The Washington herald., 1909-04-23

broke out Fourteen paragraphs were
taken UP, but only three Of them were
/ agreed TO. the others being passed over.
The last paragraph related TO gas re-
torts. The Senate committee had struck
out the House bill specific duty Of s.
each 20 30 per cent sd vaiorem. Senator
McCumber explained that the increase
amounted 10 zoo per cent Senator Nell
son, OF Minnesota, took a whack az the
Republicans by reading the report Of the
!mportations. showing that there were
practically no importstions Of gas re-
torts- He demanded 10 know why the
committee saw fl 20 raise the duty 10
such an extent
! Senator Penrose admitted he had been
responsible for the change. He explained
that the size OF the gas retofts had in
creased. which made il necessary to In
crease the duty. But Mr.. Bailey insisted
that In view OF the fact that American
manufacturers still controlled the market.
as shown by the report Of importstions
the increase OF the duty on an article
over 20 per cent vas not revision down
ward. as the country had been prom
ised. Senator Nelson took the same view.
Denies sDOwnwards Pledge.
Senator Aldrfch denied that the Repuo-
leans had promised revision down.
ward" The Republican policy. he as
serted. was 70 lay a duty that would
measure the difference between the cost
Of production at home and abroad. and
70 add for reasonable profit.
What portion Of this proposed increase
OF over 90 per cent measures the differ
ence Of the cost Of prodaction and what
measures the reasonable proftz" asked
Mr.. La Toilette Senator AIdrich read
from the statement OF the gas retort
manufacturers TO show that the cost per
ton was $ on the foreign article. and 81
for the homemade retort-
Did the committee sccept the word OF
manufacturers without seeking any cor
/ roboration from other sourcesZ" per
sisted Mr.. la Toilette.
Mr AIdrich replied that he was ready
10 take the word OF any reputable Amer
ican business man until he was shown 10
the contrary.
Senator Root ventUred into the debate
10 explain that trainers OF the Wilson
German bin changed the duty from spe-
cifc 20 % per cent ad val0rem, because
they ascertained that the specific duty
previously levied equaled % per cent ad
vaiorem. The Senator said both parties
were now agreed that the duty should be
ad valorem. Now the fact to be ascertain
ed was. What ad vaiOrem duty would az
ford the necessary protection? IF any
Il Senator has any facts 10 prove that e Is
not fair he ought 10 produce them, and
II not we ought 10 proceed to the next
paragraph" Senator Bailey admitted
that he preferred ad valorem 70 specific
duties, but did not believe the change
ought 20 be taken advantage Of to in
crease the ad valorem duties entirely out
Of proportion
says Il Is 20 Curb Competition.
Replying TO Senator Root. Mr Bailey
said he could see no reason for Increasing
the duty except 10 prevent serious and
hurtfuI competition Only ffty-fve re-
torts were imported last year. valued at
s. 900, and on which the duty was sl65: yet
with the American market so completely
protected, with no resources bu. greed
OF the manufacturers. the duty was ad-
vanced-
Senator Nelson, Republican. of Mime
sofa, made an attack on the Senate bin.
He declared that rates on the four sched-
ules. glass, cotton manufactures. earth
enware. and wooden manufactures, were
out Of proportion 70 other rates in the
bill. being IN many cases over 50 per cent.
and unduly hign. he read from the re-
port Of iruportatIons TO show that the
duties were prohibitive and the manufac-
turers controlled the home market He
said he would ask at the proper time for
q reduction OF duties in all OF the sched-
ules named
Senator GaIllnger reminded him that the
Wflson-Gorman bill reduced wooled sched-
uIes and that IabOrfng men suffered be-
cause the mills were closed down
The Minnesotan insisted that the panic
OF 1S94 was caused by financial conditions
and not by the Wflson-GorTnan BILL He
asked Mr.. Gsllinger why the New Eng
land manufacturers, who were so eager
for high duty on woods TO protect labor
ing men, did not ask for a duty on hides
for the same purpose
AIdrich aHd Bailey in Tilt.
| During the discussion over the duty on
carbon used IN electric lights. the debate
took sectional tura. Senator Aldrich
said he had been q protectionist ever
since he cast his first ballot in 1854. He
added that he had been a soldier in the
Union army and had voted the RepubH-
can ticket ever since. Ar. Bailey, Of
Texas. the Democratic leader, under
stood Senator Aldrich to make the claim
that no man who had served In the
Union army could conscientiously vote
the Democratic ticket after the civil war.
and he rose 10 take issue with this state
ment
ITO say that Unionism and Repub-
HcanisIa are synonymous" Senator
Bailey declared. 'Is to place q stigma
upon the memory Of the many Democrats
who fought bravely in the Union army
Continuing, Senator Bailey said he
Thought Mr. Aldrich would regret having
made such a remark when he read the
stenographic report In the Record. Re-
plying, Mr.. Aldrich said he did not make
such a statement, as It would have been
q reflection upon many Democrats, soms
OF whom were from his State, and had
been killed in the civil war.
I have always been a protectionist, .
Senator Aidrich continued. and have
always voted the Republican ticket since
1854 although my ancestors were Dem
ocrats, because I Believed that the Re-
publican principles were correct. AS a
Union soldier I could not conscientiously
vote the Democratic ticket in 1854, on u
platform which declared that the civil
war had been 3 failure Therefore /