St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-01-19
1T is A SWEET STEAL.
Senators Adopt the Sugar Bounty
C ause Of the Tariff Bill.

Senators Adopt the Sugar Bounty
C. ause Of the Tariff Bill.
Special Cable TO tine Globe.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 1S.-The senate
to-day continued discussion of the tariff
bill and agreed to the clause granting a
bounty of cent pound to sugar pro-
ducers. Mr.. Hale presented the
credentials of Mr.. Frye for the sena-
torial term beginning March 4 next.
They were placed On file. The tariff
bill was taken up, the pending question
being the sugar bounty amendment.
Mr.. Reagan spoke at length in 0pposi-
ton to the amendment, expressing sur
prise that the bounty was not to be
extended to maple sugar. He quoted
against the proposed bounty Judge
Cooley's work on constitutional limita-
tons. Mr.. Spopner reminded him of
decision in the Michigan courts that
bounty on salt was constitutional,
to which Mr.. Reagan replied
that senators on the other side
could always find arguments to Justify
the plumber of other senator's constitu
ents for the benefit of their own. Mr..
that 10. 100000 of people were behind
them observing their actions. He said
that the bounty on last years sugar
product would have amounted to $780,
600 and he asked what price was to be
paid Iowa and Kansas under the pro-
posed system to justify the violation of
the constitution. Mr.. Dawes said that
the senator from Texas had taken many
strange and indefinable POSITIONS, and
vet that senator charged majority Of
the senate with the moral turnitude OF
INDIFFERENCE To THEIR OATH
to support the constitution. Mr.. REAGAN
disciaimed any personal alIusion to any
senator He withdrew also his remarks
in reply to Senator Spoeper as far as
they were liable to construction OF per-
sonal criticism. Mr., Chandler said that
he was sorry the finance committee had
not excepted sugar cane grown in the
United States from the proposed boun-
ty, as that industry had been
making no progress. He declined,
howeyer. to follow Mr.. Stewards sug-
yestion to move to strike cane out OF
the amendment, saying that he would
vote with the finance committee. Mr..
Speorler said he did not approve of
eyeryiltem in the bill, but he was in
favor of reducing the revenue on the
lines Of the bill. He said he had no
doubt of the eonSGitutionaiity of the
sugar bounty clause. The language of
Senator Reagan, he said, would come
with i'll grace from any senator, but it
came with particularly i'll grace from a
senator who, having once taken an oath
tpSupport and defend the constitution,
ioiped afterwards with those who
sought to destroy and oyertnrn it.
After a discussion Of the question OF
the constitutiOnality OF bounties, In
which Senators SpOoner, Hear, Cray,
Butler. George and Reagan took part.
MIR. SpooDer discussed at length the
practical effect of the proposed legisla-
lion. In answer to question from the
Democratic side, Mr.. Allison said that
tire estimated annual amount OF the
prOpoSed bounty was not more than
s.. 500, 600. Mr.. Gibson predicted that in
five years the amount of the bounty
would exceed the present revenue on
sugar. Mr.. Spooner questioned the cor
RICHNESS of this statement, and said
he thought the proposed amendment
would
GREATLY REDUCE THE REVENUE.
I'm response to an inquiry of Mr..
Daniel as to the reasons why no bounty
was given to cotton ties and tin plate.
MIR. Speener said that the position of
sugar was exceptional. There had never
been ANYTHING under this government
as near robbery as the taxing of the
people fifty or sixty millions a year to
protect the Louisiana sugar planters.
He could account for the attitude of the
senators from Louisiana towards the
amendment, only on the ground that
they feared that the sorghum and beet
sugar industries wguld distance the