Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1897-03-30

from ~ to 2 cents per 1000 and 15 per cent
ad valoren.
Mr.: Simpson at this juncture offered
some amendments which were ruled out OF
order He also had read a long statement
which he said defined the position of the
Populists toward the tariff. 1t stated; In
effect, that the tariff had been the football
.Populists had no. faith in the ability Of
Jaw TO remedy the evils, of the existing gold
Mr.. Mccall was the first Republican to
pressed the opinion that the duties in the
bin were too high He especially P5erth.b men EN-
Are the duties on woolens manufactured
in New England too high? { asked Mr.
fiSR.d; NJ. Mccall at first evaded q. direct re-
ply. But 1 do not hesitate to say" he
continued: that think the duties in this
bill are higher than necessary for the just
purpose of protection.
But about woolens,' interposed Mr.
Hopkins. Il insist upon an answer to my
THE duties in this bill are too high" re-
iterated Mr.. Mccall. Then, turning def
reply categorically to your question, do
not hesitate to say | think these duties
could be reduced without detriment either
to the WOO grower or the wool manufact-
urer.''
representative OF woolen interests should
have criticised the duty on wool, inasmuch
as the duties on woolens were Tar above,
in ad valorem, the duties on American
wool.
Soon after, Mr. Lowering Republican, of
Massachusetts, q large manufacturer. fol-
lowed Mr.. McCall's lead and again aroused
that the manufactures of New England
did not want the duties IN the cotton and
woolen schedules in the bill, neither the
I'VE want tariff law. that viii live and
stand said he Eve do not want to be
strangied with free trade: neither do we
want to be smothered with protection.
Mr.. Russell. one of the members of the
ways and means committee, poured hot
shot into the camp of the Massachusetts
dissenterS, exposing the fact. in the course
of his remarks, that Mr.. Lowering, who is
cotton manufacturer. had asked for in
creases on the fine grades of cotton yarns.
Mr.. Walker. of Massachusetts, also at
tackled the position of his colleagues and
the extraordinary discussion" as Mr..
Dingley termed it, drew from the majority
leader vigorous statement about the cot
ton and woolen schedules. He said it was
the unanimous testimony of the cotton
manufacturers that they could not main
tain their own in the manufacture of the
finer grades without the duties in this bill.
The Wilson bill. they testified, furnished
adequate protection to the coarser goods
which were being manufactured in the
South, but the New England manufacture
ers, testified to the necessity for these in
creases. As. to the woolen schedule. he
said lit was substantially the schedule of
lHe ncf>lnley law ana gave tne mdnu1act-
urers no more than the cotton manufact-
urers obtained. 1t simply compensated the
manufacturers for the duty on wool. The
manufacturer had as much protection un-
der the act of 1s94. but the duties were re-
duced at the expense of the farmer. The
duty On wool had been restored in response
TO the demand of the farmers that they
receive the same consideration as the man.
ufacturers.
This BILL" he concluded. lis designed to
restore our industries and the opportunities
q hA f1- se
increased, prices will be increased and we
viii. once more rise to the condition that
made us the envy of the world"
The senate resolution appropriating $3.50
O00 for immediate use on the Mississippi
amended so as to carry $4,000 for clerk
hire for members to jury 1; $4,000 for mis-
cellaneous expenses of the house and ST.
100000 customs deficiencies, was adopted
and, at 5:25 p. m, the house adjourned.