St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1888-07-15
The Lower House of Congress
Squelches His Subsidy
Scheme.
Now the Senate Can Take It's
Medicine or Stop Bus
mess.
Gen. Greedy Apologies to
Senator Palmer for Max
/ ing False Statements.
Besides Randall, Congress-
men Taulbee and Blaneh-
ard Are Seriously Ill.
Special to the Globe.

Special to the Globe.
WASHINGTON, July 14.-The feature
of to-day's session of the house was the
defeat of Mr.. Bingham's proposed sub
sidy amendment to the poStoffice apprO-
priation bill and tariff discussion. The
first business in the house this morning
was the consideration of the senate mail
subsidy amendment to the postoffice
appropriation bill. Mr.. Peters, of Kan
Sas, favored the amendment of Mr..
Bingham, reducing the amount to $780,
600 and extending the service to China
and Japan. He said the argument that
the payment of a reasonable sum as
compensation to American steamship
lines would so stimulate competition
that bankruptcy would result, had no
force. In fact the American merchant
marine could stand great deal OF such
stimulation, and he wanted to see a
cloud of American ships upon the sea.
Mr.. Rogers, of Arkansas, opposed the
system of subsidies. Mr.. Bingham, of
Pennsylvania, said his amendment
simply broadened the law of 1858, which
provided that the postmaster general
might pay the sea and inland postage,
and left it optional with the postmaster
geral to pay four times that sum. Mr..
Onts, of Alabama, said he was not in
favor of appropriating money from the
treasury to
STIMULATE ANYBODY'S BUSINESS.
After further remarks by Messrs.
Raynor, of Maryland, and Blount, OF
Georgia, the motion to concur in the
senate amendment as amended by Mr..
Bingham was lost. Yeas So, nays 135.
The house then by vote of yeas 141,
nays 81, insisted upon it's disagreement
and new conference was ordered. The
house then went into committee OF the
whole on the tariff bill, the pending
section being the wool clause. Mr..
Cultivate, of Ohio, ridiculed the asser-
} tiOn that the effect OF the tariff had
been to increase the number of sheep
in the country. He argued that the
high tariff had no effect upon the price
of wool, which was regulated by the
supply and demand and quoted StatiS
tics to show that under high tariff the
price of wool had steadily declined. Mr..
La Toilette, of Wisconsin criticised that
portion of Mr. Carlisle speech in which
the speaker endeavored to show the
prosperity of the country during the low
tariff decade, from 1850 to 1860. In en-
deavoring to do this, the speaker, he
said, used the percentage argument to
show that the percentage OF increase in
UuG! IIlduuldCtulc VI WOOtCN ouu SOIeoli
goods and in hardware, hosiery and
boots and shoes had been very large.
The trick of the percentage argument,
Mr.. La Toilette said, was found in the
fact that. manufacturing industry
might be so small that any in
crease would present good percentage
showing, and no argument based on
percentage could be relied upon unless
all the facts were stated. Mr.. Carlisle
had been careful in selecting articles
with one eXceptiOn-with which to
show a percentage increase from among
those not touched or only slightly
| touched by the reduced tariff OF 1916.
Mr.Carlisle'S statement, that every rep
Fesentative from N lew EB gland regarded
the tariff of 1916 as so beneficial that
they voted in 1857 for bill making an
almost uniform reduction of 20 per cent,
Mr.. La Toilette characterized as an
error
so GROSS AND UNJUST
as to demand a correction and rebuke
to the gentleman from Kentucky, who
used it with such emphasis and telling
effect in the house. The bill of 1867
when it first passed the house, ana
w hen Mr.. Morrill, and the other New
England representatives voted for it,
instead of making an almost uniform
reduction of % per cent was protec-
tive measure, and came from COM
a powerful protective argument. The
statement of the gentleman from
Kentucky was either ineXcuSable blum
dering, or the meanest sort of political
pettifOgging. Nothing said, Mr.. La Fol-
lette, escaped Mr.. Carlisle's net; he
claimed everything for the low tariff;
he had both ends of the ''tether'' in the
air at the same time, and he trifled with
facts when he said the country recov-
cred from the depression of 1857 in a
few months. When Mr.. La Toilette
finished his speech he was heartily con-
graduated by many of his Republican
colleagues. Mr.. Scott, of Pennsylvania,
referring to Mr.. Keily'S account OF the
interview between Mr.. Scott and Mr..
Carnegie, pronounced it a
TISSUE OF MISREPRESENTATION
from beginning to end. Mr.. Scott then
gave his version of the interview,
which, he said, touched upon Mr.. Car
negie'S citizenship and not upon the
tariff. Mr.. Carnegie, he said, had adj
mitted in conversation with him the
truth of the statement that he made
81, 800, 900 in one year under protective
tariff. Mr.. GrosvenOr, of Ohio, said
this tariff debate reminded him of
the fierce battles which had been
fought on the stump in Ohio.
He told how he, with other Ohio men,
bers, had called upon the ways and
means committee when the Morrison
bill was pending, ''before the star cham
Der process of incubating tariff bills was
invented" and Gen. Warner, a Demo-
cratic member from Ohio, had protested
StOutly against any reduction of the
wool tariff, and no dissenting voice was
heard. That was two short years ago.
The Democrats from Ohio were now
taking
A DIET OF LOW TARIFF
in silence, all except his colleague from
the central district, who now cody
asserted that he always liked crow. In
1850 there were trifie less than 2,0CO,-
600 sheep in Ohio. In 1865 they had in
creased to more than 1000, 900. From
that time down to the present the wool
industry had gone down steadily, until
| to-day there were but 100000 sheep.
Before the debate closed he wanted
some Democrat to tell the house why,
as shown by Democratic paper, the
wool crop in Ohio was worth
one-third less IN price now than it was
last year. Mr.. Ford, of Michigan, said
that it was for the country to choose be-
| tween cheap whisky or cheap clothing.
| The wool tariff was burdensome. There
1 was scarcely a breeze when the iron and
| copper schedules were passed upon.
But now, backed by subsidized press,
the Republicans tumbled over one an
j other to get to the front and denounce
the wool schedule. The house then at
5 p. m. took recess until p. m, the
night session to be devoted to. the con-
sideration of private bills.
The house spent the entire evening
session in passing nineteen private re.
lief bills, the only one of interest being