The weekly Thibodaux sentinel and journal of the 8th Senatorial District. [volume] (Thibodaux, Lna. [i.e. La.]) 1875-1898, 1894-09-01

Senator Jones on the Tariff.
HE GIVES A HISTORY OF THE GREAT
CONTEST

i*Coiit tt.itt bfil contest. he Sona
tor. it will be remembered, was a
member of the sub committee to
which the Wilson bill was first refer
! red. Senator Jones says in part:
The bill, as first reported back to
E; the committee. may be considered as
an expression Of the opinions of our
] sub committee men, unm0difed by
the views Of our associates in the sem
ate. While a large majority of the
! Democrats III the senate were perfect
ly satisfied with the bill, number
complained of different parts of it and
efforts for harmony prevented another.
While there are changes in a number
of schedules, Of Importance, too, this
second report of ours provided also for
free sugar, free coal and free iron ore.
The senator relates how that, owing
to the persistent demands of senator's.
representing sugar interests, members
OF the sub-c ,mmittee, with great reluc-
tance and regret, submitted further
change in the bill imposing a tariff
ranging from $40 Of cent to l cent
per pound on all sugar, with no addi.
tlonal tax on refined sugar, proposing
| a tax Of 80 cents per ton and coal. and
making iron ore free, hoping thereby
to secnre united Democratic action.
At the caucus of Democratic senators,
which lasted three days. the senators
from Louisiana, especially White,
spoke against the bill. At the same
time senators of those states where
sugar retineries were located decided
that they could not support the bill
without some tariff on refined sugar if
there was tariff on the raw. The
result of this protracted and stormy
caucus was the adoption of resolution
sending the bill hack to the committee
with instructions to amend it so as to
meet the difficulties which had been
developed in the caucus. In obe-
dlence to this action, whic.i was really
equivalent to an order to tax sugar,
coal and iron ore, we brought in bill
with tax of l cent per pound on sugar
testing 80 degrees by the polariscope
and cent additional for egch degree
uD to 80, and 81 cent for each degree
above 80 and up to SO and on sugar
above Is standard on the color, an
additional tax of 1-8 cent per pound.
With this promise aud with coal and
iron ore at 40 cents per ton the bill
was reported to the senate on March
20.
"These changes gave no satisfaction,
and it became evident that the bill
would be defeated if insisted on. In
this emergency determined to see if
there were not some means Of saving
the bill. Governor Hill, one of tile
forty four Democrats in the senate;
was openly hostile to the bill. To
pass the bill would require 43 votes,
hence it was necessary that everyone
Of the remaining 43 votes be secured
for the support of the bill. Several of
these had already openly declared
they could not and would not vote for
the bill as reported, and it was decided
to amend it SO as to secure their sup
port. These notifications involved
changes of the sugar schedule from a
specific to an ad valorem duty. tile
imposition of an additional tax of one
tenth of per cent OH all sugars i'm
ported from countries paying baunties.
and that the sugar schedule should
not become operative until Jan. 1.
1895 taxes on coal and iron ore at
the rate Of 40 cents per ton and chan
ges in the textile and other schedules
of more or less Importance.
Before the amended bill was report
ed back to the committee Senator
Jones said he ec0nsulted with President
Cleveland, Secretary Carlisle and
members of the finance committee,
explaining the necessity for making
the changes mentioned. They all
agreed as to the advisability of doing
so. and a cancns of Democratic sena-
tors decided to support the bill as
amended. From May 1. when the
amendments were offered. to July 8,
when the bill finally passed the senate,
the 43 Democrats stood together like
stone wall and reclaimed their
pledges like men, with but single
break.
"There are many things in the
senate bill rot satisfactory to me. IF
| could have my own way ] would
have raised the revenue needed from
incomes on whisky. beer and tobacco,
and not from sugar or from wooden
goods, and when imposing a tax on
sugar wonld not have imposed an
extra tax on refined sugar. resisted
all these changes with all my power,
|, as did my colleagues on the sub-com-
mittee. and we made them as small as
possible, and at last only accepted
such as were absolutely necessary to
the passage of the bill. The bill, as