The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-01-19
aFIFTLETH CONGRESS.
The Sugar Question Debated
in the Senate.
THE OMNIBUS BILL PASSED.
The House Has a Lengthy Discussion
on the Territories-DOugh OF
Florida, Speaks for Utah.
SENATE

WASHINGTON, January 1S.-The Presi-
dents message, returning without his
approval the bill for the relief of Will
lam R. Wheaton and Charles II. Cham
berlain, register and receiver of the
land Office in San Francisco prior to
1877, to pay them the salaries for two
clerks to the amount of So 800, was read
aud referred to the committee on public
lands.
The Senate resumed consideration of
the tariff bill, the pending question
being the amendment reported to the
finance committee allowing bounty OF
1 cent per pound on sugar produced
from beets. sorghum or sugar cane
grown in the United States.
Reagan opposed the amendment,
and expressed surprise that the bounty
was not also extended to maple sugar.
Chandler expressed regret that the
finance committee had not accepted
sugar cane grown in the United States
from
THE PROPOSED COUNTY,
an industry which, according to the
committee, was making no progress.
Stewart suggested to Chandler to
move to strike cane out of the amend
ment.
Chandler declined to do so. On mat
tiers of detail he would vote with the
finance committee, although he regret
ted that the Icommittee had not taken
to encourage, by bounty, the growth of
sugar cane, especially as the Senator
from Louisiana opposed it. He ad-
mitted the possibility that these Sen
ators did not represent the good people
of their State. Chandler branched OH
into discussion of the.
POLITICAL TROUBLES
in Louisiana, stating that the colored
Knights of Labor there, who under
took to get better wages, were shot down
bv the militia, and he read a letter
from Hugh NJ. Wallace, editor of the
Terrabone Times, rehearsing some of
these troubles, and rejecting on Glib
son.
Gibson contradicted the statements
made in the letter, and mentioned the
fact that the colored people who he had
inherited were now working on his
plantation for their own benefit. with
out paving q sou of taxes. He resented,
as something which passed his under
standing, the insinuation that his
colleague and himself did not repre-
sent the good people of Louisiana. This
colloquy was continued for some time.
Spooner favored the amendment. He
said to the Senator from Texas (R agan),
that not only was that Senator not al
together justified in the language he
has used, but altogether
UNJusTIFIABLE IN USING IT.
Such language would come with i'll
grace FROM any Senator, but particu-
larly with i'll grace from Senator who,
having once taken the oath to support
and defend the Constitution, afterwards
was found with those who sought to de-
stroy and overturn it.
Spooner, when asked as to the esti-
mated annual amount of the proposed
bounty, gave the figures at between So
600, 900 and Sc COO, 600, but Allison inter
posed and gave the figures, on the basis
of the present production, at no more
than 81 500. 600.
Gibson said the bounty on sugar
would increase fivefold every year, SO
that in five years the bounty would
exceed
THE PRESENT DUTY ON SUGAR.
Spooner questioned the correctness of
this statement. He knew of nothing
that savored more of selishness than
the attitude of the Senators from
Louisiana, adding that the duty on
h11f thu Mills hill uhn,Id
be maintained as against the bounty
proposition, and help in thus joining
with their Democratic brethren to
strike down every northern industry
on the list.
Considerable discussion then ensued
regarding the Louisiana sugar produc-
ton.
Teller finally asked Eustis how he
accounted for the fact that the
LOUISIANA SUGAR CROP
of 1873. 1879, 1880 and 1881 was much
larger than the crop of 1887.
Eustis attributed it to the season. and
said the crop of 1887 was by 1000
the largest sugar crop ever produced in
Louisiana, except before the war.
Spooner read figures to show that
4OO4 w AOis WIG revenue COllGCteQ
from sugar amounted to 1851, 318, $40. or
nearly 81 100000, 600.
Butler made a speech against the
proposed bounty, which he regarded as
uniustifiable. He did not think, anv
way, that it would be fair and inst To
confne the bounty to sugar from beets
and sorghum. He would extend it to
cane.
AIdrich asked Butler whether he was
in favor of
PROTECTING SUGAR AND RICE
by higher duties than were imposed on
any other products. Butler replied thai
it was not in common fairness and com.
mon honesty. Congress ought not to
select one, two or three articles of con-
sumption and strike them down and
pile up the duties on other articles
Referring to the statements made by
Republican Senators in the course Of
their remarks, as to the debauched and