Los Angeles herald., 1890-10-01
NOW NEARLY ALAW.
The Tariff Bill Moves Up An
other Notch.
The Senate Adopts the Confer
ence Report.
Plumb, Paddock and Pettigrew Poll
Negative Votes.
Carlisle's Caustic Criticism of the Bill.
Allison's Added Arithmetic and
His Agile Straddling Act.
Associated Press Dispatches.

Associated Press Dispatches.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 30.-In the senate
today the house bill to promote the ad-
ministration of justice in the army was
passed with verbal amendment. A
resolution continuing the select COM
mittee on irrigation and reclamation of
arid lands, during the present congress,
was agreed to. A deficiency bill for
$10,316 for compensation of members,
was passed. A motion to reconsider, by
Morgan, was entered.
The conference report on the tariff
bill being taken up, Carlisle made ar
gument against certain features of the
bill. He confined himself almost wholly
to the sugar schedule. He denounced
the proposal to pay bounties to American
sugar growers, as unconstitutional and
unworthy Of craftsmanship, and char
acterized 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 was also violation mot
only of the spirit, but the letter of the
constitution.
Carlisle asserted that the bill as it
stood. excepting sugar and molasses, re-
moved 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 asserted that the bill
would reduce the revenues and increase
taxation. Unless all his calculations
were at fault, the average rate of duty
under this conference bill and the aG-
ministrative bill on dutiable articles,
would be go per cent, instead of 451a
cent. as under the existing law.
Carlisle went on to give the figures as
to the increased taxation under the con-
ference bill. In order TO compensate
for the enormous increase of taxation,
q tax of two cents per pound, (amount-
ing to IS $780, 00) was to be taken off
tobacco. The removal of that tax
would relieve no man, and be benef-
cial to nobody except the man ufacturers
and retailers of tobacco.
Coming to the question of bounty on
on sugar, he said it would amount, the
basis of the present production, to be-
tween $7,000,000 and So 100000 year.
This was the first time in the
history of the country it was,proposed to
pay bounty to domestic producers, but
no part of the bounty, he asserted,
would be paid to the grower of the beet
or sorghum or cane. Every dollar of it
would 60 to the sugar manufacturer.
The producer would not receive higher
price for his produce, nor would the con-
sumner receive any benefit from the
bounty, for bounty-paid sugar would
sell in the markets at the same price
precisely as duty-paid refined sugar
coming from other countries.
The courts had invariably held that
no state legislature could authorize a
county or municipality to impose taxes
for the purpose OF encouraging manu-
factures or any other industrial pur-
unlimited power of taxing how, Carlisle
asked, could the general government do
it.
Referring to the reciprocity amend
ment, he said it was a proposition to
confide to the Judgment or caprice of
the president alone, the determination,
not merely of certain facts
and circumstances. The amendment
was not reciprocity, it was
retaliation, pure and simple.
The proposition was one to retaliate on
the people of the United States by i'm
posing duty of ten cents pound on
tea, three cents a pound on coffee, and
from 35 to 50 per cent. on sugar, unless
China, Japan, Brazil and Spain should
do certain things, over which the con-
sumers in the United States had no con-
troll. The amendment was more a po-
litical device to appease as far as posi-
BILE the indignation of public sentiment,
and check for the time-being the rising
cloud of opposition to the extreme policy
of protection.
Allison criticised several of Carlisle's
statements, and denied their accuracy
He (Allison) differed from Carlisle abso-
lutely as to the effect of the bill, and
gave it as his belief that it would reduce
the revenues to an amount between
100000, 900 and $45 100000.
Coming down to the sugar question,
he said he had conversed with planters
of Louisiana who had come to Washing
ton, and there was not one of
them who did not say the
proposed bounty would stimulate i'm
mensely the product of sugar in Louisi-
ana and be great boon to them. But
now a senator from Louisiana (Gibson)
charged the conferees with discriminat-
ing against that industry. If it were
true that all the Louisiana sugar plant
ers spurned the bounty and denounced
it, and declared it unconstitutional, they
might find congress that would take
them at their word. He believed the
bill on the whole fair bill to every Sec
ton of the country, a protective meas
mr., and he did not believe its
general effect would be to operate
harshly on one section of the country as
against another section. He thought
some of the duties (many of them) were
too high, and had said so more than
once on the floor of the senate. He
hoped the bill would have fair test,
and fit proved beneficial, as he believed
it would, it would settle the question of
tariff for many years to come.
Gray spoke briefly, and Aldrich closed
the debate.
The senate then proceeded to vote on
the conference report. Paddock. Petit
grew and Plumb (Republicans) voted in
the negative. Following is the vote:
Yeas-Aldrich, Allen, Allison, Blair,
Cameron, Casey, Chandler, Cullom,
Dawes, Dixon, Edmunds, Evarts, Frye,
Hale, Hawley, Hoar, Ingalls,, Jones (Ne-
vada). Mcmillan, Henderson, Mitchell,
Moody, Pierce, Platt, Power, Sanders,
Sawyer, Sherman, Spooner. Stewart,
Etockbridge, Wilson (Iowa), Wolcott--33.
n d. NJ IL.