Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-03-16
Washington Lesser Notes.

WASHINGTON, March BIT is said at the
State Department that the Franco-Amerl-
can treaty signed at Paris to-day by Presi-
dent Carnot Is a limited commercial re-
clprocity, the details of which are as yet
unknown at the department, 1t having
been almost solely negotiated By the
United States Minister. Mr.. Reid,
At conference OF the Democratic men,
bers of the WAYS and Means Committee OF
the House to-day. 1T was decided not to
press a vote on the wool bill IN advance
of the taking up of the silver special order,
but to resume consideration OF the bill
after the special order relative 10 the
Bland bill is disposed of. There are so
many members who desire to speak on the
bill that it was found impractlcable even
with continuous and prolonged sessions to
conclude the discussions before next
Tuesday, the date set for consideration Of
the silver bill.
. I'm accordance with the provisions of
section of the tariff act OF 1880. known as
the reciprocity section. on January 7th
last Secretary Blaine addressed notes to
the representatives In this city OF Austria
Hungary, Colombia, Haiti. Honduras. Nj
caragua, Spain for the Philippine Islands,
and Venezuela, informing them that un-
less some understanding were reached as
10 a commercial arrangement before March
18th, the President would be compelled TO
issue his proclamation imposing the du-
ties fixed III that section on sugar, mo-
lasses. coffee. and hides, the products OF
the countries named. A commercial ar
rangement with Nicaragua has already been
published. IT is understood that similar
arrangement has already been agreed upon
with Honduras and Will be announced
within few days. Also, that Austria
Hungary has made a definite proposition
as likewise Spain respecting the Philhpine
Islands, which give promise OF an early
and satisfactory adjustment. ms leaves
only Colombia, Haiti, and Venezuela sub
iect TO action under the tariff law, and as
10 these countries the President to-day Is
sued his proclamation declaring the duties
set forth in section IN force as to sugar.
molasses, coffee. and hides, the product
of or imported from them. separate
proclamation of the same purport Is issued
TO each country.
In the Senate to-day the West Virginia
direct tax bill was postponed until next
Tuesday on account of the sickness OF MIR.
Morrill,, who wishes TO be present when
that bill is taken up.
In the House to-day. the body being in
Committee Of the Whole on the free-wool
bill. Mir. Coombs Democrat(. OF New
York, concluded his speech III favor of the
measure mentioned. The time had pass
ed. he said, when there was need for ex-
travapaut tariffs. He favored tarlf
nolicy by which the financial condition of
his government could be so arranged
that we should not be forever collecting
more than we spent-collecting for one
purpose and expanding Tor another.
With reduction or abolition OF the tarln
on raw materials, an ability 10 compete
with foreign manufacturers on better
terms would exist. No matter now
this Congress cut down expenses, 1t
would not relieve the taxpayers OF their
burden so long as the present high taxa
ton renamed. In response to questions
mt by Mr.. Dingley, Mr.. Coombs said that
the cotton manufacturers or this country
had so much 10 do TO meet our eyer-ln-
creaslng trade that they had not paid pro-
ner attention to the foreign demand. The
very pattern of muslin which was intro
duced from Manchester one year at 70
cents a yard the next year would be imi-
tated by American manufacturers ana
sold from 7 to TX cents. The quality and
nottern OF French silk brought into
his countrs and sold at from IS 10 80
a ward would the next year be initiated by
American manufacturers at 81 and $40.
MIR. Walker (Republcan), OF Massacku-
serts. said that the great body OF state
ments made by Democratic orators on the
s,,hiect of the protective tariff was not
o~ay Technically true. The manufacturers
~ tins country had not the slightest In
terest directly in the tain. IL was not OF
Tho SLIGHTEST interest 10 the manufac-
turers whether we had free trade or
,,ratection. They were satisfied with
one or the other. If the tariff was
not in the interest of the farmers and
n ,ro go workers then he would vote to re-
val II and adopt free trade. Mr.. Dockery
frnamocrat) asked whether the gentleman
meant to saw that manufacturers would be
a. nrosperous under free trade as
nnder protection. Mr.. Walker re-
ni,ed in the affirmative. Mr. Dockery !:
Then. under the theory. Of protection, the
mannfacturers merely become disbursing
accents. Mr.. Walker: That ID a mere
fiction. Mr.. Dockery: 1t seems to be the
iocic of your position. Mr.. Walker
renlied that the manufacturers OF
the country--what was lett OF them
would be more prosperous under free trade
than under protection. But Congress was
not legislating for the manufacturers: IL
WAS leclslaiing for the farmers ana the
wage-workers. Mr.. Walker entered into q
GENERAL defence of the Mckinley bill. de-
Glazing that under it In one year our
foreign trade had increased S406, 000. 600 or
OF rer cent. increase. Mr. Scott. of ILL.,
NOS Deaocrat), attacked the Mckinley
law. He held up its injustice and
;ncouaIities Is bearing on the con-
sinner. and special stress ON the
smear bounty provision He. argued
fsat this provision wss inexpedient IS Z
ruhlic rneasuro. - taking from the
Ess>~~--....- ~ s>onu.io,a sn0nov and uaViu0