The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-05-02
Federal Relief Of Chicago After tho
Fire. -

The Chicago fire, in which $50 people
lost their lives and 9S $500 their homes,
and property valued at s1se, ooo, 900 was
DESTROYED, occurred on October 7, s and
0, 1871. On December IL, soon after
Congress met, Representative II. O. BUR-
cHARD of Illinois introduced a bill for the
relief OF sufferers by the fire, the word
ing Of the bill passed by Congress for
the relief Of the people Of Portland after
the fire on July 4, 1865, being closely fol-
lowed. In the Portland fire property
valued at $4,000, 900 was destroyed and
o~ne-fourth OF the population lost their
homes and were in want,
The Burchard bill was amended in the
Senate, and as it passed that body 1t
provided that "all goods, wares and
merchandise" sent "from places without
the limits Of the United States as gratui-
tous contributions" for the relief Of Chi
cago should be admitted free Of duty;
that there should be a drawback of the
import duties con all materials imported
TO be and actually used in buildings
erected on the site OF buildings burned
by said fire." provided that the materials
should have been imported and used
during the term Of one year from and
after the passageo OF the act; and that the
collection Of internal revenue taxes Of
sufferers by the fire who had resided,
done business or owned property in the
burned district should bel suspended
until after the close Of the next regular
session of Congress-"
When the bill was returned TO the
House a stand was made by tho lumber
interests, and 1t was amended 30 as to
provide that drawbacks should not be
paid upon lumber imported for Chicago.
The Senate accepted the amendment. A
plausible argument for the exception Of
lumber from the operation Of the law was
made by Representative OMAR d, CoNGER
of Michigan in the House, and by Mr..
CHANDLER and Mr.. FERRY of Michigan and
Mr.. CARPENTER Of Wisconsin in tho Sen
ate. The argument was that at about the
time Of the confagration in Chicago large
districts in Michigan and Wisconsin had
been swept by forest fires, several -four
ishing towns had been destroyed, valuable
tracts of pine land burned, and the lum-
Der dealers had lost so heavily in growing
timber and had expended 80 much money
in employinglabor to relieve destitution
that 1t would not be fair to subject them
tothe risk of losing the Chicago market.
The debates in both houses were notable
forthe calibre OF the men who took leading
parts; in the Senate there were SHERMAN,
THURMAN, MATTHEW CARPENTER, FRED
ERlCKT. FRELINdHuYsEN, JoHNA. LOGAN,
ROSCOE CoNKLING, ZACHARIAHC CHANDLER
and THOMAS w. FERRY, and in the House
JAMES A. GARFIELD, HENRYL. DAWES and
MICHAEL c. KERR. 1t was urged in the
Senate that such legislation would be
unconstitutional, because tho Constitu-
ton provides that "no preference shall
be given by any regulation of commerce
or revenue to the ports Of one State over
those Of another and also that sail
duties, imposts and excuses shall be uni
form throughout the United states.'
Mr.. THURMAN of Ohio declared that this
argument was almost as old as the Con-
stitution. I'VE have again and again, /"
he said, RENTED duties on articles
imported into the United States for
specific purposes. ] think we did remit
duties upon all articles imported here
for exhibition purposes at the national
exposition Mr., SHERMAN thought the
bill might be a bad precedent, but he
added: at seems to me 1t does not
come within the literal language of the
Consultation. | regard it az simply a
gratuity, a contribution by the people OF
the United States for the relief Of the
sufferers by fire at Chicago Mr., FIRE.
LNGHUYsEN Of New Jersey saw no con-
stitutional difficulty, AS understand
it, he said, "the Constitution requires
that there SHALL be no unequal system ol
duties, that the system shall be uniform
throughout the United States; not that
Congress may not in a specific case, as a
N1'