The times., 1897-06-20

ing house Is said TO be In Boston. It's presi-
dent Is OF that city and its vice president
is connected with Dayton, Ohio, firm.
MI. Pettigrew produced little box of
oiloloth samples The fact that these
articles are manufactured by four firms
which participated in the profits was one
OF the reasons why the articles were pro-
tected, sarcastically said MI. Pettigrew.
Tie fact that the oilcloth was produced by
trust entitled il TO protection. Mfr. Pet
tigTew charged that the duty was the
result OF political deal Outrageous
plundering duty was imposed on articles
produced by a trust 1T was shameful
but still it was known during the cam
paign that but one party supported the
trusts and was supported by the trusts
1t was the same party that had paid the
expenses of every available man to go to
the different States and cast a vote for
the trusts
MI White, of California, suggested to
Mr.. Pettigrew that the duty on oiIcIoth
was compensatory duty for services
rendered.
Il admit thatit is partly compensatory"
answered the Senator from South Dakota,
.'but l believe it is also just as much an
depended Upon,'' he concluded.
Mr.. Jones again presented his motion
to strike out the pending paragraph and
insert the Wilson rates. The ayes and
noes were demanded by MT Pettigrew,
resulting in the defeat of the motion
by vote of 27 to 22
The committee amendments reducing the
specific duty of so cents to 40 cents on
hirfS nd C.,ff -
There was a little contest over the
adoption Of the proposed duty on laces.
MIR. White offered the present law as a
substitute for the Senate paragraph.
Mr.. Gray in the chair declared the motion
adopted on a viva yoce vote. A count
was asked by Mr. Allison 1t was at a
time when many Senators were atluncheon
and only twenty Senators were found
voting. ten In the affirmative and ten
in the negative.
lis there quorum voting, Mr.. Presi-
dent?'' inquired Mr.. Allison.
Il am informed that there is" was Mr.
Gray's response
Mr.. Allison then demanded a roll call,
which revealed a quorum. The motion was
again put by the chair and lost.
The committees amendment reducing the
specific duty on jute bags and sacks from
l 1-s cents to / cent was agreed to, and
Senator Pettus moved to strike out the
paragraph IN question CAD and also para
graph 342. relating to bagging for cotton,
gunny cloth and similar fabrics, so as to
leave them free Of duty.
Senator White favored the motion, which,
he said, was in the interest of the farmer.
The free admission Of sacks would be a
great saving to the agriculturist, who
would be compelled to pay the tax when
he bought his fertilizer and when he pur-
chased sacks in which to ship his grain
This view was concurred in by Senator
Butler Of North Carolina, who specified
the extent Of the tax on North Carolina
farmers to be $50 200 year; for South
Carolina, about $4,000, and so on for
various States
Senator Jones of Arkansas made the
statement that. before the reporting of
this bill, bags used by farmers in Oregon
were advanced from $4 80 a hundred to
81 hundred.
another prpofo OF the coming prosperity"
drily remarked Mr.. White
Senator Butler showed that, as there
was really no protection to the farmer
or his products, the tax on grain and fer
tilizer sacks was revenue duty pure and
simple, which was an enormous direct tax
on the farmers Of the country, who alone
Of Americans are left TO compete with the
pauper labor OF the world II the farmer
can face free trade. why not the manu-
facturer?
Mr.. Perkins said that Mr.. Buffers ar
gument was specious; Three yeaIs ago