Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-05-31

1anfare OF trumpets announced that IL
had back Of IT e solid democratic majority.
his in the face OF the constant evidences
that it had the honest support of neither
faction and that many of it's provisions
were resented as undemocratic How diff
isEeht this spectacle from that presented
u the republican party, which stood unit
ed n favor of levying tariff duties for rev.
ndes and protection, the one necessary
ana proper purpose OF taxation, the other
even greater. to protect employment in the
United states and 10 prevent harsh and I'M
just competitiOn with foreign labor. This
doctrine OF the republican party had been
incorporated in the Mckinley bill. 1t was
10 an extent incorporated in this bill. IL
our friends on the other side, said Mr.
sherman, had come TO us and had said
some Of the rates in the Mckinley bill
are too high, the republicans might have
Joined with them in an equitable revision.
After four years just and proper modihca-
lions of a great revenue measure became
apparent.
Ii it were proposed to pass the House
bin here. he said, the political aisle would
divide two antagoniStic principles. but II
the doctrine OF protection were to be ac-
cepted. il was in the present BILL the
cOnten ton between the two parties in this
chamber was one CT detail, not of prin-
ciple- And If this were the situation, as
he believed IL was. there was a better way
than the one now being adopted to ac-
compIish a revision of the tariff.
A Commission the Best Way.
II should have been done by a commission.
He had always thought that the best way
to frame tariff Hill was through a COM
mission especially appointed for that pur-
pose. Such commission could have framed
the present revision il the doctrine of pro-
lection was 10 be retained. This bill had
been framed without any Of the advantages
which would nave accrued had a nom
partisan commission framed it. IL so hap
pened that even the finance cOmmittee-the
best equipped TO construct tariff schedules
had had little voice in the preparation of
this measure All the work OF the finance
committee had been overruIed and modified
In the bill which bore the name of Mr..
German and his colleague from Ohio (Alr.
BrICeJ.
Dir. sherman then proceeded TO discuss at
considerable length the question Of the
ronsutULOnality Of ievying tariff duties for
protection, going extensively in the debates
Of the constitutional convention and court
decisions III support Of his contention that
tariH taxation for protection was cOnstitu-
tionaL From Il political standpoint he
pointed out that the latter day democracy
had made a Change of front from the ira
ditions Of the past. He quoted from
speech OF Senator Voorhees, delivered as
late as 1SS1. at Terre Haute. in which the
Indiana Senator had cCntended for tariff
Tor incidental protection
Democratic Platform Reviewed.
He reviewed the platform of the demo-
cratic party and the utter1nces of the great
democratic leaders from Jefferson to Blu
chanan - support his statement that all
the platforms ami all the leaders of that
party to 800 had been protecuonists. Even
from 1SGD to 1sy2. he declared. the platforms
of the party had admitted in milk and
water way the doctrine OF & tariff for
revenue. with incidental protection. And
the platform Of lS2, prOciaiming "A tariff
for protection u1cOnStitutiOTa and Il rob
berry, mad been repJdiaJed by MIR. Cleve-
land He was too shreWd to step into that
pitfaIL The author Of the Chicago tariff
plank Lawrence T. Neal, had been de-
featei by Gov. Mckinley on the direct issue
by S6.Jur plurality. the most overwhelming
defeat ever administered 70 any political
candidate in Ohio. The south. he cOnunutd,
which had always contained the most radi-
Cal free trade sentiment in the country, was
undergoing a change of heart.
Protection blessing in the south.
The blessings Of a protective tariff were
becoming apparent in the south. and the
country mas indebted TO the southern SEN
atOrss for some ameliorations, and he men
toned coal and iron ore.
The south had demanded the duty on
sugar and on rice. These duties were not
levied for revenue.
Dir. Sherman. discussing the Mckinley
bill, said II had been ersistently misrepre-
scented as bill to increase revenue. when,
- matter Of fact. il decreased revenues
Stu,Eb.tsH' O. year.
He had always believed that sugar bounty
WAS UHwise and that the bill gave TOO much
protection 10 TIE sugar trust. He went on
II point OUT the good features OF the bill
and 10 correct some of the erroneous i'm
preSSlUnS regarding il.
II President Harrison had been reelected.
he saI1 the Mckinley law would have fur
n-SheI ample revenue FOR the government.
Edlt Of prise Of silver ana Increased de-
msnd for gold might have helped to add 10
the evils which were mostly due 10 ap-
preheusion of tariff legislation
lie denied that the Cleveland election was
demand Tor a tariff for revenue Only. But
there was a desire on jhe democratic side
10 ensratt upon the Constitution the cUufed-
crate constitution, which, he thanked God.
not the Iaw Of the land
Sectional Bill.
The Wilson bill, as il came to the Sem
ate, would have created a deficiency of
$1j.UUO.OJO; the present law under present
conditions made a deficiency Of SG6. 900. 900;
that ana the Wilson bill would have Irade
a total deficiency Of sI40.OOU00V. Specific
duties he declared preferable 10 ad yalCrem
differentiation Of duty. when he was Sec
rotary OF the Treasury. he declared. caused
loss OF - per cent in the revenues. He
aEalyzed the duties in the bill 70 prove that
IL was sectional.
he ridicuIed the policy of free raw ma
teriaL The ore ceased 10 be raw material
when labor was applied 10 bring it out of
the earth.
He cited statistics 70 show that much of
the stock OF banks was in small holdings
ana that the income tax would fail upon
the poor and the thrifty. 1t was justihdo BILE
he said. only as war tax. He favored the
tax during the war and favored II after
ward He believed the industrial depre5-
sion was due to the tendency OF this bill.
Injustice to the FarminG Classes.
He enlarged upon its injustice to the
farming classes. The Senate committee he
thought. had undoubtedly improved the bill
by making it more protective. They thus
confessed the principle of protection, which
they ought To extend to every schedule.
sugar. he said was d proper article to
tax, both for protection and revenue. He
would have favored bounty and a duty,
thus giving both forms Of protection. He
would rather have duty of cents pound
rathe- than any bounty. He had never
approved Of the sugar disposition in the
Mckinley bill But that bill laid moral
obligation. though not a legal one on the
United States To protect those VINO invest
ed money in sugar production at the invi-
tatiOn Of the United States
Drawn by the Renncrs.
The sugar schedule. Le charged, had been
drawn by the reliners Of sugar in their own
interest The ad valOrem Of 10 per cent on
all sugars would permit differentiation of
raw sugars. which We're purchased from the
planters Of Cuba and other countries. Fraud