Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-08-18

! We held the higher duties covered
! by my amendment on barley, and |
think the conferees should have held
| the slight raise on wheat, while the
slight raise of cents per bushel on
wheat, making 80 cents bushel, may
not be needed just at this time, It
will be needed as soon as we cease to
| export wheat, which will be in very
! few years.
The conferees removed all duty
from hides, and to compensate re-
duced the duties on boots and shoes
and leather goods; but at the present
; time those latter duties have not been
lowered to an extent eqaul to the low
! cred duty upon the raw material. It
has, however, been agreed that this
shall be done by joint resolution.
l would have preferred the old duty
on hides, or even higher duty; but
! the fact that l did not get 1t will not
justify me in opposing measure
| which has come very close to what
/ think is right and just, and brings our
| tariff rate in near accord with the
present demand.
But, Mr.. President, as the bill
comes from the conferees, on the
! whole l think it is less favorable to
| the Northwest, to the people whom l
represent, than it was when 1t passed
| the Senate, and believe that it ought
! to 60 back to the conference commit
| tee, and that certain errors ought to
, be corrected; but I am not certain
| that if we SHOULD refer 1t back to the
| committee we would secure any bill
during this legislative session.
! l desire to have some bill enacted
into law. am certain that the Presi-
dent of the United States desires that
this Congress at this time shall pass
a tariff bill, and am governed in my
vote in not sending this back to the
committee by the desire of the Presi
! dent to secure action during this ses-
| sion. The president doubts, and M y
| self am doubtful, whether we can get
the conferees together or whether we
can get the bill in such shape that
both the House and the Senate
would adopt it during the session if
1t should be rejected by the Senate
I am certain that the bill meets
the demands of the people far m pre-
than the present Dingley Act do es;
that while the cotton and wooden
schedules have been left substantial
ly the same, Or possibly with a few
raises upon fancy articles, upon all
the balance of the goods which are
purchased generally there has been a
reasonable reduction, and If am not
able to secure the entire loaf, am
willing to take two-thirds of one.
| Most of the arguments made upon
this bill on both sides of the Chamber
have been one-sided arguments. They
have been arguments which dealt
with the extreme cases and not with
the average cases. / have tried to
avoid the extreme of either side Of
this tariff question and to weigh mat
ters from the judicial standpoint.
rather than from the standpoint of an
attorney representing either side.
While am not satisfied with the bill
because of the injustice in many In
stances against the agriculturist. ]
would be very far from the truth and
very far from performing just duty
which owe to the public and to my
State if I did not present the good
features of this bill. though I may
criticise portions. They are outnum-
Der and outweigh those features
which are less favorable.
! I have prepared a table showing
the effect of the tariff on the things
usually purchased bv the people of
North Dakota. We purchase about as
good as are purchased anywhere else
in the Union.
i ask that it may be printed with
these remarks, that those who wish to
know how this bill affects them, and
whether or not Congress has carried
out party pledges, may have the facts
before them, and may know to just
what extent those pledges have been
carried out.
i From 1t we will be able to see that
on nearly all the things we purchase
there has been reduction in the du-
ties levied: and in making this state
ment I always except the schedule of
wool and cotton goods. in which there
have been litAe changes.
! The table referred to is as fol-
lows:
] Per Cent
reduction
l nf y,rocorf