The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1889-01-09
RAGING AND TARIFF.
TONG DEBATE ON THE subject
INTHE SENATE.

Z
nares the Number of Men on the TWO
sides of the Question.
WASHINGTON, Jan 8.-The Senate, at
1890 o'clock to-day, resumed consideration
If the tariff bill at paragraph 337, relating
4o collars and cuffs for mems wear, and
fxing the duty on those composed entirely
of cotton at Is cents per dozen pieces and
"a per cent. ad valorem; and on those com
posed entirely or partly of linen at 80 cents
ner dozen pieces and 35 per cent. ad valorem.
Mr. Vance moved to strike out these rates
and to insert 40 per cent ad valorem. The
rronosed rates, he said, would be equiva-
lent to a tax Of $50 per cent ad valorem.
The amendment was rejected by the usual
uarty vote---yeas 10, nays "A.
No amendment was offered to paragraph
339 taxing hemp or Jute carpetlng cents
per square yard.
BAGGING FOR COTTON
Mr. Jones Of Arkansas moved TO amend
paragraph 339, which taxes baggng for
cotton, gunny cloth, etc, for covering
cotton, composed wholly or partly Of hemp
iute. or iute butts valued at not more than
cents per pound) three-fourths of a cent
per pound, by putting it on tne free list Mr..
Berry argued in support OF the amendment,
the pockets of southern planters and labor
ers, and would amount to l015 cents per
bale on 000 bales Of cotton, or in the
aggregate to $3.50, 900 on the years cotton
crop while the tax on cotton ties would
amour ito 81. 1856, 900 more Why. he asked,
should this 50, 100000 be taken from the
pockets of southern planters and laborers
and handed over to the manufacturers!
THE COTTON BAGGING TRUST.
,F A,-f~o
as to the combination entered into last year
by the cotton bagging trust, and said that
if the trust had been enabled to increase the
price by the existing duty equal to about 5
cents per Yard it would have eXtorted
$l500,0O0 from the cotton growers, while
the whole amonnt paid for labor III the bus
iness Of making bagging was less than
$5J0O0O per year. lie read the
testimony Of bagging mauufactur-
ers before the finance committee
admitting that they had corner" and
stating that no power on earth could pre-
vent 1.-THE only danger to the combination
being death. or that they should turn
thieves on each other. He argued that a
rate OF three-eigbths cent per pound on
jute bagging, as provided in the House bill
was ample protection and more than COW
cred tie difference between the cost OF labor
in the United States and India, but he
thought that jute bagging should be put on
the free list.
INJUSTICE OF THE TAX.
n Mr.. George said he represented the
n second largest cOtton-gro wing state in the
south, and that if he could have the atten-
ton of the republican senators he thought
he could convince them that the proposed
tax on cotton bagging was very great in
justice to the laborer Of the south and ought
q not to be perpetrated. But be had noticed
N dnIing the very able presentation of the
question by the Arkansas senator, that the
senators on the other side were reading or
ID writing, or engaged in conversation and he
III did not expect a better fate than had
been accorded the senator from Arkan-
III saS. He would cOncede that there
We're as many as 5000 laborers engaged in
the production of bagging, and he would
NJ also copcede though he did not believe it,
that those laborers were benefited by the
tax. he believed that the manufacturers
Nj Of bagging were the only persons benefited
by the tax
THE COTTON LABORERs.
But on the other hand, how many labor
erS contributed to the taxl Taking the
# total production as 10000 bales a wear
aud assumi 6 as was a fact that three bales
required the Work of one laborer there were
Az Two and one-thIrd million Iaborers engaged
Al IaSlng cotton. Largely more than half
OF the seven m!lli-n bales was raised land
own hands in its production and paid the
' TAX direct. In other words this tax on cot
Ton bagging was being imposed directly
mot indirectly Immediately mot mediately
OF through clrcumlocution) on the ,250, 600
oi u men, women and children who furnished
uue manual labor to make the cotton. The
M poor, struggling, laborlng people OF the
SS00aG'h, TO the number of more than ,2j0-
w. we're being robbed for what? To give
o,OJO men higher wages than the average
wages Of those who paid the tax.
WHOM THE TAX BENEFITS.
W II tne 1900 laborers got all the tax, he
HH6ht be content, but there was not sepa-
Dor VINO dld not know that they get but q
liIiali part OF IT. He spoke of the cotton
ISlIB trust as conspiracy by which the
Soulu nad been robbed in the last wear, and
no asked whether the Senate was going to
ss s,se 10 II the opportunity of continuing
sucA robbery in the future. If so, the sena-
tt io "o1I1 become aiders and abettors Of
aL .nose internal conspirators," every one Of
v,n,,ii roin ought To be in the penitentiary, and
sc'In.I ouia oe under any system of just aud wise
economical laws.
ALLGsON's ADMISSION.
rrIod mr Allison said the question of the duty
~ Slgu COTTON baggiug was not without some
uHicuIty. The finance committee had az
Gi.nol lt with much care The present
10y nl,y was IA cents per pound. The ra te
r. oP-esu IA the substitute was only half OF
pD.y or thiee-fourtbs Of q cent per pound
ha hvu VI tne reductions had been proposed
ino, iCogse use raw material Cute butts) row pay
pee sJ a ton was TO be put on tho fres list
rr,,.tVed ueueVed from all the testimony that the
Y3IIsel rate was the lowest that
be oe liked If cotton bagging was to
An n'aue IN the United States
bad b ,,I tne cotton bagging manufacturers
low uiilled In saying that the rate was too
of ~, o,e1c ana IN his own judgment, au addition
nacooueelEhth of a cent per pound would bs
ne,;V.a,oaFy IN order to allow successful COM
F'''''oH with foreign countries.
~, EVERY PARAGRAPH INVOLVED.
Tho ane oe question related practically not to
ever, ~o,Oon ,yo oagging paragraph alone, but to
man paragraph in the bill. II the argu-
Miss.ooit vi Tue senators from Arkansas and
woI,pS pPl were TO prevail the whole bill
dest' w. 1e cut up in detail and
tgSeUUJ ca 1t was not a question be.
and I' o. 6tho tho 5000 laborers on one side
wbetIS1o,oOO on the other. 1t was a question
II v.,er voa or not under existing circumstances
otber wise to have cotton bagpiug and
Stato.u' manufactures made in tue United
in 49, Yr whether it was wiser to root IN.
the Sail cS,'l every manufacturing industry in
nroI luhtry and to have all the Ynaruf,ct