The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1894-06-02
ON The TRUSTS TRAIL
Men Who Look Mighty Wise But Aren't
Saying Very Much.
NOrAT THE BOTTOM FACTS
II Looks as u the Senate Committee o
Was Not Going to Discover the
Fine Italian Hand Of the
Sugar Agents.

WASHINGTON, June 1.-When tho tariff
bill was laid before the senate to-day tho
battle over the sugar schedule began. The
Mckinley law placed raw sugar oh the
free list, imposed cent duty on refined
sugar and gave q bounty Of cents tn
sugar growers. The house bill repealed
free list. The first bill reported from the
finance committee Of the senate gave q
specific duty of cent 10 l.2s5 per pound
according to polariscopic test.
The compromise amendment, the ono
now before the senate, made the sugar
schedule 60 into effect Jan. I, 1895, the
rates being 40 per cent. ad valorem on all
sugars, raw and refined, and one-elghth
of percent. additional on sugars above
IL Dutch standard, with an additional
one-tenth Of cent per pound on sugar
from countries paying export bounties.
II also continues tho sugar treaty with
Hawaii.
Manderson said the sugar schedule
seemed TO pervade the whole bill. The
bill could not be touched without LAYING a
hand on sugar. Almost five billion
pounds Of raw sugar had been consumed
last year, representing, II grown and re.
fined abroad, grand total Of Sls2. .0O0, 600
10 be paid TO foreigners. FREQ sugar would
mean the immediate destruction of the
beet sugar industry and the gradual ex.
tinction Of cane sugar production In the
southern states. properly protected. he
prophesied. that before 1895, tho bee,
sugar production would have SO developed
In hA nd in, shs. A,
that the United States could supply the
full consumption of tho country. Bee,
sugar growing, when developed TO an
extent necessary to supply the
home demands. would afford a
crop of 100000 acres. Was II
any wonder that tho farmers Of tho west
wanted q continuation Of the sugar
bounty? They were enthusiastic over the
prospect. II was q great boon which they
asked congress to save to them. No coun'
try in the world was so well adapted tc
produce beet sugar as the United States
Beet growing ultimately would displaoe
cane growing. Manderson denied that In
fostering the growth of beet and cane su
gar any obligation existed to protect reiln'
ers. There was no connection, he declared
hstween the sugar grower and the odioui
sugar trust.
Mr.. Manderson gave notice that at the
proper time he would offer as a substitute
for the sugar schedule the bounty provis
ion of the Mckinley bill, continuing il In
force until July /, 1895. He argued at
length in support Of the constitutionalit,
Of bounties, quoting extensively from
court decisions, and especially from the
decision Of Justice Miller. IF congres.
were to give bounty" inquired CATER,
Of Louisiana, ito the farme- or manu-
facturer. do you contend that the court.
have no right to inquire whether the
bounty is given for public or private pur
pose?" ~ do" replied Manderson, ",he
decision Of Miller is conclusive on thai
point"
Mr.. PETER proceeded at great length to
support the bounty instead of the duty OF
sugar. In the course OF his speech he
drifted into the discussion of tho silver
question, touched upon his ideas of tho
theory Of government and the panaces
for the existing ills OF body politics. Il
was 5 As o'clock when PETER concluded
Harris then moved that the senate pro
ceed to the consideration of executive
business. Before he made tho motion he
declared that the country was Impatient
over the slow progress MADE on this bill
and that business interests everywhere
were suffering from the utterly inexcus
able delay Ho gave notice that aftei
Monday he would compel the senate tc
endure longer hours until after the bill
was disposed Of.