The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-01-23
offered an amendment to place refined
c1,crnr. a hsol,1ti aI1, on, fha free list

Mckinley law furnished the best ex-
ample of what the removal OF the
onerous protective duties would do for
| the consumer.
Blanchard. -(Democrat), of Alabama,
said it was now the duty of the Demo-
cratic party, whose last platform had
declared for revenue tariff, to restore
| the duty on sugar.
Haines, Republican). of Nebraska,
advocated the retention of the present
bounty.
| Boatner, Oenocrat), of Louisiana, in
concluding the debate for the sugar
men insisted that the traditions of the
Democratic party should be adhered
to and a revenue duty be placed on
sugar. Had Louisiana imagined her
great industry was toebe stricken down,
her vote would not have been given
| to Cleveland at the last election.
Payne, Republican,, of New York,
opposed the restoration Of the sugar
duty because it was a tax on the break
fast table, and he defended the bounty
provisions of the Mckinley law.
Wilson concluded the debate in ad-
vocacy of theF bounty provisions OF
the pending bill.
Voting began at 4:20. After a great
deal of wrangling as to the manner
in which the amendments should pe
voted upon, it was decided by the
chairman that he would permit the
four amendments pending to each OF
the paragraphs $50 and ISL, the first
relating to the bounty on sugar ana
the latter to the duty on refined sugar.
! The first vote was taken upon
Meiklejohn's amendment to substitute
the provisions of the Mckinley law.
1t was defeated without division by
strict party vote.
The vote then required upon the
amendment of Price, inserting the pro-
visions of the Mills bill. This ameritt-
ment had the support of quite a num-
Der of Democrats, including the author,
Bailey. Hooker and members of the
Louisiana delegation. The remainder
of the Democrats voted against 1t.
For the first time the Republicans
showed their hand, declining to vote
at all upon the proposition, when was
Idefeated-19 to 149.
The vote then came up on Harter's
substitute, which was lost without
division.
This made the vote recur upon Nc
Rae's original proposition to abolish
all the other bounty provisions of the
Wilson bill
Quite a number of Republicans, in
GLIDING Cannon, Hopkins, Dalzell and
Funk, voted with the radical Demo-
Gratis against the members of the COM
mittee for this proposition. Some of
/ them were Springer, Riley, Oates,
Brown, johnson (of Ohio, Culberson,
Warner, Layton. Washington, Caruth-
Iers, Wise, Stone, Everett, Bailey, Nc
lGuire, Hare, Richie. Geary, Harter,
Sayers, Goldzier and Cummings, and it
was carried by an overwhelming ma
jority of 1875 to &c.
This action abolishes the bounty on
sugar.
A vote was taken upon the amend
ments to section 181, providing for a
lduty on refined sugars.
Robertsons amendment, providing
for a duty Of from 1 LILO per pound
upward on sugars tested by the
Ipolariscope not above rs degrees, was
offered as the first amendment.
To this Warner offered an amend
ment to place refined sugar on the free
list, and after quite a lengthy parIia-
lmentary discussion as to the status of
1.-THE pending amendments, it being
iclaimed by the Louisiana members that
la misunderstanding vexisted, owing to
1.-THE ruling of the chair by unanimous
consent Breckenridge, of Kentucky,
Twas allowed to offer substitute for
the two amendments, placing a uni
form duty of L cent upon all sugars
below the 16 Dutch standard
The vote was first taken upon
duty on refined sugar, and again the
radical Democrats scored another
signal victory, the Republicans de-
Ielining to vote. By a vote of 1877 to So
the duty on refined sugar was abol-
lished.
Among those who voted for it were:
Johnson Ohio Coleman, Heard
Springer, lockwood, Mutchler. Nc
CURE, Abbott, Martin, Bland, Simpson.
White, the Louisiana delegation and
members of the ways and means com
mittee generally.
Platt, Wise and Cummings voted
against it.
The substitute of Breckenridge was
defeated-144 to 81. The Democratic
supporters to the Breckenridge amend
ment were unable to secure enough fol-
flowers to order tellers.
AT this juncture, amid great confu-
sion, the time came to take a final vote
upon Robertson's amendment, as
amended by Warmers amendment A
great deal of misunderstanding exist
ed upon the floor as to what effect the
adoption of the amended proposition
would mean. The Republicans were
hilariously joyful at the tangle into
which they had gotten the Democrat is,
Payne shouting out that if the pending
proposition was adopted, it would have
the very homogeneous effect of placing
raw sugar on the dutable list and re-
fined on the free list.
Richardson who was in the chair.
was appealed to in vain to state the
effect of the adoption of the pending
amendment.
So much misunderstanding existed.
leven among some of the most skillful
parliamentarians on both sides, that
Wilson finally decided, amid great con-
fusion, to move that the committee
.-;- -, 10 erixy
portunity to examine, over night, into
the parliamentary situation, and ac-
cordingly, at $40, the committee rose
and the House recessed until o'clock.
At the night session the following
members spoke: Brookshire, McCrea-
ry, Goldzier, Broderick, Hilbern and
Avery.