The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1897-04-03

said this was novel proposition In con-
nection With protection. Heretofore. he
labor Conditions Now. for the .nrst time.
4 was proposed 20 equaiize freight. rates.
which were ruled out OF order He also
stated In effect that the tariff had been the
football Of politics for a century. and that
either the republican or democratic tariff
law 10 remedy the evils OF the existing gold
Mr. Mccall (rep., Mass) was the first re-
publican 70 slap the bin In the face, He
ih IN the 6hi were TOO high. He especiaiIy
mentioned wool.
"Are the duties on woolens manufactured
~ New England TOO highv'' asked Mr.. Hop
sThe duties in this hin are too high" reit-
Grated Mr.. Mccall. Then. turning defiantly
10 Mr. Hopkins, he continued: TO reply cate
tate to. say | think these duties could be
reduced without detrlment either 10 the
wool grower or the wool manufactures"
Soon after Mr.. Lowering rep. Mass.l, a
la rye manufacturer followed Mr., McCan's
lead. and again aroused the plaudits OF the
opposition by DECLARING. that the manufac-
turers OF New England did not wan; the
II the bill neither III! The compensatory nor
that will live and stand" said he. I'VE 10
not want TO be strnngled with free trade
neither do we want 10 be smothered With
protection" Mr. Russell. one OF the mem
bcrs OF the ways and means committee
from Connecticut, exposed the fact In the
course OF his remarks that Mr.. Lowering,
who IL a cotton manufacturer. had asked
for increase on the finer grades OF cotton
yarns. Mr.. Walker (Mnss.) also attacked
The position Of his colleagues. and the Tex
termed II. drew from the majority leader a
vigorous statement about the cotton and
unanimous testimony OF the cotton manu-
facturers that they could not maintain
their own IN the Manufacturing OF the finer
auate projection TO the coarser goods. which
But the New England manufacturers. In
Guiding Mr Lowering, TESTIFIED TO the
Washington, March 30-The ways and
means committee Tuesday offered and had
adopted about IS amendments. Among
them was one admitting free OF duty books:
for scientific and EDUCATIONAL purposes
Mr.. Cannon rep. III declared that ne
pleased with all its features He thought
there could well be duty on hides, as the
impression was deeply grounded in the west
of cattle one dollar a head.
Mr.. Slayden dem. Tex argued that a
duty on hides would be OF practical benefit
to the cattle-raisers OF the plains OF Texas.
Kansas and the Dakotas.
Mr. Bell (pop., COLI warned tho republic
ans that N they passed this bill containing
high duties. without imposing at least
revenue duty on hides, distinctly product
OF the farm. they would regret IL. Why
should the wool men OF few states be so
generously dealt with and the cattle-rais-
ers denied anything2
Mr.. Dingley defended the action OF the
COMMITTEES, saying that when the act %
1880 was being prepared the present occu-
pant OF the white house made very ex-
haustlve Investigation OF the subject and
found first that the great body OF hides
produced In this country were a typrod-
net from the slaughter OF cattle, and that
their price was made here. second. that
goat and other skins tanned In this coun-
try were not produced here, and third, that
the hides imported, except I'm a few in
stances, were dry hides, used In making sole
leather, q large proportion OF which was
exported. We could tan hides with our
cheap material for the foreign market.
ed 10 free hides and II was decided that "A
duty on hides would not be OF advantage
10 the farmer. and would be a distinct dis
advantage 10 our export trade.
MIR. Hepburn rep, la declared that the
wool interests dwarfed in contrast with the
vast cattle interests OF the country. Iowa
was more interested In hides than wool.
She marketed annually SS.000000 worth OF
hides. ana not ten per cent. OF that amount
the tanning industries of New York, PENN
sylvnnia and New England should not be
allowed TO stifie The demands OF the west
Mr. Buckner (dem., Mch) denounced the
duty OF two dollars on lumber ~ robbery
The lumber barons were permitted 10 90
into Canada and have their lumber sawed
by the cheap labor there. IL was free
trade In labor and protection for the manu-
Mr. Lentz dem, o. presented number
OF protests from bituminous coal miners
against the restoration OF rs cents ton
on coal. He declared that the restoration
was In the interest OF the anthracite coal
MIR. Grosvenor (rep.. o., in reply said
MIR Lentz remarks had demonstrated his
,gnIrste The restoration Of The dnty on
coal had come until after the bill had been
reported 20 tho house The east was In IA
vor OF a lower duty on coal.