Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-06-05
THE sgd CONGRESS.
Allison In the Senate on Repeal Of the
Sugar Bounty.
STATE-BANK-TAX BILL.
Rayner on the Repeal Plank Of the Chicago
Platform-Cobb and Oates for
the Measure.

half-year OF the session. the tenth week
Of the consideration of the tarin Dill,
and the third of the discussion OF the
sugar schedule.
II took a quarter Of an hour after the
stated hour Of meeting to secure quo
rum. The first piece of business done
was the passage OF a joint resolution
appropriating $4,000 for the expenses OF
injuries and Investigations ordered by
the Senate.
on schedule time all pending business
was put aside. and the tariff bill taken
up. The amendments to paragraph ls2.
offered by the Finance Committee,
changing the time when the repeal OF
the sugar bounty is 10 take effect from
May /, 1894, to January L. 1895. were agreed
to. Subsequently, by unanimous consent,
that action was reconsidered. and the
amendments still remain open.
Mr. Vest recalled his controversy with
Mr. Aldrich before adjournment on Sa-
turday, when Mr.. Aldrich asserted, posi-
lively, II not aggressively." that there
were no sugar-stock certificates In the
market In 1899. Mr.. Vest fortified his
own statement by reading from an
almanac OF 1891. showing that in the year
1890. 1,552, 600 shares Of sugar-stock certi-
ficates had been sold in New York. And
1t was while these large sales were being
made. with fluctuations OF 30 per cent,
that the Mckinley act was being manipu-
lated In Congress. He went on to show
that from duty Of about IL per cent,
when the bill was first reported from the
Committee on Ways and Means. the tax
went up by jumps to 20 cents per hundred
pounds. and was then reduced in confer
ence to 30 cents-the existing rate. And
yet" said he contemptuously. "our friends
on the other side taunt us with being
under the control of the Sugar Trust.
And tfey ask us constantly for the
principle on which certain things have
been done. I would like to understand
what principle entered into that sort OF
legislation. | would like to know on what
principle that change took place. ! know
nothing else that could have caused II
except some influence unknown to the
public"
As Mr.. Aldrich was not present when
Mr.. Vest spoke. there was no reply.
Mr.. Allison took the floor and argued
against 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 az to
what would be the average rate of duty
per pound on sugar for consumption under
the present complicated schedule. Mr..
Vest stated It at o cents on the hundred
pounds.
Il hope" said Mr.. Allison. that 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. of Arkansas. also stated that
there was no difficulty about arriving at
the conclusion stated by Mr.. Vest.
Mr.. Teller suggested that the explana-
ton should be made for the benefit OF
senator's who confessed their inability to
understand the question. and Mr.. Jones
said he would do so.
Mr. Allison proceeded with his argument.
He declared that the sugar schedule
went beyond the limit of protection. and
was schedule. practically. of prohbi-
ton against the importation of refined
sugar That was unfair 10 all the other
industries.
In answer TO question of Mr.. Mander-
sons as to the increased price which
would have 10 be paid for sugar under the
proposed schedule. Mr.. Allison said that
beyond all question the price would be
increased l-2 cents a pound. And all
because the Senator from Louisiana
wanted 10 "vindicate theory and abandon
a condition" lie concluded with these
words "If had my way. | would strike
from this bill every vestge of duty on
sugar. and would continue the bounty on
sugar. as we are morally bound to do.
till 1905, and II additional revenue were
necessary. | would look around among the
luXuries and lay duties on them"
JONES ANSWERS ALLISON.
Mr.. Jones replied TO Mr.. Allison. and
defended the schedule as proposed by the
Finance Committee. His remarks were
mostly Of technical character. involving
the various points as TO raw sugar above
and below certain points of saccharine
strength; as TO the effect OF the different
rates Of duty on them. and as to the point
where the market value Of raw sugars
Is to be fXed-whether at the point of ex-
port. or at the principal markets of the
country from which they come.
On these and many other abstruse
points a rapid. confusing, and generally
unintelligible controversy was kept up for
a long time between him and Mr. ALI
son. Mr.. Jones. however asserted very
positively that under existing law there
was not a pound OF free sugar. but that
81, 000.O0O annually was paid sugar re-
finers and not a dollar to the Treasury.
Mr.. Allison asked Mr.. Jones what would
be the average increase Of the price of
sugar per pound TO the consumer over the
present price.
Mr.. Jones replied that he supposed the
increase would be about y cent a pound.
Ii might exceed that. or 1t might be a
little less.
"Oh. more than that" Mr.. Allison re-
marked.
Mr.. PETER again asked whether a duty
OF 40 per cent. ad vaorem would not ope-
rate to raise the price of sugar from IA
to IL cents a pound.
Mr.. Jones thought II might be IA
cents, but from that was 10 be deducted.
he said. the 6l-lCo per cent. duty under
the present law.
In colloquy with Messrs. Allison. Aid
rich. and Teller, it was stated by Mr..
Caffery, of Louisiana. that under the
tariff and excise laws of Germany the
prices Of sugar to the consumer was
S cents per pound, while owing to the
bounty allowed for expectation and to
the freedom from excise taxes. the same
sugar was sold in London at l l-l5 cents
a pound. And he argued that that was
the condition of things which sugar
bounty was calculated 10 produce He pub
llcly avowed his acknowledgement to the
senators OF his party for the duty on
sugar
Mr.. Morgan gave notice of an amend
ment, making II a criminal offence FOR
persons TO enter into any conspiracy TO
import any article so as TO Increase its
market price in any part OF the United
States.
Pending this debate the question before
the Senate was stated 10 be the amend
ment changing the date OF repeal OF the
sugar bounty from July /, 1894, TO jan
uary l. 1895.
As the usual hour OF adjournment was
now approaching. Mr.. Harris rose and
said: Il need not emphasize the impor-
tance OF an early and final determination,
not of this sugar schedule merely, but
OF the tariff bill generally. l gave no
tice last Friday that | would. on and
after to-day unless much better prog
ress was made) ask for longer and later
sessions.
1T Is now nearly the usual hour OF ad-
journment. and. II can get unanimous
Corsent to take the vote on the pending
amendment at an early hour tomorrow,
and upon all other amendments 10 the
sugar schedule without further debate
after that hour | shall be glad to ac-
commodate the convenience OF every
senator (and my own as welD by moving
a brief executive session and then an
adjournment But unless such agree
ment can be reached, my sense OF duty
will compel me to stay here and ask the
Senate TO stay with me for longer hours.
Can l get such agreement
Objections were made on the Repub-