The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-10-01
PASSED THE TARIFF BILL.
Three Republican Senators Vote Against
1t, But to No Purpose.

al, unworthy of statesmanship, and ,harac.
teriaed the reciprocity section as in conflict
with every foreign treaty with the United
States now in existence. The power given
the president in connection with reciprocity
ls also violation, not only of the spirit
but Of the letter of the constitution. HI
asserted that the bill, as 1T now stood, (ex
cepting sugar and molasses) removed from
the free list and placed on the dutiable list
more than it took from the dutiable list
and placed on the free list. He also assert
ed that the bill would reduce the revenues
and incl ease taxation. Unless all his calcu.
lations were at fault, the average rate Of
duty under this conference bill and
the administrative bill on dutiable
articles would be sixty per cent, in
stead Of forty-6ve and one-half per cent
as under the existing law. Carlisle went or
to give figures as to the increased taxation
under the conference bill. In order to com.
pensate for the enormous increase of taxa.
tion, tax of-two cents pound (amount-
ing to $5,6OO,0O0) was to be taken off to-
bacco. The removal of that tax would
relieve no man, and be beneficial to nobody
expect tho manufacturers and retailers o1
tobacco. Coming to the question of the
OouHUy Oh sugar. no salu ~ WOulO amount,
on the basis of the recent production, to
between seven and eight millions year.
This was the first time in the history Of the
country that it was proposed to pay a
! bounty to the domestic producer. But no
part of the bounty, he asserted, would be
paid to the grower of beet or sorghum or
cane; every dollar Of it would 90 to the
sugar manufacturer. The producer would
not receive higher price for his produce,
nor would the consumer receive any benefit
from the bounty; for the bounty paid sugar
would sell in the markets at the same price
precisely as the duty paid refined sugar
coming from other countries. The courts
had invariably held that no state legisla-
ture could authorize county or municipal
ity to impose taxes for the purpose Of en-
c0uraging manufacturers or any other in
dustrial pursuits. If the states could not
do it with the unlimited powers of taxing)
how, Carlisle asked. could the general 90
ernment do it, Referring to the recipro-
city amendment, he said it was PROPOSE
tion to confide to the Judgment or caprice
of the president alone the determination
no only of certain facts defined in law, but
the results and effects of those facts and
circumstances. The amendment was not
reciprocity. it was retaliation pure and sim
pie. The proposition was one to retaliate
by imposing q duty of 10 cents pound on
tea. cents pound on coffee and from IS
to 80 per cent. on sugar, unless China,
japan, Brazil and Spain should do certain
things, over which the consumers in the
United States had no control. The amend
ment was mere political device to appease,
as far as possible. an indignant public SEN
tlment and check for the time being the
rising cloud of opposition to the extreme
policy Of protection.
Aldrich and Gray also addressed the SEN
ate. At the conclusion Of Gray's speech, a
vote was taken on the adoption Of the con-
ference report and it was adopted SO to n.
Pettigrew, Plumb and Paddock, republic
cans, voted with the democrats in the mega
tive, the only deviation from a strict party
vote iff. = -