The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-06-11

man, addressing his associates, land at
the little end you see the legend. Tariff
Tor revenue only" instead of that great
doctrine of democracy, equal rights for all,
special privileges for none"
In conclusion, the senator said he be-
Leyed in securing for the south as many
benefits as possible. He arraigned re-
publican senators for the inequalities of
their legislation, and for keeping Cuba
under the heel of WeyleT" They claim
ed, he said, 10 be followers of Lincoln
but you are unworthy to tie the shoe
latches of that great man
The democratic senator's claimed to be
followers of Jefferson, while they were
abandoning Jefferson's cardinal principle
OF equal rights TO the people.
After the amendment had been further
debated by Mr. Allen of Nebraska, Mr..
Perkins of Colorado and Mr. Cannon, a
vote was taken on it. The affirmative
was given by Messrs. Allen. Butler, Stew
art, Harris of Kansas and Heitfeld, pop
ulists; Cannon. Mantle, Pettigrew, silver
republicans, and Roach and Tillman, dem
ocrats.
Mr.. Tillman announced that his col
league Mr. McLaurin, would have voted
| for the amendment.
Inis closed the consideration of the ce-
| real paragraphs of the agricultural sched-
| ule, and Mr.. Allison, in charge of the bill,
| asked that further consideration of the
| agricultural schedule be postponed and the
| Senate go back to the sugar schedule
| There was no opposition and the Senate
| then took up the consideration of the SUI
| gar schedule.
Mr. Jones of Arkansas made the first
| speech. He had before him small bottles
| showing the various grades of sugar, raw
| and refined, and with these Illustrated his
| argument as he proceeded. He asserted
| that the new sugar proposition would in
| crease the profits of the sugar refinery in
| every point. Ii that was the purpose of
| the managers of the bill they should let it
be known. He was in favor of a tax on
| sugar but he believed it should be made
as light as possible and should give no
special benefit to anybody by the way in
which the duty was arranged
MIR. Jones read letters from sugar men
| criticising the Hawaiian reciprocity treaty
| and declaring that it's benefits accrued
entirely to the sugar interests of San
| Francisco and Hawaii, while taking mil
| lions out of the pockets of the people
| Commenting on these, Mr.. Jones remarked
| that when rascals fall out honest men get
| their dues.
| Mr.. Jones also read a statement from an
expert accountant, showing profits of 80
| per cent. by one of the sugar companies
| of the Pacific coast, which vigorously sup
| ported the abrogation of Hawaiian reci-
procity. 1t disclosed the comfortable con-
| dition of a concern which came here and
| pleaded the baby act he said.
| Mr.. Jones was followed by Mr. Vest
| who criticised the general features of the
sugar schedule. He spoke of the effect
| the Senate's action would have on the
! spectators in Wall street, and said he
| had heard it predicted from those who
| ought to know, that if this schedule
| stands, sugar will go up to $3.50 a share.
Mr.. Vest described the new sugar sche-
! dule as ingenious and artistic" The
spectators understood it. He had as
! certained, and was prepared to prove
mathematically that the protection given
| the trust on sugars testing SO degrees in
| the present law was "a cents pound; in
| the Dingley schedule, SO; in the original
! Senate BILL so, and in the new schedule
| agreed on by the republican Senate eau
| Gus, 81 In conclusion, Mr.. Vest declared
| that the schedule deluded the public in
the interests of this gigantic monopoly"
Mr.. Lindsay of Kentucky offered an
| amendment to strike out the differential
on refined sugar. Mr.. Morgan gave notice
| of an amendment to be offered at the
| proper time. levying a tax of / cent a
| pound on all sugar refined in this coun-
| try, excepting, however, sugars that are
| refined by concerns not in the sugar trust
Mr.. Caffery of Louisiana followed. The
| old fight between the producers of raw
| sugar and the refiner, which in this coun-
| try was the trust, was he said, again on.
| lie spoke OF the scandal OF 1884 over the
| sugar schedule produced by the rapacity of
! the sugar trust. 1t was to be REPEATED now.
! There were consumed in this country
| 4,000,000O0O pounds of sugar annually. If
| the trust was to receive half a cent a
/ pound, as the schedule proposed, that
would mean 1000 to the trust. Here,
| then, was the impelant cause which
| brought this great corporate to Wash
| ington to look after its interests.
Mr.. Caffery discussed sugar production
| in both Germany and his own state and
| said he did not believe 100 per cent. or so
| per cent. duty was necessary to keep the
| Louisiana sugar industry afloat
| At o'clock the Senate held a short
! executive session and then adjourned.