St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-06-14
HAASBROUGH HITS HARD.
SAYS TARIFF BILL DIS cRiMiNATES
AGAINST THE WEST.
THE WOOL RAISER RUINED.
Wheat. Flour. Wool and Other
Western Products on the Ere e
List-Says Manitoba Wheat
Will Be Dumped on the
Markets of Duluth, Minneap-
oils and Chicago.

VIII DO Du"BCu oh tAO
Markets of Duluth. Minneap-
oils and Chicago.
WASHINGTON, June 13.-Mr. Perkins,
of California, took occasion at tile OPEN
ing of the session of the senate today to
briefly defend the memory of the late
Leland Stanford from the charge made
by Representative Geary few days
ago. that he had founded the Stanford
university out of spirit of revenge and
resentment that he had not been elected
a trustee of the University of California.
When he was governor OF California. he
(Mr. Perkins) had appointed Mr.. Stan
ford regent of the university, but, at
the request Of the latter, the legislature
did not confirm the nomination. Gov.
Stoneman also would have made MIR.
Stanford a regent, but the honor was
declined. A resolution offered by MIR.
Morgan was passed, calling on the sec
rotary of the treasury for certain in
formation; first, what amount of gold
coin has been received by the treasury
department since Nov. l. 1892; second,
how much was received by the sale Of
bonds, and to what persons or banking
institutions such bonds were sold;
third, what outstanding obligations have
been redeemed in gold since that date.
Mr.. Hoar offered resolution calling
on the president to inform the senate
what. if any, representations, written
or oral, have been made to the govern
ment of the United States by the rep
resentatives Of any foreign countries as
to any contemplated retaliation on &C
count of the proposed imposition OF
discriminating
DUTY ON SUGAR
against bounty.giving coun tries: also
the facts as to the probable exclusion OF
our agricultural products from Ger
many or Guatemala, and also any in
formation in his possession relative to
any proposed retaliatory legislation by
the cortes of Spain on account of the
abrogation of the reciprocity treaty
under the tariff act of 1890.
There was no objection, and the resO-
luton was adopted.
On motion of Mr.. Villas Dem. Wis.).
three bills providing one additional
circuit judges each tor the Seventh,
Eighth and Ninth judicial districts were
passed. and then the tariff debate was
resumed, the pending question being
Mr.. PETERS amendment to restore SO
per cent of the duty on raw WOODS.
Mr.. Sherman was recognized and
made a vigorous speech against free
wool. The question of free wool, Mr..
Sherman said, vitality affected the peo-
pie of Ohio. He reiterated what he had
said in previous speech, that free
wool was the eliminating atrocity Of
this bill. He appealed to the Demo-
Gratis to put aside politics and withhold
this destructive blow to this great in
dustry. The sheep-raising and WOOL
growing industry was common, in a
greater or less extent. to every state and
territory. 1t was certain, he said. that
the United States could not compete in
the production Of wool with Australia.
Argentine Republic and other countries
where sheep raising was the principal
industry. Unless some government aid
was given the farmers of the United
States must abandon the field. Mr.. Du-
oOio \ltSP.s 1uoio/ lOlIOWCu SU6I.
man. When Mr.. Dubois finished MIR.
Stewart Pop, New took the floor and
made an argument against free WOOL,
MIR. HANSBROUGH
Rep., n. d. took the floor and spoke
at some length. While favoring the
principle of protection. and desiring to
see that policy perpetuated, he was op-
posed to the protective tariff bill now
before the senate. He opposed it be-
cause of its Determinations, its sectional
inequalities and its false pretenses. 1t
discriminates against the people of the
West in placing wool on the free list,
aud 1T favors the people of other sections
in giving rice duty of 80 per cent. 1t
leyies duty of more than so per cent
upon sugars, and places wheat, flour
and many other products of the farm on
the free list. While claiming TO he in
the interest of the extension of our
markets for agricultural products, it
strikes down the reciprocity clause of
the Mckinley act, thereby narrowing
tue American farmers foreign market
by millions of dollars.
He declared that the wool raiser west
OF the Mississippi river would be
obliged TO 90 out of the business, for
the simple reason that while the cost to
him of producing wool was from 10 to
IL cents per pound, the cost i'll Australia
was from 5 to cents per pound, and in
addition to this, that while the frelghts
from Rocky mountain points to Boston
and Philadelphia were "a to 3 cents
per pound. the carrying charges from
Australia were less than l cent per
pound. he was confident that here
after, if this bill passed. sheep would
be raised in the West only for mutton.
Referring to the
GRAIN SCHEDULE.
he said that the duty which Canada had
been paying in order to sell barley in
our markets WAS tax upon the Cana
dian farmer and that the money went
into our treasury as contribution from
him. and that it was not a tax upon the
consumer Of harley IN this country.
The inequality of this measure lies in
| the fact that it places high protective
duty upon all that we buy, and puts
upon The free list those things that the
farmers of this country have to sell.
With wheat on the free list, the farmers
OF the Northwest country, from Mani
| toba to the further confines of the Sas-
katchewan, would dump their wheat
| into the markets of Duluth. Minneapo-
| lis and Chicago. thus creating a larger
surplus for which the American farmer
must find foreign market. Our facil-
| tiles for handling our own grain are
already overtaxed. If we must ON top
| of this handle the surplus Of the Cana
| dian farmer, the result can we'll be i'm
agined. This is the kind Of reciprocity
| proposed by this bill.
Mr. uapchrDr trh ypaS SooOpdad hv NJ
Shoup Rep.. ldaho). who also opposed
| free wool as disastrous to one of the
| chief industries of the state
Mr.. Shoup contended that the fall in
| price of wool had been world wide for
! twenty years. and that in the United
| States it ruled higher than elsewhere
|, by the amount Of the duty levied. The
| demonstration of silver had much to do
| with the fall of the price of wool in the
worlds markets. He cited market quo
| tations to show that the difference be