The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1922-09-16
TARIFF FIGHT
TAKES SUDDEN
TURN IN HOUSE.
Leaders Are Unable to.
Control RepubIi Iican
Majority in Support
of Potash Duty

Washington, Sept. 13-RevoI1ings
against the action Of the conferees &
in writing back into the administers
ton tariff bill a dye embargo II
censing provision and a duty on
potash, the house late today sent
that measure back to conference
Its managers were instructed to.
accept the senate amendment ZEE
pealing the existing dye embargo
and placing potash on the free list.
Some Republican house leaders.
plainly surprised and disappointed,
were pessimistic as to what the.
ultimate result of the house acc
ton would be. RepresentatISe
Monden Of Wyoming. the foor
leader, said he did not know what
the outcome would be. while Chair
man Fordney OF the ways and
means committee said it looked
doubtful whether there would be
bill at. this session Of congress.
Chairman McCamber Of the senate
managers took more optimistic
view, however, stating that the SEN
ate would agree to another con-
ference and that the differences
would be adjusted speedily.
The vote In the house was III to-.
F30. with. 102 Republicans. 4s
Democrats and the one Socialisa-
voting in support Of the motion by
Representative Garner Democrat
of Texas to recommit and 126 Re-
publicans and four Democrats vote
ing against it. The vote followedsa,
day OF !, parliamentary Wrangiing
and sharp debate and announceSs
ment of the result by Speaker Gliss
lett was greeted by applause on,
both sides OF the chamber and with
loud cheers from many OF the
Democrats. s's5 &: -.
Republicans supporting the Gar
ner motion included Scott and Taye
lor, both OF Tennessee. ssls..:.
Democrats voting; against the
Garner motion were campbell
PennsySania and Fayrot, Iazaro
and Martin, all of. Louisiana.
Most. OF the Republicans voting
for the Garner motion are from
| the Western agricultural states ard
New York, with a majority of them
opposing both the dye embargo
provision and the duty on potash
Other sectfpns Of the bill. howeSer
came in for sharp criticism rom
the Republican side ana some lead
ers regarded present sentiment IN
the honsesas SO divided as to mako
doubtful: the fate of the measu7e.
Apparently, the move by Repre-.
sentative Garner, who is the rank
ing Democrat on the committee
which framed the original tariff 20 ]
include potash in his motion to re-
commit took the managers OF she
bill by surprise.
In announcing that he would ofs
fer the motion. Mr. GasIss- ss. ssssee
clared the potash duty was -.scan-
dar" and charged that it had been
placed in the bill ..in order that
certain interests in the state OF
Utah may have an opportunity te
rob the farmers at the rate OF $50
ton for the potash they hold
He added that Republicans from
farming sections might successfully
defend their vote for the bill with
the dye embargo provision in IL
but that they could not defend q
vote for asduty on potash.
Chairman Fordney, in reply, de-
clared the potash duty was neces-s
sary to protect the industry built
up in Utah, California. Nebraska
and other states during the war.
Both the house and senate voted
out the dye embargo provision but
the conferees, in considering the
specific section Of the senate bill Tor
repeal of the existing embargo Il
censing law, voted TO continue the
present act for one year with au-s
thority for the president to con-
tinue it for an additional year
should he find that to be necessary
for the protection of the industry
which grew up in thisrcountry dur
ing the World war. Sc