The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1897-08-14


one quarter of a cent pound. Thus, it
appears to have impressed Mr.. Wilson and
his conferees of the Ways and Means
Committee that sugar refining, having be-
come an American industry, to cut its
profits under Republican legislation in half
would be in conformity with the other re-
form features of his bill, Notwithstanding
the trust which controlled this branch of
industry had become better known to the
people than the other trusts They were
also no doubt largely Influenced by the fact
which subsequently played such an i'm
portant part in the Senate in the consider
alton of the same measure) that under the
operation of the improved machinery the
Louisiana producers of cane sugar had be-
come large competitors in the production of
refined sugars and were unwilling to sur
render all of the differential duty.
ENDORSED BY PRESIDENT CLEVELAND.
President Cleveland, in his message to
that session of Congress, strongly endorsed
the Wilson bill in the shape it was presented
by Mr. Wilson to the House. (See
Message and Document, 1884
MR. WILSON DEFEATED IN THE HOUSE.
But when the sugar schedule came up
for consideration in the House Mr.. Wilson
was defeated, and not only were his tenn
porary bounty provisions stricken out, but
the tax on refined sugar was also swept
away, leaving sugar absolutely on the free
list. This, according to the Baltimore
Sun of July %, 1894, was effected by
combination of Republicans and free
traders. In its issue of that date, under
the caption, "a Second Defeat of the
Ways and Means Committee, the Sun
had the following:
"After a discussion that consumed
nearly the entire afternoon the Democrats
of the House of Representatives today made
an emphatic declaration in opposition to
the sugar bounty, and voted not only TO
abolish it, but also to abolish the duty on
refined sugar.
Gas the hour for a vote arrived the in
terest became intense. Probably not since
the session began has there been so large
an attendance on either side.
= x x y x 4:
chairman Wilson closed the debate
with his characteristic ability. His words
showed, however, that he felt the Ways
and Means Committee were to suffer a
second defeat, and he contented himself
with laying before the House the reasons
that had prompted the committee to re-
commend the gradual instead of the imme-
date abolition of the sugar bounty.
4 4: X x x 4;
sLater, when Representative Warner,
of New York, offered an amendment abol-
ishing the present duty on refined sugar,
the Republicans joined the free traders and
aided in declaring sugar absolutely free, by
vote of 1871 to So
DIFFERENTIAL FURTHER REDUCED IN
SENATE.
When the Wilson bill came to the Sen
ate its deficiencies in revenue producing
capacity had become we'll known to its
friends, and especially to the Secretary of
the Treasury, and among the measures for
increasing its yield of revenue tax of 40
per centum ad valorem on raw sugar was
readily agreed upon. But the Wilson
differential on refined sugar was again cut
in half and fixed at g Of cent pound,
or lust one-fourth of the rate of the then
existing Mckinley law. Indeed such was
the odium manifested on the part of many
Democratic Senators against the Sugar
Trust, that no differential at all would have
been allowed on the refined article had it
not been for the firm stand taken by the
two Louisiana Senators. They demon
strated that through the use of the latest
improved machinery over 80 per cent. of
the sugars sent to market from the Louis
lana plantations were above 16 Dutch
standard, and therefore classed as refined
sugars. They did not think that the duty
of 40 per cent. afforded sufficient protec-
ton to the Louisiana interests-it was GER
tainly far less than the existing bounty
and they insisted upon retaining differen
tial on refined of at least l-8 of Il cent.
POSITION OF THE LOUISIANA SENATOR'S.
An inspection of the Congressional Di-
rectory of the SD Congress will show the
political composition Of the Senate at that
time to have been A Democrats, 80 Re
publicans and 3 Populists, making 80 in
all-there being vacancies. The Popu-
lists announced from the first their purpose
to defeat all tariff legislation, if possible,
hoping thereby to convict the Democratic
party of incompetency 1t therefore be-
came absolutely necessary that the Demo
Gratis should present such bill as would
command the support of 43 of Their A
Senators. Mr.. Hill, of New York, hay
ing announced his uncompromising opposl-
tion to the bill on account of the income
tax, it was absolutely necessary to retain
the support of both of the Louisiana Sen
ators. As stated they insisted upon the
retention of the ! of cent differental duty
on refined sugar for the benent it conferred
on the Louisiana producers, and in defer
ence to them it was retained. The posi-
ton assumed by the Louisiana Senators
upon this question its clearly shown by the
following extracts from speeches made by
them in the Senate. While the confer
ence report on the Wilson bill was pending
in the Senate, Mr. Villas moved to strike
out the | cent duty on refined sugar, and
upon this motion both of the Louisiana
Senators made strong speeches-which
will be found in the Congressional Record,
Vol. 26, pages 7741 to 7747-from which
the following extracts are made:
EXTRACT FROM SPEECH OF SENATOR
cAFFERY Cor LA.
"Mr. Caffery. Mr. President, | un-
derstand the motion of the Senator from
Wisconsin Mr. Vilas) to be an instruc.
ton to the Senate conferees to drop the
differential of one eighth upon refined sugar
which has been adopted by the votes Of
the Senate. During the course of the
Senator remarks | ventured to ask him
question. after a strong expression on his
part and which he referred back to me fol
a response. 1t is absolutely useless for me
to say that, representing my State and Its
chief staple product, have no concern
with or interest in the Sugar Trust. am
here to advocate so far as | can the inter