Evening star., 1897-06-15


tries. and that the cost Of refining was
less than 80 cents a hundred pounds. The
senator said this controverted Mr. Allison's
assertion that the cost in the United States
was greater than in foreign countries. He
criticised in detail Mr.. Allison's figures,
showing the diffsrentials on the law Of
1894 and on the pending schedule. They
showed that the protection increased as
the scale proceeded DOWNWARD to 75-de-
gree sugar. which. he said, accrued to the
benefit of the trust Mr.. Caffery said he
did not wish to unduly occupy the atten-
tion Of the Senate. but this was a grave
question for the people, and the Senate
should not add to the favors received by
an overgrown corporation.
Mr. Ltndsay's Amendment Rejected.
The vote was then taken on Mr.. Lind
says amendment, and it was disagreed to
-yeas, 81; nays. 3d. Mr. McEnery da.)
voted with the republicans in the negative,
and Messrs. Mantle and Pettigrew. silver
republicans, with the democrats in the af-
firmative.
Mr. Allison moved to strike out the re-
taHatory clause OF paragraph aO6, from
line to Il, page 63, because. he said. it
was covered in the third section of the
schedule.
In this connection Mr.. Vest of Missouri
criticised Mr.. Allison's figures, given yes
terday to the differentials. saying they
were complete abandonment of the posi-
ton originally taken by Mr.. Aldrich. 1t
disclosed. he said. the radical difference In
calculations on the other side of the cham
her. He had prepared table showing
thts Emergencies in calculations. 1t
showed that on 96 sugar Mr.. AIdrich had
given 70 as the price per pound; Allison.
2.12, and the sugar dealers. 225. With this
varying basis of calculation. the results
were necessarily conflicting.
The net result of his tables, Mr.. Vest
said, was to show the relative protection
on 96 degree sugar to be: Wilson law, 81
cents Per hundred pounds; Dingley rate,
IL cents; Aldrich rate, 46 cents: pending
caucus rate. Al cents. showing. he declared,
protection cf 10 cents per hundred pounds
greater in the pending schedule than the
protec tion Of the existing law. He denied
absolutely, he said, the figures which
showed that the Wilson differentials were
more than those of the proposed schedule.
Imitation Of the Wilson Bill.
MIR. White of California also criticised
Mr.. Allison's figures. saying they were in
correct throughout. Taking them as cor
rect. however. Mr.. White pointed out that
on the two great grades, 95 and 90 degree
sugar. Mr.. Allison conceded that the VIII
son differential and the present diferentiaI
were practically the same SO that at most
this schedule was but an imitation of the
Wilson bill.
Mr.. White again turned to the records
OF republican senators on former sugar
schedules. He quoted Mr.. Hale's statement
four years ago as to the poor mans break
fast table, adding safcastically that that
over to the modern autocrat-the sugar
trust. Mr.. Aldrich was also quoted, amid
amusement, as saying that the democratic
senators were so hopelessly under the in
fiuence of the sugar trust that the Ameri-
can people were Inundated.
Mr.. Tillman of South Carolina remarked
that he thought that this showing justified
his word Villains" for which he had been
chided in referring to the sugar rates.
Mr. Allison's motion striking out the re-
taiiatory clause in paragraph 206 was then
agreed TO without opposition.
The Hawaiian Proviso Passed Over.
At Mr.. Allison's request. the proviso re-
lating to the Hawaiian Islands was passed
over
This completed the consideration of par
agraph 2O6. except the Hawaiian proviso.
Mr.. Allison moved to insert q new par
agraph, to be known as paragraph 206x, of
which he had given notice. 1t Is as fol-
lows:
'.2O6h. That the duties on molasses,
clayed. Jaggery and other sugars testing
not above 81 degrees by the polariscope
shall be one-tenth Of one cent per pound
less than those imposed by the preceding
paragraph on corresponding tests of su-
gar"
The paragraph was agreed to without OBJ
lection.
Paragraph 2U7. relating to maple sugar
and mable sirup was agreed to as reported;
also paragraph 206. relating to saccharine.
The committee amendments to paragraph
1u5, relating to sugar candy and confec-
tionery, were agreed to as reported.
This brought the Senate TO the end of the
sugar schedule, the Hawaiian provision
being the only committee provision to 60
over.
The Anti-Trust Amendment.
Mr.. Pettigrew desired to have his amend
ment relative to trusts voted on as part
of the sugar schedule. Mr.. Allison asked
that IT go over and be considered at later
stage OF the bill.
Mr.. Pettigrew said he felt like having
the issue now, unless overruled by the Sem
ate. g..
Mr.. Vest remarked that he had not SUD-
posed there was any difference among par
ties on the propriety Of this amendment.
1t was time to dispose Of 1t now. otherwise
the whole sugar debate would be reopened
at q later stage.
The amendment was then read with q
view to a vote. 1t covers three printed
pages, and in brief provides: That all ar
act shall be admitted free OF duty II said
articles Of a like character Of domestic
production are manufactured or their sale
controlled or the price affected by q trust
or combination to increase the cost Of
said articles to purchasers by preventing
competition or otherwise"
Mr doar said the amendment provided
for an importers trust.
Mr.. Faulkner maintained that all raw
mater al and partly 6nished product would
be kept on the duttable list, as the provts-
| 6ns OF the amendment were limited to
Manufact, red articles.
Mr.. Pettus (Ala.) took decided stand
against the Pettigrew amendment, and
| urged that the Senate should not destroy
the Industries OF the country by hasty and
| inconsiderate action.
l
Court 0f Claims Award.
The Court Of Claims has awarded to the