The Portland daily press., 1897-06-02
stituting the rates of the present law.
Mr.. Whites amendment was defeated and
the paragraph was agreed to as reported.

stituting the rates of the present law.
Mr. Whites amendment was defeated and
the paragraph was agreed to as reported.
| At this point 2.30 p. m. Senator Smith,
| OF New Jersey arose to question of per-
sonal privilege and made the following
| statement, reading from manuscript.
Mr.. President: During my absence
| from the Senate the other day ascer-
| tained from = the record that in a very re-
markable deliverance by the senator from
South Carolina, (Mr Tillman), he be-
| came sponsor for a newspaper clipping in
which my name was mentioned in con-
| nection with the sugar schedule in the
pending tariff bill e
"It is only necessary for me to say that
the statement in the newspaper clipping
| IN question is absolutely and unqualified
| ly untrue. l have not during this session
of Congress bought or sold directly or in
directly a single share of sugar stock nor
at any time prior to this when any legis-
| lation affecting the value of sugar or
sugar stock was pending"
| Mr.. Iillman sat at his desk while the
| statement was being made, but made no
ton OF the tariff bill was quickly re-
sumed.
Mr.. Smiths question of privilege not
taking more than two minutes.
The remaining paragraph relating to
glass ware were agreed to as reported ex-
cept the paragraph covering stained or
painted glass windows which went over
at the request of Mr. Wilson. The mar
BILE and stone schedule was then taken
up,
| Mr. Vest made contest on the para
graph relating to manufactures of agate,
etc., moving q reduction Of the rate from
30 to 20 per cent. The amendment was
| defeated, yeas II, nays 80.
| The committee proposed change In
onyx, leaving the marble rate as reported
and placing onyx in block at 81 so per
cub ic foot.
| Mr.. Vest remarked that this was raise
of 300 per cent over the present rate, to
which Mr.. Aldrich assented.
Mr.. Caffery spoke against such heavy
increases, warming Mr. Aldrich that he
was digging the grave of protection.
| Mr.. Aldrich answered that the pro-
posed rates We're requested in order to
give the American producers of onyx
adequate protection against Mexican
onyx.
Mr.. White supported the committee on
| this amendment, showing difference
with his Democratic associates on the
| finance committee in this repect. He
said onyx was an article of luxury, more
rare than marble and should have a
higher rate of duty than marble. He re-
ferred to Mr.. Proctor of Vermont as an
| authorized authority on marble and onyx
and asked him for an expert opinion as
to the relative duties on the articles.
| Mr.. Proctor responded that onyx was
much more rare and valuable than mar
Bile and ought to have a greater duty.
| Mr.. Perkins of Ca lifornia spoke of the
growing onyx industry in his state and
their need of adequate protection against
the brilliant grades of onyx produced by
the cheap labor of Mexico He stated
also that geologists have located large
onyx = deposits in Arkansas and he ex-
pressed surprise that the Arkansas sena-
his people to develop the deposit.
Mr.. Jones replied energetically that in
his Judgment there was no justification
| for tariff taxation except for the purpose
of revenue and he would not give his sup
port to any excessive tax even if it did
benefit the people Of his state. Such tax
alton, for private benefit, was robbery,
pa-fe and simple, he said.
| In referring to the rates ON onyx, Mr..
White of California said they would be
less than those given by the present sugar
schedule, which he added, incidentally,
he understood. would never be voted it.
This drew a response from Mr.. Caffery
as to the sugar schedule. His state pro-
duced cane sugar, he said, while the state
of Mr.. White produced beet sugar. But,
as for himself, he did not approve of this
sugar schedule of the Dingley bill, or of
the Senate, and he would not support
either one Of them. The present duty on
| sugar suited him, he said, against any
of the proposed changes.
Mr.. White and Mr.. Jones of Arkansas,
| both minority members of the finance
committee, had several colloquies, which
disclosed a divergence of opinion between
them and in response to jocular remarks,
by Mr.. White, Mr.. Jones said a 800 per
cent increase could not be Laughed into
respectability' The committee amend
ment placing onyx at 81 so per cubic foot
was then agreed to, yeas 81, nays H..
Messrs. White and Rawlins voting with
the Republicans in the affirmative.
| The committee amendment as whole
relating to marble and onyx was then
agreed to.
| Another contest was made on free stone
and other classes of undressed stone, Mr.
Vest moving reduction from IA to
cents per cubic foot
| Mr.. Vest pointed out that the proposed
rate was cents greater than the McKin-
| ley rates under which the exports We're
less than under the Wilson rates.
| Mr.. Vests amendment was disagreed to,
yeas is; nays 81.
| Ou dressed Tree STONE MT v eSb moved a
reduction from so to 80 per cent. In this
connection Mr.. Vest remarked that it
became his melancholy duty to refer to
another duty raised above the Mckinley
rate. Already, he said, he had pointed
out about 80 instances of the kind, al
though Mr.. Aldrich had claimed there
We're but half dozen rates above those in
the Mckinley bill. 1t had reached a
point, Mr.. Vest said, when the advocates
Of the bill had lost all yeneration for
the tariff act bearing the name of the
Presid ent of the United States.
| Mr.. Lodge of Massachusetts, and Mr..
Gallinger of New Hampshire, spoke of
the greater labor cost in the quarrying
of granite in the United States over that
| IN Scotland and Sweden, and Mr.. Gal
linger expressed the hope that when the
bill got into conference, the protection
afforded American granite workers would
| be greater than ever before.
| Messrs. Caffery, Mills and Vest spoke
against the committee rates. Mr.. Vests
amendment was then disagreed to, yeas
19, nays 2s.
The other paragraphs relating to stone
and slate were agreed to as reported.