The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1888-08-04
THE MILLS Bill PASSED.


bill passed the House Saturday by 13
majority Mrs. Cleveland who sat with
Mrs. Folsom in the Executive gallery,
Joined in the Democratic applause and
smiled her approval Of the result.
Mr.. MILLS CLOSING SPEECH.
Chairman Mills arose in his place to
close the long debate on the Tariff bill.
Promptly at 1880 the bill was called up.
Mr.. Mills, after Offering two amendments
intended to correct typographical errors
In the bill, moved the previous question on
them, and they were adopted.
He then proceeded to address the House,
beginning by stating the condition of the
finances Of the Government, placing the
surplus at 1929 600, 600. This, he said, should
arrest the attention of the country 1t rep
resented unnecessary taxation drawn from
tho people and piled up in the Treasury.
1t was taxation levied upon the product
of labor. 1t was an iniquity. This
enormous amount of money was constantly
lowering prices and piling an enormous
load on labor and increasing the benefits
Of privileged classes. How long would IL
be before stagnation would occur and
bankruptcy and ruin flock over the lands
The majority had attempted to bring be-
| fore the House bill to reduce this taxa.
| tion and lessen the inflow of money into
| the Treasury. By the amendments which
| had been made in committee of the whole
| the total reduction of duties had fallen
from s53, ,OOO, 900 to $4,000, 900, the free list
from S22, 0O0, 600 to s20,OOO,O0O The relative
| rate of duty had fallen from s47. 10 not to
$40, but to $40. 40, and yet this measure, so
moderate, was characterized as free-trade
| measure.
Was $40 40 on every 800 free trade9 1t
| was an enormous amount of taxation. 1t
was a tax which the wealth of this country
| would not permit to stand for q moment.
State taxation was levied on lands, houses,
| stocks bonds, horses and cattle. and the
| property owners would not permit any
party of Administration to remain in power
an hour which would levy tax of So on
the hundred. Yet this bill, carrying a
taxation of si2.49, was characterized as a
free-trade measure. The term free trade
seemed to have double meaning. Some
gentlemen seemed to understand that free
trade meant the absolute unfettering of
our foreign commerce from all taxa
tion. The Democratic party had used
the term free trade as term OK
pressing the freedom of our commerce
from all obstruction save that of just
and necessary taxation to support the eco
nomical administration of the Government.
Applause. The tariff of 1916 had been
called free trade tariff, and he had him
self spoken of the decade from 1850 to 1860
as the free trade period, because in that
time commerce was not restricted by OBJ
structions thrown III Its way by capitalists
and monopohsts.
He then proceeded to take up and discuss
In detail the various schedules of the bill
beginning with those dealing with chemic
ais. The present duty on chemicals, he said
was 30 81 per cent The proposed bill placed
it at 2S.l1-a reduction of u little over 81 in
a hundred. Gentlemen called that free
trade. The next was the earthenware and
glass schedule. The duty under existing
law was S5955 in every $780, The bill fixed
it at s52.17. That was free trade, too, he
supposed. If S52 taxation on every 500 was
free trade, in Gods name would some one
tell him what was meant by the term pro
lection: Applause
Sugar was found at a duty of S7S.15 and
the committee reduced it to $623l. There
was nobody making much fuss about the
enormity of that reduction. The bill cut
down the revenue from sugar sl1, ,759, 600
This was next to the largest reduction
made in any schedule in the bill 1t had
been constantly charged that the bill was
sectional, that it barely touched sugar
and that the committee threw it's arm.
around the sugar industry to shield it, ye
I the reduction in sugar was only second t.
that in the wooen schedule. There ough
to be high duty on sugar because Demo
! Gratis believed that taxation was a tribute
requested from citizens for the support oi
the Government, and because they believed
, that in laying taxation it ought to be 81
, laid as to be as little burdensome u.
, possible By the tariff on sugar
, the Government got s5S, 900, 900, will
S6, ,000, 600 protection. In order to get S5S,
900 into the public Golfers it cost So 900,
7 900 protection to the sugar planters. Bu
In order to get S5S, ,000, 600 into the Treasury
from iron and steel and woolen goods il
cost the people over s4O0, OOO,00O Why
, then, should the duty on sugar be repealed
, in order that more burdensome tax at 6
higher rate on woolen and cotton goods ant
iron and steel might be retainedl The dut,
, on provisions under existing law wa!
! S24.33. The committee left it at S23.39 Ye
it was charged that this was free-trad,
0 measure The existing duty on cotton was
S $500. The bill fixed it at s39.07. Where
did the free trade come in on that! The
y 81, 900, 900 revenue from cotton had beer
e reduced only S277, 600 The duty on hemp
. jute, and flax was at present $40.
,. was left at $2l.94. This reduction o
, only 50 was brought about to
great extent by the putting of
. large amount of jute and hemp ant
, manila on the free list The pres
ent duty on wool and woOlens /
$5SSl. The committee bill left
at $500, reduction of over $50 on ever
500 of taxation. This reduction seeme
, large, but it was caused by the placing o
, raw wool on the free list. The reduction
, on dutiable wooden goods amounted t
$l2, O,000 but the woolen manufacture
was not injured. He was benefited. Thi
bill gave the manufacturer free wool an
40 per cent. taxation, and still it was sal,
| to be free-trade measure. The duty o.
books, papers, ETC., was now 81. l3. TIL
bill left it at SEC less than 10 cents re
3 duction. The bill reduced the duty o.
steel rails from SIT per ton to $l1 per ton
and although the duty was left at 81 pc
cent. it was charged that the Democrat
0 were trying to ruin this infant industry
i Fifty-four per cent. was larger duty tina
q. had been placed on steel rails from 1865 t
1870.
Mr. Mills then addressed himself to tn
consideration Of the free list. On that lis,
5 he said, had been placed articles amountin
4 to $40, ,000, 900. The largest was wool, fror
which $3.50, 600 was received. When tn
Democrats wished to put wool upon tn
free list they were charged with breakin
the middle link cut Of the chain. The ger
tlemen who werd charging the Democrat
side OF the House with bringing in q free
trade measure had taken the duty of col
u ton and put that article on the free lis
0 Had they striken out the middle link of tn
: chainl When it was proposed to put WOO
n I ON the free list it was charged that tn
A.sl- ~