Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-06-07
MORE TARIFF TALK.
Several Amendments 10 The Bill
Under Consideration.
DIFFERENT VIEWS AS TO LUMBER.
Senator nonr OF Massachusetts Gives
Lively Tufn TO The
Discu. sfpn.

"hohikNoioN, tSuho 'hS
Senate today Quay o. Pennsylvanis
presented several proposed amend.
ments 10 the tariff bill. Oae OF them
proposes to strike out the duty OF tea
aud substitute duty OF 10 per cent ad
yslorom on ali articles proposed by the
bill to be place on the free list, thee
duties to contiAus until July /, 1901,
After which the articles shsll be ex.
empt from duty.
Another amendment proposes a
proviso to the paragraph fixing
duty on iron ore SO that all Iron ore
irom foreign mines owned by Amerl-
can citizens aud imported for their
own use anu not Tor sale shall be ex-
empt f;Om duty.
The confederation OF the tariff bill
was resumed soon after the sessio d
opened AM tue discu sion proceeded
on the paragraph placing duty Of So
per 1000 feet Oh lumber.
Allan Pop, Neb.) moved TO substl-
tute the provislons Of the Wilson bill
which placed lumber on the free list.
The senator spoke In particular against
Restoring white pine to the uutlabio
list, urging that the rates were de-
signed to be prohibitory against Cana.
dian pine.
There WAS nothing, he salt, in thu
"clap-trap ARGUMENT OF American
hign wages" as the wages OF lumbe,-
men In CanaGR were on the whole
higher than they were Ia tue
U ni,ed States. This was simply an
d tempt to pay back to the iumbpr
syn ioste the advance which 1t hau
possibly maize less than q year aga,
and IN the eyes of every honest man
was nothing short OF absolute larceny
leg alizsu larceny.
Berry Ark.) spoke against restoring
the duty on white pine. He had been
appealed Ia by the lumber interests OF
nis own state to supp ri the July bu,
he could not do 4, when IL laid euch
hesvy tribute on the agricultural
people OF the Western states. Berry
expressed his astonishment that any
Democratic senator would support tn 10
rest ratiOnoi uuty on LABOR.
Bacon (Georgia), who is supporting
the lumber duty. reminded Berry that
his Bacon's) support was due 10 the
fact that the duty was revenue rather
Than . protective rate.
Berry responded with q v, hement
arraignment OF the bill, fran. d, he
said, IN the interest OF every trust anu
combination In the country. When ne
saw that the bill gave the large In.
create Of duty ~ the sugar trust and
every other Combination OF capital, 10
Satisfied him that the measure wa,
framed distinctly on the lines OF pro.
tsction anu not Of revenue.
b. Q lite lively tara was gwen to the
Senate tariff debate this afterne IN by
H0ar OF Mass. Bacon OF Gsorgis had
spoken in favor OF = duty on LUMBER
ss according to the Democratic tenets
and Gallery of louisiana had opposed
1T as unuemocratic.
HJsr thereupon reterrsd to the Pc
culiarities Of the way come Democrats
acted on the tariff. Cafiery's idea of
lariff, he said, was duty ON sugar,
eugar aud nothing else.
He added that CT fiery was go al xi.
Qua for protective duty on sugar
when the Wilson bill was being col :
siuered that when the vote was take "a
he fret cast his vote sgsinst the House
bill as protest aud before the compile
tion OF the call changed to yeas. Hoar
said Bacon wanted protection and
revenue to 60 hand in hand when II
came to the lduty on lumber. II the
Democratic SIDE could make \ tariff
bill 1t would be found that everything
In their own states would be p.otecl-
Ell. Bacon asked Hosr what he would
do about duty on hides.
H0ar said he would support tariff
bill II 1t contained a duty on hides
which his colleagues thought proper.
He said he thought q duty Of q cent =
pound on hides was not protection anu
frum that point Of view was Jolly.
Allen (Neb.) sail Hoar's statement
that the propJsed duty on hides was
only one cent was not correct. He
thon co mint e1 the debate on tcc lnm
Der sohe dule.