The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1897-06-05
LUMBER BARONS EXPOSED
Interesting Disclosures i'm the Sen
ate Debate Upon the Schedule.
Southern Senator'S Assert That
Their Section Has Been Neglected
and Express Their Opposition.

there were not more than half dozen
Senators in the chamber.
An interesting debate was, however. to
he anticipated, as the lumber schedule was
in order TWAS understood that the Demo
Gratis would attack the wood schedule.
The first business to come up was
protest of the government Of Austria
Hungary against the discrlninative duties
on sugar. The letter conveying the same
was laid before the Senate, but o. request
of Senator Vest all of the papers We're
read.
IL was an important paper, inasmuch as
it intimated that the new tariff was
practically a violation OF the Commercial
understanding between the two govern
ments.
A great many bills were handed up, but
there was no DISPOSITION to obtrude any
of them on the attention of the Senate.
The consideration of tie tariff bill was
taken up shortly after noon, the schedule
On wood and wood manufactures recev-
ing attention.
Senator Jones of Arkansas objected 20
the taking OF many classes VI lumber off
the free list, and proce eded TO show that
the rates were largely due to the Iumoer-
men in certain sections Of the Union. Mr..
Jones read a circular letter, which Went
TO show that the lumber convention re-
Gently held had made STRENUOUS efforts To
present 70 the Finance Committee petitions
of operators, laborers and others, the Oh
ject being TO show that the interests Of
the latter could be best served by high
tariff
Mr. Jones went on to say that an extra
ordinary interest was being taken i'll this
tariff on lumber by an organization in this
city.
Mr.. Vest opened on the same line, hold
ing that it was intended to- make the duty
on white pine, 1.-The king Of the conifeTous
woods" on parity with spruce pine,
and to make the duty on both absolutely
prOhbitory. He asserted, and challenged
contradiction of the statement, that he
duties Of the present bill Were a scheme in
favor of the multimillionaire lumber
barons and resulting in The oppression Of
the consumers.
Mr.. Vest had read Il communication from
/ NJ Weston giving the names of manyor
the barons, and the extent Of their posses
derived from this schedule would he small
the whole advantage would be TO the
lumber dealers who would control the
trade and exact enormous profits from the
poor people of the West.
Mr. Jones read an article 10 show the
inconsistency Of some of the protectionists
on this point, in one case lumber man
contending that the effect Of the sched-
ule would be to make lumber cheaper.
Mr.. Jones read numerous extracts from
newspapers IN support of the general po-
sition assumed by him and Senator Vest.
Mr. McLaurin of South Carolina all
dressed the Senate briefly in the interest
OF Southern wood products. he showed
that whatever merit there was in the
duties on lumber it was only incidental
TO Southern products.
The entire schedule seems TO me- said
Mr. McLaurin," TO he framed for the sc,e
purpose Of protecting woods which are
grown in the northern part Of the United
states, and giving Just as little as possible
TO the timber of the South
He had read letter from q constituent
in South Carolina, sd ing how adversely
the schedule would operate on the railroad
tie industry.
Mfr Allison said that the Finance Com
mit,ee would recede from some of the
suggestions it made with reference TO
railroad ties and some few other pTOdurts
of industry.
Mr.. Bacon of Georgia disagreed with
Senators Vest and Jones as TO the wood
schedule being the most indefensible in
the bull. He was against d specifically pro-
tectiye tariff, but when it came to
revenue tariff he believed in having its
benefits uniform in all sections Of the
country. He favored the Republican
schedules on wood
Mr. Vest asked Mr.. Bacon whathe thought
Of the statement of lumber men theGr
selves, that the present duties We're abSo-
lUtcly prohibitory-
Nr Pacon replied: Il simply say, and
l think every Senator will bear ME cut.
that it is absolutely incredible that the
duties imposed would be absolutely no
hibitory"
Mr.. BACON also thought that the testi-
mony and documents introduced by Mr..
Vest and Mr. Jones We're also incr sdible.
II c intimated that Mr.. Vest in 1894 and
1897 was inconsistent.
Mr. Vest replied that the bill of 1894
was not to be considered, but that, in Isis
opinion, three things that redeemed it in
great measure were free salt, free lumber
and free wool
Mr.. Vest, in this connection, argued that
when you taxed raw material you handi-
capped the manufacturer, and he in turn
upprzsri thr r1nnHnr4Tr
sir HHr~n .I%HIsa EGt TTaa IaW mlTETluI
was ever tenet Of the brm0rTdtiG pnItyr
hut equality Of opportunity and advantage
was a Democratic fundamental principle
Mr. Clay of Georgia. addressed the SEN
ate for the first time on the bill. He
said he was not free trader. He stood
for Il tariff fer revenue only, but belicred
that the benefits Of the act should be Ills
tributed equitah!y.
He attacked only the protective fea-
lures % the hill. Protection was perhaps
AZ one time necessary IL was first thought
that three years would have been suffi-
cIent to set up oar infant industries.
but here after hundred years the pro-
tectionists were more arrogant and clam
orous than ever.
large part of Mr.. Clay's speech, which
was read, was taken up with a comparison
Of certain salient features of the Wilson
bill and the Senate Dingley bill. He ana
lyzed particularly the sugar schedules, his
position being largely that assumed by Mr..
Bacon and Mr.. McLauTiu.
ur Isos o H,rueT. uTOuIIeTor of tie Ptr-