The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-04-01

Name them" shouted the democrats.
The trust" replied Mr.. Grosvenor,
which controls monopoly of what God
gaye-the silver trust"
The republicans cheered this response,
while the opposition groaned.
There was some further sharp cross
firing, which reused both sides to enthu-
siasm.
Mr.. Newlands (sil) of Nevada said that
most of the trusts created in the past ten
years had been for protection against fall
ing prices; even labor was organizing
trusts for that purpose and cotton plant
ers were organizing to limit production
in vain attempt to resist falling prices.
Mr.. Bland (dem.) of Missouri declared
that hardly a state legislature had met
last winter that did not seek to lay the
heavy hand of the law on unlawful cor
porations.
Mr.. Tawney declared the opposition
| was attempting to make some cheap DO
litical capital out of this alleged assault
on trusts. The republican party was the
only party that had ever enacted anti
| trust legislation in congress. He created
much amusement by reading list of the
prominent democrats in the present house
who voted against the consideration of the
antitrust law passed by the Fifty-frst
| congress.
Twill you name single conviction I'M
der that law?' asked Mr.. Richardson.
WHY" replied Mr.. Tawney, ,'only last
Monday the supreme court declared that
the greatest trusts of the coutry violated
that law" Republican laughter.)
Mr.. Richardson, Mr.. Tawney said,
raised the question of consideration
against the antitrust law.
| Mr.. Richardson produced the record to
show he raised the question in the inter-
est of the silver bill. The democrats ap-
plauded this statement.
| Mr.. Tawney said that was exactly the
position assumed by the free silver sena-
tors to defeat the Dingley bill.
| Mr.. Bland and others declared that the
democratic position was misstated. and
declared that Mr. Tawney had not the
| courage to read the vote on the final
passage of the bill. Every democratic
vote on the floor was cast in favor of
, that bill
Mr.. Dalzell admitted this, but said the
democrats had tried to prevent a vote on
the bill. 1t was only when their hands
were tied and they were driven into a
corner that they voted for the bill, be-
cause they dared not oppose it.
Mr.. Bland and Mr.. Henderson INDUCED
in a lively passage, in which much feel
ing was displayed on both sides.
Mr.. Dingley ended the debate by rails
ing the point that the pending amendment
was not german to the section and
should be ruled out of order.
When the time, arrives to deal with
trusts" he said. "rest assured that we
will meet the question. We all under
stand that the purpose of the other side
is to oppose the revenue to be raised by
this bill
Mr.. Sherman of New York made an
elaborate ruling, TO which the house
showed close attention, holding that the
amendment was not in order and Mr..
Dockery appealed from the decision of
| the chair. As way out of the difficulty
pending appeal, Mr.. Richardson asked
| unanimous consent that the amendment
| he adopted. Mr.. Dingley insisted that
| first the appeal should be disposed of.
Then the gentleman from Maine OBJ
| Jects!" inquired Mr.. Richardson.
The democrats smiled in self-satisfac-
| ton at this attempt to get the leader of
| the majority on record.
The vote on the appeal was taken and
| the chair sustained by strict party vote,
15S to 1O4.
The combined opposition voted against
the ruling of the chair.
Similar amendments against trusts We're
| offered by Mr.. McRae (dem.) of Arkan-
| sas and Mr.. Cooper (dem.) of Texas, but
were ruled out of order. Mr. Robinson
| (dem.) of Indiana offered one to put goods
on the free list when the. prices in this
| country were the prices charged abroad,
plus the duty and 20 per cent for trans
portation.
Mr.. Smith (dem.) of Arizona offered one
providing that the customs duties be paid
in silver bullion. 4S2 grains to be equiva-
lent to 81.
MIR. Wheeler (dem) of Alabama offered
one directed against railroad and other
| trusts; Mr.. McAlillin (dem.) of Tennessee,
one for the payment of customs duties in
bimetallic currency, but all failed.
An amendment fixing the duty on
boracic acid AZ cents per pound was
agreed TO.
The democrats offered various amend
ments as the reading of the bill proceed
ed. but all were rejected.
Committee amendments offered, how
ever, were in each case agreed to. The
duty on crude tartar, wine lees, etc. test
ing less than 40 per cent of bitartrite of
potash. was fixed Mt l cent; over 40 Itr
| cent of bitartrite was fixed at cents per
pound.
Mr.. McNilliln criticised the increased
rate on celluloid articles, saying that if
the purpose was to decrease importations,
it meant decreased revenues.
1.-The purpose of the bill is not merely
to increase the revenue. said Mr., Rus
sell (repD of Connecticut: 1T is also to
put labor to work" (RepuDlican APP