The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1897-07-21

these did not cause material delay.
Seven pages of the printed report, COW
ering thirty-eight pages, were disposed
of in the first half hour.
When the item of window glass was
reached Jones read a telegram just re-
ceived from leading window glass deal
ers of New York, saying the restoration
Of the Mckinley rate would place
duty equivalent to 140 per cent. on this
article, which would be prohibitory and
would stop all revenue from this source.
The lumber amendments led to an
animated debate. Teller and Vest con-
tended that the 50 rate on white pine
and the retaliatory clause against Ca
madam logs in effect permitted a double
tax
Teller declared that the whole thing
was conceived in the interest Of a few
mill men of Michigan, Minnesota and
Wisconsin. by which they would be able
to raise the price of pine from SO to
81 per thousand.
PettigTew of South Dakota severely
criticised the conference after making
personal reference to the Michigan Sen
ators. He said the 50 on pine was de-
signed to benefit a few men who own
what standing pine there is in Michi-
gan, Wisconsin and Minnesota One
Michigan lumberman was worth S10,-
100000, and was prominent in Repub-
lican politics.
He is the man who manipulated the
election of Senators in Michigan" as
serted Pettigrew. This condition made
the lumber amendment an important
one the Michigan machine, he said.
This lumbermans $4,000 900 counted
against the influence and votes of TO-
coo men of ordinary means" He said
that the conference report ought to be
rejected on this lumber item, but it
was full of tricks.
Commenting on newspaper clipping
read TO a gathering OF lumbermen in
Burrows room, Pettigrew said it
showed that the pine amendment would
take over $6,000,000 out of the pockets
Of the people and put in it the pockets
of this little group of lumbermen gath
cred in Burrows room" While the bill
was full of such tricks, Pettigrew as
serted that the lumber rate was one
of the worst and most bare-faced tricks
of the whole bill.
The debate was fruitless of result,
and the reading of the bill proceeded
until the amendments to the sugar
schedules We're reached.
Vest said this was the storm-center
of the bill, and he asked Allison if he
approved the statement made by the
House conferrees that the House diff
ferentials and the general features of
the House schedule had been preserved.
Allison responded with an explana-
tory statement, which was interrupted
by frequent questions. He said the
general effect of the amendment was as
stated by the House conferrees. The
Senate had provided 1875 on refined
sugars, where the House gave 1.Sfo,
making the Senate differential One-tifth
instead of one-eighth. The House pro-
vision was now restored, and that diff
ferential retained.
Berry interrupted to ask how much
less the sugar trust got from the con-
ference report than they did from the
Senate amendment.
Allison answered that under the
schedule as modified, taking the point
of 100, the differential was 1212 cents
Taking 96-degree sugar, the sugars
above No. 16, Dutch standard, refined
more than they would have received
under the House schedule, and some
thing less than under the Senate sched-
ule.
Jones of Arkansas said he would
hereafter show that the differential be-
tween raw and refined sugar was not
almost as much in the conference re-
port as in the Senate schedule, but that
in general this should be an absolute
surrender by the House on vital points.
White Of California presented tables
showing that instead of the House hav-
ing gained a victory on the sugar sched-
ule. the reduction from the Senate diff
ferential was trifiing. They showed
also, he said, that on refined sugar
made from sugar testing less than IS
degrees the amount of protection CIV
en- the trust, instead of being less, is
greater under the schedule agreed to in
conference than under either the House
bill or the Senate amendment.
mo wonder the market trembled and
brought forth increased rates on sugar
stock" remarked White
The formal reading of the report then
proceeded.
When the amendment restoring cot
ton bagging and cotton ties to the du-
table list was reached there was sharp
protest from Jones, Butler, Tillman and
Bacon.
Tillman expressed his Indignation at
the sectionalism which had inspired the
Conference Committee. He gave notice
to Southern Senators that if they would
stand by him they could hold the Sen
ate in session until next December,
rather than to submit to this change.
Bacon characterized the restoration
of cotton ties and cotton bagging to
the dutiable list as indefensible favor
itism of the North against the South.
Replying to the suggestion OF Till
man. Butler said he stood ready to join
in any movement to hold the Senate in
session for a week longer, to prevent
the contamination of this iniquity
against the South.
Il will tell the Senator" called back
Tillmah, that I am negotiating with
the Senator from Pennsylvania (Quay)
for the speech by which he stopped the
last tariff debate, and 1 may be ready
to start on that speech tomorrow
morning.