Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1890-05-08
TIE TARIFF BILL.
Debate on that Importsnt Question
Commencsd by the House.

The House vent into . committee Of the
whole for consideration of the tariff bill.
Mckinley took the hoof in support of
the bill, He said under the existing statute
any citizen Of the United States could i'm
port an article, pay the duty on 1t, make it
into q complete product and export it, and
the government refunded 30 per cent of
the duty paid on the raw material. The
committee recommended that the govern
ment should retain only per cent iasteai
of 10 per cent. This gave the people of
the United States practically free raw
material for export trade. This provision
completely disposed of the argument that
If manufacturers only had free raw mate
rial they could compete in the markets of
the world.
Mckinley stated no change made in the
earthen ware schedule because the commit
tee believed the retention of present duties
esst ntial to the prosperity and further de.
velopment of this great industry. The
committee recommended an increase of
duty on glassware. The agricultural inter
ests Of the country BY tar6 had been
recommended. majority had advanced
duty all along the line. Farmers had come
to appreciate the time was alreats here when
an American agriculturss nr4st sell his
products in the markets of the world iB
competition with what was produced by low
priced labor in other countries. Their
care must hereafter be to preserve our own
market, for they must be driven from
foreign one unless by reducing the cost Of
production they could compete with un-
equal conditions Under the duties fixed
by the bill the annual imports of $25. 0OO,-
900 agricultural products could be supplied
the people of the United States by Ameri-
can farmers rather han BY Canadian farm.
ers, and S25 600 900 distributed smOng the
farmers would relieve some depression
prevailing and give them confidence and
courage with increased ability to raise the
mortgages upon their farms. Applause.
The committee recommend an in ,rease
of duty on the wool schedule The present
rate of duty on frst class wools is 10 cents
per pound. and on second class wools 12|
ce nts The committee recommended that
the duty on first class woods be advanced
to II cents per pound, and that the duty on
second class wools should remain. On third
class woods the present duty is 2 IL cents
per pound. on all wool costitg unier IL
cents per pound, and Eve cents ON woOls
costing over IL cents. The committee
would offer an amendment changing the
classification from IL to IS cents, and
would recommend duty on wool under
l3 cents of 32 per cent ad raiorem, over 13
cents so per cent ad roiorem. The COM
mittee increased the duty on manufactured
wool to compensate for the increased duty
on raw material The duly on tin plate i.
increased from ! cent to | $40 and Is l6
cents according TO various grades. 1t is
proposed to make the duty high enough on
tin plate to enable our people to manu.
facture enough for domestic cons sumpsion.
The committe have taken from the free
list and placed on the dutisble list IS arti-
cles. 10 of which are articles of agriculture.
If the same qusntity is imported this year
As las, this would increase the revenue
90, 400, 900. They have taken from the
dutiable list and put on the free list 4s ar
ticles. which last year paid into the treas.
ury $6l 500, ,090-S55 900 90 from sugar
alone.
The committee increased the duty on
carpet wo,ls, and necessarily increased the
duty on carpets themselves. When steel
rails were 500 ton there was a. eQuiv Va.
lent ad raiorem duty upon them Of 2s per
cent, the instant the p ice of steel rails was
reduced to $50 the ad raisrem equivalent
went up TO SO per cent. Democrats looked
at the per cent. republicans at the prices
The republicans would rather hsve steel
rails $50 ton and ad rdlorem Sc per cent.
then have steel rails 500 q ton ard ad
raiorem 2s per cent Foreign markets are
as accessb BILE under this bill as under the
existing law. As accessible under this bill
as it you'll be under absolute free trade
The bill put no burden. no taxation, no
restriction on American products that went
out Of this country. The committee would
e courage ard sustain foreign trade. Why
should We pass over the best market Of the
world-our own market Notwithstanding
all these croakinss. we are nov eIp-rting
more products than at any other tim- in our
history. Our exports increased 35 pr cent
more than the exports Of free trade Great
B itsn. With the same aid to shipping that
Great Britain gave. ships Of the United
Sta,es voul plov in every sea under the
A neficsn h.g in suecee.ful con petition
with any ships of the world. Applause
We have enjoyed 20 years of continu rus
protection, the longest period since the
foun iation of our government and found
ourselves in er-ater prosperity than at aLy
other time.
Mills Of Texas follow NJ, said This Was
the first bill to come be fore the American
people with mask torn oh, like 4 highway
man, demanding their purses. Applause.
Protection boiled down, meant more work
and less results, and if carried out to its
conclu'io N. ant all work and no result
Pig irou Was the base If all our iron and
steel manufacture In 1871 prices were
rising after period of depression, and.the
importation of pig iron was increasing
| From 1880 tons in 1870 imports Of pig iron
rose TO II 600 900 tons in 1873. II the re-
| publican doctrine were true every ton of
imported displaced . ton Of American iron.
| Figures show our domestic product rose
from 50. .0o0. 900 tons in 1870. TO lI9 .0oo 900
/ tonsin 1872. Two years ago the democrats
stood on the floor and declared the country
vas on the edge of 4 dark shadow. The
republicans ridicuied this and said farm
mortgages we're only evidence Of prosperi
ty and wealth. Laugh;er.l At length
these gentlemen we're brought to theil
knees at confessional. snd vas bound to
admit there xas widespread depressio.
throughout the agricultural regions. Wins
dii the bill do to aid aSriculture
II put sugar on the free list Why did no
the committee put . protective duty OF
sugar, compel its production in fhi
country. and carry out iss protective policy
Why not put . prohibi'5ry duty on COTE
and naturalize il in this countryf Why di
not The committee put the duty on hides 4