The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-07-04
A HARD OLD DEBATE.
The House Tackle the Iron
and Steel Clauses
OF THE TERRIBLE TARIFF BILL
Scott Charges the Republican Party
With Having Deserted Its Plat
form of 1SS4-Et
HOUSE

WASHINGTON. July 3.-The House
to- day at noon, conourred in the Sen
ate amendment, appropriating $8O0,O0t
in the postofioe bill to provide more
efficient mail service between the
United States and South and Central
America, and the West Indies.
On motion of Mills, cf Texas, it was
ordered that when the House adjourned
to-day, it was to meet on Thursday
! next. 1t was also agreed that the tariff
bill would not be called up for consid-
era ton on Thursday.
T he House then went into committee
of the whole, Springer, of Illinois,
in the chair, on the tariff bill.
Mckinley, Of Ohio, moved to increase
from So TO $6.72 per ton, the duty on
pig iron. He explained that the present
rate Of duty was Sc. Y per ton, and the
proposed reduction would be very in
furious upon the pig iron industry.
The motion was lost, yeas 6S, nays II.
Mckinley then moved to restore the
present rate of duty on iron railway
bars weighing more than twenty FIVE
pounds to the yard. Lost,
Mcmillan of Tennessee, moved to
strike out the clause imposing a duty
of $u ton on slabs and billets of steel
and restore the present rate of 45 per
cent. ad vaLOreH.
BaYne, of Pennsylvania, opposed the
motion. The present duty was equiv
alent to IS ton, which he thought was
not sufficiently high when compared
with other articles on the iron and steel
schedule. The motion was agreed to.
Motit moved to increase from $40 to
$22 per ton the duty on charcoal bloom
iron. Lost.
Mckinley moved to restore the exist
ing rates on bar iron, and the motion
was advocated by Burrows, of Michigan.
BaynA, OF Pennsylvania, in supporting
the motion, expressed himself disposed
to the reduction of tariff and in favor of
a repeal of the tobacco tax and the tax
On alcohol used in arts. This, he
thought, would reduce the surplus as
far as it sho Id be reduCeds if
the government intended to do
Justice to the widows AMI children Of
soldiers of the war. He favored tariff
because it provided home market, and
said the two tickets before the country
to-day represented two ideas. The Re-
publican ticket, that the American mar
zet should be for Americans, and the
other that the American markets should
be open to the whole world.
Scott. of Pennsylvania charged the
Republican party with having deserted
its platform of 1884 for a revision of the
tariff, and going before the country in
1888 asking the people for their suffrages
on principles which it never before adj
vocated. Under the cry of an American
market for Americans and protection
for Amer can industries and labor the
Republican party proposed to carry on
the tariff system in this country which
would protect 1,500 900 wage workers as
against l6, 10000 wage workers.
Reed, of Maine, expressed delight at
seeing the gentleman from Pennsyl-
yania come back from his other occu-
pations to attend to his occupational
business as member of Congress. Had
the gentleman been present he would !
have known these questions had all |
been discussed and the House perfectly
with them. The gentleman
based his remark on the idea that
were producers and it 5
for the benefit of the American peop'e
who were consumers that the pro-
ducers, who were also Americans,
should have an American market.
Scott said 100000 laborers had been
thrown out of work during the pas
week, and in what classes2 Why in
the protected industries which Repub
iicans stood up to defend. These lab |
orers have been driven out because
their employers had attempted to make |
q 10 per cent reduction in their wages. |
Why should the manufacturers Of
Pennsylvania demand these men to |
submit to this reduction? Was there |
any change in the condition of the
Had any tariff bill passed the |
House that could possibly affect these |
men? Was not there Republican SEN |
ate having power to pigeon hole such
bill or keep it in the committee for all |
time?
After the debate had run for some
time, Bland, of Missouri. appealed for |
more rapid progress but BANDS appeal |
proved Intellectual and an hours discus
sion ran on. Finally McKinley's motion
was voted down, 90 to so.
Sowden, of Pennsylvania, moved to
fix the duty on iron or steel rails weigh
ing not over twenty-five pounds to the
yard, at S1792 per ton, and on iron or
steel fat rails, punched, $40 l6. Lost.
On motion of Breckenridge, of Ar
kansas, a duty of 81 10 per pound was
on iron or steel, fiat. with
ribs, for the manufacture
of fence.
Having completed consideration of
four pages Of the bill the committee |
rose.
A conference was ordered On the river |
and harbor bill appropriation and the
House adjourned till Thursday.