Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1894-06-05
SUGAR SCHEDULE
Now Under Discussion in the Senate
Merci|essIy Riddled.
Denounced As Scheme Of Public Plunder BY
worst Trust In Country.

WASHINGTON, June 4.-The joint resolu-
ton appropriating 500 for the expenses
of the Senate investigation was passed.
The tariff bill was taken up and amend
ments to paragraph lS2 were offered by the
finance committee, changing the time when
the repeal of the sugar bounty is to take
effect from July l, 1896 to July l., 1895,
agreed to. Subsequently by unanimous
consent, the action was reconsidered, and
the amendments still remain open.
Allison (Rep.) of Iowa, argued against
the repeal of the sugar bounty and
against placing sugar on the dutiable
list. He declared the sugar tax now
proposed, was in essence capita
ton tax. 1t taxed every man, woman and
1t allowed the sugar crop of the whole
duty up to January /, 1895. Forty per
cent. ad valorem duty on sugar provided in
the bill would practically exclude from the
American market the refined beet sugars of
Germany, France and Austria. He offered
to yield the floor and let Mr.. Vest inform
the Senate as to what would be the average
rate of duty per pound on sugar for con-
sumption, under present complicated sched-
ule. Mr.. Vest stated 25 cents on 100
pounds. Allison declared that the sugar
schedule went beyond the limit of protec-
ton and was a schedule practically of pro-
hibition sgainst the Importation of refined
sugar. That was unfair to all other indus
tries. Under the proposed schedule Mr..
Allison said beyond all question the price
of sugar will be increased one and a half
cents pound.
Jones (Dem.) of Arkansas replied to
Allison. On number of technical points
a rapid, confusing and generally unintelli-
gible controversy was kept up for q long
time between the senator from Arkansas
and Aldrich. Blanchard (Dem.) Of Lou
isiana argued in support of the sugar
schedule. Carey (Rep.) of Wyoming ad-
vocated the sugar bounty.
Caffery (Dem.) of Louisiana advocated
the sugar schedule. Morgan (Dem.) of
Alabama gave notice of an amendment
making it criminal offence for persons to
enter into combination or conspiracy to
import any article to increase its market
price in any part of the United States.
Chandler (Rep) of New Hampshire made
an argument in favor of the continuation
of the sugar bounty against the imposition
Va uuey Oh suSais
At the close of his speech the question
was stated to be an amendment changing
the date of the repeal of the sugar bounty
from July l, 1894, to Jan. l, 1895. AL
drich argued that the effect of the postpone
ment of the repeal and of postponement till
the same period of time when the sugar
duty was to so into effect would be to give
the sugar trust six months within which to
buy up all the sugar of the world and en-
able it to charge cent and half a pound
additional on all sugar consumed.
Platt (Rep.) of Connecticut spoke of the
amendment rs "scheme of public plunder
for the benefit of the greatest and most
avaricious combination or trust in the
United States"
After some discussion of the matter, il
was agreed that the vote on the pending
amendment and on Mr.. Mauderson's pro-
poaed amendment ''to continue the sugar
bounty to 1895" should be taken by | to-
morrow; on any other amendments debate
should be under the ten minute rule and
the sugar schedule before disposed of be-
fore adjournment tomorrow. The Senate,
after executive session, adjourned.