The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-06-17
Senate Proceedings.

Washington, June 1.-THE continu-
ance of the debate on the sugar schedule
in the senate served to swell the attend
ance considerably today.
Before the tariff bill was taken up,
Mr.. Harris of Kansas introduced a res
olution on the status of affairs relating to
the Union Pacific Railroad and express
ing the sense of the senate that the Sec
rotary of the treasury should take steps
to pay off the liens prior to those of the
government and then to operate the road,
or if that was deemed ineXpedient, to
adopt foreclosure proceedings in the
courts.
The resolution went over.
The tariff bill was then taken up and
the consideration of the sugar schedule
resumed.
Mr.. Jones of Arkansas began the dis
cussion by placing in the record state
ment of sugar expert, showing the
price of each grade of sugar, the rate of
taxation of each under the Wilson act
and under the proposed schedules.
Mr.. TurDie of Indiana, in behalf of the
minority of the finance committee, gave
notice of new amendment to be offered
as an additional paragraph to the inter
nal revenue provisions, placing tax of
per cent on estates of descendants when
the Inheritance amounts to $4,000 or more,
and is not for the benefit of n religious,
charitable, educational or like institution.
The tax is to be in force for five years
from January /, 1898.
The question then reverted to the COM
mittee amendments striking out .S75 and
substituting .95. A vote was about to be
taken when Mr.. Caffery of Louisiana
took the floor and read a newspaper ac-
count of the growth and development of
the sugar trust
He made long speech bitterly hostile
to the sugar trust, thus preventing an i'm
mediate vote.
The extracts read by Mr.. Caffery were
very long and gave in detail the profits
of the trust by years, its absorption of
lesser sugar establishments and the in
ternal business affairs of the organiza-
ton. Mr.. Gallery then took up the ques-
ton as to the amount of raw sugar nee
essary to make pound of refined sugar.
He asserted that reliable expert claimed
that the government figures and estimate
were furnished by trust officials and were
partisan.
Mr.. Gallery went on to say that a
countervailing duty of .3S on German
graduated sugar was ample protection
to the American refiners. The latter
held the sugarcane industry in the hollow
of their hands, with complete control of
the market with German sugars kept
out. and in his judgment the differential
of .3S on German sugar was ample
against them.
Returning to the general features o.
the schedule. the senator said this Bit
proposed to give more to the sugar trus
than the Wilson bill, and that gave to
much.
"The sugar trust" said he, sis the onl
gigantic trust in the world which rest
entirely on legislation for its support. Il /,
legislation it controls the cane sugar pro r
net of the world and whenever it thrus Is
it's hand into the legislative hall thefe
was always faint, kind of malOdor
arising from its efforts to get Legislation
in its own behalf, and if it appears from
a reasonable showing that what the trust
asks is too much, it should be refused.
Mr.. Plat (rep.) of Connecticut aroused
Mr.. Caffery to another indignant protest
against the repeated intimations thrown
out from the other side that he wanted
protection for the sugar producer.
"Your position" said Mr.. Plat, lis
free trade for the refner and protection
for the producer" :,
II have stated and repeat it again.
replied Mr.. Caffery. his voice rising till
it fairly rang through the chamber, that
sugar is the ideal article for democratic
duty for revenue only. If it were for
protection. 1 should not advocate it."
Continuing, he tainted the republicans
after their experiment with sugar bounty
under the Mckinley law for going. back
to sugars for a real revenue producing
duty. -,