The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1888-08-21

stiles of the poor. The bill kept duty of
45 per cent upon clothing and 40 per cent up
on woOlen cloth, precisely the same duty
that was now imposed, yet the gentleman
had the temerity to claim that the Democrat
ic party was in favor of cheap food and
clothing The gentleman relied for his state
ment that the Republicans wanted to open
the doors to cheap labor upon the fact that
when the country was in the throes of war, a
law was passed encouraging immigration.
When the necessity for the law ceased, the
law was repealed, although in the 46th Con-
gress, which was Democratic in both
branches, no action was taken to that end.
Referring to the violation of the contract
labor law, the speaker asserted that the Re-
publican party stood committed to strength
ening any law upon the subject in
any manner the President might propose
1t was the duty of the President if the law
was not strong enough, to call attention to
its weakness and ask that it be amended.
Touching upon the tariff question Mr.. Ding
ley continued that the Democratic party,
being in favor of free importation of the pro-
ducts of labor, was logically in favor of the
free Importation of labor.
Mr.. Mcmillan, of Tennessee, suggested
\ that ii the proposition of the gentleman
/ from Maine was true the converse was also
true. Therefore, the gentleman from Maine
was free trader, for when the
was up, the gentleman had said that it was
wrong to keep out the Monaghan.
Mr.. Dingley-"I said nothing of the kind" I"
Mr.. McMillan-"You voted 1t and that's
| stronger than saying it"
Mr.. Dingley-"I declined to vote for the
bill as long as | believed it contravened a
| treaty."
Mr.. McMillan-"Ah, my friend, so long as
it conyenes treaty Then you are in this
| predicament. Whenever you hold then that
a treaty once established cannot be abroga-
| ted except with the consent of the nation
| making it, you make it an everlasting treaty.
| More you critized the Democratic party and
| said it is for free importation of labor. See
| that your own skirts are clear. The treaty
was made by the gentleman's party and the
gentleman voted against excluding the
| Chinese"
Mr.. .Dingley--"I have three times voted to
exclude the Chinese"
Mr. McMillan-,The treaty remaining the
Mr.. Dingley-'The amepdatory bill was
made to conform to the treaty."
Mr.. McMillan-"The gentleman has done
what his present candidate for President is
doing. He has heard from the people on the
question"
Mr.. Cannon of Illinois, referred to the
passage in 1864 of bill to encourage immi-
grafton and its repeal by a subsequent Con-
gress, when the repeal bill passed the House
unanimously. and Ireeeiyed only nine dis
senting votes, all of which were cast by
Democrats, in the Senate. Among those
Senators voting in favor of its repeal had
been Gen. Harrison; and yet men, after
sleeping their tongues in gall, had got up
and denounced Gen. Harrison, and criticized
his record on the subject of immigration
They were pretty set of ducks.
Mr.. Bynum said that the gentleman from
California, (Mr. McKenna), had admitted
that Gen. Harrison's record had been wrong
but that, like Saul Of Tarsus, he had been
Dingley), had criticized the 48th Congress
Tor not acting on the Chinese
question. If the gentleman had ex-
amined the, Record, he would
resolution was adopted calling the Repub-
lican administration to negotiate and amend
the treaty with China. In the 44th Congress
such a resolution had been adopted and had
died in the Senate. In the 45th Congress,
Mr. Willis, of Kentucky, had reported reso-
luton calling attention to the fact that the
Republican administration had refused to
take any steps in the matter and, before
breakfast the next morning, Senator Evarts
was at Mr.. Wlllis's door, begging him not to
push the resolution. 1t was not until after
that time that the administration took steps
to appoint commission. The treaty was
negotiated in 1880 but was not promulgated
by the President until 1881 If the gentleman
from Maine wanted to know why it was that
bills were not introduced during the 46th
Congress, he would tell him that it was be-
cause President Hayes vetoed the act of 1881.
The gentleman from Illinois MR. Cannon)
had attempted to defend General Harris0n's
record. The gentleman would have to de-
fend his own. In the 46th Congress, when
resolution was before the House to enforce
the eight hour law, the gentleman from H.
linois opposed it, and, upon his motion, it
had been tabled. and such men as Reed, Nc
Kinley and Morton had voted to table it.
Referring to Mr.. Dingley's remarks relative
to the duty on sugar and rice, Mr.. Bynum
said that the gentleman would have been
more fair If he had stated that the duty had
been reduced on sugar from so to 6S per cent,
and on rice from 113 to 100.
Mr.. Dingley-"You voted down an amend
mendment fixing the duty ON sugar at Al per
cent and on rice at so per cent"
Mr.. Bynum-'The gentlemen on that side
have been CRYING out all the time that the
Mills bill was a sectional bill, and the only
two items they undertake to attack are the
items Of sugar and rice, which are raised in
Southern States"
Mr. McCreary, of Kentucky, closed the de-
bate with a defence of the committee on
foreign affairs from the charge of dilatori-
ness and the bill was then passed without
division, with an amendment providing that
the repeating clause should go into effect on
the ratification of the pending action.
The House adjourned at $50.