The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1890-05-14
THE TARIFF DEBATE.
MIR. Isntterwortii's Speeci, Crentes Some.
5 thing Of u SenSntlon.

Mr. 45utterW0rtnb speech Crehtes Some.
thing of II Sensation.
WASHINGTON, May l3.-Mr. Butter
worth to-day created considerable excite.
mcnt on the Republican side Of the
House, and applause on the Democratic
side, in his remarks on the tariff bill.
He severely criticised some parts Of
TINT measure, especially the increased
duties imposed on agricultural products,
and on copper and tin plate.
Mr.. Dutterworth has advocated for
years reciprocal trade with Canada, and
ho regards the present tariff bill as one
frnught with untold evils, the effect OF
which, il adopted, will be disastrous to a
large majority OF the people. His speech
made deep impression on the House.
The House met ut II o'clock to-day,
and after the transaction OF some rou-
tine business, went into Committee OF
:. the Whole on tho tariff bill. ~
Mr.. Mchlillin, Of Tennessee, moved
to reduce the duty on ammonia. He
said he could see no reason why this
article OF necessity to the farmer should
be so heavily taxed. Mr.. Mckinley, in
opposition, stated that since the tariff
had encouraged competition in this
country, the plice Of ammonia had been
reduced from 20 10 n cents per pouad.
BUTrERwoRrII's BREAK.
Mr.. Butterworth said that the price OF
M article was not reduced on account OF
competition alone. It was reduced on
account OF improved methods Of manu-.
facture. He never doubted that the
protective system was wise and had
conferred blessings on the land from
shore to shore. II there was any danger
to the protective system it was in its
oscillation between the extreme OF free
trade on the one hand, and on the other,
the extreme which created inequalities
among Americans themselves. The
country. in the election OF Harrison and
the Republican Congress, had declared
unequiyocally in favor OF sustaining and
upholding the protective system. The
conflict in 'SS had not been between
achedule rates, but between economic
policies. The Democratic policy was
well known. The Democratic policy
was we'll known. It was that the tariif
should be levied for revenue only.
The Republican policy was that the
tariff, whether high or low, should be
40 adjusted as 10 establish and protect
American interests uutl industries in
competition with the rest OF the world.
Did that policy mean to remove tho in.
eoualities which existed between indus.
tries on this side OF the water and in.
dustries OIL tho other. or did 1t mean to
( shut out all importation. He insisted
That We should not create any Unequal.
ities h0re. The protective syRtem dealt
with conditions, and not withnational
boundary lines, except when the pres
ence OF those national boundary lines
indicated tho presence OF those condl'
tions againpt the influence Of which II
/, VIA necessary To interpose the barrier o.
a protective tariff. II tho tariff did moi
1 deal with conditions, then tariff Wal
good in the abstract, and II it was, the
gathers OF the Republic had paid them
selves a poor compliment when the3
provided that as between the Statei
there phould be no restriction Of com
merce. Competition never created new
industriea. They were created by th'
work of brain.invent;on5. Il
GETS DEMOCRATIC APPLAUSE.
The coinmitteo had tried to do, th'
beot it could in framing tho bill, but j
was not always csio 10 rely altogethe
upon the testimony Of tho beneaclerie
under tho law. (Applause on the Dem
ocratic side.] He had indicated his be
lief respecting the proper functions Of
tariff act, and would sooner resign hi
sent than depart one hairs breadth iron
that belief. or course he respected th
wisdom OF the committee, but why wa
Paul favored and Peter turned down
Why. increase the profits Of eert!al
classes? He could name capitalist
whose profits had exceeded those Of a
tho agriculturalists in any State Of III !!
Union. [Applause on the Democrat
side.] He was not, he said, disturbe