The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-07-20
THE TARIFF VICTORY.


~
| by Populist senators and held in the bill
! by the Populists on the conference commit
| tee.
Mr. Kelly challenged Mr.. Grosvenor to
name the senators.
The two senator's from Nevada" replied
! Mr.. GrosYenor.
Il was not aware that Nevada had more
| than one PopulisI senator at most" said
| Mr.. Kelly. mo man who votes for the
/ Sugar trust is a POpulist."
! Mr. Lewis asked Mr.. Grosvenor whether
| it was not a fact that the duties on white
! lead gave the Lead Trust $35oO,00O of pro-
| lection
GROSVENOR'S LITTLE SLIP.
Il do not know and I do not care" re-
piled Mr.. Grosvenor, smiling.
81 knew the latter was true responded
Mr. Lewis with his most debonair air.
"The Republican party does not care what
outrage it commits" Democratic laugh
| ter)
The House then, at 6 p. M, took recess
until 8 D. M, under the agreement made
earlier in the day.
At o'clock when the night session began
| the galleries were crowded, many ladies
| being present Mr.. Dingley stated at the
| outset that he hoped to secure vote by
| 10 o'clock. Mr.. Bailey said 10 O'CLOCK was
| too early, but he thought the vote couid De
| taken by IL o'clock. He would not, now
| ever, make a definite agreement on the
| vote. Thereupon Mr.. Dlngley gave not !
| that he would move the previous question
not later than IL o'clock.
In the galleries were many distinguished
| personages of both sexes. In the executive
| gallery sat Secretary of Navy Long ana on
| the floor at the side of Hit, of illinois, sat
Attorney General Mckenna, who was a
member of the ways and means committee
| in 1890 when the Mckinley law was passed.
| Altogether it was a brilliant setting Tor the
| close of a memorable struggle. Inc re-
| publicans still pursued the tactics they mao
| adopted during the day session. None OF
| them claimed the floor and the minority
| cOmDQllq0 TO nut forward Il6lF speak
| ers. Therefore, after Mcdowell, OF ONO,
| and Mr.. Berry. of Kentucky, had mace %
| brief speeches, Mr.. Bailey, the Democratlc
| leader who had been reserVing ms speech
| for the close, took the floor. he made a
carefully prepared argument, dealing more more
| with the general principles involved than
| with details Time and again durlhg the
! progress of his remarks the Democrats
| were aroused by his eloquence 10 hlSh
! pitch of enthusiasm.
Just before the close of Mr.. Bailey re
marks the most sensational 1ncldent OF t me
! debate occurred. He had been assaillng the
| doctrine of the free raw materials, com
| parative innovation in the Democratic
| creed In order to demonstrate that II was
! a product of CIevelandism, he sent 10 the
| clerks desk and had read an extract from
| a newspaper commenting on the taet that
| in the Forty-ninth Congress senator Nails,
| then a member of the House, MIR. McMlllln,
of Tennessee, and two other Democratic
members of the ways and means commIIIee
| had voted against free wool. Mr.. McMlllh
| bumped to his feet and demanded TO know
| whether it was charged that he had voted
| against free wool. III,
his own lips" replied Mr.. Bailey facing
| Mr.. McMillin, whose face was nusneq. Not
| only that but he said both you and Sena-
| tor Mills voted against some reductions III
| the metal schedule. o.
| "Since the gentleman has seen fit to at
| tack my record and to mlSrepreSent me
| began Mr.. McAillin but Mr.. Bailey quickly
| disciaimed any purpose of attacking him.
| Il desire to commend your action then'
The s' disclaimer being accepted. Mr.. Nc
! Millin holly asked in turn why Mr. Balley
| had voted in the ways and means comrit-
| Zee against the wooden schedule of the
| present law when it was offered as SUD
stitute for the high rates IN the penolhs
| measure.
THE GALLERIES ROARED.
| xyava of APPLAUSE ran over the Demo-
cratic side at this question, but was
drowned in the perfect storm of approval
| that greeted Mr. Baileys reply that never
| as long as he was in Congress would he
vote for so per cent duties on wooden goods
| and no duties on raw wool The Republic
ans and the galleries joined in this demon
stration.
How could the gentleman from Ten
nessee'' he continued, when the applause
subsidized. vote for free wool in the face
of the Chicago platform which ne heipeo
THE Chicago platform did not take the
! back track on the principle OF tarlH lor
revenue only" replied MI McMl Nm Ra,e,,
| us Mr. Robertson, Of Louisiana, in the
! House?" he asked. looking about him, put
| Mr. Robertson was not present, and Mr.
| Bailev proceeded to argue that the Chicago
| platform did return to the odd Democratlc
! theory" He said the present democratic
| organization sought to rescue the party
| from those who were Wrecklng II. When
! the party was making new recruits the
When he repudiated ''the Cleveland here
| sy'' and announced the doctrine that all
taxes should be laid for revenue the Dem
| w. Mr. Bailey spoke for about two hours
and a half. His peroration was enthuslas-
tically greeted and he was warmly congrat-
Mr.. McMillin Dem, TENNESSEE, who had
twenty minutes of his hour remaining, con-
sumed that time in denouncing the sugar
schedule, which, he said added $l2 0OO.ooo 70
the price of sugar certificates to-day, ana
| in replying to Mr.. Balleys remarks ABOUT
his record. Amy statement from any quar-
ter that he had ever advocated duty on
wool Mr.. McMillin declared, was unjust to
him and incorrect. He had been consistent.
Moreover Mr.. McMllin in turn delved into
Mr.. Baileys past, and pointed out occasions
| when the Lone Star statesman had voted
for free coal free iron ore, free barbed wire,
free sugar and even free Wool IN the FlIty-
second Congress. Mr. McMillin's comment
on the inconsistency of Mr.. Bailey s free
wool vote caused much merriment. In con-
clusion he appealed to the Democracy 10 go
into the battle again with its banners bear
Mr.. Bailey got the floor after Mr.. McNIl-
lin finished long enough to say that when
he cast the votes referred to by Mr. McMfl-
| lin the Endorsed doctrine of his party was
| free raw material. and, a loyal Demo
crat, he supported its platform declaratlons.
| He now held a commission from the Democ-
| racy to oppose that doctrine, and he should
| do
! Mr. Payne and Mr.. Dingley successfully
| took the floor for some closing remarks.
| The former devoted his time to a defense
| of the sugar schedule He figured out
| differential in favor of the refiner in the
i law the nTiCGS DrpVailinC in 1894
of 521a cents per one hundred pounds. TAX
| ing Mr.. Swanson's illustration of the nine
! ty-two-degree sugars, Mr.. Payne figured on
| the basis of the amount of raw sugar un-
refined Q14la pounds) that the refiner under
| the present law had differential of .3l4
per one hundred pounds against .173 of diff
| ferential in the proposed schedule.
Mr. Dingley openly avowed that the
! schedule gave a slight additional protection
to refined sugar. but at the same time it
| raised raw all along the line. Trusts, he
| said could not be eradicated by epithets.
THE way to break down the trusts" he
! cried. lis to establish a beet-sugar factory
! in every congressional district in the coun-
| try and make competition That is the way
| TO clip the wings of the trust" loud and
| long Republican applause)
Amid storm of cheers Mr.. Dngley then
demanded the previous question on the
! adoption of the conference report. Nainlv
| Mr. Johnson Republican, of Indiana, tried
| TO ask Mr.. Dingley question while the
/ question was being put. Several times he
| called Mr.. Speaker" but was not recog-
! niZed
The demand was sustained by a viva
| voce vote. and the vote on the adoption
! of the report followed by yeas and NAYS
Considerable excitement occurred while