Morning journal and courier., 1889-01-19
Fiftieth Congressional Session
WARRINGTON, Jan THE SUGAR BOUNTY.

| 1nE SUNAh 6OON11s 1 SENATE.-The senate resumed considers
 tion of the tariff bill, the pending question
 being on the amendment reported fnoR the finance committee allowing a bounty of one | cent per pound on sugar produced from 0eets, sorghum and sugar cane grown in the United States.
 Mr. Began opposed the amendment and expressed his surprise that the bounty was not also to be extended to maple sugar. He commented upon MT. Plumb's support of the bill. Aessrs. Mitchell, Teller and Dawes spoke for the Republicans in support of the bounty.
 MT. Chandler expressed his regret that the finance committee had not excepted sugar cane grown in the United States from the proposed bounty, and industry which (ac- cording to the committee) had been making DO progress. Mr. Stewart suggested to MT. Chandler to move to strike cane out of the amendment. MT. Chandler declined to do so. The Senator from Nevada could make that motion if he chose. On matters of de- tail he would vote with the finance commit tee, although he regretted that the commit tee had undertaken to encourage by boun- ty the growth of sugar cane, especially as the Senators from Louisiana op- posed it. He intimated the possibility, how ever, that those Senators did not represent the good people of their State.
 MT. Spooner favored the amendment and said that while he did not approve of every item in the bill, he was in favor of reducing the revenue on the lines of the bill-that is, on the line of protecting American industry, of increasing the demands for American labor, of building up the country, and of winning its complete independence. He ad- mitted that he had been at first reluctant to vote for the sugar bounty, not that he had any doubt of it's constitutionality. He had no such doubt. If he had he would not vote for it.
 A long discussion as to the constitutional power of Congress to give such bounties was carried on by Senators Spooner and Hoar on the affirmative side of the question and Senators Gray, Butler, George and Reagan on the opposite side.
 bounty the production of sugar would in- crease fve-fold every year, so that in five years the bounty to be paid out of the treas- ary would exceed the present revenue from sugar.
 MT. Spoonsr questioned the correctness of that statement, and said that if it were cor rect he would not vote for the amendment. He was in favor of reduction of the pres ent duty by ons.half and the payment of bounty, because that would accomplish two purposes. It would give the needed protec- tion and encouragement to the sugar indus try all over the United States and would largely reduce the revenue.
 
 only industry to be treated to bounty. Why was not the same principle applied to cotton ties and tin plate, which were not now made in the United States.
 MT. Spooner thought that there was clear distinction between the cases. Sugar occu pied an exceptional position. The duty on it had not operated to increase it's production in Louisiana. Statistics showed that before the war the product was much greater than it had been since the war. The dispropor- ton between the domestic production of su- gar and the importation of sugar was so great that there never was anything more like robbery (apart from the necessities of revenue) than the requiring of the people of the United States to pay from fifty to sixty millions year as the duty on sugar in order to protect the Louisiana sugar planters.
 Finally the discussion was closed and the vote taken on the sugar bounty amendment. It was agreed to by vote of 27 to 23, party lines being maintained on it, except in the case of MT. Payne, of Ohio, who voted with the Republicans, and MT. Quay, of Pennsyl- vania, who voted with the Democrats against it. Adjourned.