The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-06-24

WASHINGTON. June eg.-After con-
test lasring throughout the day. the SEN
ate completed the paragraphs Of the wool
schedule relating 20 raw wool. and ad-
Faaced into the features relating TO manu.
! iaet4red woolen goods. The day was de-
voted largely 10 discussion OF the effect
OF tarin rates on the price Of wool. and
the speeches were on technical lines Ia the
main.
AT one point Mr.. Hoar diverted the dis
cuss!on by a reference 20 William j. Rry-
ans opposition TO the tarif This brought
Senators Mantle. Allen and Stewart TO the
defense OF Mr. Bryan
Teller was drawn into the controversy
and in a few remarks warned his former
republican associates that their hopes Of
prosperity from this bill would he blasted
quay made a strong effort 10 have the
house ad vaiorem rates on third-ciass wool
adopted but he was defeated 10 10 a.
The committee rates were then agreed
10. viz:
-Four cents per pound on third-class
Wool valued at 70 cents or less per pound
and cents per pound on third-class wool
NaIued ahove IL cents per pound, Tn.
! schedule was completed ND % paragraph
sn4. relating to cloths. knit fabrics etc.
Early in the day Allen Of Nebraska rose
10 question of personal privilege.
Allen then arose 20 question Of per-
sohdt privilege IN connection with the
conduct Of the last campaign There vas
much interest in the statement as Mr.
Allen was chairman Of the populist Ma
tional committee Allen read published
press dispatch from Lewiston Me say
ing that Prof L. G. Pateman. candidate
Of the Populist party Of Maine for COVER
nor last year. was out In an attack on
William J. Bryan 10 the effect that Mr.
Bryan's gift Of 81 800 TO the Populist ma
1Y.I -,-,sy
understanding that no action against fu-
sion should be taken by the Populist ma
. tional convention. Allen made sweep
! ing denial. He said BRYAN had deter
( mined 10 divide the royalties on his books.
and in so doing allotted 81. 500 to the Pop
ulist party. The draft was sent TO Allen
but the chairman of the PopuIist national
committee fSenator Butler of North
I Carolina( declined to accept ii. There
upon. at the suggestion Of Mr.. Bryan.
Allen invested the amount. to be used IN
! the interest of bi-metallism Allen de-
ciared that the statement that any agree
ment existed to fusion in connection
! ssith the gift was "an absolute and un-
qualified faisehood" There had never
been he declared. an attempt TO fuse the
parties. either nationally or locally. AL
len also specifically denied the statement
that Mr.. Bryan forged his tAllen's) name
to the list appended to the letter of noti-
fication. The senator closed with high
tribute to Mr.. Bryan and an arraignmert
of Prof Bateman
Butler briefly stated that the offer was
: made 10 him. but he felt impelled 10 de-
cline II. He knew Mr.. Bryan's motive
but felt that the acceptance might be
open to misconstruction. The offer had
been made, he said. without any condi-
! tion. express ar implied
The consideration Of the wool schedule
was then resumed Paragraph 357 rela.-
ing to third-cIass woods was taken up.
! There was considerable opposition 10 the
proposed rates. the debate being largely
on technical lines relative to grades OF
wool
Vest of Missouri pointed on. conflicts be-
tween the views OF Lawrence and Justice.
two wool experts. and said II these recog-
nized authorities were so far apart. how
could the Iaynen nc expected TO get at the
trdtae
/ Mantle of Montana criticised some of the
) statements % Mr. Justice. particularly that
10 the effect tina: no more than per cent.
I OF the wool grown In this country was car
pet wool Mantle asserted that one-eighth
OF every fleece OF the common sheep was
clsssed as coarse carpet wool He would
regard Il most equitable 10 levy a specific
duty on all carpet woods. without any dis
tinction as an ad vaiorem led 10 under
valuation. The senator discussed the effect
+ Of the Mckinley wool rates, saving that
they did not accomplish All that had been
expected. they did not offset the heavy de-
2 cline caused by business depression.
Mills of Texas said IL was Incompetent
sible TO him why wool men demanded high
duties. in face OF experience that The price
OF wool could not be raised ny the sariH
any more than the price Of cotton could be
( increased b. a duty. The price q wool
/ had been Ealing constantly for forty YEARS
In spite of iari1 rates. He quoted sf8tis-
/ ties showing that wool rates had fallen
after the imposition OF the Mckinley rates
ana had risen after the Wilson provisions
for free wool. Xais was proof iucontest-
ible. he declared. that tariff duties could
not affect the price OF wool
Al one point IN -iills re5narke Mantle
! inter3ected the remark: Generally spea X
fns. the senator will not question mat the
. imposition Of a du-y has raised the price
( 10 the wool grower
Il have never been able 10 discover L.
! answered Mills.
Mantle asserted that this general benefit
10 the wool grower was incontexfthle. GER
. talnly 10 the Montana growers. and he oe-
+ Iieved il vas 50 generally. Mh's maintain
/ - that he was speaking from tables Of
/ prices which constituted a reco.d not to -
fr1Deached under the rules OF evidence ~
general opinions.
3 Carter of Montana said It was a fact be-
yond dispute that during tae last year the
wool growers 81 340C ANA e:re FecE44 - :
cents per pound. while under t6e Mcki4-
iev law they were receiving u cents
.sAnd the difference between cents and
. il cents j. taa difference between des1yf1e-
ton und prosperity" declared Carter.
When AIals quoted certain low rates n
4 Montana WOODS under 'he Mckinley law.
Garter RESPONDED fhat these were QBog@l
a. "a time when the passage of the Wilson
bill vas anticipated, serving 10 send Gown
the prices
Gray OF Delaware declared that * MAS
Z tErle for o r~Volt aEaiusE fEe asna4n 81
+ the Woe Growers ASSOCIATION II those
yvGo oppose these h3Eh duties on wopi aFs
10 - considered eF -r7ies. ssta he- "tney
must take tseir position 1s enemies. aud
they wfI not ~ }zcklcE "a resources %
srsakr their oppos fi0a Eesf-
ThLs extra session cf congress was caitss!
( Tor 16e primary purpose ~ framing = law
x4S1re adequate revenue aud IL was inf2-
/ ,ssous h,e asserted. that Tflgs revenue meas
/ .tg@ caaLd f.at pass satll a tetl Hzs leVIs71
( or the great nTaSs ~ poGr p@opie of sas
+ country. tae Wesrers of e5c57ins ana users
( Of b.ankEts in c-sieF % Increase tns proofs
of tns wool growers.
9u4F ~aots2 s aIsa gree 80 tss COMMITTEES
anasGff1suts 90 paragraph &st.
TIE sIesg af sxaay u1vt4on would - 10
I 20 sark Ia she h0use Tate 81 - per cent.
. "a Vaf0Tcru
+ Ffoar pointed osIt that there v2s not 3
i xsaa5ofzty 5u Fhz senate favorable 20 THAI
| cccirfna G. pEStees4eu supported p tAs