sec
tions. The debate was continued in the
same line.
Mr.. Mckinley Of Ohioy recurred to the sub
ject OF Mr.. Blaine's speech, and said he had
looked up the debates, and could state posi-
lively that Mr.. Blaine's remarks had re-
ferred only to an internal law.
Mr.. Breckenridge of Kentuckey, argued
the same principal held good in the case of
any tax upon production.
Mr.. Reed, of Maine, said the gentleman
from Kentucky, afforded the Democratic
party the opportunity to do what they had
always grudglngly done, give Mr.. Blaine
generous need of applause. 1t clearly was
| by inadyerJence, or accident, that the GENTLE
man had used the point made by Mr.. Blaine
to fit one case, that of a revenue tax, to stop
another hole. the customs tax. No doubt
the gentleman would sincerely regret his in
| advertance.
Mr.. Mills asked that debate on the section
be closed Objection was made, and it was
moved that the committee rise. This pre-
| vailed the Republicans solidly opposing, and
| the committee rose having passed over the