The times., 1897-05-26
stead of for protection, the Republican

stead OF Tor protccuOn, the RepubllCun
policy.
Dld the tariff of 1890 bring sunshine 10
the agricultural classes as predicted by Nc
Kinney, wilosaid that ii manufacturers We're
protected they could then reach out and
seiZe the foreign markets. He challenged
an affirmative reply.
/ Mr. Vest quoted statistics TO show that
for the nine mon tbs ended March 30, S97,
the volume OF trade in our favor was
$323,3S1 ,5l9a3 yet tile farmers We're
still in tile same condition as in IS9u,
although we not only supplied the home
market but sold $323,3S1 ,519 worth OF
goods abroad Certainly it was not
market that was wanting
Dir. Vest argued that the Republicans
had taken the wrong road To produce in
creased revenue Under The Mckinley iill
it was history that revenue fell off from
wear TO year after tire first year IN which
il operated
Mr. Chandler said that Mr.. Vest ought to
have explained in fairness how the surplus
of 81 % ZOO, 900 got into the Treasury,
meaning the Cleveland sale OF bonds.
Mr Vest admitted the origin OF the sur
plus, but said it made no difference how it
got there The real question was what are
you going to do with it? Why not use it
instead of putting on more taxes? II was
illogical to refer 10 the source OF this sur
plus. Where is the necessity for protecting
manufacturers who are sending abroad
twenty-siX per cent of the 1928, ,00o, ,0oo of
the balance OF trade? The only wa 10 ,x-
plain the enormous exports was because The
farmers here were unable to buy. 1t was
nonsense to assume that a higher tariff
would help the market. The true trouble
WAS because the agricultural class was in
direCtcompetitiou with the gold premium
Mr. GallingerrcnaTked here that Mr.. T>st
was arguing like Senator 5 tewart Had he
not heard OF the change ofJapan to the gold
tandard?
Mr Stewart. Thatmeansthat Japanhas
been bought out Laughter)
Mr.. Vest went ON TO argue that farmers
could not buy unless they had money, and
they couldn't have money unless they
could sell their products.
The salient feature OF every tariff bill.
he remarked, is sugar. Ingenious tables
could, ne said. no doubt be formed by
experts showing the ''diffeFentials He
had heard lot OF testimony on these diff
ferentials. but he knew that the amounts
OF drawback were known only inside Of
the refineries AS to the Republican policy
with regard to the Hawaiian reciprocity
treaty, il would have been better to
repeal the treaty and act fairly.
on what theory, he asked, was the duty
doubled on lead when our producers were
supplying the foreign trade? on the part
of the ad-producing State Of Missouri be
would disclaim any necessity for such q
| duty
Mr Vest inveighed against the schedules
| on crocFery, etc, which, he said, was out
rageous oppression of the poorer classes.
| Al TO the wool schedules, ne challenged
contradiction of the statement that the
| prices Of wool went down under an high
tariff schedules, and thatits fan was first
! arrested by the Wilson bill The Speaker
| paid his respects with irony to the hide
| schedule.
Mr. Vest touched up the Republicans on
| their former policy OF a poor mans free
| breakfast free coffee, free tea. free
| sugar, and quoted Senator Altlrich as
| formerly advocating free sugar, also Sena-
rors Hale, Morrill, and Mr.. Allison, who
stated that a tax on sugar was n captation
| tax. Mr.. McCurdy was also put on the
! stand to the same effect.
Mr. Vest believed that the bin had been
denounced sufficiently. He would CON
1 tent himself for the present with having
| shown that there was no necessity for the
| proposed hi CHER taxation If, however. Re
| publicans can put blood again into the
torpid veins Of the country, he would give
| credit where it belonged
Mr.. Cannon gave notice OF an amendment
| providing export bounties on agricultural
| products, as cents on corn, 10 cents
| on wheat, 1 cent on cotton, so cents
| on rye, flour, etc.
| He argued that this proposition was so
| directly in the line of protection that he
| was surprised that the agricultural classes
! which had so materially aided the Repub-
| lican party were excluded from protection
by the Finance Committee. He would
/ urge this amendment and fight 1t to a
! vote.
| Mr. Cannon said there were only three
remedies for existing conditions: First.
! the restoration of proper money conditions;
| second, absolute free trade: and third, the
| granting of an export bounty Oh agr-
cultural products. The first two he did
| not expect
! The third proposition, he said, was ad-
vocated inferentially by Webster and Clay
and directly by Albert Galatin. He laid
| down the proposition that what was given
! to the manufacturer In tariff taxes should
| be returned to the farmer In export boun.
! ties. He admitted that this would mean
higher price for breadstuffs in the cities
but, as the Republicans claim, theincrease sed
| wages would offset that difficulty. Mr.
| Cannon said that the Government might
cut down the purchases Of armor plate, for
instance, if it found it didn't have enough
money to help the farmers. If we do not
adopt this amendment, the farmer will, al
the first opportunity, overturn this robbeI
1 tariff
Mr.. Chandler desired to know when Mr.
| Cannon began to believe that tariff was a
| robbery.
| Mr. Cannon: "Just as soon as began to
understand the truth about It, He be-
| lieved no longer in the theoryof taxing one
| class for the benefit of another class. He
| was still protectionist This system, how
| ever, was robbery and the Republic
| would fail, as Rome fell, through the op-
@~~o~~@~e~@@@~~~~A~@~@~~~e
TX ITS the business tchose sight 3