Arizona republican., 1913-06-26
WILSON'S
 TARIFF POLICY
Bears Out Presidents An nouncement Some Days Ago Compromise on These Features of the Bill Was Entirely Out of Question

WASHINGTON, June 25. Free sugar in 1916 and free raw wool is now established in the tariff revision bill. having been approved late to- Gay by the democratic caucus Of the senate after two days fight. The sugar schedule as reported by the majority members of the finance committee and practically as it pass ed the house was approved by vote of forty to six. Free raw wool as submitted by the majority and just as it passed the house swept the senate caucus by vote of forty enc to six.
 This ratification of Wilson's tar if policy. he having insisted on the raw wool and sugar propositions be- lore the ways and means committee in the beginning, came after long series of developments since the tar if passed the house, and in which the president has been an active par ticipanl When the fight on anti free sugar and anti-wool among the democrats was getting hot, the presI- dent issued a public statement de daring that any suggestion of compromise on the wool and sugar schedule ideas was absolutely out of the question and later stirred all the administration leaders to action when he made the charge about the eX- istence in Washington of an 'insi- Glous lobby the investigation of which brought the results regarded as favorable to the tariff bill.
 The six democratic sehators who voted against free sugar on the final vote approving the schedule were Hitchcock. of Nebraska; NewIand of Nevada; Ransdell and Thornton. of Louisiana: Shafroth, of Colorado, and 1 Walsh of Montana.
 The six who opposed the free raw wool 10 the end were: Chamberlain, o< oregon: NewIands. of Nevada: Ransdeu and Thornton. Of Louisi- ana Shafroth and Walsh.
 No attempt was made in the { caucus today to bind the members tc the action of the caucus. The ! question will come up when the en- ] tire bill has been passed upon. Some ! cf the members will fight it but l the administration leaders said to- night they believed that only the two 1 Louisiana senators would ask to be released from the caucus pledge if ! one was asked. 4 general opinion ] binding the resolution will be offered. The approval of the schedules came after d prolonged discussion and aft CT several amendments had been voted down.
 On some of the amendments the , opposition showed more strength. the ! maximum being ten votes for Sen atOr ShafrOth's amendment to the 1 sugar schedule
 This was eliminated and free sugar was substituted for duty of ap- 1 prOXimately half a cent per pound on l refined sugar. This amendment
 lost by veto of g to 10, Senators Thompson, Chamberlain, Hitchcock. Shafroth. Lane, Fansdel, Thornton. Tillman and Walsh voting for it.
 When this was done. Senator Thompson offered an amendment to retain the Underwood rate for three years and reduce it 50 per cent in 1916. and 25 Der cent each succeed 1 ing year until it reached the free list
 Senators Chamberlain, Fletcher. New l lands, Hitchcock, ShafrOth. Thompson TiIlman and Walsh supported this amendment The amendment offered
 bN Senator Thornton to eliminate the
 free sugar provision and to maintain the Underwood rates indefinitely
 Was supported only by Senators
 Ransdall and Thornton.
 Senator Walsh offered an amend
 ment to the wool schedule proposing a duty of 15 per cent ad valorem
 on first class woos and that wools
 of the second class and third class
 such as carpet and clothing. would be
 free This was defeated by thirty
 nine to :. The senators voting for
 il being Chamberlain, Newlands i Ransdell, ShafrOth, Thompson, Walsh end Thornton Three senators were i absent: Culberson, Owen and Lewis. ,i Senators Ransdell. Thompson. New
 lands, Thornton. Lane and Shafroth
 took up most of the time for the op-
 position while the chief administra
 ton defendants were Senators James.
 Thomas and Pomerene
 When the sugar and wool had been 1 disposed of the caucus ratified the
 committee amendment placing hair
 from angora goats on the free list. , Consideration of the agricultural
 schedule was then resumed and a
 dispute at once arose over the com l mittee amendment putting a counter , Vailing duty on wheat and -four. As
 the discussion developed the oppo-
 s;tiOn grew and decision on the ques-
 (Continued on Page Five)