The times., 1897-07-03
THE SENATE PROCEEDINGS
Two Important Amendments to
the Tariff Bill Adopted.
THEY PROVOKE MUCH DEBATE
One Is a Provision for Countervail-
ing Duties and the Other Gives
the President and Senate the
Right to Modify Tariff Figures
Under Reciprocity Treaties.

The Senate yesterday adopted two very
important amendments to the tariff bill :
one the provision for counteryaiiing duties
as an Offset TO the export bounties paid by
! any country whatsoever; the other the
amendment giving the President and the
Senate the night to modify the tariff
figures under reciprocity treaties TO be
| entered into by and with the consent OF
the Senate The House bill amendment
as to reciprocal treaties was objectionable
| 10 the Senate, Democrats and Republicans
alike, as it ignored the Senate in the
! treat y-m aking power. Several Senators
! who were opposed to the reciprocal treaties
under the proposed way OF forming them
| voted for tue measure asst appeared 10 be
| impossible TO have any other measure OF
| this Importance passed at this session
Soon after the assembling of the Senate
| Mr. Wellington, of Maryland, maded speech
| of personal explanation, which viii be founI
! in another column.
The tariff was taken up at the PROPOSE
ton .section - relating TO export boun-
ties. leyying on foreign bounty protected
ARTICLES an additional duty equal to The
| amount of that export bounty
Mr. Chandler SAID That he would vote for
| the section with reluctance, but he did not
see any other way of protecting the Amert
can sugar industry. Mir. Chandler said that
there were reasons which he would not
specify which made it wise that we
should not give offense now to Germany
or England or France. He said that the
section applied 10 all nations and was in
evita5le if protection were 10 be made
effectuaI
Judge Lindsay said that there was no
| possible excuse for the countervalling duty
| to protect the American market against the
| German export bounty. 1t was intended
| even to raise revenue. 1t was undeniably
| for protection alone, and he was surprised
| TO hear Il advocated by Democratic Sen
ators. Judge Lindsay said we We're simply
| violating the terms of the treaty.
Mr.. Caffery said that even from a free
trade standpoint his position was defensi-
ble. because the United States even then in
| this case would be allowed to take care
| of itself This country should have at all
times the right To meet such methods OF
| commercial warfare as foreign export
bounties. Such things were attacks on
this country, il was violation Of law, 4
| destruction of trade.
The vote resulted-yeas, 33; nays, %
So the amendment providing countervailing
| duties was agreed to-
MIR Allison then submitted a substitute
for section 3 CT the House bill, being the
new reciprocity measure already reported
| hy Mr. IlisOr and Dublishpi
Mr.. Stewart made speech in which he
declared against all treaties, if avoid
able.
Mr.. Vest took the ground that the
treaty-rua king power had never been
delegated to the President, nor should that
| power be given as in the present amend
ment Such a provision as this nullifies
the provision that certain things shall be
done by and with the consent of the
| Senate
MI. Allison showed that the words 'by
and witt the consent. of the Senate" had
been placed in the section
Mr.. Mills made th6ipoint that neither
the Senate nor the President could usurp
the function Of the Kpuse of Representa-
| tiyes
Nj. Vest thought it strange that this
1 nave ueCidIeu
mercial war against other countries and
now should be talking about reciprocities
and friendly relations.
Judge Linday maze another point, that
if the Congress gave the President the
4 right contemplated in this bill it would
| give him Il right not to be found In the
Constitution. 1t also involved the admis.
sion that the House OF Representatives.
IA -g.-s%
cred by the redprOcities agreed on by
the President.
MI. Pettus said that the simple PROPOSE
ton was that, where tariff duties were
laid, the Senate and President could abro-
gate them. That was unconstitutional
MI. Morgan recalled Il case before the
Supreme Court, in which it was held that
Congress could invest the President with
power tn determine whether law was or
was not operative and with power to
suspend the operation of the tariff laws.
MI Morgan concluded that the decision
quoted was in justification of the proposed
amendment. The act of 500, giving the
President power in the premises, was Con-
sutItiOnal, and, therefore, the present
scheme could not be defective, for the act
of $40 went further than the present acU.
Nj. Morgan denied the statement that
there was any new law made by the bill
Mr.. Teller held TO the opinion that tho
President could make uo treaty without tbe
Senate concurring. Mr.. Teller said tha
the matter was too grave to be considered
In hurry. He thought it ought to bC
renntted to the legislative: that in a
country like ours it ought not to be
| given TO the executive If lie would yot,
for reciprocity the reciprocity must be il
legal manner; that is, within the legisla
tive channels
The Constitution declares the right sllnl1
exist In both Houses of Congress and the
House shall be the moving power in fiscal
matters MI Teller held that the lie gis-
lative branch could not delegate its au
thority TO do anything to the President
or the S enate.
Mr. Teller asked what was the objection
in submitting the matter to the House also.
is the Senate afraid OF the House?
Mr. Chandler said that the Senate ha6
before it all the time the House provision
deiegating the power to the President
alone
Mr. Allison said that there was always
the understanding that there would bs
an amendment
Judge Lindsay-And we didn't see 4
till yesterday.
| Mr.. White quoted the case of Field VS.
Clark, quoted by Mr.. Morgan, to hold
exactly the opposite view to that helt
by Mr. Morgan.
Mr. Allison called for the vote on his
substitute for the House provision
Mr.. Teller protested against dispospl