The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-09
COMMENTS ON GoRMAN,s BILL.
Hill Still Observation-Disclosures by
RcpubIicans.


Republicans.
WASHINGTON, May S.-Leadng Sem
ators were chary to-day about expressing
themselves upon the subject of the revised
tariff bill. Senator Mcpherson would not
talk, saying he had not read the bill with
sufficient care to justify statement for
publication. Senator Hill did not claim not
to have read the bill, but he said he had
nothing TO say on the subject beyond what
he had previously said. and he indicated
that he did not consider the bill acceptable
so long as il should contain any provision
for income tax.
Senator JONES' who had assumed the bur-
den of preparing the amendments. said that
he believed the bill would be passed by
Democratic votes, and that it would be
sent back to the House sooner than most
people believed. The finance committed
said he, has every confidence of enough
Democratic votes to put it through. Sen
ator Smith spoke approvingly of the
changes, and expressed apprC val of the
tariff part OF the bill, but added: 'I am
not yet entirely reconciled to the income
tax"
Senator Faulkner contented himself with
expressing confidence in the work of the
tariff committee, and in saying that he be-
leved that the bill would pass Senator
Cockrell said that he thought the bill, when
perfected, would be one of the best tariff
bills the country ever had He thought the
bill would pass the Senate.
The Republicans were naturally not so
well pleased with 1t. Senator Dubois char
aGS sad Il tbs as tber 0e S in 81
courses for the Republicans to pursue-to
either let the bill pass after a businesslike
discussion OF it's provisions. or to stand 1t
March a
the former the wiser course to pursue.
Senator Platt said: IF the Wilson bill
be called a bin of shame. If it had not
been for the power of the Sugar Trust 1t
Is doubtful, in my mind, If there would have
been single protective duty in the bill,
but even the Democratic members Of the
finance committee could scarcely give the
Sugar Trust the duties which would en-
able 1t to make more money than under
the Mckinley law and withhold the SEM
blance of protection from all other indus
tries. 1t is bill without principle. pressed
by party without policy.
Senator Aldrich said Every schedule
except those bearing on woods and spirits,
and almost every paragraph OF the bill as
reported from the committee originally, has
been amended by providing an Increase of
duties ranging from 10 to 800 per cent The
taking the place OF the ad valorem rates
originally reported. If the rates had been
tion TO all industries, the bill would not
have been SO Objectionable, but the in
creased duties evidently nave been proposed
TO and were the demand OF Democratic Sem
ators who were dissatisfied with the original
bill. The increase in rates which they have
insisted upon is unequal, and the result is
bill less harmonious, less just in its pro-
visions than that originally reported to the
Senate. Some large industries have re-
ceived no recognition, presumably from the
fact that their claims have not been urged
with sufficient vigor upon the conference
committee who are understood to have pre-
pared this measure"
1.-The trusts which simply had their fingers
in the first edition have put their arms up
to the shoulder blades into this fourth edi-
ton OF the tariff reform" said Senator
Hansbrough; 'and" he continued, 1--WE are
told in the debate to-day there may be
another edition. Raw wool. notice. Is still
on the free list. Mr. Havemeyer, head of
the Sugar Trust has been given about a
cent. per pound ad valorem over foreign
refiners. while the humble sheep raisers on
American farms are left TO compete on an
equality with the Australian wool raiser.
Along with this wicked discrimination
against one class OF producers the rates
Senator'S Mills, Berry and Faulkner con-
ferred with House members during the day
concerning the tariff situation The feel
ing or opposition to the amendments was
very marked among Democratic members,
as they regarded the changes as a step
toward protection and as retreat from
the revenue-reform lines OF the Wilson bill.
Mr.. MOntgomery, of Kentucky, a member
OF the WAYS and means committee. said taat
the amondments looked like a move for the
worse all along the line. He had not ex-
amined the details OF the amendments, yet
they impressed him as being In the line OF
protection.
on the Republican side of the House
there was much sarcastic comment. Mr.:
means committee. said that the changes
gave protection in spots. Some items had
secured ample protection. but there ap-
peared 70 be no system In making the