The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-03-12
PROCEEDINGS IN DETAIL.
Mr.. Longs Speech and the Sugar Beet
Mems Protest.

WASHINGTON, March u--About 80
members were present tonight at the
fourth conference of House Republicans
called to consider the question OF Cuban
reciprocity. Speaker Henderson and the
leaders on both sides OF the controversy
were in attendance. Representative Can
non, of Illinois. presided and arrangements
were made for a division of the time be-
tween the advocates and opponents of reci-
procity. Representative Long, OF Kansas.
a member of the ways and means COM
mittee, opened with an exhaustive argument
in favor of the % per cent concession adj
vocated by his colleagues. He argued that
the maintenance of a protective tariff was
not involved in the proposition OF the ways
and means committed but that the policy Of
reciprocity was ''The defeat of this bill
said he. means that the Republican party
has refused TO follow the leadership Of
Blaine of Mckinley and of Roosevelt. and
it would mean that reciprocity was no
longer a part of Republican faith" He
pointed out that the Republican platform
of 1896 referred TO the repeal Of the reel
procity agreements under the Mckinley
law as a national calamity, and demanded
their renewal and extension. The original
section of the Dingley bin authorizing reci-
procity agreements. ne said. named sugar
of the articles which the Presi-
dent was authorized 10 reduce the duties,
but the section was changed in the Sen
ate and sugar was stricken out. The Ding
ley law authorized the President to make
reciprocal agreements on articles produced
in this country. and President Mckinley
made agreements with France. Germany,
Italy and Portugal that were now in force.
so that he maintained that those who IA
vored reciprocity with Cuba were not
true 10 the doctrines OF the Republican par
" because tobacco and sugar produced IN
this country were Included. Moreover. he
insisted that the hearings before the COM
rnittee ways and means showed conclu-
sively that concessions made on Cuban
sugar would not affect the price OF sugar
in this country, and that the beet sugar
industry would not be injured. A reduc-
ing the duty such sugar ar S.34 per hum
dred pounds would rot enable the Cuban
fning 10 compete with the beet sugar
Chicago, Kansas City or Denver, which
are the principal markets for beet sugar
NOT \ CASE OF CHARITY.
He espoused reciprocity with Cuba. he
said. not only because it would be helpful
10 Cuba, but because he believed we would
get an adequate return. and IN support q
that belief he instanced the result OF the
reciprocity with Cuba under the Mckinley
law from Sept. 1. 1871. TO Aug. z. 1894. Tn
DER that law sugar, nolasses, coffee and
hides were admitted free. and in return
Spain made concessions on our products
entering Cuba The results were dcmon-
strated in the fact that our exports 10 Cuba
increased from Sl2. .224 SSS I'm 1891 20 S24ls7.e3S
IN 1888 In 1856. after the agreement WAS
abrOgated. they had fallen TO s. So. $50 our
exports 10 Cuba were now only S2S.07S ZOE.
out OF total OF S6505O.l lfl. The witnesses
before the committee ora ways and means.
he said. stated that with prosperity IN
Cuba the imp0gtatiOns OF that island would
amount TO $3.50 10000 10 S-o0.o00oo9 annually.
This. he argued, was the trade that Cuba
offered us In return for concessions on
sugar and tobacco. This was not charity
Ii was good bargain.
Mr. Long cCutemded thar In addition 10
self-interest there was a moral Obligation
upon the United States 10 grant cOnces-
siOns- He declared that when the cOmmis-
sion from Cuba was prevailed upon 20 ac-
cept the Platt amendment President Me-
kinley assured them that in consideration
OF its acceptance he would do all IN his
power 10 secure economic concessions. and
said that the commission 80 reported TO the
Cuban convention. He presented detailed
figures 10 show that Porto kican sugar.
growers had received the full benefit OF tie
free admission OF sugar from that islsac-