Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-05-11

tDat what the majority contenotu xVera
not the American protective system The
Henry Clay sometimes alluded 70 and
founder OF the protective SYSTEM .i,sv
Silas Wright members OF this house Wy, ~
would be found in unqualified oppositloIlr
this Dill If the United States made IL u.s.. u
ties prohibitory il must expect retalla'..bbe
azainst its corn and wheat and beef on Wv
part OF the nations Of Europe. IL ne Md
the most radical of Protectionists ne NoIIie
vote against the measure because ne % -
lieved that in the end any such abuSo Us
the taxing power must Lead TO the i no.5S Ina
struction OF what had been called .H
American system. The pending oil wa,
step backward in civilization and I'D ~
tempt TO outwit the laws of nature a1N
eyade the rules OF common honesty. -
Mr. LaFollette, of Wisconsin, menpoi
of the Committee on Ways and Meant
drew n comparison between the Mills OH
and the pending measure. The measures
Jared IN opposite directions. An oceani
could roll between them. and II eacn ~.
were consigned 10 the home OF a maJolnJ
of its friends an ocean would roll oet"sseini
them. lApplause.l The Republican D,i'
favored protection to American agi I.oa-
ture. manufactures, and labor. The Demo
cratic bill opposed that policy. The he-
publican bill proposed to save the hoino
market for Americans. The DemOcrAsro
bill proposed 10 invite all other countrlc7
10 take this market from our people wren.
ever Il was in their power so 20 DO. ~, ~
issue was made up, and he as o Republican,
welcomed il. On these lines the contest
must be fought ont 10 the end. The Demo-
Gratis were for a repeal OF the protectlro
duty. The Republicans were TOR lis co"-
tinuance
sPRrSoyR OF ILLINOIS IN PLACE OF CARLISLE
Mr.. Springer (taking the place OF pr.
Carlsle) cOntroyerted the declaTatiou.
made By Mr.. Burrows, Of Michigan, tla a.
il was a theory and not condltlon 10
confronts us. he contendeu thaI 80; W.;
country was confronted with a CONDITION
in resnect 10 the Treasury. The theory OF
the minority was not wholly new, but u
had never been 80 openly ayOwed as u was
in the pending bill. The system OF Pre-
lection was a system 10 favor classes IL
he were employedas an attorney to convey
special privileges to particular indlylduais
and interests for past favors he could not
improve on the pending bill. lie dld nj nj
assert that at the last election thefe nnu
been any agreement between the nlanu-
facturers Of the country and the Ohalr!l I.la
of the National Republican Committee
that certain contributions were to be maze
to the Republican campaign. funds, IN re-
turn for which those manufacturers were
TO be given an additional protective tarlh.
He did not assert this, but II II were iaGl'
II IL were literally true, the trainers OF inc
pending bill could not have responded 10
the agreement with more perfect success
than they had done.
He denounced the two bounty FEATURES
of the bill (sugar and silk and conciudeu
that there was no power IN congress 70 Il'-
nronriate money raised from the people 10y
TAXATION and give it 10 any particular IN
dusty of the country 10 encOuragclts busi;;
ness. In facetious manner he proceeded
To point out the benefit which would inure
10 the farmers Of Illinois from the pro-
visions OF the law.
cABBAoEs.
Cabbaces were now taxed 10 per cent. al
rqiOrap. II was now proposed 10 tax then
3 cents a head. According 10 the agrlcui,
tural reports no cabbages were imported
al 10 per cent. How many would be I'M
ported ut an equivalent of so per cent!
tLaughter.i This was for the benefit OF the
illinois farmers. lLaughter.I
Mr.. Dinglcy asserted that cabbage was
imported. but that it appeared in the sta
tistics az vegetables"
Mr.. Springer said the Democratic party
was ready to meet the issue rendered IN the
bill, and he PREDICTED that the House IN tue
Fiffv-second Congress would have Demo
cratic majority of fifty, In 1897 there
would be n Democratic Congress pledged
10 repeal this bill if it should become a
law.
Mr. Dingley, Of Maine, after discussing
in exhaustive detail the provisions OF the
bill. generaliZed on the methods upon
which the measure had been framed. The
fact that under Protection the united
States had become the largest manutactu-
rinc nation in the world was refutatlon
of the statement that Protection was a
failure. The pending bill was framed upon
the theory that articles which the United
States could not produce IN sufficient
Quantities TO supply the homo demand
should be placed upon the free list, be,
cause the duty on such articles appreciated
the cost 10 the consumer. and that was
why the duty on sugar (of whlch the
United Ststes produced only one eighth OF
its consumption wasa tax which increased
the burdens Of the people.
REMARKS TO TIE POINT.
Mr.. Barnes, Of Georgia. addressed the
committee in opposition to the protective
system of the bill. He urged that before
the war no one contended for Protection
oxcept as an incident TO revenue; that the
present high tariff system was war mea-
sure, but had been continued durlng u
period of twenty-five years of peace to the
enrichment of few and the lmpoyerlsh-
ment of the great body Of the people, and
that under its operations wealth was being
concentrated in the hands OF privileged
class. This country, and especially the
farmers of the country, were crying out Tor
relief and for more extended markets. Inc
reply of the Republican party was a stu
further increase Of duties and an increase
of the restrictions on trade. The only
&C . Ia NV wa
of taxation on the necessaries OF life, the
imposition OF an income-tax for pensions,
and an increase Of the currency TO the ex-
tent necessary for business interest.
Mr.. Andrew, OF Massachusetts,, opposed
the bill. There was no free trade party IN
existence, but if anything would create
one it was such a measure as the pending
one, which not only continued the war
tariff Of twenty-five years ago, but In
creased that tariff.
ELOCUTNr AMOS CUMMINGS.
Mr.. Cummings, Of New York. character
lied the present session OF Congress as a
raging sea of ravenOus legislation. The
House had rules which were a complex bat
terry turned upon the Treasury. Friends OF
the people were permitted only TO cry out
before they were thrown overheard and
breathed their means to the winds and
waves. This tariff bill was only lever IL
the complex machinery. Thank God,
had said Ebenezer Elliott, pointing to the
top of q bleak mountain in Scotland
there is one place on earth where taxed
wheat and paupers cannot grow" Jap
plause.1 Revenue protection was sneak
thief in the larder Of the people. As the
war-tarif had scourged the people with &
whip carrying out the biblical story o.
Jeroboam), its offspring to-day threatened
81 ,rrft
claimed that the bill was carrying out the
American system. 1t was not an American
system. Ii was tho old cGst-of and aban
doned system of England. 1t was a spectre
Of the most lawless and meanest Of the
English kings. James /. James Stuart
with his google eye and elongated tongue
ought to be here to advocate this bill. tx
trayagance had been his necessity, and ex
! travagance was the necessity now. This
bill struck at New York as though she were
a viper or unclean reptile. On behalf OF
Z l.. 4 -