The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1894-02-03
.fHe rARlFF.
eynopsis Of the Debate in the National
House Of Representatives.

On tho 10th Mr.. palxcll crop, Pa.) continued
his remarks. He began by recapitulating the
charges he had made against Mr.. johnson
(dem., o.. He did not believe, and had II on
authority Of the president Of the Cambria iron
works, that Mr.. johnson paid higher wages
than his neighbora johnson and Carnegie
we're both robber barons, with the difference
that the latter was q true philanthropist and
gave 1900 day for the relief OF the poor In
Pittsburgh, while the fa'so philnnthropist from
Clev Slasd (Johnson) takes advantage OF the
winters blast to dcker about the wages Of his
employees He johnson, had waxed fat on the
watered stock OF his street railroads. and his
bank account was swelled by the manufacture
of rails under the protection Of patents.
Mr. johnson replied by saying that the qucs.
tion before the committee was Shether steel
rails should go on the free list He had listened
TO the fearful TRADE against himself and his
partner, but even confessing that all said was
true that offered no reason why rails should
not go on the free list The personal side OF
this controversy was not brought into the
house by him. Instead Of arming himself with
arguments he (Dalzell had brought pins here
to stick into him (Johnson) As TO the per
sonal charges, he plead guilty to the first that
he was monopoist To the next charge that
he was manufacturing class OF rails pro.
tected by 100 patents ana would not be af-
fected by free rails, Mr.. johnson replied: 1--WE
only have twenty or thirty patents on rails; we
tried to perpetuate the monopoly and control
the market, but the courts decided against us.
That threw us open to home competition My
amendment proposes TO put girdor rails on the
free list so that we will be open to the worlds
competition"
Mr.. johnson went on to explain that the nj.
Tentative wns to reduce wages or close the
mills entirely, as was done at Sparrow Point,
Nd. As to the grave charge that changing
the record he had practced q deceit upon the
house, he explained that when he made his
l,..
the question Mr. Dalzell prOpounded to him.
When he went home and consulted his records
he found he was slightly In error and he had
made the change to which MIR. Dalzel had III.
ludcd. Rut the first thing he had done the
next day was to inform Mr.. Dalzell of that fact.
The gentleman had been so hard pressed,
continued Mr.. Johnson, that he had lugged in
his wicked partner Arthur j. Moxham. Mr..
Moxham although not u naturalzed citizen,
when the food at Johnstown left ~, 600 people
in the water and 900 drowned, was chosen die
tator He fed the living and buried the dead.
II was also true that he had purchased IN en-
gine In England because he could not get il
. here until five months after the English
manufacturer agreed to deliver it. In those
five months he had paid out Sl76,0J0 in
wages. The purchase of that engine had
benefited American labor The other per
sonalities had been brought into this con
troyersy by the eloquent advocate of the stee
BUSINESS he de ecared that this steel-rail poo
was only typical of other protected trusts the
existence of some OF which was perhaps not sc
easily proved as this.
Mr.. Bland dem, MOI declared that free
rails would enable many companies to repair
their roads and take many out of the hands OF
receivers
Mr.. Wilson, chairman OF the committee, tool,
q position against Mr. johnson. He and many
other democrats mad no doubt sympathized
eould not afford to go of in great question
like this ut half-cock. There were, he de
| clared, no friends of the stee.-rail pool among
| those who framed this schedule. The steel
| rail schedule had been dealt with in the same
| spirit of fairness as others had been.
| Mr. Hopkins rep, III offered an amend
Ment 10 restore the existing rates on stee
! rails. This was lost without division
| The vote was then taken on Mr. Johnson's
| free-rail amendment, which was defeated by
vote of 10J to 10, forty democrats voting with
| Chairman Wilson
| Mr. Henderson Gep., Ia.) was then recog
nized to offer the agricultural schedule of the
| MCKINLEY law us a substitute for that Of thu
| Wilson b Il.
| Mr. Hull rep, Ia followed with discus
sion of It's effect Of the agricultural schedul,
| on his state This precipitated Il long discus
| sion between Mr. Hull and Mr.. Springer dem,
| Ill.,, who produced statistics and figures tC
| prove tlilt protection for the farmer was
| sham an a fraud.
| On the 10th MIR. Henderson's amendment sub
| stituting the existing law for the proposed ag
| ricultural schedule of the Wilson bill was de
| feated--yeas, SO; nays ll6. Other amendment
| were offered and voted down. Mr.. Bynun
| dem, Ind) offered an amendment defining
| more exactly the different classes of IRON bu
not materially altering the pending bill. Mr
| Bynum held that failures and strikes were NOR
frequent under protection than they had bee
under the Walker low tariff, and that tn
greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the peopl
in the name of protection was the tariff bill o
| 1890 His amendment was unanimously
agreed to.
Mr. Hit (rep., ILL offered an amendmen
providing that when q country imposed u to
on American products which this country in
ported free that the existing rates be imposed
He madea plea against the throwing away c
the opportunities the country possessed c
| wrestling from Canada free entry OF our mani
factures and agricultural products In return fo
free entry into the United States of Canada
coal He pleaded for reciprocity with Canada-
| reciprocity which should not give Canada all tn
advantages, Representatives OF Canada ha
been besieglng the doors Of the state depar
ment for forty years asking for reciprocity.
appealing to the democratic party not to thro
away the great advantages they possessed
reciprocity, he said: "We all live under til
same flag We are legislating for ourSelve
1
Canada which we could get in o great part"
| At the night session the first three speaker
were Messrs Talbot dem, S. c., G w. Stor
(rep., Pa.) and Boatner dem. La) The 10
ter in referring to The sugar question said
was the only American agricultural produ'
which could be protected incidentally by
tariff for revenue only. But the Wilson bi
was not democratic measure In the sense
being revenue bill, for 1t Intentionally cut b
low the line OF necessary revenue, and was OF
and out o protective measure where 1t was nj
free trade bill
Mr.. Strong (rep., o. drew In parallel &C
umns an amusing picture OF the farmer as
is under protection and as he was sin the got
old days Of free trade" the comparison betl
largely in favor OF the lattcr-day farmer.
MI. Wheeler (rep., ILL., thought the WtlsC
bill should be entitled "A Bill TO Decrease II
Revenue and Increase the Public Debt by u
Issue Of Bonds" instead OF a bill to reduce ta
alton and to raise revenue.
On the I'D u running debate was had on BE
eral amendments offered 20 the sugar schedu
OF the Wilson bill.
Mr.. Dockery dem, Mo- arraigned the bou
ty paragraph In unmeasui ed terms and said
/ would cheerfully vote 10 strike the boun
feature from the statute books
Mr. Cannon (rep., tl) made vigorous 6
tack upon what he called the cowardice OF Il
: democratic party In retaining o bounty whi
they had denounced us unconsI tutionaL
Mr.. Gear (rep, Ia) advocated the bestow
of bounties, which he said had always been 4
policy OF the government.
3 Mr.. Bryan dem, Ncb) protested again
. putting tax back on sugar, and TO raise I
, revenue needed he favored an inccme tax.
Mr.. Dlngley lrep., Me- SAID he was in fav
e OF continuing In the experiments provided
the tariff of 1890 10 test the question as
\ | whether We can produce our own sugar by