The Butler weekly times., 1897-04-08
ITS DUTIES TOO HIGH.
Even the Republicans Protest
Against the DingIey Bill.
Say II is Oysr-Protecton.- England
Members Call II Too Much of Good

Members Call II Too Much OF Good
Thing.
Washington, d. G., March %
Even the republicans in Congress
protest that the rater in the Dingley
bill are too high. Two members
from Massachusetts, Mr.. Mccall and
Lowering, declared that the manu-.
facturers Of their State did not want
to be ''smothered with protection,
and asserted that the measure was
too much of good thing.
It was by far the most sensational
session the House has witnessed
since the tariff debate began. The
proceedings throughout were of
lively order, and several times bor-
dered on the sensational. The demo.
Gratis blocked proceedings in the first
instance by demanding the presence
Of quorum before allowing any
legislative work. Mr.. Richardson
offered dilatory motions, but finally
withdrew them, saying: "Let the
other side work out its own puzzle"
"There is no puzzle" remarked the
speaker, except the Incidence OF
members"
"We have as many present on this
side as the majority has," observed
Mr.. Richardson.
At this point MIR. Dingley moved
the approval of the journal, and after
an hour and twelve minutes delay it
was 80 ordered, 222 to /. On resump-
tion of consideration OF the tariff
bill, Mr.. DlngleY announced that the
ways and means committee had sew.
eral amendments to offer. The first
increased the rate on gelatine and
glue valued at not above 10 cents per
pound from 2 to 2! cents. The sec
ond placed duty of 81 per ton of
bauxite not refined.
Mr.. Dockery called attention to
novel proposition in connection with
protection. Heretofore, he said, pro
lection was accorded to equalize
labor conditions, now for the first
time it was proposed to equalize
freight rates.
Mr.. Dalzell denied that any new
doctrine was involved in according
protection to bauxite. Labor was at
the base of freight rates, and the
theory of protection was now and
always had been to equalize labor
conditions.
Mr.. Mccall was the first republi |
can to slap the bill in the face. He
boldly expressed the opinion that
the duties in the bill were too high.
He especially mentioned wool. The
democrats forthwith became very
much interested.
"Are the duties on woolens manu-
factured in New England too high?"
asked MIR. Hopkins (rep) of Illinois.
S1r. Mccall at first evaded direct
reply; "but I do not hesitate to say"
he continued, ''that I think the
duties in this bill are higher than
necessary for the just purpose of
protection"
"But about woolens." interposed |
Mr.. Hopkins, Il insist upon an an
swer to my question"
THE duties in this bill are too
high" reiterated Mr.. Mccall. Then,
turning defantly to Mr.. Hopkins, he
continued: ''To reply categorically
to your questions, l do not hesitate
to say I think these duties could be
reduced without detriment either to
the wool grower or the wool manu-.
facturer."
Soon after Mr.. Lowering (rep.) of
Massachusetts, a large manufacturer,
followed Mr.. McCall's lead and again
aroused the plaudits of the opposi-
tion by declaring that manufacturers
OF New England did not want the
duties in the cotton and woolen
schedules in the bill, neither the
compensatory nor the straight duties.
I'VE want tariff law that will
live and stand,' said he. "We do
not want to be strangled with free
trade, neither do we want to he
l. \ al