St. Paul daily globe., 1894-07-21

inure to the benefit of the producers?'
asked MIR. Caffery. of Louisiana.
1.-The senator from Louisiana Is better
able to answer that question than ]"
replied Mr.. Villas. ''But it has met
with the universal disapprobation of
the caucus. 1t has been placed in the
bill as a peculiar advantage to the trust.
AS such l deal with it. Let US deliver
ourselves from the charge of SuDservI-
ence to colossal aud Cr95us-like COM
binatiOn."
THE TRUSTS GREAT PROFITS.
The sugar trust corporation. he said,
had been able IN SINCE year 10 divide
nearly one-third of the aggregate of
the gigantic and inflated stock of $75.-
000.000. Did such a corporation need
protection? As long ago as 1888 the
president of the sugar trust had said
sugar could be refined here at a cheaper
labor rate than in England, France or
Germany. For one he could not sup
port this measure without seeking to
relieve the conference Of this tax. so
obnoxious and oppressive to the people,
SO criminal in its purpose and and so
offensive 10 the True principles or
rIue Democracy. The tariff reform
measure OH which there was so much
hope for the future, he concluded, should
not be marred with the badge of seryi
tude to the sugar trust. Mr.. Catfery, in
reply 10 Mr.. Villas. said he was in the
senate TO guard the interests of his
state. Sugar was its most staple prod
uct. He was not interested III the sugar
trust, nor were his people. sBut the pro-
dueeTS OF Louisiana were also manu-
facturers of centrifugal sugars, with
which those of the trust competed, and
they were entitled to the one-eighth of
AGENT differ entail. He declared that i'm
the matter OF tariff reform he was in
strict accord with the orthodox teDets of
his party. He reviewed the historic
attitude of his party toward a sugar
duty. A fair revenue duty on sugar
now was what the situation demanded
and all the sugar producers of Louisiana
asked. He was a Democrat; he loved
his party, but if the time came when he
had to choose between his state and his
party, lie would stand by his state. Ii
he-One-eighth differential on refined
sugar were stricken out, he declared in
conclusion, he would not vote for the
bill.
Mr.. Sherman. replying briefly to Mr..
Caffery, declared that in his opinion
fat ad valorem duty of 40 per cent was
SUFFICIENT TO protect the sugar producers
ofek6uisiana. The sugar producers, in
his opinion, had no right to complain.
Sugar was offered higher duty than
any other agricultural product. Why
should the additional one-eighth of cent
be imposed?
PALMER TAKES A HAND.
Mr.. Palmer Qll.) proclaimed that he
was i'll favor of free raw materials, and
announced that he would oppose the
one eighth ditterential to the sugar
trust. He thought sugar producers of
Louisiana were III pUOr company when
they joined hands with the sugar trust.
The partnership should be dissolved.
docs an identity Of interests consti-
tute partnership" asked Air. Caffery.
Certainly" replied Mr. Palmer.
IAN Identity of interests and division
of profits do constitute partnership"
"Protection," Mr. Palmer continued,
twas sham and a fraud.''
Ibid you believe when you moved to
take barbed wire from the free list and
place duty OH it that protection was
fraud?" asked Mr.. Gallery.
Il did," replied MIR. Palmer, amid
laughter. Ii the materials out of which
barbed wire was made had been OH the
free list should have supported the
proposition to place the wire Oh the free
list"
MIR. Palmer said he was in favor of
passing the bill with such notifications
as could be obtained. He was in favor
OF sending it to the president. Let the
president do his duty as he understands
it., said he. elf lie thinks this is a bet
ter bill than the Mckinley law, let him
sign 1t; If not let him veto it. | voted
for this bill because practically this was
all we could accomplish. | was Il sena-
tor from Illinois before Mr.. Cleveland
was elected president. "a word to the
wise Is sufficient"
Mr.. Blanchard Dem. La), who fol-
lowed Mir. Palmer. charged bad faith on
the part OF some of the Democratic SEN
atdrS. He pointed out that in the Dem
ocratic caucus the concessions he
PLACED IN THE SENATE BILL
were assented to Dy forty-three Demo-
cratic senators. The 1s differential Cd
refined sugar was one of those couces-
siohs. The 4O per cent on raw and re-
fined sugar was another, and the pay
ment OF bounty for the remainder of
The present year was another. This
last agreement was violated. MIR. Villas.
who made the motion to strike the X
OF, was in caucus, Mr.. Blanchard said,
and had made no AFFECTION to it.
Somebody" said he, ais not living up
to his agreement, which is as binding
now as 1t ever was" The Louisiana
senators, although the caucus arrange
ment had been violated In the failure to
provide for the continuation of the
bounty for the remainder of the wear.
had voted for the bill with the eXpecta-
tlon that the provision would be in
serted in conference Mr.. Blanchard
called attention to the fact that Mr.. Hill.
who was now anlasoniStic to his posi-
tIon on sugar, was in the Democratic
conference anu did not raise his voice
against the sugar schedule.
'Ihe senator very we'll knows" ins
terrupted MIR. Hill, that l dissented
wholly from the conclusion of that
caucus and refused to be bound by it. |
did not mention sugar one way or the
other"
MIR. Blanchard proceeded to say that
1t was time To be plain spoken. Over
S100, 100000 in his state was involved.
and, without indulging in threats, he
desired to say that the Louisiana repre-.
sentatives expected that the caucus
agreement would be carried out to the
letter.
When Mr.. Blanchard concluded, Mr..
Coekrell moved that when the senate,
adjourn today it be to meet on Monday
next.
Mr.. Hill attempted to resist the mo-
tlon, but 1t was not debataUle. The mo-
ton was carried-30 10 23.s
Then, at $40 p. m, the senate went
into executive session. and. at $50 D.
M. adjourned until Monday at IL
O'clock.
SENATOR'S AT SEa