The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-07-22

Washington, July 19.-lne noor OF Tic
house presented an animated appearance
/. long before the speaker raped that body
order today. Members stood about in
I Houps and discussed, sometimes in excit-
tones the result %. Of t the c9R he nel
conference report on the general de-
fciency appropriation bill was adopted.
This out of the way, Mr.. Dingley arose,
holding aloft the report and great mass
of papers, said in a calm tone:
Mr.. Speaker, 1 desire to present the
conference report Ola the tariff bill. =,
Applause from the republican side
greeted this announcement A mOuon
was made to secure an agreement for
vote.
Mr.. Bailey said The minority desired
three days, but knowing they could moi
obtain them would be satisfied with two.
Mr.. Dingley refused to agree to this,
SAYING it would cost the treasury $780,
600 day. -,
Not so expensive as the ten days
spent in arranging the sugar scneGule
With tbe sugar trust" retorted Mr..
Bailey, amid a counter round OF ap-
plause by his followers.
Mr.. Dingley, in reply pointed out that
never before in Legislative history mad a
tariff bill been in conference so brsef n
time. The Mckinley bill had been in con-
ference two weeks "and our friends on
the other side" said he addressing the
democrats "n 1894 were in conference
six weeks without reaching an agree
ment." A.,
"The trouble IN 1894" retcorted MIR.
Bailey. was that we were trying to run
the democratic congress with iot OF
mugwumps in command" (Laughter)
Mr.. Dingley continued his efforts to
fix time for vote and uhe republicans
during the discussion cried 'o'e' "0'e'
vote" .., - ,.too,,
Zoos m n little higher" said Mr.. Bailey
sarca stically. at has gone up S6 a snare
since the agreement was reported.
All efforts to reach an agreement nav
ing failed, Mr. Dmgley opened ms speech
.on the conference report. lie to0k up
each schedule explaining IN detall ahe
charges made ana followed closely the
formal statement given out by the COM
: 1nittee. Concerning the sugar schedule
AIR. Dingley read from the dtficial state
nlrnt, adding brief comments. am
nv the agreement about SZ;OU.OOO m
crease of revenue would be realized as
,hs increase had baen placed on raw
sugars at the point where revenue would
I've received and at the same time the
beet sugar industry will receive sub
stantial benefit.
When Mr.. Dingley referred tie the elm,
inatton of the stamp tax. Mr.. Todd
lJeml of Michigan asked him if he then
confessed that they had abandoned the
idea of taxing the stack gamblers OF
Wall street. D. .,x,o
discovered that the sales in Wall street
could not be followed. No record Is kept.
T'be machinery Of collection would be too
complex.
MI. Cooper (rep1 of Wisconsin wanted
IN explanation of the net result OF the
change of the sugar scedule.
Mr Dingley explained it along the line
of the statement submitted by the con-
(erees. The differential TO the refiner he
said was exactly the same az the house
Till. This started volley of questions
about the sugar schedule.
Mr.. Johnson (rep) of Indiana wanted
+, know if the increase in the rate on re-
fined sugar would not increase the prof
IFS of the trust on the anticipatory i'm
variations of raw sugars.
Mr.. Dingley explained the impossibllity
of preventing these profits.
Mr.. Dingley. after calculation. at
tirmed that the refner of sugar under
the present Wilson law had a differential
of % ~ cents per 100 pounds as against
~ IL cents in the pending bill as agreed
TO by the conferees.
As to the question of revenue to be |
raised by the bill, Mr.. Dingley pointed
out the difficulty resulting from the large |
anticipatory importations. The bill next
wear, he said, would raise $225, 600 900, !
I,T5, OOO, 900 more than the present law.