The Washington times., 1894-04-05
Attacks Income Tax, Ad valorem
Duties, and Sugar Tax.
MILLS ON SPECIFIC DUTIES
Sharp Criticism Of the Texan Tariff Reformer
on Republican Methods-He Is Not Salts
fed with the Bill, but Will Vote for It as
the Best Obtainable.

ator Allison's speech. He began by an attach
on the substitution ofthe ad valorem for the
specific method of levying duties, and also
| against the tax on sugar and increase OF tax
ON distilled liquors and on the income tax.
Then he began diatribe against the blind
method of estimating revenue under the bill
by basing that estimate on the importationf
| OF last year, and he likened the bill to mole
burrowing in the earth without knowing
| where it would come out.
In the language Of the famous representa-
tive from Georgia, Mr.. Allison inquired.
"where are we MP" Laughter.l without
knowing where we were, or whether at the end
of the year we would be in bankruptcy and
in ruin, We are absolutely cropping in the
dark
Senator Vest said that no man who was not
| inspired (and the days OF inspiration were
over in the Democratic party could
| predict what the importation would be next
| year or the year after.
In response to question, Senator Allison
declared he intended TO vote for free sugar,
both raw and refined, as it was in the bill as it
| came from the House. and then he would pro-
| pose an amendment for replacing the bounty
| on sugar as it was in the Mckinley law.
| Senator Mcpherson inquired whether 1t was
not as necessary for the people to have cloth
ing as to have sugar, and II so, whether it
| would not be right to give them free clothing
and then give the clothing manufacturer a
bounty, taxing the people for 1t.
1.-The Senator has reached another point Of
discussion responded Mr.. Allison.
81 had always supposed sugar was excep-
tlonal, and had believed that it needed stimu-
lation, while the clothing industry did not"
Mr. Allison then passed to discussion of
the alcoholic liquor schedule of the Senate
bill, and opposed the addition OF 10 cents
gallon, made by the House. and the further
addition of 10 cents gallon made by the
Senate. as imposing great hardship on many
industries of the country.
He severely criticised the bill which, while
disturbing every industry in the country and
absolutely destroying many OF them by seal
ing down the duties on their products, created
Il deficit which it was proposed to meet by
levying tax on sugar and an income, and
the Senator from Indiana Mr.. Voorheesl he
declared had confessed that this was but the
first step. and that when the revenue from
those sources became sufficient another step
was TO be taken in the direction Of reduc-
tion of duties.
The bill. If passed. would upset our reci-
procity treaties. thus getting this country into
trouble with the countries of Europe as well
as those on this side OF the water.
There was nothing in the bill favorable to the
agricultural classes unless the medium of u
cents on sugar could be called a protection.
There was one class of people, however
who would be benefited by 1t. and that was
English manufacturers. who would send
their goods into this country to compete with
our own hardy workers.
He then branched out into a discussion of
the silver question as the tariff bore on it.
maintaining that this country was following
the footsteps of Great Britain. She was los
ing her trade now because of her dealings
with India and she was losing her trade
there and in all oriental countries because of
the position of England with regard to silver.
The looms OF Manchester were idle on account
of it.
''And now we propose to surrender our
markets 10 Great Britain, he continued earn
estly, lin order that she may take our gold to
fight battles against the world. We are
to allow the woo-growers of Australia to
come in here without opposition ana compete
with the wool-grower of Montana. sending to
Australia from 800. 100000 to S150.000 900 in
gold to enable one of England's colonies to
continue the fight aSainst the world In oppo-
sition TO n double standard
In conclusion he asserted that as a Senator
OF the United States he should not knowingly
contribute by this bill or any other to pro-
noting the interests of Great Britain at the
sacrifice Of the interests of his own country.
Senator PETER then obtained recognition.
but yielded the floor to Senator Mills. with the
understanding that he should not thus yield
his right TO il this morning.
Mr.. Mills then spoke for about half an hour,
combining himself principally to a defense of
the ad valorem system of taxation. which. he
said was Endorsed by Secretary Carlisle. as
well as by Secretary Walker. The value of
all articles made by human labor. he as
serted, and especially those made by machin-
cry. were falling all over the world. and had
been falling for fifty or sixty years. but under
n specific system of taxation no change would
be made in the duty on such articles on that
account. He declared specific duties to be
unjust. un-American. and un-Democratic,
and in reply TO a question of Senator Mitchell,
of Oregon, why a specific duty had been re-
tanned on so many articles, retorted by ask
ing. "Why. in the Mckinley law there were so
many examples of the ad valorem system"
Senator Allison subsequently asked SINH
lar question. in reply to which he asked why,
when the tariff commission appointed by
President Arthur had advocated a duty of Is
per cent. on hides. that duty had afterward
been taken of. "Why was that!" he asked.
sit was because you New England people
demanded it. You must come to the confess
sionai and must come to the confessional"
he continued. I'VE cannot pass our bill
without making some concessions. am be-
tween the devil and the deep sea. and when it
is aquestion of going to the devil by keeping
the Mckinley law or of going to the sea and
trusting to some favorable wind to blow us
back TO land l am going to sea-
He then yielded to Senator Call, of Florida,
and on his motion the Senate at 4. As o'clock
went into executive session.