The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-03-31
WHO MAKES THIS ONEs


After the Mckinley act was framed
and the question rose as to who really
framed its schedules, Hon. o. NJ Hall
took the trouble to put into the deadly
| parallel the requests for rates made
by the manufacturers while the COM
mittee was having its hearings" and
| the schedules as reported to the house,
and in case after case the phraseoIogy
and very words of the requests of the
beneficfaries to the committee appear
ed in the bill. When Mr.. Dingley's COM
mfttee was engaged in the same grim
farce Of taking evidence from these
experts" in order to get information
on which to make tax rates, we VEN
| tured to assert that the modest de-
mands of the manufacturers would
again appear in the schedules. Where
upon, our estimable contemporary, the
Milwaukee Sentinel, took us sober1y to
task for thus prejudging the court, as
surfing us that the committee would re-
ceive these requests as any court re-
| ceives evidence, to be weighed. sifted,
scaled down and given only the weight
they were entitled to when all interests
were considered
We concluded that we could afford
to wait, confident that the Dingley
committee would follow the illustrious
precedent Of the old Pennsylvania
Dutch justice, who summed up the case
at the finish of the testimony and ar
! gument Of counsel and gravely assured
| the parties that he would take three
days to consider the case, "but 1 will
efentually find for de plaintiff" Mr..
Dingley, prodded by the revolt of two
Republican members from Massachu-
sets from the wool and woolens sched-
ule on Monday, confirms our expecta-
lions and admits that he found for
the plaintiff" Mr.. Mccall slapped the
bill in the face" says the report "The
duties in the bill are too high" care
| the duties on woolens too high?" que
ried Hopkins, Of Illinois, with a thin
layer of sneer spread over his question,
for Hopkins stands for wool and wool
growers, and, his pet lamb having been
duly blanketed, he assumed that Nc
Call would be inclined to dodge at this
thrust at the eve lamb of his con-
stituency. But Mccall was pIucky and,
for Republican under the lash, sur
prisingly candid. ct do not hesitate
to say" said he to Hopkins II think
these duties could be reduced without
detriment to the wool grower or the
wool manufacturer"
Here clearly was a dangerous break
in the line that called for reinforce
ments and the presence on the field
of the COMMUNICATIVE chief Then up
rose Dingley, stately, dignifed, com
handing, and flung at the dissenters
a vigorous statement about the wool
and cotton schedules" He told them
fatty that 1.-The manufacturers had tes-
+ titled (Nere they really under oath0
that they could not maintain their
own in the manufacture of the finer
goods without the duties in this bill"
! Turning to Lowering, of Massachusetts,
who had joined Mccall, he reminded
him that he was a cotton manufacture
er and had thus assured the committee.
Il take it," said Dingley, that the
gentleman has not asked for more than
was necessary" Was there a yelled
sarcasm in this? And, as for wool,
the duties had been restored on the
demand of the farmers Judge Law
renee, the "Ohio shepherd'O that they
receive the same consideration as the
manufacturers" So the farmers. that
is Judge Lawrence, wrote in the wool
schedules, and Mr.. Lowering wrote in
the cotton schedules, and the deputa-
! ton of wooden manufacturers wrote in
the woolens schedule, and the commit
tee court, without waiting to hear from
the 72,OOO,O0O defendants, found for the
| plaintiff"