The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-02-27
HOUSE PROCEEDINGS.
Debate ON the shipping Bil1-The d
ficiency Appropriation Passed.

Debate ON the shipping Bill-The De-
hciency Appropriation Passed.
WASHINGTON CITY, Feb. 26.-The House
met at 10 O'Clock this morning, there being
less than twenty-five members in attend
ance. On motion of Quinn of New York
the Senate bill was passed for the relief of
John Roach.
The House then proceeded in committee
Of the whole to general debate on the ship
ping bill. Grosvenor spoke in favor of the
shipping bill, devoting most of his atten-
ton to the Mckinley bill, which he eulo-
gized. The reason the Democrats would
be in the majority in the House was that
there had been misrepresentation and mis-
understanding of the Mckinley bill. The
commodities that entered into the daily
life of the people are cheaper than on the
LIST of September last, and cheaper than
ever before in the history of the country.
At the same time agricultural products
brought better prices.
Coleman of Louisiana said he was
authoritatively informed that since the
passage of the Mckinley bill the price OF
jute bagging and ties to cotton planters
had been greatly reduced.
Grosvenor, in closing his remarks, said
congress should take advantage of the Nc
Klnley bill and send American vessels.
covered by the American flag, carrying
American products, to seek for the mar
kets of the world.
Mills of Texas opposed the bill, and ridi-
culed the reciprocity policy of the present
administration. If reciprocity is wanted,
why not negotiate with England, France
and Germany? A few months ago the
Republicans put up the bars against
foreign trade. Now they want it, and in
order to get trade, they want to further
tax the people in order to send ships to
foreign ports, to show the American flag
and return in ballast. The Mckinley bill.
he said, had cheapened the wages of
American labor in all parts Of the country.
In conclusion, Mills laid down the doc
trlne OF the Democratic party, quoting
from Thomas Jefferson. He affirmed and
reaftirmed that the will of the majority.
when expressed, was the will of God. but
that will must be reasonable; it must be
rightful; it must be equal. Laws should
protect the rights of the minority. That
was what the Democrats were contending
tor.
Hopkins of Illinois opposed the bill be-
cause he was opposed to the policy of sub
sidy. 1t was against the policy Of the gov
eminent, and always would be, to take
money from the treasury and paw it to a
class of persons engaged in private call
ing. mat was all the measure did. This
legislation was modelled on the French
law, and that law had proven failure.
He objected to adopting the bounty sys-
tenn in order to aid the wooden ships of
Maine. The great mass of the American
people would not be benefited one iota. and
yet the bill would take $50, 00O, 600 Of the
peoples money.
Morrow of California, in supporting the
measure. emphatically denied the declare
ton frequently made that the bill was be-
ing passed by an active lobby If there
was such lobby he had never heard of it.
The legislation was requested by the repre-
sentatives of the leading commercial or.
carnations of the Pacific coast He did
not look upon the measure as partisan
one, but as one that should be considered
on its merits.
Cummings of New York. advocated the
bill as tending to build up the American
merchant marine, and extend American
commerce The bill would achieve results
that could not be achived BY the passage
of the free ship substitute. Free trade and
sailors rights was good Democratic doc
trine. The shipping interests had always
been allied to free trade. The maritime
prosperity Of England might be cited as
an example, but even with free trade hun
dreds and hundreds of millions had been
drawn from England in order to increase
hoP raPrv1n~ troAA Thsa nv.t~