The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-06-10

democratic party. He claimed the addi-
| tional duty of 20 per cent provided
| would simply add that amount to the
price of the finished product. He took
| issue with Mr.. Bacon over the contention
| that the amendment was in line with the
platform adopted at Chicago.
IF" he said, Il had thought the plat
| form meant what the senator from Geor-
| gia says it does, | would not have touched
| il any more than / would have touched Il
| rattlesnake. knowing there was no
whisky within y hundred miles. God
help us if the new evangel is to prevail
In conclusion, Mr.. Vest said he had, as
southern democrat, always pointed with
pride to the fact that cotton was admitted
| free Of duty, as showing the democratic
consistency in support of free raw ma
terials. Hence, his disappointment that
| this amendment should be proposed by a
southern senator, as it would justify and
| open the way for a duty on wool, lumber
and all other articles classed as raw ma
terials.
Indeed" he exclaimed, sit leaves two
naked. without argument"
Mr.. Jones OF Arkansas also opposed
| the amendment in an incisive speech,
| following somewhat the lines of Messrs.
| Vest and Chiffon.
1T amounts to nothing and will bring
nothing" he said. but higher prices on
cotton manufactures.
Mr. Jones said the cotton growers
| would not be misled and deceived by n
proposition so palpably thin as this. It
was the same chaf offered to the south
that the rates offered on other agricul-
| tural products gave to the farmers.
Mr. Bacon briefly answered that if
pOstiveness of assertion and vehemence
were to control in the subject then the
senator from Missouri Vest would have
his views prevail But the senate was
Il forum of argument and no senator
was to be put down by the mere
vehemence of the senator from Missouri.
however long and eminent his services
might be.
Mr.. Bacon became impatient over fire.
Qucnt Interruptions, the last one coming
from Mr.. Caffery.
Il think the senator has enough to
do TO answer the question addressed to
him yesterday by the senator from Mas
sachusetts as to sugar. answered Mr.
Bacon, sharply.
Objectionable feature of the tariff in the
past had been its sectionalsm and its
discrimination of one part of the country
against the other. But the democratic
platform. recognizing revenue tariff, in
sisted that it be free from sectional bene-
fits and that there be perfect equality in
burden or in benefit. This was the
only "new evangel' to which the senator
from Missouri had referred to.
In closing Mr.. Bacon referred to state
ments that his tariff views were shaped
by the interests of his own state. He
was not. he said, Indifferent to the fact
that his people might be benefited or
injured by the rates imposed AS it was
recognized that the country was to have
a revenue tariff bill he intended to see
to it that his state received an equal
share of it's benefits. for, within the
words of the Bible, the man who does
not care for his own household is worse
than an intidel.
Mr.. Stewart of Nevada created amuse-
ment by declaring that the hair-splitting
distinctions between revenue tariff and
a protective tariff were all "tweedle-dee
and tweedle-dum."
The Georgia senator (Bacon) was right,
Mr.. Stewart said. in seeing that his state
should receive the same benefits as
other sections.
what are we here for?" asked Mr..
Stewart, vehemently.
ITO get Offices" suggested some sena-
tor. jocularly, in stage whisper.
mo. not all of us" continued Mr.. Stew"
art. "We are here to represent our con-
equal rights under the tariff and all other
laws.
Mr.. Stewart insisted that it was time
the raw materials of the south and west
received benefits with the manufactured
products of New England.
The discussion evidently had aroused
much feeling among senators, and this
was given expression soon after Mr.. CAT
fiery began speaking. He said the, posi-
ton of Mr.. Bacon had been clearly ex-
posed as one favorable to protection for
nues as a mere incident.
How about sugarT inquired Mr..
Bacon, mockingly.
Very deliberately Mr.. Gallery answed:
"Twice the senator declined to answer
my questions. and now | decline peremp-
torily to yield"
Il accept that status between u.s."
answered Mr.. Bacon.
You made the status YOURSELF said
Mr.. Caffery.
1T is very great deprivation" continued
Mr.. Bacon in hooking tones, but | will
endeavor to bear it with equanmity.
Mr.. Gallery was soon interrupted with
another inquiry as to sugar, this time
from Mr.. McLaurin of South Carolina.
The galleries were much amused and
Mr.. Gallery said: II see that the bad
precedent set by the senator from Massa-
chusetts l1Oar) to put me in hole is
being followed by my associates on this
side of the chamber"
Mr.. Caffery went on to state he was
not in favor of free trade. He believed
in Il tariff on sugar as a revenue measure
with any reductions which the require
mentS of revenue would permit 1t was
not because sugar was produced in his
state, but because he believed in the doc
trine of the democratic party. Mr.. CAT
fiery spoke against the system of protec-
ton which allowed man to put his
hands in his neighbours pocket and de-
clared his belief that the fall of the sys-
TEN was not far off.
The vote was then taken on Mr.. Bacon
amendment placing raw cotton in the
bill at 20 per cent ad valorem. Yeas AZ,
nays 10. The republicans voted solidly
| for the amendment. Messrs. Allen, But
| Ter, Heitfeld and Stewart, populists, voted
| for it; Cannon, Mantle, silver republi-
cans. and the following democrats favored
| it, Bacon. Clay, McEnery, McLaurin,
| Rawlins. Tillman. Kyle (pOp.) voted with
| the democrats against it.
Paragraph 226 TO 22S inclusive, macca-
roni, oats and oatmeal, were agreed to as
| reported.
When the rice paragraph was reached,
| Mr.. Allen (pop) of Nebraska took occa-
sion to speak sarcastically of the differ
ences among democratic senators as to
4 l.