Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1894-06-16

get bill that 43 Democrats would vote
for
Senator Hill Testifles.
Senator Hill was detained in the room
of the committee on Investigation longer
than some of the other senators. In addi-
ton to the questions as to whether he had
speoulated in sugar or owned sugar stock,
which We're answered in the negative, SEN
ator Hill was questioned in regard to the
meeting at the residence of Senator Brice
when the sugar question was discussed.
He said that he was present at that time
and listened to the Louisiana senator, who
explained the sugar duties and told what
was needed, but he did not remember see
ing Havcmeyer there. There was moro
or less discussion of the sugar schedule by
others present, and all listened to the Lou
isiana senators.
II did most of the listening" said Mr.
Hill.
He also answered questions regarding
the visit of Mr.. Havemeyer to his room
when the latter asked him to interest him
self in behalf of II sugar duty Mr. Hill
said that Mr.. Havemcyer would no doubt
remember the details of the interview
much better than he, as many people were
calling upon him Mt that time in relation
to the New York state affairs, and he could
not remember all the requests made upon
him. He did remember having told Mr.
HaVemeyer that he was more interested in
the income tax than any other feature of
the bill.
The examination of tho other senators
was confined almost exclusively to the
same stcrcotypcd list of questions which
the members of the committee had sub
mittcd to each other and tho answers
were unvarying to the same effect
Voting on the Wool Schedule.
WASHINGTON, June 16.-Although the
senate made no actual progress on the
wooden schedule, series of amendments
looking to the restoration of a duty on
raw wool was voted upon, hut all of them
suffered defeat by ma oritieS ranging from
= to s. The three Populsts voted against
the restoration of the Mckinley duty on
WOOL but in favor of Mr. PETER amend
ment to scale the duty down so per cent.
This amendment commanded the largest
vote of the day. being defeated by but two
votes. The Democratic lines remained
unbroken, all the Democratic senators
voting solidly against every attempt to
place duty on wool except in one in
stance, when Mr.. Hill of New York de-
clined to vote on the PETER amendment.
just before adjournment Mr.. PETER offered
an amendment to place all manufactures
of wool on the free list, justifying it on
the ground that the farmer and manufac-
turer should be placed on the same footing.
1t was not acted upon, however. The de-
bate was devoid of sensational or marked
features of any kind.
The dizziness OF the days proceedings
in the house was in marked contrast to
the excitement of yesterdays session. An
event somewhat out of the ordinary was
personal explanation by Mr.. Richardson
in reply to allegations made in II Washing
ton newspaper that he had been using his
position as II member of the committee on
the District of Columbia to further the
interests of an overhead trolley syndicate
to whom he (Richardson) had sold real
estate indirectly. He denied the charge
in toto.
The Indian appropriation bill was again
considered and a rule adopted to bring it
to n vote today. The section of the bill
providing for the sale of certain state
bonds credited to the Indian trust funds
was stricken out on point of order after
II sharp debate.