, 1890-10-02

would bo 40 per cent, instead OF aoia Per
cent. as under tho existing law.
MIR. Carlisle went on TO give flSdres as
to the increased taxation under tho con-
ference bill. In order to compensate for
the enormous increase OF taxation the
tax Of 2 cents pound-amouning 10
&C. 800 0O0--was to be taken oil tobacco.
The removal of that tax would relieve
no man, and be a benefit to nobody ex-
cept tho manufacturers and retailers OF
tobacco.
Coming to the question OF the bounty
on sugar, he said 1t would amount, on
the basis Of the present production, to
between 81, 900, 900 and IS, 900, 900 year.
This was the first time in the history Of
the country that II was proposed to pay
u bounty to domestic producers, but no
part of the bounty, he asserted, would
he paid to the producers of beet, or sor-
ghum, or cane. Every dollar Oft would
90 to the sugar manufacturers. Tho
producer would not receive higher
price for his produce, nor would the con-
sumer receive any benefit from the
bounty, for the bounty-pald sugar would
sell In the markets ut the same price
precisely as the duty paid on sugar
coming from other countries The
courts had invariably held that no state
legislature could authorize county or
municipality to impose taxes for the pur-
pose Of encouraging manufactures or
any other industrial pursuit. II the
states could not do II, with unlimi ted
powers Of taxing, how, Mr.. Carlisle
asked, could the general government do
1T?
Referring to the reciprocity amend
ment lie said it was a proposition 10 con-
tide to the judgment or caprice of the
president alone the determination, not
merely of certain facts defined In the
law, but of the results and effects of
those facts and circumstances. The
amendment was not reciprocity, IL was
retaliation, pure and simple. The
proposition was one to retaliate on the
people of the United States by imposing
duty of 10 cents per pound OH tea, 3
cents on coffee, and from 80 to 30 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
amendment was u mere political device
to appease as far as possible indignant
public sentiment and check for the time
being the rising cloud OF opposition to
the extreme policy of protection.
Mr.. Allison criticised several of Mr..
Carlisle's statements and denied their
accuracy. He (Allison) differed from
Mr.. Carlisle absolutely as TO the effect OF
the bill, and gave 1t as his belief that 1t
would reduce the revenue to an amount
between $40, 900. coo aud s45, 900, 600.
Coming down to the sugar question,
he said that he had conversed with the
planters of Louisiana who had como TO
Washington, and there was not one of
them who did not say that the proposed
bounty would stimulate immensely the
product of sugar In Louisiana, and be n
great boom to them. But now the SEN
ator from Louisiana (Gibson) charged
his confreres with discriminating
against that industry. II II were true
that all the Louisiana sugar plan tcrs
spurned the bounty and denounced 1t,
end declared 1t to be unconstitutional,
they might find a congress that would
take them at their word.
He believed that the bill was on the
whole a fair bill to every section OF the
country, as u protective measure, an
he did not believe its general effect
would bo to operate harshly on one sec
tion of tho country as against another
section. He thought that some OF the
duties-many of them-were too high,
and had said SO more than once OIL the
floor of the senate. lie hoped the bill
would have a fair test, and If it proved
beneficial, as he believed, 1t would settle
the question of the tariff for many years
to come.
Mr.. Gray spoke briefly, and Mr.,
Aldrich closed the debate.
The senate then proceeded to vote on
the conference report. Mcssrs. Pad
dock, Pettigrew and Plumb (repub,icans) }
voted III the negative.
Following Is the vote:
Ayos-Aldrich, Alien, Allison, Blair,
Duwes, Dixon. Edmunds, Eyarts, Frye,
Hale, Hawley. Hoar Ingalls, Jones
| (Nevada), Mem illan, Manderson, Mitch
ell, Moody. Pierce, Platt, Power. San
ders, Sawyer, Sherman, Spooner
Stewart, Stockbridge, Wilson (lowa),
and Wolcott-33.
Noes - Barbour, Bate Blackburn,
Blodgett. Butler, Carlisle, Cockrell, Coke,
Colquitt, Daniel, Gorman, Gray, Hamp-
ton, Harris, Hearst. Kenna. Morgan
Paddock. Pasco, Pettiprcw, Plumb,
| Pugh, Ransom, Reagan. Voorhees,
| Waltliill, and Wilson (Maryland)-27.
The following pairs were announced !:
Teller and Berry, Dolph and Brown,
Farwoll and Payne, Quay and Faulkner,
| Morrill and Vance, Davis and Gibson,
Hiscock and Jones (Arkansas) Higgins
and McPherson, Squire and George,
| Turpie and Washburn, Vest and stan
| ford
In addition Messrs. Call and Euslis
Were paired with Messrs. Pettigr1w and
Paddock, who voted in the negative.
| So the conference report was agreed
to. and now the tariff bill needs only the
signatures of tho presiding officers of
both houses and the president of the
| United States.
The house concurrent resolution to
correct the enrolment OF the tariff bill
was agreed to.
The conference report was agreed to
on the signal service bill.
The house bill to enable tho postmas-
ter general to test at small towns and
villages the practicabilty of the free de.
livery system was passed; also, the
house bill to set apart certain tract oi
land In California as a forest reservation.
The senate then adjourned.
| House Prooeedings