, 1890-05-11

WASHINGTON, May lO.-The house
vent into a committee of the whole on
the tariff bill. Mr.. Lanham of Texas, in
a speech generally critical of the measure,
urged the importance Of reciprocity with
Mexico. He especially antagonized the
feature of the bill which places a duty
on silver lead ore. declaring it would de.
stroy the smelling industry of Texas and
neighborine states. and would invite re.
taliatory legislation on the part of Mex
leo.
McAdoo of New jersey opposed the
bill and in the course OF his remarks sar
casticallv tainted the Republican party
with failure of keeping its ante-election
promises.
LaFollette of Wisconsin drew a com
parisop between the Mills bill and the
pending measure. The Republican bill
favored protection tn American agricul-
ture, manufacturer and labor; the
Democratic bill opposed that policy. The
Republican bill proposed to hold the home
market for Americans; the Democratic
bill proposed to invite all other countries
to take this market from our people
whenever it was in their power to do so.
iuc isauc was maue, auu he, rs u hepuU
lican, welcomed it. The Republican
policy would strengthen the alien labor
law: the Democratic would nuliiy that
law because it was cheaper TO import the
product of CHEAP labor than to import
cheap labor itself. He then entered into
detailed explanation and defense
of the various schedules of the bill. In
conclusion he said: What does the do
nestle system offer2 The gentleman
from Texas (Mills) has told us. [ hst-
ened to his gleefll description of the
worlds market our farmers would find if
the binders OF protection were removed
from their eyes. He descanted in an en-
thusiatic aud robust speech OF the gov
ernment CUP houses in the old world es-
tablished to feed the hordes of hungry
poor, and mounted to his supreme climax
with the declaration hat men were
starving for bread there" / waited
~breathlessly for more, but in vain. In
Gods name Is this the market you ask
American faruers to sell their wheat in?
Are they to trundle their grains from the
Dakotas to the old world and wait for an
aristocratic patron of the government
soup house" and other subjects starving
for bread to bid against each other and
fix the price2
Springer, OF Illinois opposed the bill.
He denounced the granting OF bounties
on sugar and raw silk and then in a face
tious manner proceeded to point out the
benefit which would inure to the farmers
Of Illinois from the provisions Of the law.
Cabbages were now taxed 10 per cent.
ad valorem. 1t was proposed to tax them
three cents a head. According 10 agri-
cultural reports no cabbages were imported
at 10 per cent. How many would be i'm
ported at an equivalent of so per cent. =?
Daughter Alter ridiculing the impnsi-
ton of a duty on Eggs as n measure of
protection to ex-President Hayes, who
had gone into the chicken business, he
reviewed the free list and declared that
the American hog was discrimi-
mated against in that bristles
were placed on tha free list,
while a high duty was placed upon wool.
Was it for the benefit of the Illinois far
mer that his sleek. tat hogs were placed
on an equality with the razor backs Of
Mexico? Laughter. The Democratic
party was ready to meet the issue in the
bill and he predicted that the house in the
Fifty second congress would have a
Democratic majority of fifty. In 1892
there would be a Democratic congress
pledged to the repeal of this bill if it
should become a law.
Dingiey of Name supported the bill
and Barnes of Georgia, Andrews of
Massachusetts. Cummings of New York
and Buckner of Wisconsin opposed it.
The committee then rose and took a re-
cess.