The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-07-08
B0UNTIES AS AN OUTLET.
MESSRS. CANNON AND KELLEY OF
DIFFERENT OPINIONS.

terized as Not in Harmony With the
Party's Platform.
WASHINGTON, July THE house this
morning went into committee of the whole,
with Mr.. Springer of Illinois in the chair,
on the tariff bill, the pending amendment
being that offered by Mr.. Cannon of Illinois
to the sugar schedule. The discussion lasted
throughout the entire session, and the COM
mittee rose without reaching a vote upon
Mr.. Canron's amendment.
MessrS Cox and Breckinridge of Ken
lucky were the only speakers on the demo
cratic side, but dozen or more republicans
participated in the debate
Mr.. Kelley opened it by expressing sur
prise to hear the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr Cannon make an assault upon the plat
form recently adopted by the republican
party. He then quoted from the Chicago
platform the protection plank. and he re-
GREETED that the doctrine there enunciated
had been assailed from the seats of the re-
publican members.
PROTEST.
From the remarks made by this gentle
man, he dlssented in the name of the repub
lican party at whose birth he had been, and
to whose interests he had been devoted from
that time to this. II the duties on sugar
were wrong, let them be righted and made
proper, but the gentlemen should remember
that the republican party had declared not
for the establishment of the imperial system
of bounties, but for the maintenance Of the
American protective system.
Mr.. McKe1na of California said that he
too was a republican, and for that reason
he rose to oppose the amendment. 1t had
no true basis of fact or of principle For
the same reason urged to support it, every
item Of the Mills bill could be supported.
For the same reason given to put sugar on
the free list every American production
could be put on the free list.
IN OPPOSITION TO THE PLATFORM.
The amendment was opposed to the prin-
ciple of protection. 1t was distinctly and
accurately opposed to the Chicago platform
That platform declared protection to
American industries to be the supreclest
principle of the republican party. 1t con-
ceded the necessity of reduction Of the
revenue, but distinctly enumerated the
means Of reduction.
THE BOUNTY SYSTEM
Gentlemen might say when you give
bouuties you give protection. He did not
deny this, but what assurance could be given
of the stability of this projections We're
the gentlemen willing to extend the bounty
willing to interpret the republican platform
as offering a system of bountiesl The
amendment was distinctly unrepublican
and distinctly antagonistic TO the declara-
tion of the republican convention.
CANNoN's REPLY TO KELLEY.
Mr. Cannon said that the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelley, who had
so much more reputation in the country
than he had. had seen proper to arraign
the amendment and his (Mr. Cannon's)
position as unrepublican, if not unpatriotic.
If the gentleman was correct
about this matter, if the Chicago
cc&vention meant what it said, and if he
(Mr. Kelley alone of 60 ,OOO, 900 people had
the right to the platform then he (Mr. Can
nom must get off Of it. Mr. Cannon then
quoted the tariff plank Of the platform and
asserted that with the declarations he was
in entire harmony and according to
his best judgment the amendment he had
offered was in entire harmony with those
declarations.
REVENUE TARIFF.
He argued that the tariff on sugar was a
revenue tariff. and not a protective tariff.
Did not the gentleman know that since the
close of the war the south had bounded
forward in the production of cotton and
every other article except sugari The
sugar tax was a bastard, and an intruder
and fraud upon the protected industries
of the country. [Applause.l 81 tell the
gentleman" said Mr.. Cannon, in conclusion,
"in the face of this house, and of
tho country, in the presence of
my constituents, before whom l stand
for reelection, asking for their ballots ifnow
or hereafter | have got to choose between
taking the tax off sugar (which is the rev.
enue tax only and taking the tax off spirits,
l will take it off sugar. [Applausel Hav-
ing said this much | appeal from the gentle
mans construction of the Chicago platform
to the platform itself.
RIVAL DEBATERs.
Messrs. Peters, Ryan and Anderson of
Kansas opposed Mr.. Cannon's amendment,
Messrs. Gear and Henderson of Iowa favored
it as a sound business proposition and
strictly in line with the Chicago platform.
Mr.. Holmes of Iowa criticised the amend p
ment as embodying bad policy, bad
ethics and bad financial legislation.
He was opposed to the theory of bounties
and in favor of putting sugar on the free
list.
Mr.. Bayne Of Pennsylvania dissented
from tue construction placed upon the Chi
cago platform by his colleague, Mr.. Kelley.
There was nothing in that platform in
consistent with the amendment offered by
Mr.. Cannon. The sugar industry was not
an established industry, except in partial
sense. 1t had had long trial and had
failed Of development. Notwithstanding
his belief that there was no hope Of sugar
ever being produced in large quantities in
this country, he was willing to pay a
bounty to the people Of Louisiana, Kansas
and California to enable them to produce as
much sugar as possible.
ATTITUDE OF THE DEMOCRATS
Mr.. Breckenridge Of Kentucky said that If
congress should take the entire $50 900, 900
off of sugar and :3l 900, 900 off of touacco, il
would render itself absolutely incapable of
taking any other burdens off the manufac-
turers or give relief to relieve any just cause
OF discomfort labor might have 1t would
indefinitely put of the day for a fair re-
vision Of the tariff. II was therefore i'm
possible In the view of the democratic party
TO take all the duty Off sugar It
would be impossible to do it without
deliberately determining to leave the whole
question Of the tariff unsettled. The ques-
tion presented was whether congress would
relieve the manufacturers who had to pay
enormous duties for their crude material,
duties which prevented them from com
peting with foreign manufacturers.
AN OPENING FOR CRUDE MATERIAL
He believed the true wisdom of congress
in seeking TO reduce the public revenue was
TO let the system be so altered by conserva-
tive and cautions changes that crude mate
rial would be brought into the country
rather than the finished product. Then
the profit of tho manufacture would