The herald., 1897-06-24
was carpet wool. Mantle asserted that
one-eighth Of every fleece Of the COM
mon sheep was classed as coarse carpet
woo1 Ja would rooord it yooct euIlit a :

BILE to levy a specific duty on all carpet
wools without any distinction, as an ad
valorem duty led to differentiation. The
senator discussed the effect Of the Nc
Kinley wool rates, saying that they did
not accomplish all that had been ex-
pected; they did not offset the heavy de-
cline caused by business depression.
Mills of Texas said 1t was incompre
hensible to him why wool men demand
ed higher duties in the face of experience
that the price of wool could not be
raised by the tariff. any more than the
price Of cotton could be increased by
duty. The price of wool had been fail
ing constantly for forty years. in spite
of tariff rates. He quoted statistics
showing that wool had fallen after the
imposition of the Mckinley rates and
had risen after the Wilson provisions for
free wool. This was proof incontestible,
he declared, that tariff duties could not
affect the price of wool.
At one point in Mills remarks Mantle
interjected the remark: Generally
speaking, the senator will not question
that the imposition Of duty has raised
the price to the wool grower?"
II have never been able to discover It,"
answered Mills.
Mantle asserted that this general ben
eft to the wool grower was incontesti-
BILE, certainly as to the Montana grow
ers, and he believed it was so generally.
Mills maintained that he was speak
ing from tables of prices, which con-
stituted a record not to be impeached
under the rules of evidence by general
opinions
Carter of Montana said 1t was fact
beyond dispute that during the last year
the wool growers of Montana were re-
ceiving cents per pound, while under
the Mckinley law they were receiving
IA cents.
"And the difference between cents
and IA cents Is the difference between
destruction and prosperity" declared
Carter. When Mills quoted certain low
rates in Montana woods under the Nc
Kinley law Carter responded that these
were quoted at time when the passage
serving to send down the prices.
Gray of Delaware declared that 1t was
time for a revolt against the demands
of the Wool Growers association.
"If those who oppose these high du
ties on wool are to be considered enc
mics" said he, "they must take their
position as enemies, and they will not be
lacking in resources to make their op-
position felt
This extra session was called for the
primary purpose of framing a law CIV
ing adequate revenue, and 1t was ,infa-
nous. he asserted, that this revenue
measure could not pass until a toll was
levied upon the great mass Of poor peo-
pie of the country, the wearers of cloth
ing and users of blankets, in order to
increase the profits of the wool growers
Quay moved to disagree to the COM
mittee amendments to paragraph 357.
The effect Of Quay's motion would b.
to go back to the house rate of 80 per cent
ad valorem.
Hoar pointed out that there was not
a majority Of the senate favorable to
that doctrine of protection supported
by the Republican party. 1t became
necessary, therefore, to secure the CO.
operation of those who had supported
man for the presidency who, If elected,
was pledged to veto tariff bill.
Mantle replied that he had never
known that the silver candidate for the
presidency was pledged to veto a tariff
bill
Hoar said Mr.. Bryan's record in the
house of representatives would throw
some light on the subject.
HE was supported by nearly all the
free traders in the country" added
Hoar, land If the party did not pledge
him, he pledged the party"
Allen said the statement Of Hoar as
to the silver candidate for the presidency
should not go unchallenged There was
nothing in what Mr.. Bryan had said JUS
tifying an assertion that he would have
vetoed tariff bill. If it had been a bill
Of confiscation, doubtless he would have
vetoed it.
Hoar brought forward copies Of the
record, showing Mr.. Bryan's course or
the tariff. He voted in the house to put
wool on the free list; he had carried out
in triumph Wilson, who had denounced
protection as robbery; he had himself
denounced protection as robbery.
II have good deal of respect for Mr..
Bryan" continued Hoar. His charac-
ter has impressed me very favorably,
and have never Joined in criticism upon
him, but If he would not veto a tariff
bill after such utterances I would not
have much respect for him.
Stewart thought these criticisms of
Mr.. Bryan were most unfair, for, said
the senator, an examination of Mr.. Nc
Kinley's record would show him to have
voted for free and unlimited coinage of
silver.
Stewart stated that during the consid-
Grafton of the Bland-Allison act, McKin-
ley had voted at every stage with the
most radical silver men," Even as late
as 1890 Mckinley had made a speech at
Toledo denouncing Cleveland for dis
eliminating between the metals.
Stewart caused a laugh as he closed
by saying. very earnestly, that "it was
no use criticising Mr.. Bryan, as he's go
ing to be the next president"
The vote was then taken on Quay's
motion to table the committee amend
ments to paragraph 357, and 1t was re-
jected-19 to Al. The vote in detail is as
follows:
Yeas-Bacon, Chiffon, Cockrell, Cor
man, Jones Of Arkansas, Kenney, Nal
lory, Mills, Mitchell Morgan, Murphy,
Pascoe, Penrose. Pettus. Quay. Smith,
Turpie, Vest, Walthall. Total 10.
Nays-Allen, Allison, Burrows, But
Ter, Carter. Chandler, Clark. Davis, De-
Doe, Fairbanks Foraker, Frye, GAL
linger, Gear. Hale, Hansbrough, Heit-
field, Hoar, Lodge, Mcbride, McEnery
Mantle, Perkins, Platt of Connecticut