Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-06-05

ment fixing January 1, 1895, as the date on
wnlcn the repeal Of the sugar bounty
should go into effect
The Votes In Detail.
A good deal Of interest marked the prog
ress Of the roll call. but there was no party
break and the amendment was carried. 30
81, as follows: Yeas-Allen, Berry. Black
burn. Blanchard. Butler, Caffery, Call, Cam
den, Cockrell. Coke. Faulkner, George, Glib
son. Gray. Harris. Hunton. Jarvis. Jones of
Arkansas, Kyle, Lindsay. McLaurin, Nc
Phsrson, Martin, Mills. Mitchell of Wis
consin, Morgan. Murphy. Palmer, Pasco,
Tusn. Ransom. Roach. Smith. Turpie. Vest
Nays-Aldrich. Allison. Cameron, Casey,
3 Chandler, Cullom, Davis. Dolph, Dubois,
Frye Gallinser. Hale Hansbrough. Hawley.
Higgins. Hoar. Lodge. Mcmillan, Mander-
son. Morrill,. Patton. PETER. Perkins. Petit
grew. Platt, Power. Quay. Sherman. Shoup.
Teller. Washburn-31.
Pairs. Bate and Proctor. Daniel and
Jones Nev). Brice and Wolcott. Villas and
Mitchell (Ore.). Irby and Dixon. Hill and
Stewart did not vote. nor were they paired.
MIR. Henderson then offered his amend
ment to continue In force the two-cent
bounty provision in the Mckinley law. 1t
also was defeated, $40. without party
break. the populists Allen and Kyle vot-
ing with the democrats against and
PETER with the republicans in favor of it.
Mr.. Henderson then offered an amendment
on the line OF the original provision of the
House bill to continue the bounty for ten
years beginning July I, 1895, reducing It
. oDe-tenth each year until 1905, when II
should cease entirely.
p This amendment received the support of
three populists. Allen. Kyle and PETER, but
1t was defeated. 3i-37.
Mr.. Henderson then offered amend
ment to continue the bounty provision of
the Mckinley law in force. but restricting
the payment OF the bounty to the producers
OF beet and sorghum sugars. This also had
the support OF Messrs. Allen. Kyle and Pef-
fer. and it met the fate Of its predecessors.
61-39.
The Nebraska Senator followed this with
an amendment to continue the bounty pro-
vision of the Mckinley law confining 1t to
beet and sorghum sugars. at one instead OF
two cents per pound until 1905. Although 1t
received the pOpuiistic support, IL failed, "a
%. Mr.. Allison then offered an amendment
10 reduce the sugar bounty for the remain
der of the calendar year to eight-tenths
cents per pound. and to make the sugar
schedule take effect Immediately on the
passage OF the bill
The three populists this time voted with
the democrats. and still there was no break
IN party lines. and 1t was defeated. $40.
The Louisiana Sugar Growers.
Mr.. Frye asked Mr.. Allison whether. II the
House agreed to the amendment fixing the
day on which the repeal bounty shouid go
into effect at January /. 1895. the sugar
bounty of two cents for this year, and also
the benefit of the duty.
Mr.. Allison replied that there was doubt
about that. They would get 1-2 advance
for this years crop.
rs not that simply a matter Of opinion"
asked Mr.. McLaurin.
1T Is not" replied Mr.. Allison; ut Is sus-
ceptible Of mathematical calculation.
'It is as true as that two and two make
four" Mr.. McLaurin argued hat II could
be solely a matter OF opinion. The Senate
then passed to the next paragraph. 1S2 1-2.
fixing the duty on sugar.
The Compromise Amendment.
Mr.. Jones offered the compromise"
amendment fixing the duty on raw and re-
fined sugar at 40 per cent ad valorem, with
differential OF one-eighth of one cent on
sugars above 16 Dutch standard, and en-
additional one-tenth on sugars imported
from countries giving an export bounty,
continuing the Hav allan treaty in force and
imposing duty of 2 cents a gallon on
molssses- He offered an amendment to
strike out molasses testing below 40 de-
gress by the polariscope.