The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1888-06-14
Interesting Debate in the House
Cd the Flax Paragraph IN
the Tariff Bill.
Sharp Sparrlng Between Rayner,
of Maryland, and Reed,
of Maine.
FIFTIETH CONGRESS.
HOUSE.

of maintaining existing duties on fax,
asserting that the average duty, % per
cent, vas among the lowest imposed by
Law on imports.
Mr.. Clifford, of Dakota, and Buchanan,
of New Jersey, also Mr.. Mills, defended
the bill and deprecated efforts made by
Others to distort every attempt at revision
into an abuse of the poor.
Mr.. Lind, of Minnesota, republican,
who has heretofore supported the bill,
made plea for the protection of the
iinseed oil industry, which would be, he
said, injuriously affected by the removal
Of the existing duty on linseed. He told
the Missouri democrats that the success
of their lead works depended in a great
measure on the success of the flax indus
try.
Mr.. Mills said he knew something about
flax, having worked upon it during his
boyhood in Kentucky. But the flax in
dustry in Kentucky had almost disap'
peared because it was not profitable, or
because other crops were more profitable,
and wheat would drive flax out of Indiana
as it had done in Kentucky. His earnest
synpathies were with down trodden Ire
land.
l.
"under free trade England"
Mr.. Mills replied that it was under the
merciless carpet baggers of England, O;
the great centralized power of England.
He would be unwilling to help even Ire
land at the expense of his fellow country
m On, but in this case he could help Ireland
and at the same time help his own people.
When we took the product of Ireland's
Labor, we helped her just in proportion as
we helped ourselves.
Mr.. Rust, of Massachusetts,, asserted that
not q pound of fax seed in Iowa and
Indiana could be used by one
of the manufacturers in his dis
trict. Every dollars worth of raw
material they used was an imported article
and every penny of the duty paid on fax
was tax upon their property in the in
terest of the producer. 1t was necessary
that flax and all the fibres of flax should
be placed upon the free list.
Mr.. Brown, of Indiana, in general
terms, criticized the bill for placing the
production of the farmers of the west
upon the free list, while it retained pro-
lection upon the manufactured products
of the east. = If the tariff was robbery,
the farmers of his district ought to be
allowed to join in the swag.
A motion to strike out the clause plac
ing fax straw on the free list wes de-
feated-62 to "a.
Mr.. Rayner, of Maryland, ridiculed the
reference in Mr.. Reeds tariff speech to
trusts and that gentleman's declaration
that outside of the patent Office there
ware no trusts IN this country and never
would be. He asserted that number of
trusts were in operation for the purpose
of limiting production, and he charged
the republican party with having been
from the day of their existence friendly to
combinations and the capital that
composed them. Applause on the demo-
cratic side. He defied the republican
party to place in it's national platform, as
the democratic convention had done, a
plank avowing its open antagonism to
combines, which one by one were draining
the life out of the country. Applause.
The republican party would not dare to do
., and not man on that side would
I've the moral courage to oppose trusts
which we're sending republicans to the
house of representatives in the contest of
the manufacturers against the consumers
nd Iaboring men. ApPlauae.l
Mr.. Reed, of Maine, said that this was not
the first time he had seen the gentleman
on that side in a estate of humiliation"
Laughter. He had heard such ora
lions as the gentleman's upon other
subjects. That kind of oratory was cheap
on the other side and cheap anywhere
slss. He had heard gentlemen on the
other side in the most agonized condition
of mind about running of conventions by
hold OF hn ho1
them supinely register the edicts of their
own Office holders. He bad heard gentlemen
in q great state of exertion talk about
the national banks and vampires of Wall
street, that we're sucking the blood of the
nation, and had lived to see democratic
administration put sixty millions of the
peoples money into the Golfers of the
national banks. Applause on the repub-
Iican side. Of these gentlemen, the gen
tieman from Iowa (Weaver), was the
solitarysurvivor of all that wild scream
ing that tried to possess the
democratic side; he would live to
SEQ the day when the gentleman
from Maryland (Haynes) would have to
get over his condition. Trusts on the
democratic side were taking the same
place in morality that fits we're in medi-
cine. The gentleman from Maryland and
L!8 confreres would tear everything to
pieces. Nothing but the destruction OF
in 1ustries would suit their purposes.
Tlese gentlemen were like the lame bear,
who, seeing fly on his masters nose,
determined to destroy it. He took huge
psving stone and destroyed his friend.
s ntlemen on the other side proposed to
destroy trusts by destroying the in
51stries, and they appealed to the people
AID rent the atmosphere with noise. 1t
vas about time that congress talked sense.
Il was not worth while everlastingly to lie
30 the community.
Mr. Hemphill, of South Carolina, refer
ing to his recent speech during the gen.
elal debate, said that his remarks as to
ZEE trade in labor had been misconstr1ed.
W'hen it came to the introducing of Coolie
and hungarian labor, there were other
Iings to be considered besides the ques-
Ion of cheap labor. 1t would
Oe very unwise to advocate
ne Introduction of any set of people who
ad not and would not have proper at
action for the institutions under which
re lived or would not be likely to assimu-
tie with our people, but as to all others
Vho choose to come in and become good
citizens, he could see no objection to