Year: 1860

During the debate on the tariff bill in the
House of Representatives, few weeks ago
Mr.. Scott offered the following amendment
"In line twenty-one, tenth section, insert
On rice, one hundred cents per hundred
pounds; and paddy (rice in the husk) fifty
cents per hundred pounds"


Mr.. Scott gave some pretty good reason:
in support of his amendment, but it was re-
jected. The House was we'll satisfied that
the Chinese were nuisance in California
that they came in competition with white
labor; thAs they chiefly consumed rice i'm
ported from China and India, Tor which they
paid gold extracted from the California
mines, and that they were thus not only an
annoyance in the country but of no particular
benefit to the general prosperity of trade and
commerce. Still the amendment the princi-
pal object of which was to tax them so high
upon rice as TO increase for them the price of


living to such an extent as to check their
immigration, was rejected. The House knows
that we have been legislating in this State to
get rid of the Chinese, and that the only
practicable, constitutional method upon
which we have hit is that of taxing them.
That body refuses to aid us in this policy,
and for what reason we cannot see, unless it
be that the national treasury must be sup
piled, at whatsoever sacrifice to any individ-
ual State.


We give below the remarks of Mr.. Scott,
and tho interlocutory observations of Mr..
Hoard, on the amendment:


There are, Mr.. Chairman, in the State of
California, some As, 900 Cinnamon. The rice
which they consume is chilly imported from
Siam, China, and India I; and of this rice they
consume several million pounds annually
This rice is purchased by the product of
their labor in the extraction of gold from the
mines of California. They are scattered
through the whole mineral region of that
State, and they come in competition with the
white laborers within its limits. They are
entirely separate and distinct from the rest
of the foreign population. Their habits and
customs prevent them from becoming citi-
zens of the country. Now, l believe that if
the amendment offered is adopted, it will
bring revenue offrom 100000 to $780,
600 into the Federal Treasury. 1t will not
affect, in any manner whatever, the thirty
one States on this side, because rice is q pro-
duct the same as wheat, corn, or any other
article which your agriculturists produce.
These Cinnamon send to foreign countries and
import the article of rice with the gold which
they get out Of the mines of California and
| think if they desire to deal in foreign lux.
uries they ought to be made to pay for the
same. | therefore hope that the tax will be
raised from fifty cents, as proposed in the
bill, to one hundred cents, as proposed in
my amendment.


Mr.. Hoard-I beg to ask the gentleman
from California if other miners do not use
rice as well as Cinnamon?


Mr.. Scott-They do.


Mr. Hoard-Then, sir, it is an article of
common consumption.


MIR. Scott-It is chiefly the article of con-
sumption with the Chinese. They eat scarce
ly anything else but rice. 1t is their nation.
al food, and | am satisfied that the miners of
California will be willing to pay an addition
al tax, provided they can get rid of the 40,-
900 Cinnamon, for the feeling towards them
IS not of friendly character.


MIR. Hoard-lt seems, therefore, that we
are to drive out Chinese miners. This is the
amount of the gentlemans amendment
Now, the gold which the Cinnamon produces
is, l suppose, a common benefit If they
are class of men who live chiefly on rice,
at the rate of dnty now paid, it seems to me
it would be very bad policy that they should
be driven out, because then the duty would
cease altogether We now raise $40O 900
duty upon rice imported by these men. If
an additional duty be placed on rice, it will
not be imported at all. 1t seems to me.
therefore. the proposition is simply to cut off
ialf a million from the revenue and there.
fore object to it.