, 1889-01-30
The Senate passes the Tariff
Anne Mdment proposing a Bounty
on Sugar.
From the N. Y. Herald Of 18Th January

one cent per pound on sugar produced from
beetS, sorghum and sugar-cane grown in
the United States.
Mr.. Reagan opposed the amendment,
and expressed bis surprise that the bounty
was not also 70 be extended To maple sugar.
."Mr. Chandler expressed his regret that
the Finance Committee had not excepted
sugar cane grown in the United States
from the proposed bounty-an industry
which, according TO the committee, had
been making no progress.
Mr.SpOOneTsaid there was good reason to
believe that the growth Of the sugar beet
need not be confined to California, but that
the beet could be grown to advantage in
other States. 1t would not be fair to that
Industry or just to the people to Withdraw
from the sugar industry all protection. And
if it was TO be protected it had to be done
either by continuing the present duty on
sugar or by reducing it and giving i'll lieu
of the reduction a bounty.
Mr.. Gibson predicted that under the
bounty the production of sugar would in
crease ivetOld every year; so that in five
years the bounty to be paid out of the Trea
Spry would exceed the present revenue
from sugar.
. Mr.. Daniel inquired why sugar was the
only industry co be treated to a bounty ?
Why was not the same principle applied
to cotton ties and tin plate, which were
not now made in the United States.
Mr.. SpOOner thought that there was a
clear distinction between the cases. Sugar
occupied aI exceptional position.
NJ. Frye asked why the industry of sugar
cane in Louisiana should be further pro
tected when it was acknowledged that it
WAS impossible TO make it a success.
Mr.. SpO0ner said that it was an existing
industry OF the country ard thar it was
not absolutely certain that the diminutiOn
of The sugar product of Louisiana was not
due to the war and the disastrous effects
of the war.
Mr.. Edmunds called Mr.. Buffers atten-
ton to the act of 10th February, 1892,
granting u bounty of so much IA ton on
fishing vessels, aud asked how that act.
which was passed in the time of Washing
ton, Jefferson, and Madison, differed in
point of constitutional authority from the
pending amendment.
Mr.. Butler did not believe that Congress
had the constitutional right to pass that
law any more that Congress had to pass
this one.
Finally the discussion was closed, and
the vote taken on the sugar bounty amend
ment.
1t was agreed to by a vote of 81 to %,
party lines being maintained on it, except
in the case of Mr.. Payne, OfOhio, who vOt-
ed with the republicans, and Mr.. Quay, of
Pennsylvania, who voted with the democrats
against it.
The amendment, which has been some
what modified since it was offered, reads as
follows =
,t'Stcti0n-That until April, 1900, there
Sllal II be paid to the producer of sugar test
ing not less than eighty degrees by the
polariscope, from bept~, sorghum or sugar
came grown within the United States, a
bounty of Onr cent per pound, under such
rules and regulations as the Commits
SiOner of Internal Revenue, with the
approval OF the Secretary ofthe Treasury,
shall prtscrib:'.' The producer of the said
sugar to be entitled to said bounty
shall have first filed with the Com
missioner Of Internal Revenue a notice
of the place of production, with a general
de. criptiOn of the machinery and methods
to be employed by him, with an estimate of
the amount of sugar proposed to he pro-
duced in the DeXt ensuing season, and an
application for a license to so produce, to be
accompanied by a bond in a penalty and
with ~sureties to he approved by the Com.
missioner of Internal Revenue, cOndi-
toned that he will faithfully observe all
rules and regulations that shall be pres
oribed for such manufacture and production
Of sugar.
Ss1nH,o flouor o;o c;oDar of Iutorpol Pow nnuo