The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-06-12

Caffery, from a farm of 500 acres I
am the smallest planter in my parish,
but 1 say to you that if all my fortunes
were involved in sugar duty, 1 would
not support it except for revenue. y
public man who is confined within the
narrow limits of a selfish interest is not
fit to hold a seat in the United States
senate
Upon the conclusion of Mr.. Caffery's
remarks, Mr.. White (Cal.) took the
floor. He arraigned the Republicans
for their advocacy of this sugar sched-
ule. From the debate on the Wilson
bill he read the remarks of various Re-
publican senators denouncing the sugar
schedule to that bill which, Mr.. White
said, was not half as advantageous to
the trust as to the proposed schedule.
When he quoted from Mr.. Gear, of
Iowa, he and the Iowa senator were
drawn into sharp exchange about the
way prosperity Jagged behind it's pre-
dictions. Mr.. Gear declared that pros
perity would come when the tariff bin
was passed
Give US a vote on the bill now,"
shouted Mr.. Mason, CID.
One of Mr.. Aldrich's expressions as
to the effect Of the sugar duty on the
poor mans breakfast table, was read
ny MI. w nlU6 III 1lOCKlnR tones.
Mr.. White closed at 2:45 %. M. and
Mr.. Frye (Maine) was again about to
put the amendment to vote but MIR.
German said he had a word only before
the vote was taken. He said he had
no doubt the condition of the treasury
had forced the other side to abandon
their position of eight years ago-a free
breakfast table. The country would
understand, he said, that this bill in
creased the burden of every man by 10
per cent. In conclusion, he declared,
that the peoples verdict would be as
in 1890.
Mr.. Stewart (Nev.) asked Mr. Allison
to state before the vote was taken
whether this bill gave the refiners
greater advantage than the present
law.
Il have no doubt" answered Mr.. AL
lison, that excluding the countervail-
ing duty this bill does not give a. great
er advantage to the sugar industry
than the Wilson bill.
DO you believe in protection to labor
Is. G. -'--'''--'
That is generality" replied Mr.
Allison, ''to which the senator well
knows my answer I believe in pro-
lection to American labor, but I believe
IN protecting American capital also
from foreign capital
the concentrating influences OF the
sugar trust. Now was the opportunity
he declared, for Republican senators to
make good their professions of four
years ago against the trusts.
Mr.. Stewart said he did not expect
this tariff bill to afford any material
relief to the country, as there was a
| cancer Of financial contraction which
was eating all the vitals of the coun-
| try.
Mr.. Caffery replied briefly to Mr..
Allison and then the vote was taken,
amid great expectation, resulting, yeas
80, nays 80, as follows:
Yeas, Allison, Burrows, Carter, Gull
| lom, Davis, De Boe Elkins, Fairbanks,
Foraker, Frye, Gallinger, Hanna Hans
! brough, Hawley, Hoar, Jones (Nev.),
! Mcbride, McEnery, Mcmillan, Mason,
| Nelson, Perkins, Platt Comm, Prit-
chard, Proctor, Sewell, Shoup, Spooner,
| Stewart, Wellington, Wetmore and Will
son-32.
Nays, Bacon, Bate, Berry, Butler,
Caffery, Chiffon, Clay, Cockrell, Daniel,
Jones (Ark.), Kyle, LINDSAY. Mallory,
Mantle, Mills, Mitchell, Morgan, Pasco,
Pettigrew, Pettus, Roach, Tillman, Tur-
pie, Vest, Walthall and White-3O
Mr.. Jones (Arko then moved an
amendment striking out the words: "On
all sugars" in line 20, page 65, which
went over.
Mr.. Allison asked if an agreement
| could be reached for Ii a. M sessions
! beginning Monday. Mr.. Jones answered
| that such consent would be given next
| Thursday or Friday.
Mr.. Hoar gave notice of a new Sec
| ton to follow paragraph 2O6 provid-
ing for the appointment by the presi-
| dent Of a commission of five persons
who shall investigate and report at
the next session Of congress the most
| advantageous methods of producing
and refining sugar, and what method
| will give to the consumers sugar at
| the least cost. At $40 p. M, the bill
was laid aside, and the senate went
into executive session, adjourning soon
after