Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1890-05-20
2&S9l(ggs5 3zE
ASSOCIATED PRESS DISPATCHES.
Proceedings of Congress.
WASHINGTON, D. o., May 20.
SENATE.

SENATE.
Mr.. Hosr presented remonstraDces, slgh-
ed by several Boston firms, against the great
increase OF duties proposed in the Mckinley
bill.
Mr.. Ingalls, introduced bill to establish
metal money, and said that he did so at the
request OF the wage workers political ALL
ance of Washington, D. G. That alliance,
he said, desired to have 1t publicly an
nounced that it was responsible for the pre-
visions of the bill-a desire In which he Col
daily concurred.
Mr. Stanford introduced bill for loans
on public lands, and said that he would
hereafter address the Senate on the subject.
The Senate then proceeded to consider
the bill ubjscting imported liquors to the
provisions of the laws of the several States
the bill being in the following words ::
That no State shall be held to be limited or
restrained in its power to prohibit, regulate,
control or tax tho sale, keeping for sale, or
the transportation as an article Of commerce
or otherwise, to be delivered within its own
limits, of any fermented, distilled or other
Intoxicating liquids or liquors by reason Of
the fact that the same have bsen imported
into such State from beyond its limits,
whether there shall or shall not have been
paid thereon any tax, duty, impost or ex-
else to the United States.
Mr.. Wilson, G. Iowa, addressed the Senate,
stating that the bill was made necessary by
the Eeceat decision of the Supreme Court on
that subject The efsct OF the bill, he said,
| would be to leave each State In the union to
determine for itself what Its policy should
be 10 regard to the trs flic 10 Intoxicating Il
qaors.
MIR. Veat sGid he had not been able to
agree with the majority In reporting the
| bill, because 1t would sweep away the
exclusive jurisdiction of the United States
over interstate commerce. The Su
prema Court had decided that alec
hoic stmulants were an article OF
interstate commerce and that the power 10
regulate commerce among the States was
an exclusive power vested in Congress by
the Constitution. The latimation that Con-
gress might delegate TO State that power
was contained in mere obiter dlctum of
thai decision. He (Mr. Vesl contended
that it could not be done. The Supreme
Court had decided that thu power of Con-
gress over Interstate commerce was an e1-
elusive power and could not be delegated.
# il could be delegated in regard to one ar
ticle of merchandise (acohoI) it could be
delegated as to any other artiole-wheat,
corn, rice, oleomargarine, etc.
HOUSE.
A conference was ordered on the District
OF Columbia appropriation bill aud then
the House went into Committee OF the
Whole on The tariff bill.
Amendments abolishing thu minimum
punishment prescribed for violation of the
internal revenue laws and repeating the to-
bacco tax were rel ected
Mr.. Sayers. OF Texas. offered an amend
msnt providing that iron and steel cotton
ties or hoops for baling or other purposee,
not thinner than No. 20 wire gauge. shall be
admitted free Of duty.
Mar. Blanchard, OF Louisiana, regarded the
bill as direct blow at the cotton growing
interests of the South. The burden on the
cotton producers would be increased nearly
81 100000 year. The life of the cotton tie
was one year, and thus the duty had to be
paid yearly. The life of steel rail was 10
years, and thus the duty must be paid once
in decade.
MTr. Stewart, OF Georgia, said that the ef-
feet OF the provisions of the bill in regard 10 |
Gotten ties would be to bear heavily upon
the co!ored leborers OF the South.
Mr.. Bayne, OF Pennsylvania, commended
that it was in the interest Of the coored la |
b,rer of the South that such duties should
be imposed.
Mr.. Wheeler, Of Alabama, made an earn.
eat appeal against The proposed increase of
duty. The amendment was rejected by a
vote of Sc to 1914