New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-06-05
.,,r PROCEEDINGS IN DETAIL.

" sacond half-year OF the session. the tenth
on - the consideration Of the Tariff bill and the
W. W. Aav Of the discussion OF the sugar schedule
tn' - Senator HarrAss avowed determi-
Nol"'',9 ,,vc procress made 1t not until after
na"V ~ an hour from the time Of meeting 90
e1 hat a quorum could be obtained, and even
,hare was not one Senator TO spare. MI toar
w. Nass) took advantage Of the circumstance
Vroke suggestions as TO taking recess or ad-
70 .~' The first piece Of business done was tine
~ Joint resolution appropriatins $1,000" for
pNsorsas Of injuries and Investigations ordered
inc c,,to Al 1920 the Tariff bill was laid before
% s.,,,o The amendments to paragraph ~. or
- ny the Finance Committee. changing the time
- the repeal of the sugar bounty Is to take erect
WIZ" ,,,. lSot 10 January /. 1895. agreed to.
~" Consequently. by unanimous consent. that action
- rsconeldercd and the amendments SIN remain
open. ~ ro.,uod b,s controversy
81 -. ur Ailr,cr before adjournment on saturday.
- Mr. A.drich asserted positively. If not ag-
.,,alv 90 thas there no Sugar stock ccrtn-
es,es In the market in lN"'
a. ves- fortified his own statement by reading
~. almanac of 1891. showing that in the year
I'm ~" CO.. an shares of Sugar stock certificates had
.S sold IN New-York. And 1t was while these
49,. sales were being made. with fluctuations OF %
cont that the Mckinley act was being manpu-
lated in Congress.
A. Mr. Adrch was not present while MI vest
,rp ALLISON ATTACKS THE SCHEDULE.
n, Allison Rcp, Iowa. took the floor and argued
.ganst the repeal Of the sugar bounty and against
.i,c,nr sugar or The dutiabe list.
Va declared that the sugar schedule, as now pro-
- WAS In its essence. a captaton tan ana
"a. q, taxed every man. woman ana child IN me
1,,,.el States a dollar year While II allowed '"e
sugpr crop Of The whole word 10 come mo lhe
,,ra5 states free os duty up to January l. 1880
vrha he called the
r...sd, and technical sugar schedule. ard was
~, nv NJ Teller (Rep. Col) 10 state what
.,r,s no the average cost OF the duty per pound to
"a. consumer HIS reply was an admission OF MS
,r,h,.v 10 give a plain answer to the question. lie
,boueht that a frank explanation should nave Oseh
vsn by those who were responsible for L. ana ne
IA honed that the Senator from Missouri Cr.
y.s, would have given such an explanation TINS
morning. ~ .,,
Coming 10 the question OF beet sugar. Mr. Allison
.,oka az the enormous productions OF beet sugar
nv Germany and Aus,ria-the former having an an
rral surplus for expectation OF 10000 TONS ana the
Ter q. 1000 tons There had been imported into
49, 1-,Itsd states he said. o600oO tons Of German
49,. snrar in lS93-a quantity equal 10 the entire
s,,u,, rroiuc:ion Of Louisiana. The 40 per cent
A vs,orern duty on SUGAR provided In the bill would
nr,et,cally exclude from the American market the
,sansd bee: sugars OF Germany, France ana AUS
,,Ia They might possibly be imported from Eng
.ns h,un,y they were cheaper than they were al
bom. 50 that the Senate dealing with very
complicated question and was left to grope around
,,hou, knowing he effect OF the legislation IN
which I; engaged.
SEARCHING FOR INFORMATION.
He offered 10 yield the floor TO Mr.. Vest and 10
le, him inform the Senate as 20 what woud be the
average rate o: duty per pound on sugar ior con-
sumption under the present complicated schedule.
sba
Il hope" said Mr.. A.drch Rep.. r. ID that the
Senator from Missouri will az some time state the
process By which ne arrives a. shat conclusion.
There Will be no trouble about that said Mt
Ves.; that will be done
~ hope So" said Mr.. Adrich.
~ submit" Mr.. Allison remarked That Il ought
20 be done by those who presented this schedule
NJ Jones Dem. Ark) also stated that there was
no difficulty abou, arriving a. the conclusion stated
by Mr. Ves:.
Mr.. Teller CRep. COLI suggested that the ex-
p.anation should be made for the benefit OF SEN
ators who confessed their inability 20 unierstan1
the question. and Mr.. Jones SAID mat ne "ou'u %
SO with great Pleasure. . u. 10.
Nr. Allison proceeded win Ms argument, Ie ~
c.ared that the sugar sche 1ue went beyond me
limit OF protection and was schedule. practcany;
OF prohibition against the importation OF renned
sugar. That unfair 70 all the other industries.
He did not know tauinS 20 the LOUISIANA sen
aiors) what coercion had been brought 10 bear on
the Finance Committee 70 bring about th.s prom
billion OF refined sugar.
NO amount OF explanation OF juggling CUM
change the fact that the proposed section was pro
hibtOry He could not understand why the LOUISE
sugar bountJ provisions. under which the sugar
Industry OF their STATE had prospered during the
last three years more than before
Coming 10 the question % the beet sugar In
dus,ry in the Northwestern States Mr. Allison
ing soil and climate 50 favorable to that Industry.
should go paying tribute 20 the other nations
Democratic party He criticised the Louisiana
senators FOR bowling down to me Joss ,,.o Oa
linked. no; with free ,rade but with protection.
In answer 20 a question Of Mr.. Henderson as 70
for sugar under the proposed schedule. Mr. Allison
sad that beyond all question the price would De
Senators from Louisiana wanted TO ''vindlcate a
'nvCfy ana 70 abandon eondiuon' NJ .u,sor On
number Of technical points rapid. confusing
ana generally unintelligiDle controversy was KEEP
Mr. PETER pop. Kan) asked Mr. Jones what
would be the average increase Of the price Of sugar
per pound 10 the consumer over It's present price.
would Ss a5 s nat e h PD9S the es
Geo that. or / might be little , less. a.,,o,
Mr. PETER again asked whether a duty Of 40 per
cent ad valorem would not operate 10 raise the
Mr.. Jones thought ii might be u. cents; but from
that be deducted he said the 6l-l0O per cent
auiy under the present law.
Alta cKING THE SUGAR TRUST
Mr. Teller rep. Cob referring to Mr.. Jones's
sa'enlsnt tn1t under existing law $Zo,DO'VO went
70 the Sugar Trust. spoke OF that trust as being
based on $50 20 of properly. capitalized at 3d.
woo and paying on that capital from 20 70 q per
cent OF dividends every year. lie understood that
me steal" which Mr. Jones mad spoken OF was 70
oe Continued, but Senators the other side ala
not seem to be willing 70 show why the steal was
- De continued Theoretically. he said he was a
.ree trader but ne found he came 10 the
practical application Of free trade Il did not work
vel at all. In his judgment, coffee and tea-which
we're not produced In this country-were the IDEAL
ssucies for revenue. because all Of the duties i'm
yvsed on those products went to the Treasury but
susar was no, ideal article for revenue because
t..ou SIX 10 eight millions OF the revenue derived
iron. ron Il would 20 into the pockets OF Louisiana
sugar planters
NE declared that an income tax brought down
~ incomes even OF 81 900 year. and with per
,segft ADDED to IT, would be less oiious and an
ahnlteiy farer tax than duty on sugar. lie said,
"a Conclusion. that he would vote first for the
sso1hty, because ne thought 1t preferable 10 duty
ssnu tnen he would vote against the duty because
se thought that the people should have free raw
esa Tree refined sugar.
Ar Blanchard dem, LAD defended the position
a..l col