New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-08-22
THE HOUSE DEBATING THE LARD BILL.
ANUMBER OF SPEECHES FOR AND AGAINST THE

ANUMBER OF SPEECHES FOR AND AGAINST THE
MEASURE, BUT NO VOTE REACHED.
Washington. Aug oI.-The House to-day. under che
specia order resumed consideration of the bill dein
ing lard"
Mr. McClammy. Of North Carolina, opposed the
measu,e lie had intended to answer the eloauencc
OF the gentleman from fchhsSNaina INT. DiOsiusJ,
but he could not do so.
Mr. Mas1n of Illinois. said that this a serious
question 10 him and 10 the People lie represented
This was fight between the packers Of IIp,re lard
and the packers Of refined compound lard. It was
trade fight and had place i'll Congress. He was In
fvor OF branding every article in the market for what
n really was He much opposed to food
osulteration as any the House. The com
nound lard men were charged with defending fraud
and counterclting. That charge false. This bill
strucN down every possible Glance OF exporting lard
or compound lard from this country. He not here
t defend cOuntcIfeng but he was here 10 defend the
men who manufactured a Clean healthy food product
The more hogs lard that taken out of ii and the
more cottonseed oil put into it, the purcr and cleaner
il was Tor the human stomach.
The working people not asking for this bill.
Gentlemen spoke about the poverty Of the farmers
snd proposed to tic poor laboring men Of his dis.
trict in order TO help the farmers Did gentlemen
ever know Of a farmer going hungry. But the labor
Inc man. who worked fourteen hours day out Of the
sunshine must be taxed for a cheap clean food
product 10 help the farmers Of the country when no
farmers organization had demanded il. 1t was said
that Chicago fighting this bill The manufact-
rrcrs OF lard in Chicago who used smOthcred hogs were
not opposing this measure which Que Of the most
hunglpg pieces of legislation which had ever come ont
Of a committcc-room. Mr. Mason defended Mr.. Fair
bank against some structures made upon him by MI
Eous ard then proceeded TO argue in support OF the
Paddock Pure Food bill.
Mr. McRac of Arkansas. offered amendment 70
the first section Of the BILL by adding the following
Words and rendered in open kettles the process used
by farmers ard butchers" TO the definition u laN'
He hoped and expected that the amendment would
be adoDted lie wanted the lard Of tic farmer to be
exempted from taxation.
Mr. Hatch, OF Missouri opposed the amenhIhent'
IT would prohibit the manufacture Of lard except IN
omen kettles while 10 per cent OF the lard made IN
the United states was mace III th"t iaS'noi Ia.
amendment not only prohibited the manufacture oi
lard brt il DESTROYED tho value Of the hog product OF
tie o0untry 49,,
Mr. Alien. of Michigan. said that the object of the
amendment was 10 h!il the bill. Tie farmer did not
render his lard Tie lard was made by Others
The amendment was lost-yeas, 50; nays w.
Mr.. Alien Of Michigan then took the hoor in ad-
yocqcv OF the bill not true. he sad-as s'a'eu
by the gentleman from Illnos-that tlla bill III any
way affected the men who produced cottonseed OIL
il was true as stated ly sir Fairbank, mat co'n
pound lard could be made Of twenty per cent OF ia'N
AID eighty per cent Of cOtt"nsccd OIL WHY ho' D'd.u
il 4, co.tonscod oil cpTpound"l why a't"'h tic
word GARD t. it, II done for the purpose Oh
selling The commodity lard, and, by so dong ue-
traudur the farmers Of the market which they wond
Otherwise possess His friends from the South hnc"
that every quart Of cottOnsccd oil was tOda! ID tHe
hands OF a cOttOnsced trust, ana they were oo'n6 VIC
Southern farmer injustice by voting against u' oi
Mr. Henderson, OF Iowa, said that no one questions
tc mower Of Congress 10 enact this legislation. Inv
TIe fr ffnr
mir. Mason) had toarfuy pleaded for the laboflhs
mo-, of the country aud had PIT them In anu'h'Ns
~ the farmers Did the gentleman refer 10 MesSfs.
FarDauls and Armour who had III re" years ANA "
millions at the expense Of the farmers ! MI ieh.
dnson asserted that the farmers Of the country hah
uet ,',c0 IN favor of this bill. II well enoash
f. sncer at the farmer Inc farmers We're lcadcis ai
thinkers. and they we're organizing ana hc was b'A'
~ NJ, uouk Of Tennessee said theTe were some thing,
the measure tiat ne OH ,S itdrsi OF the farmer
Mr. stewart Of Texas, thought Jlat l,c 1n NM.
,,nnrv be termed The first fruit oi great error Tor
= "a certainly the sequence OF thai ANOMALY III 'om
,rcssionai legislation known a. the cieoar-erlhe Dl
- Wien il Inn,t be said that greater p,rveFaion "a
The taxing power had ever been pcrpG'rateI Ny CDi
- lad AZ me biz Itself Instead Of doing the poor
GOOD the bill eonEh; to take from them LhclF sihH
earnings for the benefit Of the WcaIlp -
oP lard Mr. stewart appealed 20 rs colleague, on
tle Democratic .dc not 10 depart from the fam tiy
mad often boosted oi-a s.Fict con,f E VI U''
Mr. oates Of Alabama. commended mat II Consrf.
wished 20 he fair 70 all TIE udustrc, Of the country
ougt not 10 put a rider on one and make IL carry
weight lie then proceeded 10 make cOh'ttunHi"l
argument against the iill.
Mr Wheeler OF Alabama, appealed 20 members on
tho democratic side TO stand by their constitutional
piincplcs That some gentlemen on the Democratic
side Supported this biz proved oaN that there were
men wfo valued the pOay Interests 81 their con
st!tuents more han they value the great cnhobiIig
,,drrinie of Democratic government. The whole
irOuble was thai the SOlDI-GOd UIc-s That country
llaughtcrl was raising vegetable 50 superior Ia all
other vegetables in purity.
Pending further debate. the House al o'clock tool;
recess until O'Clock. tc evening session TO be for do
bate only on the Lard bill.