The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1888-07-08
THE SUGAR DUTY.
Lack Of Harmony Among
the Republicans.


. t<stsfs tS7s- NAst--f ~ SCI >ttrSt9s{;
Leonard A. Harris, Of Ohio: John A
Martin. os Kansas. and John r. Hart
ranft. Of Pennsylvania, 10 TIL vacan
eses .. the board OF managers O
national homes for disabled volunseel
xoidser2
The hour having arrived, the hous,
went into committee OF the whole or
the tariff bill, the pending amendmenl
being that offered by Cannon. of Iii
nois, as 20 the sugar sehesiale.
Kelley. Of Pennsylvania, announces
himsei. to be a Republican. devoted
TO the doctrines of his party. TO ths
etserances OF the Republican conyen.
tion- He was a proteciionist and be.
iieyed the system OF protective dutie.
had DEVELOPED the country to its pres.
snt Industrial position. and was essen
sial 10 maintain this position He
had been surprised to hear the gentle
man frern Illinois tCannon1 make ar,
assault upon the platform recently
adopted hy the Republican party. He
then quoted from the Chicago plat
form the protection plank, and re-
GREETED that the doctrine there enun.
ciated had been asssiled from the
seats OF Republican members. From
the remarks made by these gentlemen
he dissented IN the name of the Re-
publican party, at whose birth he had
been and 10 whose interests he hat;
been devoted from that time to this.
Kelley then defended the protective
system IN regard 10 sugar. and op-
posed the bounty policy.
Al the conclusion of his remarks
Nelson, OF Minnesota, suggested that
the gentleman from Pennsylvania
was the only man who was thor
oughly indorsed by the Chicago
convention. This remark caused con.
siderable laughter
Kelley accepted the compliment aud
said the convention did endorse his
position, and he was ready to saw.
Lord, le'test thou thy seryan; dcpart
in peace for mine eyes have seen the
glory of the Republican party. "
Laughter.
Hckenns, OF California. said he. too
was Republican, and for that reason
he rose TO oppose the amendment. n
had no true basis OF fact or of prinei-
pie For the same reason urged Ia
support IL, every item OF the
Mills bill could be supported.
For the reason given to place sugar
on the free list, every American
production could be put on the free
list. The amendment was opposed Ia
the principle Of protection. 1t was
distinctly and accurately opposed 10
the Chicago platform That platform
declared protection to American in
dustries to be the supreme principle ol
the Republican party. 1t conceded
the necessity of reduction of the
revenue, but distinctly enumerated
the means OF reduction. Protection
was not To be sacrificed. The gentle.
man might say. when YOU give
bounties you give protection. He
did not deny this. but what assurance
could be given of the stability Of thi.
protection? Were the gentlemen viii,
ling totxtend the bounty system to any
other industry? Were they willing "a
interpret the Republican platform a.
defending a system of bouniies 10 the
industries of the country?
The distinction between protection
by tariff and protection BY bounty was
not verbal distinction. II was a sub.
stantial distinction. Ii was distinc.
ton between what the people were used
to and what the people were not used
to, and he asked the Republicans ol
the house If they were about to submit
the question OF protection to the haz.
ard OF dispute, not TO cas-; into one OF
the scales an odious and Objectionable
form OF that protection.
The amendment was distinctly un-
Republican and distinctly antagonistic
10 the declarations of the Republican
party in convention assembled. He
was sorry, sincerely sorry. that the
gentleman had offered this amend
ment lie hepeI it would not receive
any substantial vote. Ii it received
sab .tan;ial Republican vote be wonid
60 from the house to-day disappointed
III his party, disappointed in the belief
IL expressed and affirmed. that the
principle o. protection must be uniyer-
sal. 1t the Republican party declare
this universal policy and il would sue
ceed IL would deserve to succeed.
I EApplagse.
Cannon aid the gentleman from
PennSylvaniat Kelley had seen proper
10 araign the amendment and his
tCannon'si position a. a Republican,
il not unpatriotie. Ii the gentleman
was correct about this matter; il the
Chicago convention meant what he
said. aadsif, he said. Kelley alone, OF
10, Geo GO people, had the right To con-
structhe platform, then he tCannonj
must get off it, He had no feelings
save those OF kindness towards the
gentleman from Pennsylvania. but the
gentleman could not ask him to sit
still and listen 20 him tKelleyb piare
the party 10 which they both belonged
in position which so his mind il did
not occupy.
In combustion Cannon said il he had
to choose between taking the tax OF
whisky and off sugar he would take il
off sugar.
Peter Of Kansas said he would favor
the protective duty on sugar, even IL
not pound was produced outside o:
strated that the highest grade Of sugar
would he made from sorghum pro-
duced in Kansas.
Bayne of Pennsylvania inquired Il
the sorghum crop had proved sue
cess before a state bounty had been
granted.
Peters replied that sorghum had
been cultivated six years ago in Kan
sas. The bounty had nothing to do
with the industry. Every farmer in
that country where cane eoaid be raised
was interested in the protection of the
industry. II was a certain. safe crop
Grass-hoppers did not touch IL, and
changes of weather did not affect it.
Was there any use OF talking ~ tbs
Kansas farmer. thea. about taking of
the protective duty because suga'
could not he produced in the United
states lie would he glad To see thi:
industry assured hy bounty, bat no
body coalsi give that assurance.
Gear. Of ioxa, announced himsel
in favor Of the amendment. for ths
reason thA; il was a sornd, praetica
business proposition.
Henderson, OF Iowa. was for ths
amendment.
Arsisrsoa. Of Kansas. expresses
earnest opposition 10 the amendment
which he regarded ~ monarchicai
ignr@rial. anti Republican.
Holmes. OF Indiana, criticised tks
amendment a. eInboiying bad policy
hasi ethics and bad legislation. III
was opposed to the theory OF hountiez
and in favor OF putting sugar On th'
ire kst-
Evaa. Of Kansas. argued in favor o
sssnisnu 4tioa Of the system Of proter
tinn for the sugar industries and an
uoanoed kis opposition - the ,heorl
os hoHntsss,
Rasne dsssen;ed from the coassruc
ton placed upon TIE Chicago platform
b. his colleague tkslley., There ~a