Springfield daily republic. [volume] (Springfield, O. [Ohio]) 1887-1888, 1888-07-07

WAsHINGToN July THE passage of the
Land Grant Forfeiture bill and discussion
on the Tariff bill were the main features OF
the House proceedings yesterday.
The House conferees on the Agricultural
bill were instructed to insist on their dis
agreement to the Senate amendment ap-
prnpriating 100000 for experiments in
sorghum.
The conference report on the bill to ratify
ths act creating the county of San Juan,
New Mexico, was agreed to.
A bill was passed appropriating $5O,OO
for public building at Opelousas, Louis
lana.
Mr.. Ryan endeavored to secure considera-
ton for the Emporia, kas., public build
ing, but objection was made on the Demo-
cratic side. This objection was character
lied by Messrs. Buchanan, of New Jersey,
and Ryan, of Kansas, as ''one-sided busi-
ness" allowing consideration of bills called
up by Democrats and refusing on bills pre-
sented by Republicans.
The yea and nay vote on the passage of
the land grant forfeiture bill was then
taken and the bill passed-ycas liz, nays 8.
Mr.. Belmont, of New York, reported the
case Of John Curtin Kent. Calendar.
The tariff bill was then taken up in COM
mittee of the whole. Several amendments
offered but were lost. Rapid progress was
made in the reading of the bill; motions by
the Republicans TO strike out many para
graphs being rejected without division.
The paragraph, imposing 35 per cent.
advalorem duty on woodscrews, was
st:iken out thus restoring the present rate
OF duty.
Mr.. Reed taunted Mr. Mills about the
latters recent speech in New York, and
asked him to bravely ayow to the House
what his position was
Mr. Mills said he had said in New York
what he had said Texas. He had the cour-
age of his convictions and he hoped his
friends on the other side would have the
same high courage and would stand by
their whisky platform. He had heard that
the other side were making flank move
ment on the whisky question. When they
found the Democratic battalions on the
march, they began to say that they did not
want so much whisky but would take some
sugar in it.
Mr.. Reed said he had hoped the gentle
man would repeat his speech his speech of
four years ago, in which he had said,
wealth, prosperity and power will bless
the land that is dedicated to free men, free
labor and free trade" Instead of defining
his position, the gentleman had told how
brave he was, while he really showed how
brave he was not. 1t was strange what an
effect climate had on a gentleman S courage
and forms of expression.
On motion of Mr.. Mills the present rate
of duty ON pen knives and razors was re-
stored.
A clause was inserted fixing the rate on
new type at Is per cent. dd UdL0rem.
1t was agreed that the sugar, molasses
and confectionery clauses should be consid-
cred together, and hat no vote should be
taken US yet. Mr.. Cannon of Illinois, then
offered an amendment striking out all of
the sugar and molasses paragraphs and in
serting clauses fixing the duties as follows:
Sugar not above Ii, Dutch standard. syrups
dc, and all molasSes testing not above 81
degrees not otherwise provided for are TO
exempt from duty, in the event that no ex-
port duty is levied by the country of ex-
portation. Sugars above No. l6 are to pay
| u duty OF one per cent molaSSes above 81
degrees cents per gallon. 1t is also pro
| vided that TO encourage domestic produc-
| ton there shall he paid bounty to United
States producers of sugar from bcets, sor-
gum and other cane raised in the United
States as follows: On sugar cents per
pound crystalliZable sugar contained
| therein. on molasses above SO degrees six
cents per gallon, not above 56 degrees fOur
cents.
Mr.. Cannon said frauds had grown up
under the present law, and the Mills bill
| perpetuated them. The bill was better
| than the present law but it was far short oi
| what il ought to be. He commented on
| the fact that the Mills bill as originally
drawn let in at the lower duty sugar under
No. 10 Duttfl standard and prohibited
drawbacks on exported refined sugar. But
the committee had changed these provi
sions He believed there was fraud in the
matter of the importation of sugar from
| the time il got To the dock up to the time
| it was exported. He did not mean to de
sert the Louisiana planter or the kansa.
and Illinois planter, and therefore favored
paying them a bounty. Protection on
sugar now averaged , cents pound from
which the country got six million dollar.
OF protection, and it cost s90, ,0o0, 900 tC
| pay it.
Mr. Kelley said that just as the agricul
tural interest OF the country was beginning
to be diversified by the raising of the su
gar beet and sorgum it was proposed t.
change the whole policy of the Govern
ment respecting sugar. He did not believe
in it.
| Mr.. Peters, of Kansas, was opposed to tn,
| bounty system for fear that capitalists, no
1 knowing what moment the bounty Nigh
be withdrawn. might hesi ate to risk thei
money in the industry of Sugar produc
| ton.
| Pending further debate the committe,
rose and the House at 5 p. m, took re
cess until s O'Clock, the night session to b,
devoted to the consideration of priyNte pen
| sion bills