The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-06-17
I'm THE SENATE-ORIGINAL COM
NITTEE AMENDMENTS WE'RE
WITHDRAwN.
SUGAR TRUST SEVERELY CRITICISED
ny Vest, Jones and Others-TilImnh
Thinks "TnriR for Revenue
Only" IL Obsolete Demo-
cratic Doctrine.

w
began work at IL a. IN. today, and the
tariff bill was taken up as soon as The
routine business was out of the way.
Mr.. Tillman took the floor on the pend
jng amendment Of Mr.. Cannon of Utah
providing an export bounty on agricul
tural products. He desired the atten
ton of his associates and as the at
tendance was meagre he noted the ab
sence of n quorum. The call disclosed
fifty-four senators, nine more than
nuorum. and Mr.. Tllman proceeded.
He said the tariff debate had disclosed
a nebulous condition in the minds OF
senators. The republican senator's sat
quietly, apparently controlled by the
caucus, refusing to discuss the inlquities
of the bill and unanimously voting for
the exactions in behalf Of the trusts and
monopolies. -, A..
Tillman, "the democrats are IN perlod
of transition. They don't know where
they are at. The older more expert
enced proclaim their allegiance to the old,
'time-honored doctrines. We had an I'M
nassioned speech yesterday (by Mr.. Mis-
in behalf of the Walker tariff, principles
brought forward at this late day as
the democratic doctrine Secession,
notification and other issues which nave
passed out of the minds of men might as
well be brought here. The tariii Is
merely question of policy as to how the
government will raise its revenue.
saw without hesitation it is to the best
interest of the American people that ar
ticles consumed by our people should be
produced by our people. If that is re-
publican doctrine, well and good; If that
is not democratic doctrine 1t ought 10
be-"
Mr.. Timan went on to show that
diversified industries gave diversified
means of labor. AS to the farmers, the
need was not for more farmers, but for
tariff which no longer would rob the far
stood. with his skinny, honey hand out
stretched, asking this export bounty to
overcome the robbery of the present syS-
TEN, and yet senator's sat in stony silence,
expecting this idiotic farmer, with the
mortgage gnawng on his home, not to
know that they refuse to give relief.
Mr.. Tillman yehemently pledged his
word TO his colleagues that they would
not deceive the farmers, and that the
nine million followers of the plow twill
SETTLE with you mt the ballot box"
Mr.. Tillman's speech was in his usual
vein though not quite so sensational or
explanatory and more argumentativc.
He declared that the south had been
treated ms an Ishmaeite since the war,
and, with the farmers generally, had
oeen bled to benefit New England.
Mr.. Allen of Nebraska briefly spoke in
favor of an export bounty. Mr.. Perkins
of California announced his readiness to
support the export bounty amendment if
modified SO rs to conline the bounty to
goods exported in vessels flying the flag
of the United States and documentcd in
customs houses of the United States.
Mr.. Cannon expressed n willingness to
accept this new proposition, 20 per cent
of the bounty to go to the agricultural
exporter and % per cent TO the American
vessel
Mr.. Perkins declined to agree to this
and withdrew the amendment.
After some running debate II vote was
taken on the Cannon amendment proyid-
.ing an export bounty for agricultural
products, and it was defeated; yeas, 10;
mays, 80.
THE affirmative vote was given by
Messrs. Allen, Butler, Stewart, Harris Of
Kansas, Heitfeld. populists; Cannon,
Mantle, Pettigrew, silver republicans;
Roach and Tillman, democrats.
This closed the consideration of the
cereal paragraph OF the agricultural
schedule, and further consideration was
postponed and sugar taken up.
Mr.. Pettigrew of South Dakota gave
notice that he would offer his amend
ment 10 admit free of duty goods made
by trusts in connection with the schedule.
Mr. Allison asked that the provision
relating to the Hawaiian island go over.
He said in this connection that the ac-
ton of the senate committee relative to
the Hawaiian proposition was not due
10 any purpose to exclude Hawaiian
sugar The committee had never con-
sidercd the question and had let it go
over for future consideration. Later, he
thought n proposition on that branch Of
the subject would be presented.
Mr.. Allison, in behalf of the committee,
then moved an amendment striking out
S75-1000 and inserting 95-1O0 as the duty
on refined sugar.
Mr.. Jones of Arkansas was recognized
for a speech on the general features of
the sugar schedule. The senator had be
fore him small bottles showing the vari-
GUS grades of sugar, raw and refined,
and with these illustrated his argument
as he proceeded. He asserted the new
sugar proposition would increase the
profits of the sugar refiners in every
point If that was the purpose of the
managers of the bill they should let it
be known. He was in favor of n tax
made as light MS possible and should give
no special benefit to anybody by the way
in which the duty was arranged.
Early in his remarks Mr.. Jones re-
ferred to the unfairness Of Mr.. Aldrich's
statement on the sugar schedule in speak
ing of the difference between German
sugar and the raw sugar coming to this
country. The comparison was not q fair
one, Mr.. Jones contended, as the German
sugar could not be compared to the
American. When figuring on the
amount that should 20 to the refners
the American article, raw and refined,
must be considered rather than the Ger
man.
With great emphasis Mr.. Jones de-
cleared that he proposed to see that there
was some contention before German gran
ulatcd was taken rs the basis for finding
the differential due to the reiner. Mr.,
Jones insisted that the grades of sugar
compared by Mr.. Aldrich in his speech
did not compare. Mr. Jones stated the
price of refined sugar upon which Mr..
Aldrich based his calculations of go
cents was too low.
IL should have been 2.G6 cents, he said.
Still, taking Mr.. Aldrich's figures, Mr..
jones calculated margin of from .43
ITO .b2sof cent per pound TO the refiners.
GIe announced this schedule, which, it
was claimed, gave less profit to the re-
finers than the house schedule would give.
He had looked conscientously into the
question without prejudice. and he be-
came satisfied a clear dfferential of
is Of cent was right. Under this diff
ferential the companies profits had in