The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-06-05
VEST SHOWS UP A RECORD.
II Puts the Republicans in a Hole on
the Sugar Question.

20 Cents During the Senate Debate
and Finally Fixed at 30 Cents.
Allison Argues Against the Repeal
of the Bounty The Cost to the Con-
sumner Under the Proposed Legisla-
tion.
Washington, June 4.-The Senate to-
day entered on the second half year of
the session, the tenth week of the con-
sideration of the tariff bill, and the third
day of the discussion Of the sugar sched-
ule. 1t took a quarter of an hour after
the stated hour of meeting to secure a
quorum.
The first piece Of business done was the
passage of a joint resolution appropriating
$4,000 for the expenses of inquiries and
Investigations ordered by the Senate
On schedule time all pending business
was put aside, and the tariff bill was
taken up. The amendments TO para
graph 102, offered by the finance commit
tee, changing the time when the repeal of
the sugar bounty is to take effect from
July /, 1894, to Jan 1, 1895, was agreed to.
Subsequently, by unanimous consent,
that action was reconsidered, and the
amendment still remains open.
THE REPUBLICAN RECORD on SUGAR.
Mr.. Vest, dem, Of Missouri, recalled
his controversy with Mr. Aldrich before
adjournment on Saturday when Mr.,
AldriCh asserted positively, IL not ag
gressively,n that there was no sugar
stock certificates in the market in 1890
Mr.. Vest fortified his own statement by
reading from an almanac of 1891, showing
Nl,sRF - an mn Il.
sugar stock certificates had been sold in
New York and it was while these large
sales were being made, with fuctua-
tions of 30 per cent, that the
Mckinley act was being manipu-
lated in congress. He went on to
show that from duty of about 16 cents
per hundred pounds, when the bill was
first reported from the committee on ways
and means of the House, it had gone up
by jumps TO 20 cents per hundred pounds,
and was then reduced IN conference to 80
cents per hundred pounds, the existing
rate. "And YETI said he con
temptuousIy, ''our friends on the other
side taunt us with being under the
control Of the sugar trust, and they ask
US constantly for the principl on which
certain things have been done. / would
like to know on what principle that
change took placei ! would like TO under
stand what principle entered into that
sort of legislation l know nothing else
that could have caused it except some in
! fiuence unknown to the public"
AS Mr. Aldrich was not present while
Mr.. Vest spoke, there was no reply to his
remarks.
ALLISON TAKES THE FLOOR.
Mr.. Allison took the floor and argued
against the repeal of the sugar bounty,
and against placing sugar on the dutiable
| list. He offered to yield the floor to Mr..
| Vest and let him inform the Senate as to
what would be the average rate of duty
per pound for sugar for ption un-
der the present complicated schedule.
| Mr. Vest stated ii at % cents on the 100
pounds.
II hope" said Mr. Allison, chat the
senator from Missouri will at some time
state the process by which he arrives at
that conclusion"
There will be no trouble, about that, )"
! Mr.. Vest said, that will be done"
Mr.. Jones, dem, of Arkansas, also
stated that there was no difficulty about
arriving at the conclusion stated by Mr..
Vest.
Mr.. Teller, of Colorado, suggested that
the explanation should be made for the
benetU of senators who confessed their
inability to understand the question; and
Mr.. Jones said that he would do so with
great pleasure.
Mr.. Allison proceeded with his argu-
ment He declared that the sugar sched-
ule went beyond the limit Of protection,
and was a schedule, practically, of prohi-
bition against the importation Of refined
sugar. That was unfair to all the other
industries.
THE COST TO THE CONSUMER.
In answer to a question of Mr.. Mander-
son, as to the increased price which would
have to be paid for sugar under the pro-
/ posed schedule. Mr.. Allison said that, be-
yond all question, the price would be in
| creased IL cents q pound. And all be-
cause the senators from Louisiana wanted
to "vindicate a theory and to abandon
condition" He concluded with these
words: If | had my way would strike
from this bill every vestige of duty on
sugar, and would continue the bounty on
sugar, as we are morally bound TO do, till
! 1905: and If additional revenue were nee
essary, | would look around among the
luxurles and lay duties on them"
Mr. Jones, of Arkansas, replied TO Mr..
! Allison, and defended the schedule as pro-
posed by the finance committee. His re-
marks were mostly Of technical charac-
ter, involving the various points as TO
raw sugar above and below certain points
of saccharne strength, as to the effect of
the different rates of duty upon them;
and as to the point where the market
value of raw sugars is to be fixed
whether at the point of export, or at the
principal markets in the country from
which th ey come. On these and many
other abstruse points, rapid, confusing
and generally unintelligible controversy
was kept up for n long time between him
and Mr. Allison. Mr.. Jones. however,
asserted very positively that under the
existing law there was not pound of
free sugar, but that $4,000, 900 year
was paid to sugar refners and not dol
lar TO the treasury.
PEFFRR ASKS QUESTION.
Mr.. PETER asked Mr.. Jones what would
be the average increase Of the price Of
sugar per pound to the consumer over its
present pricel
MIR. Jones replied that he supposed the
increase would be about one-half Of a cent
pound; it might exceed that, or it might
be little less.
ooh. more than that" Mr.. Allison re-
marked.
Mr.. PETER again asked whether duty
OF 40 per cent. ad valorem would not oper-
ate to raise the price Of sugar from a TO
l15 cents pound.
Mr.. Jones thought il might be a cents;
but from that was TO be deducted. he
said the 6l-1O0 per cent. duty under the
present law.
In colloquy with Mr.. Allison, Mr..
AldriCh and Mr. Teller. it was stated by
MIR Caffery, of Louisiana, that under the
- 1fHfaf IA