/
5746 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE ~· 5, I .
SENATE. l assistant surgeons, United States Army; which was referred to ~ the Committee on Appropriations. TUESDAY, Jttne 5, 1894. He also presented a memorial of the 'l'rade and Labor Council The Senate met at 10 o'clock a.m. of R eading, Pa., remonstrating against the enactment of Jegis Prayer by Rev. GEORGE EDWARDS, of Lewistown, Mont. lation nullifying the provisions of the so-called Geary Chinese The VICE-PRESIDENT resumed the chair. law; which was ordered to lie on the table. The Journal of yesterday's procaedizigs was r ead and approved He also presented a memorial of the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Pennsylvania, remonstr-ating against EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION. the admission of Utah into the Union as a State; which was The VICE-PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a communica ordered to lie on the table. tion from the Secretary of the Treasury, recommending that H e also presented the memorial of Edward Relneberg and 42 certain changes be made in House bill No. 7097 , making appro other citizens of York, Pa., remonstrating against the passage priations for the legislative, executive, and judicial expenses of of the proposed income-tax provision of the pending tariff bill; the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1895, and for which was ordered to lie on the table. other purposes, affecting the force therein provided on pages He also presented petitions of John Marston and 75 other citi 22, 24, and 25, for the office of the Secretary of the Treasury, zens or Philadelphia; of F. G. Craig-head and 41 other citizens and on page 29 for the t emporary employment of clerks; which, of Allegheny County; of W. H. Keech and 114 other citizens of with the a.ccompanying paper, was referr~d to the Committee Allegheny County; of F. H. Banker and 19 other citizens of on Appropriations, and ordered tcr be p rinted. Luzerne County; or W. H. Lambert and 325 other citizens of Philadelphia County; of Isaac Post and 123 other citizens of , PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS. Lackawanna County; of James Kuntz, jr., and 19 other citizens Mr. DAVIS presented a petition of the Chamber of Commerce of Washington County; of M. L. Montgomery and 34 other citi of St. Paul, Minn., praying for a continuance of the existing zens of Berks County; of C. C. Heller and 21 other citizens of reciprocity treaties; which was ordered to lie on the table. Hazleton; of Howard W. Lippincott and 95 other citizens of He also presented the petition' of George W. Granger and 42 Philadelphia; of W . .J. Beaver and 10 other citizens of Manor; other citizens of Rochester, Minn., and a petition of sundry citi of James Martin and 33 other citizens of Allegheny County: of zens of Polk County, Minn., praying that mutual life insurance C. H. Ruhland 43 pther citizens of Berks County; of A. M. High companies and associations be exempted from the proposed in- and 55 other citizens of Berks County; of W. S. Kirk and 22 ~ come-tax prorision of the pending tariff bill; which were ordered other citizens of Chester, and of Charles Platt, jr., and 15 other to lie on the table. citizens of PhiladelJ_>hia, all in the State 'of Pennsylvania, pray Mr. PERKINS presented a memorial of the Humboldt Cham ing that mutual life msurance companies and associations be ex ber of Commerce, of Eureka, Cal., remonstrating against the empted from the proposed income-tax provision of the pending abolishment of 'the custom-house at that city; which was referred tariff bill; which were ordered to lie on the table. to the Committee on Commerce. Mr. CA~iERON presented a petition of the Congregational Mr. SHl~RMAN -presented petitions of A. T. Abbott· and 32 Messenger, of Braddock, Pa., praying for the enactment of legis- other citizens of Cuyahoga; of Walter B. Johnson and 21 other 1ation to su-ppress the lottery traffic; which was ordered to lie citizens of Knox County; of B. F. Boyd and 4J other citizens of on the table. Youngstown, and of George W. Hill and 18 other citizens of He also presented a petition of the Boaro. of Trade, of Phila Bowling Green, all in the Shte of Ohio, praying that mutual delphia, Pa., praying for a continuance of the appropriation for life insurance companies and associations be exempted. from the the "making up" of the crop reports by the Department of proposed income-tax provision of the pending tariff bill; which Agriculture, and furnishing- them to the various trade centers were ordered to lie on the table. . of the country; which was referred to the Committee on Appro H e also presented a petition of the East India Manufacturing priations. Company, of Piqua, Ohio, p raying for the retention of the pres - He also presented sundry petitions of citizens of .Philadel ent rates of duty on imported cocoa' mats and matting; which phia, Shippensburg, Harrisburg, and Allegheny, and of sundry was ordered to lie on the table. citizens of Lycoming, Blair, Dauphin, Berks, Luzerne, and Al Mr. VEST presented the petition of T. B. Minor and sundry legheny Counties, all in the State of Pennsylvania, praying that other citizensof Jackson County, Mo., and the petition of W. F. mutual life insurance companies and associations be exempted Hammon and sundry other citizens of Randolph County, Mo., from the proposed income-tax provision of the pending tariff praying that the funds of mutual life insurance companies and bill; which were ordered to lie on the table. associations be exempted from the proposed income-tax provi Mr. PALMER presented a petition of sundry citizens of Paris, sion of the pending tariff bill; which were ordered to lie on the Ill., praying that fraternal society and college journals be a-d table. · mitted to the mails as second-cl~ss matter; "\Vhich was referred Mr. MARTIN presented the petition of T. W . Brewer and to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads. sundry other citizens of Minneapolis, Kans., praying that fra· He also pl'esented sundry petitions of citizens of Tazewell, terna.l society and college journals be admitted to the mails as Marshal, Kankakee, and Iroquois Counties, all in the State of second-class matter; which was referred to the Committee on Illinois, praying that mutual life insurance companies and a.s Post-Offices and Post-Roads. sociations be exempted fram the proposed income-bx provision He also presented petitions of 0. E. Maxwellandsundryother of the pending tariff bill; which were ordered to lie on the table. citizens of Crawford County; of B. J. Dawson and sundry other Mr. KYLE presented a petition of the Seneca Nation of New citizens of Republic County; of I. H. Prince and sundry other York Indians, praying for the passage of Senate bill No. 1934, citizens of Sheridan County; of A. P. H;:tvens and s undry other defi ning the rights and privileges of mixed-blood Indians under citizens of Ottawa County: of the Fraternal Aid Association of the treaties and statutes of the United States; which was re Lawrence County· of Ed win Knowles and sundry other citizens ferred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. of Shawnee County; of H. N. Boyd and sundry other citizens of !\1r. DANIEL presented a petition of the Business ·Men's As Republic County~ and of B. P. Waggener and sundry other citi sociation of Norfolk, Va., praying that an appropriation be zens of Atchinson County, all in the State of Kansas, praying made for a national exhibit at the Cotton States and Interna· that in the pa-ssage of any law providing for the t a..·mtion of in tional Exposition, to be held at Atlanta, Ga., in the fall of 1 ~ 95; comes, the funds of mutual life insurance companies and associa which was referr ed to the Committee on Appropriations. tions ba exempted from hxation; which were ordered to lie on He also presented petitions of Lew E. Lookabill and sundry the t able. other citizens of Roanoke, Va., and of George C. Morgan and Mr. CULLOMpresenteda petitionof sundry citizens of Wood sundry other citizens of Richmond, Va., praying for the passage stock, Ill., praying that fratemal society and college journals of House bill No. 5246, restricting immigration; which were re be admitted to the mails as second-class matter; which was re ferred to the Committee on Immigration. ferred to the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads. He also presented the petition of Baverly T. Crump and sundry He also pr~s ented a petition of sundry citizens of Lee County, other citizens of Richmond, Va., praying that fraternal benefi ill., holders of life-insurance policies. praying that in the passage ciary societies, orders, or associations be exempted from the of any law providing for the taxation of incomes the funds of proposed income-tax provision of the pending tariff bill; w!Iich mutual life-insurance companies and associations be exempted was ordered to lie on the table. from taxation~ which was ordered to lie on the table. He also presented a petition of sundry citizens of ~bingdon, .Mr. QUAY presented a petition of T ypographical Union No. Va. praying that national building and loan assoClations be 187, of Wilkesbarre, Pa., praying for the Governmental con.trol exe~pted from the proposed income-tax provision of the pend of the telegraph service; which was referred to the Committee ing t ariff bill; which was ordered to lie on the table. on Post-Oflices and Post-Roads. He also presented petitions of sundry citizens of R?an_o~e, He also presented a memorial of the Medical Society of Penn Manchester, Suffolk, and Richmond, all in the State of V1rgm1a, sylvania, remonstrating against a reduction in the number of praying that mutual life insurance companies and associations 1894.. CONGRESSIONAL RECCIID-SENATK 5747 be exempted from· ·the. proposad: inc:eme~tax: provision of the letter of' the Searetar.}t of the Treasury with the accompanying -pending tariff bUI; which were ordered to lie on the table. documents. , .MJ.~. P~TT p~esented" sundry p_e.titions of Gitizens of Nor- The VICE-PRESIDENT. Ts there objection? Tb.e Chair wich.t Conn. t and· a petition_ of sundry citizens of Connecticut,, hears nonet and it is. so ordered. praying that mutual life- insuranc_e companies. and associations- Mr. GALLINGER.. lfin.d. further that the letter from the be exempted .from the proposed income-tax prov:ision. of the Secretary of the Treasury was by ordm: of the Senate referred pending tariff bill; which were ordered to lie on the table. · to the E:Jommittee on Civil. Service and Re-trenchment, but that Mr. PETTIGREW. lpresen_t_additionalpapersto accompany the lette.rfrom the Secretary of the Interim• was ordered to lie; the bill tS. 2000) granting to the Brainerd and Northern Minne- en the table. I thi11tk that both. documentl:l sh-ould go to the sota RaiLway, Company a :cig.ht of way through the Leech Lake · committee_, as they contain ve~:y important matter. I move that Indian ,Reservation, in the. State or Minnesota. I move that the ' th.ele-tter from. the, Secretsry at the Interior, with t'he ae.com papers be printed as a document and laid on the table, the bill 1 panying documents.,~ be taken fr.om th.e tabla and referred to tha having heretofore been ropoL"ted bv me. · Committee on Civii Service- an:.d Retrenchment. The motion was agreed to. v The motion. was: agreed to~ ·
AMENDMEN.T TO DIPLOMATIC AP:PROFBI.ATIDl~ ffiLL.. HUDSON RIVER BRIDGE. Mr. TURPIE, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, to Mr. VEST. I ask the Senate to con.tinue the consideration of whom was referred the amendment submitted by himself on the the bridge bill which was intecrupte.d yesterday by the. expira.-- lst instant, intended to be proposed to the di"Plomatic and co-n- tion of the morning hour. · · sular·app.ror>riation billt reported favorably thereon., and moved By unanimous consent, the Senate1 as in Committee of the that it be referred ta t.he Committee on. Appropriati.ons arut Whol~, resumed the consideTation of th.i3 bill (H. R. 6448) to au.~ printed; which was. agreed to. 1 thorizetl::teNew; YorkandNew Jersey Bridge Companies to con- BILLS INTRODUCED; struct and mainta.in a bridge across the Hudson River between . •. , . . : New York City and the State of New Jersey, whieh had been Mr- JO~ES of A;_rkansas.mt~·oduced a. bill (S. 2084) to: refer-.to · repolrted from th.e Committee on Commerce with an amendment ~e Co~t ot Clalllls. th.-e claim~ or ~the con.fe~erated ~or1a, , . to strike out all after the enacting claus.e and..insert: Pia;nkesha w, Wea,, and Kaskaskia .tribes ?f I~dmns agamat the That the New '¥ork and New Jersey Bridge companies,. b..eretOfore. in.cor Umted States; whiCh was read tw1ce. by. 1ts. title, and referred porated by the States of New-York and New Jersey and existing under the to the Committee on Indian Affairs. laws o:r said States, are hereby authorized to const~uct, epera.te, maintain, M.r: CULLOM introdue.e.d a,. bill (S 208~ far the' relief of and rebuild, in cas~ ot.destruc.tiou, a. bridge a.ci:oss th01HudsouRiv:eroe- • • ~ . · • • '·"L • · ' • t.ween. New York C1ty, m the county and State of New York, a.ndl the State Sarah. Ft'1edn:tan;. w;hich. was: read twlee by iits title, and!~ w:Lth of New·Jersey, subjec.n. tO> the Ia.ws o:r s.a.id States, respective!!' upon the rol- aecompanying- papar,.:Jo."Elierre:li to the Committee' on Claims ' :tow:ing t-erms. limitations, and conditi.{)ns~ ' He also- m1lr'o.auceti a bill. (S 2Q86) for the relief ol Jioh:'n. (iJ : First. That the location o:r said bri~ge ~hall be s:n:biect to a.p:proVllil. by the . . . . • · .· . . • Se<'reta.ry ot Wa:£, upon such exannnatw:RS;, hearmg.s, and reports rur he Phillips~ which waS: read tw1-ce by its tith~,,. and, \\Uth the a~ shall.hereaftel' prescribe: P'romtt.m, That it shall not be located oorow Fifty· companying paper-, referred to ilia Committee on. Milita.-r-y A1~ nin-th street, New-York City, nor a;bove-Si.xtly~nintnstreetr, New York CiV. fairs Second. That the said colll])Mlies ma.yloca.te', construct, and maintain over: • • . • • • . such bridge and the approaches thereto r.a.ilroa.d. tracks for the use of rail- He also 1n.treduce:di a. bill (S» 0Z08:7) ta. p.ensl{>n. Julin. M. Falle'I"t roads: Provided, That any railroad on eit;fu)r sid'& or said river shall be per widow of Bennett L~ Fullec, late of Compan}f G, Fifty-ninth In- mittedtoconnect..its.track&wicth t~e-sa.id bridge approaches. aond shall~ve diana Volunteer Infantry. which was read twice by its title and eqnalctghts of transit.- fox Us :r:ol~ stock, ears, passengers •. and fr
I . ..._ ::
5748 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 5, ·
struction of the same, as herein required; and, unless the actual construc tion of said bridge shall be commenced, proceeded with, and completed MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE. within the time and accordin_i to the provisions herein provided, this act shall be null and void. ' A message from the Rouse of Representatives, by Mr. T. 0. 'l'he right to amend, alter, modify, or repeal this act is hereby reserved. TOWLES, its Chief Clerk, announced that the House had passed Mr. FRYE. A bill to bridge the Hudson River at this point the bill (8.1424) to amend section 8 of "An act to authorize the has boen pending in Congress for a good many years, and I sup construction of a bridge across the Calumet River," approved pose that I have seemed very persistent in my opposition. It March 1,1893, with amendments; in which it requested the con - has arisen, however, entirely from the fact that each bridge bill currence of the Senate. heretofore has contained a provision which appeared to me to The message also announced that the House had passed the invit.e-tho.J>lacing of a pier in the river. I have been and am bill (S.1950) to authorize the Pennsylvania and New Jersey now unalterably opposed to a pier in the North River, believing Railroad Companies, or either of them, to construct and main that it would be a very serious obstruction to navigation. I have tain a bridge over the Delaware River between the States of tried in these bills to have a provision inserted that no pier New Jersey and Pennsylvania, with amendments; asked a con should be placed in the river. I have been overruled in that by ference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two the committee and also by the Senate, after a deliberate dis Houses thereon, and had appointed Mr. WISE, Mr. DURBOROW, cussion of the matter. and Mr. MAHON managers at the conference on the part of the I have, I am glad to say, secured in this bill amendments House. which leave that question entirely_with the Secretary of War; ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED. and having entire confidence that he will not permit a pier to The message further announced that the Speaker of the House be placed in the river, I, as a reasonable man, suppose I ought had signed the following enrolled bill and joint resolution; and to ' 1.894. I. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 5749 "thereafter;" and after the word ''act," in line 4, insert "after sugar was not necessary for the revenues of this country, and January 1, 1895;" so as to make the paragraph read: · tha-t we could raise adequate revenue without imposing any duty 182. That so much of the act entitled "An act to reduce revenue, equalize on sugar. It has not been reimposed as a revenue duty. It has duties, and for other purposes," approved October 1, 1890, as provides for, been put back, so to speak, at the point of the pistol as a pro and authorizes the issue of licenses to produce sugar, and for the payment tective duty, a protection to the cane-sugar producers of the of a bounty to producers of suga.rfrom beets. sorghum, or sugarcanegrown in the United States, or from maple sap produced within the United States, State of Louisiana, without the vote of whose Senators this be, and the same is hereby, repealed, to take effect January 1, 1895; and it measure could not be passed. . shall be unlawful to issue any license to produce sugar or to pay any bounty If any such compulsion had ~been brought to bear by the rep for the production of sugar of any kind under the said act after January 1, 1895. resentatives of the national beet interest of the United States, Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. President, I think it may be fairly said in my judgment it would have had the amplest justification. that the duty proposed upon sugar by these amendments is un· While it is true that cane sugar can not supply our demands in necessary for the purposes of revenue. By the McKinley act of this country, there can be no question, after the luminous ex 1890 sugar was placed upon the free list; it has remained upon position of the subject by the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. MAN the free list since; and there was adequate revenue under the DERSON] the other day, that it is entirely adequate, or within McKinley act for the conduct of all the business of the Govern our power by the culture of the beet, to produce all the sugar ment and the meeting of our large appropriations, not less under which we can consume in this country. It is not a mere experi the Fifty-second and Fifty-third Democratic Congresses than ment when we are asked to pass upon our capa.city to produce under the Fiftv-first. Nor was there any apprehension or trou beet sugar in sufficient quantities to meet the domestic demand; ble as to the adequacy of the revenue for meeting all the ex That experiment was tried and solved in Fran3e, ~Germany, . penses of the Government -qntil the election of a Democratic and other portions of continental Europe. It stan.ds there to President and the imminent coming of a Democratic Adminis day the great monument in vindication of the protective policy, tration into power. Therefore, i! the Republicans had contin not protection simply by the impositi-on of dut.v, but protection ued in power there would have been no imposition o! sugar du by the granting of bounty, protection as a great matter of public ties, and, least oi all, would there have been any occasion to policy forced upon France and upon Napoleon. When every man impose sugar duties because of the needs of the revenue. of-war· that France had was either captured or driven from the It may be further said that in voting upon these amendments sea and closed up in her own ports, and shut off from the supply at this stage of the pending bill we are voting blindly, without of cane sugar from the tropics, they were by war forced to make adequate knowledge, and without that knowledge and informa the experiment. . tion which will be afforded by the action taken by the Senate Mr. President, no greater success has ever marked a great upon the subsequent schedules of the bill. No schedule will measure of public policy. There Wd.S great doubt in this coun more powerfully influence and affect the revenues of the coun try for a long time as to whether the beet could be successfully try than the duties which may be levied under the woolen sched grown or not. As was said by the Senator from Nebraska in his ule. JJntil we vote upon that we can not know what the reve interesting remarks, such an experiment was tried, and it was nues of the country will be. So far, I am not aware of- any tried and apparently very fully in my own State, and in fact, if estimate having been furnished by the Finance Committee as to I may say so, in my own. neighborhood, where it was a failure. the revenue this bill will produce. I believe estimates have The beets did not produce the requisite amount of saccharine been furnished· as to what revenues would probably be raised strength, and the gentlemen who had put their money into the under the rates of duty proposed in the bill, b3.Sed upon the enterprise lost it. But it appears now that this problem is one amount of the importations in the years now passed-1893 and which has been successfully solved in our Western States and on 1892; but that would be absolutely inadequate and, indeed, mis the Pacific coast. It is no longer a question-as to the variety of leading as to the amount of revenue which will be raised-under seeds which are requisite for producing beets with an adequate the rate of duties to be imposed by the bill. amount of saccharine matter. Of course, the principle is that the lower the duty the larger We were told by the Senator from Nebeaska that tha con the importation. The very theory of this bill, its object and tracts made by the sugar iactories in Nebraska are not for beets purpose, is to vastly increase the importations of woolen goods containing acertainproportionof saccharine matter, but only for and all other goods on which the duties are lowered and where a certain weight of beets. They are paid for by the ton. The the people ara to be relieved of these alleged great burdens of quantity of saccharine matter in the beets is no longer a sub taxation. So it_is altogether probable when you come to learn ject of experiment or uncertainty. Nay, more than that, in Cali absolutely and accuratelybyexperiencewhatwill be the amount fornia the richness of the beet in saccharine matter is absolutely of revenue raised by the bill, that this duty upon sugar will be double that of France or of Germany. · absolutely unnecessar~. Mr. President, in the face of a fact like tha~, we sta.nd here There is another thmg to be said about this duty. It falls ab with the absolute assurance of our ability to produce all our solutely as a tax upon every consumer in the country, and as sugar as readily, as easily, and more so than is done on the con sugar is_an article of universal consumption by every man, tinent of Europe, and the proposition of the pending bill is no - woman, and child, it becomes, therefore, as was well said yes more nor less than _p, refusal by the Democratic majority to al terday, simply nothing else or less than a capitation tax. It low that industry to be established. There can be no uncer was from this burden falling heavily upon every individual in tainty in the mind of any farmer in the coul!try, East or West, the economy of his daily and yearly life, a burden amounting- to at whose doors we can lay the denial to him of the opportunity not less than $50,000,000, the amount collected previous to the to engage in this industry. No one can pretend to measure the McKinley act, that the people were relieved by that measure. extent of its value to our farmers if it could be introduced to This duty is now proposed to be put back upon the people unaer day. They meet competition the most sharp and severe in all the plea that they are to b3 relieved and saved from taxes. grain products, in cattle and animal products, and in all the for- Mr. President, the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BUT age products. · LER], who is not now in his seat, raised the question just before the The farmers of the country are standing on the verge of bank adjournment last evening as to why the duty upon sugar was ruptcy. This would give them a new crop, an alternative crop, not a tax. I do not propose to go into that matter. It seems if a crop which may be called a money crop, one which would pro anything- would be killing time that would be. Of course the duce ready money, a matter of infinite value to the farmera of. principle which governs the question is that a duty is a tax the country. It will secure to tho country the exemption of wherever the domestic consumption in our country can not meat paying about $120,000,000 to foreign nations which we now pay the domestic demand, or largely meet it-so largely go to meet for sugar, and paying it in gold. That would be kept at home; it, in connection with whatever importation there may be as that would relieve the drain of gold upon our Treasury and the will produce a lowering of the price; but it is not contended that agony of our Democratic Administration in its financiering the with cane sugar alone the domestic demand of the consumers of business of the nation; that would secure a balance of trade fa this country can be supplied. vorable to the country; and yet that great experiment, already Thera never was any justifi~ation_for the impo_sition of a duty initiated and in the course of successful evolution, is denied. upon sugar on the g round of 1ts bemg a protectwn to the cane The experiment, if experiment it ever was, has been solved sugar producers of Louisiana or of Florida or of Texas· and that in respect to the machinery for extracting the sugar from the for the reasQn that t:q.e productions of those portions of our coun beet. We do not have to invent it. ·Wecansimplyimportfrom try which are sufficiently within the warm zone are not suffi Germany, or manufacture in this country from German design.s, cient to supply the country with the amount of sugar which is the machinery which has been invented there, and without needed. It was therefore only as a revenue tax that it was justi doubt American ingenuity will add to the already ingenious ma fiable, and as a revenue tax it was removed, because we did not chinery adapted to that purpose. So it is open to us to estab need the revenue. lish the beet-sugar ind_ustry as well as to maintain the sugar in When this bill came from the House of Representatives to dustry. ~his body, it came with sugar free. Those who passed upon it There is another thing about the duty imposed by the pending m the other House gave it as their judgment that a duty upon bill. It is 40 per cent ad valorem. That amounts to about 1 .. 5750 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE _5, cent a pound. The duty previous to the MoKlnley_ B:C~ was 2 Mr. HIGGINS~ I am ver-y glad the Senator from Louisiana. · cents a pound, and yet the 2 cents a pound was not suffi.ment to has seen proper to restate his position It is furthest from greatly enlarge the cane-sugar production of Louisiana. I sub my desire to misrepresent him o.r to do other than have his po mit t hat 1 cent a pound will prove to be hopelessly inadequate sition accurately stated. The f.lwt remains that the people of to meet it. The contention of the Senators from Louisiana in his Congressional district north of the Red River did not want the earlier stages of the bill as we understood it was that noth a duty upon sugar. The people in that district wanted tariff re ing less than H cents would prese-rve the industry to them~ form. Their sense of public duty and their sense of the publio Here they are taking the risk for their people of only 1 cent a interest went no further than their own district. It was con pound. But there is a great deal that is mysterious about this fined and limited to it. measure, and one of the mysteri-es is that a bounty of 2 cents a I think that that marks the broad line of difference and de pound has doubled the effect of promoting the culture of the cane markation between the two great parties of the country. The sugar which a duty of 2 cents a pound had. Republican party has never begrudged to the people of Louis Under the impulse and assu'l-ance given by the bounty the iana the protection to theirsugarth.atwasgiven by the duty that planters of Louisiana enlarged their plantations, enlarged their we laid upon sugar. We wished them -prosperity and develop planta of machinery, doubled their production, and are now on m ent. We begrudge te the South the development of no part a care.er of still more largely increasing in these respects. But of its res.ources, whether or n.ot it will furnish competition with they are going to accept a duty of 1 cent a pound only, and that Northern industry and prouuction--· is all they "Could extort from the men on their own side. They Mr. ALDRICH. Will the Senator from Delaware yield to could do no less or else than to take a stand for some protection. me for a moment? I do not know that I have ever been startled by an expression Mr. HIGGINS. With great pleasure. more than by the utte1-ance of the mayor of New Orleans in .an Mr. ALDRICH. I have just received a telegram, which I ask article in one of the magazines early in this year, wheTein he may he read, throwing some light on the question of Southern said the effect of the Wilson bill upon the State oi Louisiana in views upon the sugar question. making sugar free would be more severe than the ravages of The PRESIDING Ob,FTCER. The Secretary will read as re Turenne, in the Palatinate. He needed a strong expression. quested. He neeued one of the most ghastly chapters ip human history T.he Secretary l'ead. as follows: in order to picture what would be the effect of this measure of LAMOURIE, LA., June 4, 1891. Democratic policy upon a Democraticcommunity. Louisiana at ToHon. N. W.ALDRICH: The great majority of sugar planoors of this State favor the bounty or cle last was brought face to face with the theory of tariff reform <>r mandits equivalent, as- the present .schedule means ruin. Tll~ sugar con· of free traile in an industry which ean not survive on this con vention never passed any resolutions indorsing the acts of Senators G.AFFERY tinent withoutvrotection, eitherin theformofdutyor a·bon.nty. 9r BLANCHARD on their present stand. We simply appreciated their serv wes, but approve stand of Congressmen P&rOE, DAVEY, RoBERTSON, and It was remorselessly condemned to d:eath by this theory, which l'tiEYER on their vote against free sugar a.nd in fa-vor o-.t the bounty. Reier say.o that any industry which ca.nnotsurvivewithoutproteetion you to published proceedings of convention sen-t you. I authorize you to ought to be c:s.st into the outer darkness. and that to attempt to use this. tel-egram if you wish. maintain it hm·e is robbary,plunder, and extortion. Itw.as with DAVIDS. FERRIS. that theclry that tlle people of Louisiana had to wrestle~ and Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. Ferris"\vas secretary ofthe convention, where right th-ere, ev-en in their own midst, we see the pernicious and-]] have nn dmrbt he speaks with authority .as to the opinions influence of this pernicious theory. · of the planters of Louisiana on this subject. For awhile there was sent to m:e, .and I expect to other mem 1\if:r. IDGGINS~ Mr. President, questions of approval or dis- bers of the Sen"l..te, when thi'l controversy in Lou.isia;na w:as very approval bv the sugar-planters of Louisiana of the aetion of the warm, copies of some of their papers. I tb:ink it w.as in the representatives of their State hare is but a secondary matter. Picayune that there was an article protesting against seutionaJ Whatever of kindliness they may have for those gentlemen, w.ho ism ill our p.olitics. When f saw the title of the artic.le I .sup are deserving of so much kindly feeling,.or whatever of unkind posed it was ~ing to be an inveighing against Massachusetts or ne.ss may possibly exist, is a ma;tter with which the country has New England for soma unfairness towards the South. It was absolutely no con.cern. But what is a matter of acute interest not so, Mr. President. It was a well-grounded complaint on the to the people of all the country is what the su.gaT planters of part of the e.ditor on behalfof the people .south <>i the Red River Louisiana think and reel about the policy of the pending bill. wh<>gt~owsugar , againstthe people northof the Red River who It is a matter of acute interest whether they approve of the do not grow sugar, because the latter were not willing that pro imposition of a tax of one cent a pound, 40 per cent ad valorem, tection should be given to the sugar.--g-rGwing industries. South. m1d the taking off of the bounty: of 2 cents a pound, or whether It was upon tb.&t amusing ground that the junior Senator from they want, and wish their representatives to vote for, a bounty Louisiana [Mr_ BLANCHARD J in the other House voted against of 2 cents a pound, a bounty which costs this country infinitely thedutyonsuga-r,orf.or the pending bill withoutthe du.ty, while l-ess than the proposed duty will cost, to say nothing of how much here he j :.IStif:i.es his vote for th-e bill with a duty on the ground less it has been than the duty of 2 cents a pound under the law that he r e presents a State rather than a district. before the act of 1890. Mr. BLi\.NCHARD. Mr. President-- It has been said here by the Senators from Louisiana, and The· PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. WHI'I'E in the chair). Does stated ina manner as if it were one of those ultimate truths which the Senator from Delaware yield to the Senator from Louisi could not be gainsaid, that there is no permanency in a bounty, ana? th:at a bounty can not stand because the people are against it. Mr. HIGGINS. Certainly. What people, Mr. President? If they say the Democratic _ Mr. BLANCHARD. Mr. President, I take this occasion to party throughout the lengthand breadthofthecountry, Isho~d again state my position. say it probably is true that a maj.ority of the Democratic party Mr. HIGGINS. I did not mean to misrepresent it. I pre are opposed to bounties. But I believe that the Republican sumed I was stating it correctly. party are unanimout~ly in favor of a bounty for sugar. I believe 11r. BLANCHARD, It is not statedeorrectly-by the Senator that they would be in favor of a. bounty for ships; I believe they from Delaware. When I had the honor of repret~enting at the would be in favor of a bounty wherever it can be shown either othee end of this Capitol a district in Northwestern Louisiana, by argument, and still more by eA."'Perience, that the imposition and the pending measure was before the House~ I supported by of a bounty will be good busin-ess for the country. Experience my voice and vote a du.ty upon sugar. When the duty wa.s has shown in respect to sugar that a bounty is ol infinitely less denied I.ma.Q.e a speech entering a solemn protest against the cost to the cGu:ntry than the imposition of a duty, while it pro treatm:en.t a.ceorded to sugar by the House, but declared in that motes the interest twice as much and twice as fast, promises us speech that inasmuch as the constituency I represented wante-d e-xemption from taxation. in the future and the growth within theil' vote, which was in my keeping, castforthe bestthatconld our borders of all of the product hitherto supposed to belong to be had from- the Democratic House in. the way of a tariff-revi the tropics. I believe the people ()f the United States will vote sion measure_, I should so cast that vote, expecting and hoping for that party which commits itself to the enactment .of a bounty. that1 the Senate of the United States would place a duty upon N.ay, more, Mr. President. While I speak of the Republican ' su.:,crar, and that eventually, should I remain in the Rouse, I party, now dominant, so far as it isdomin.ant, intheStatesofthe would ha.va the pleasure of voting for a bill containing a duty North. I believe that upon this very issue and on this very prin upon. sugar. ciple it will see the overthrow of the Democratic party in many !11; the Senate1 as I have heretofore stated, I represent in part c.f the Southern States. The people of Louisiana., with the bill 1,200,000 people in Louisiana, with a diversity of sentimen.tan.d pt-ofoundly im:pariring their interests, if not destroying them, will a va;riety of interests, and th-at, representing all the interests of · have to-elect between self-preserv.a.tion on the one hand., or immo ·' the State, I felt it my duty to support a reasonable duty upon ' lating themselves, their interests, their families, and their sugar. I ?aves t.a ted ~hat it ~s quite a different thing to represent . homes, everything that comes under the word welfare or pros- a State with a d1 verSlty of 1n.terests and to. represent one Con 1 pecityr to. th-e f-etich. ef a party theory. That theory may do gression.al distdct with one interest and one: sentimen.t. very well in th-e offices of able editors in New York; it may \ . 1894. CONGRESSIONAL. RECO~ENATE. sound very well on tlle stump, but it is a differen:t matter when hin:d the throne that is compelling the enactment of this re.eas it comes in deadly fashion to. the homes and the firesides of the tl['e? Nay, more than that, if through th.e investigating-com people. - mittee we do not discover who it is, if we are permitted to go The Republican party believes in the doctrine of protection. on and vote without knowing who it is that is t_hus compelling applving in its bene.ficence throughout the whole length and the measure to. Q.e framed in this form with this advantage to breadth of the land. We wi&h to see not merely the sugar in- the sugar trust, we do know who votes for it in the form in which d.ustrybut every industry developed to the uttermost. I shall it is1 and ratify their agency by adoption, and make themselves not take up the time ot the Senate by attempting to marshal responsible for the bill in its present shape just as much as if it in array th:e industries in which the South is interested. It was done at their request. needs no specification for the imagination to grasp it. The coal, Mr. President , the Democratic party of the United States thus the iron, the lumber., the vast resources o£ the forest and the stands face to face with the people of the United States with a mine, the untold possibilities of theirwaterpowoc, the fortunate proposition to levy a duty of 1cant a pound upon all raw sugars character of their climate and "their soil, where manufacturing and oi more than that upon .refined sugar, making it a capita industries can be built up alongside that of agricultural, all show tion tax upon every ma~ woman, and child in the country for that there is no section of this country and. no section of the the benefit of the most hug~ the most grasping, the must sordid, wocld that tn-d:ay would be so blessed as the South would be by the most intolerant, the most flagrant and avowed trust whose the development of its hitherto hidden resources. existence is known and admitted. It has flaunted itself in the As I briefl.y stated the other day, the South was committed to face of. the people. an opposite theory for a ueason which has departed. Before its The &tandar.d oil trast at least has the decency to keep ita interest in slavery and in cotton became as acute, so to speak, stock from. off the market,_and not to put it under the eyes and an.cl as developed as it has been by the application of the cotton. noses o.f the people every day. But ltere we hav:e this traffic in. gin, Mr. Calhoun, as its leader. of thought, was in favor of high trust certificates. It is made the football of the market~ It. protective duties for the establishment of manufacturing indus· has made it to the infinite discredit oi the Congress of the. United tries over the entire country. Not until tha exigencies- of slav- States. It has aroused, and properly aroused, a profound sense. eryrequired it did he develop the doctrine of nullification and of indignation against the system_ that would p_ermit i-t, and I secession in: order to compel from the re.st" of the eountry the think that this people will: visit 31 swift fudgment upon the men abandonment of the protective sy&.tem. That was done liD.de:r who are· responsible for it. the tariff of 18_33. I twas because o.f. the interestwhieh. th..e South Senators upon the other side have pofuted.. out.. the advantage felt in the thaory that fxee trade-and cotton-growing went hand giv:en to the trust by the Mc.Klnfey aet. Grant i.t, Mr. Presi mhand that they took the extreme ground o1 compelling the- dent; and. while I know thai. ignorance is no ex.cuse for crime, it country to accede to their demands. ma.-y be an excuse f-or mistakes in legislation. I had no·idea. that But th.e< wlwle reason for- that has departed. Slavery is gone. the sugar s.chedule of the McKinley act contained any such pos To-day there. is no reason wfiatever why the people of the South sibility, as has beendeveloped by the sugar trust;. and I only want s-hould condemn their resources to be forever- locked up, and to know that the provisions o.£. that act do make· ft possible for, why they should prevent their development. On the contta;ry, such ar trust to go on to vote as quickly as I ean._ get an O})por we need only look to the convention that 'was held in Georgia tunity and take aw-ay the ad vantage. last week to see: that the most active measures are being taken That is the position of the Republican party upon this meas by the prom'())tion o.f immigration. and in: every ethel'" way, to ad- ure., and one on whiah I think the whole sc.hedule sh.o_uid be de VliDCe the developmen._t of their mining and ma.uuiactU!.'in-g in- feated. But even if it is defeated, the wors.t. phaae of it all, if terests. Yet. while they are doing that1 their representatives possible, is the pending amendment postponing the operntion h.ere, by: es..ta.blishing this· measure offre.e• tr-81de as far as it goes of these duties. until the 1-st oC J..a.nuary next. It furnishes an. in that direction, are taking the most effectual steps to prevent opportunity for- the sugar trust. to go into the marke_ts o1 the the development ot the South.- world, to sweep clean e-very bin wheee sugar is held, from the While, too proposed duty of. 4U per cent ad valorem on raw Straita SettlementS; the Asiatic coasts, in India, in South AIDer sugar is imposed to some extent for the: benefit: of the sugar- ica, in Cuba, in .Mexico, wherever ca.-ne sugar is grow~ to· take pro behmd the Sena.~s wh.e: thus co.mpe~ed the ~sition of this up to sJty that this was. unfair and unJust1 and such a sugg,e.stion rata ot duty what 1s the deus ex md.cht.na, what IS the power be~ was made_by- the Se11attozo from Rhode ISland and the Senator . - 5752 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 5, from Iowa. It was plain that justice required that a bill redu will need eith~r the ~uty on sugf\r or th~ income tax; but the · cing duties and subjecting the home producers of manufactured theory of the other side of the Chamber IS that we want more merchandise to the competition of large new importations ought money, that the Treasury is empty, and now they make a duty to be postponed,sofar as the commencement of its operation was of 1 cent a pound on sugar that will amount to $50,000,000 annu concemed, to some future date, in order that the- home producers ally, and they deliberately postpone the l;aking effect of the duty might finn time-to adapt themselves to the cb.anges made by the until January 1, 1895. bill. Instead of that, the committee propose to make the bill in Mr. PLATT. We are running. behind in our revenue now at its general provisions take effect on June 30, 189!, while they a rate of eight or-nine million dollars a month, and if the duty propose that the sugar duty sh ~1U not take effect until January could take effect immediately it would probably prevent the 1, 1895. ; necessity of a bond issue. Why, then, postpone it? The bill in substantially all its provisions except this one is a Mr. CHANDLER. There is no reason unless it is the reason reduction of duty, a reduction of protection. In the sugar pro that everyone understands. There is not the slightest reason vision it i.s an increase of duty, an imposition of duties upon mer why this bill should take effect upon ev~ry other article that is chandise which now comes in free. The reduced duties are to made dutiable by the bill on the day which it passes, on the 30th take effect immediately. The increased duties upon sugar are day of the very present month of June, and the impoaition of to take effect six months after the passage of the bill. the duty on sugar be postponed until the 1st day of January, ~ The action of the committee, it seems to me, is an absurdity. ~M. ~ The bill reverses in both cases what should be the correct de - Mr. President, there is no reason for postponing the takinoo cision. Where a bill reduces duties and tends to bring into the effect of this increased duty to be derived by asserting that it country articles which arejo come into competition with home is a protective duty. All the rest of the-bill is reduction. The products there should be a postponement for a few months, and reduction of a duty is the diminution of protection. There m that event the new and reduced duties should not be applied may be, as I have said, reason for postponing the reduction of a to merchandise already in bonded warehouse to be withdrawn duty, but the increase of a duty, the imposition of a duty upon from consumption. But the committee propose that the reduced sugar, when we must import nine-tenths of what is consumed, duties shall apply to merchandise withdrawn for consumption, is not a protection, and there is not the slightest reason, so far and it has already been stated to the Senate that this decision is as the protection of sugar in this country is concerned, why a donation to the owners of merchandise now in bonded ware that duty should not be imposed at once. houses of between two and three million dollars, and a loss to Mr. HOAR. The Senator, I suppose, received in his mail this the Treasury of the United States of duties to that amount, morning the public debt statement which has come from the which it seems to me is utterly absurd, illogical, and unjust. Treasury, showing a very large increase of the public debt. It What should in justice be done? The bill should not take has increased $40,000:000 or $50,000,000, I think, during the past effect until six months after its passage. The duties on the year. The Senator from Arkansas stated that the object of this goods now in bonded warehouse should be collected at the pres bill is to reduce the debt which the Republicans created. ent rates, and the lapse of time between the passage of the bill . Mr. CHANDLER. If this bill were defeated, it is my opinion and the taking effect of the law would give the owners of the that there would be no deficit, and that the present McKinley merchandise in bonded warehouse the opportunity of taking it law would produce revenue sufficient to prevent any deficit. out of warehouse, and disposing of it, and placing it in the way What will happen if this bill becomes a law no man can tell: be of consumption before the influx of the new goods from abro:td cause the reduction of duties all along the line may result, and -. at the reduced rates of duty. In that way no injustice is done to would be sure to result under ordinary conditions of business, in the owners of merchandise in the bonded warehouse, while the such largely increased importations that the revenue would be two or three million dollars is saved to the Treasury. The manu sufficient. Therefore I do not undertake to know what the needs facturer of home articles like those on which duties are reduce<;l, of the Government will be if this bill becomes a law. c~n also in the ~ix months of the delay dispose of their surplus I do know that the framers of the bill pretend that it is nec stock, and can make preparations for competition with the mer essary to have more money, and in the face of that pretense they chandise which will be imported under the new and reduced deliberately throw away the duties upon a half year's sup rates of duty. ply of sug·ar; they deliberately throw away $25,000,000 when no This is just! this is the correct method; and the two or three earthly reason can be given for it based upon common sense or milHon dollars should be saved to the Government, while the common honesty; and no-real reason can be given for it unless owners of merchandise in bonded warehouse and the home man the object is, as I undertook to show yesterday, to enable the ufacturers of goods like those upon which the duty is to be re sugar tru3t to import a year's supply of sugar without paying duced should all have six months in which to prepare for the the duty, and after the lst of January next to get the full bene reduction of duties and the increased competition from abroad fit of the increased value of sugar by 1 cent a pound, which the to be occasioned thereby. imposition of the duty after that date will give to the sugar then Mr. President, I am confident that the correct and sensible in the country. and just method of dealing with the question of the time when Mr. President, there can be no doub~ that the object and pur this bill shall take effect is what I have stated. The committee pose of postponing this date is to give this money to the sugar reverse the plan, give away the two or three million dollars, and trust, by allowing it to import large quantities of sugar betwe.en expose the manufacturers of the country to an immediate influx now and the 1st of January next. of foreign imported merchandise, and to reduced rates of duty Mr. FRYE. Mr. President, I think the Senator from New which will be a great injury to them and an unnecessary damage Hampshire is making a ve~y serious mistake when he demands to their interests. for this bill the ordinary rules which govern and control ordinary This is the mistaken and absurd proposition of the committee legislation. He ought to consider that this is most extraor as to the time when the general provisions of the bill shall take dinary legislation; that the bill itself is an anomaly; that if it effect. They are to take effect immediately, and are most un passes the Senate at all it passes it without having a single Sen wisely to take effect immediat-ely. as I have endeavored to show. ator in favor of it; it will be passed by somebody outside of the But, Mr. President, what next? The committee proceed to Senate. make an exception !n the bill as to sugar; they provide that Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, what the Senator says is sugar, which is now free and is to have a duty imposed upon it true, and yet the Senator will bear me witness, and the present equal to Lcent a pound, shall not be subjected to that duty until occupant of the chair [Mr. WHITE] will bear me witness, that I the 1st day of January, 1895. Has any rea.son been given why have not ceased from the opening of the debate upon this bill this delay should be g·iven to sugar which is given to no other to seek a rule or p.rinciple of action to govern the framing of article mentioned in the bill upon which a duty is imposed? the bill. I have not assumed, as the Senator from Maine now Every other product upon which a tax or a duty is to be imposed does, that there is no principle behind this bill, no principle by the bill is to have th:1t duty take effect upon the passage of controlling· the other side of the Chamber; that it is a bill of the bill. The one exception is the article of free sugar that is bargains, to be forced through by some mysterious power be now to have a duty imposed upon it equal to 1 cent a pound. hind the throne. I have not assumed that. Why is that, Mr. President? _ I have endeavored to find out the principle upon which the Mr. PLATT. Will the Senator from New Hampshire allow duties were to be imposed, and I have also sought to find the me? - principle which would determine the date at which the bill or Mr. CHANDLER. Certainly. different portions of the bill should take effect, but when I first Mr. PLATT. If the duty on raw sugar is a revenue duty, has find that the bill itself as to all reductions of duty is to take ef ;- . there ever been a time when the Government needed ·revenue fect immediately, that two or three million -dollars is to be given more than at present? away to the owners of merchandise in bonded warehouse, and Mr. CHANDLER. It is the theory of the other side of the that the manufacturers of this country are to be subjected to an Chamber that the Government needs more money. I am not immediate influx of foreign goods paying a lower rate of duty 1 myself sure that the Government, even if the bill becomes alaw, and next find that the new duty pn free sugar is not to take et· .- / 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.-SENATE. 5753 feot until the 1st day of January, 1895, I am impressed with the its responsibility as a newspaper journal that it believes· that coaviction that, although I seek a principle I do not find the the sugar trust has resorted to the bribery of Senators in order principle, and that the Senator !rom Maine must be right when to procure the passa-ge of such a measure on the subjectof sugar he says that the bill is an anomaly, a thing of shreds and patches, as the sugar trust demands to have passed. I do not believe as that it is the result of ..-bargain and trade1 of exigencies and of does the Kansas City Times upon this point. emotions, and does not contain a single principle from its be I do belie~e that Senators have speculate~ in sugar stocks, but ginning to its end. I do ~ot b~heve that there. has been the bnbery which the Kan I made an estimate yesterday that a million and a hall tons of sas C1ty T1mes says has ex1sted; and I have faith, and trust that sugar could be imported between now and next January, and when the committee reports it will be able to relieve the Sen that there would be a profit to the sugar trust by importing this ate from ~ll such suspicions a.s have been cast upon it by this sugar free of duty before the 1st of January and selling it at the Democratic newspaper; and yet I shall not feel satisfied in the increased price which would prevail after the 1st day of Janu fa-ee o~ tho~e aspez:sions, not yet cleared up by & report from the ary, of about $3!,000,000. I find a confirmation of my calculation committee, and w1th all the clouds of doubtand suspicion which this morning in a remarkable article from the New York J~mr to-day hang around this Chamber, if the Senate goes on to post nal of Commerce, of June 4, headed " Senators of the United pone the time for the taking effect of the sugar duty from the 30th States, or of the Sugar Trust." It says, speaking of the com day of Ju~e, when every other duty imposed by this bill takes mittee which it calls" The Jones private committee:" effect, until the 1st day of January, 1895, the object and purpose It did one thing more. lt postponed from .Tuly 1, 189~. to .Tanuary 1, 1895, and plan and scheme andcontrivanceofthe whole.postponement the enforcement of the new schedule. Did that have any purpose except to being to put into the hands of the sugar trust, which in the enable the trust to make an enormous profit by importing all this year's raw sugar free of duty to sell next year at prices raised. by the tari:!!? With Sugar Trade Journal, shamelessly boastsof its control o~ee the 96° centrifugals at 2.75 a pound, the imposition or a. duty or 40 per cent on Senate, a gratuity to the trust of not less than $34,000,000. January 1, next, would add 1.1 cents a pound to all the sugar the trust had Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President, we have had three official or on hand at that date. On 1,405,000 tons, the a.mount melted last year, this privile~e of buying sugar while it is on the free list and selling it under a semiofficial statements of the character and extent of the rates auty Wlll be worth ~,619,200. imposed in thescheduleuponsugar. First, we had the statement Mr. President, this Democratic newspaper makes the charge clear, distinct and definite, of the Senator from Maryland [Mr: that this date is fixed for no other purpose than to give the GORMAN], who stands before the country as the representative sugar trust this extra profit of $34,000,000. That is the charge. and author of the pending measure. He stated that "the duty What is the answer? What.answerhas been given on this floor, upon refined sugar in excess of the duty upon r<.tw sugar was one except that the duty is to take effect when the bounty is re eighth of a cent a pound, and that the reduction of dutv from moved? There is no necessary connection between the two. the McKinley act was three-fourths of the existino- duty making We pay the bounty for this year. The committee propose to the remaining discriminating duty as stated. He st~ted, fur pay 2 cents a pound bounty on the crop which is now growing, thermore, that the refiners would get no benefit from the 40 per which crop will not be sold until, under the effect of this duty, cent ad valorem. , the value of it has increased 1 cent a pound; and thus they pro Next we had a statement from the Senator from Missouri pose to enrich the sugar producer to the extent of 3 cents a [Mr. VEST], giving the discriminating duty on refined sugar pound. above raw at a quarter of a cent a pound. The Senator did not What earthly need, then, Mr. President, of allowing the im furnish -the dab upon which this claim was based. Yesterday portation free of duty until the 1st day of January, 1895-what we had an elaborate statement from the Senator from Arkansas is the need of allowing the importation free oi a million and a [Mr. JONES], in which he stated the differential duty upon re half tons of sugar, a whole year·s supply for the people of this fined sugars at less than twenty one-hundredths of a cent a pound country, when every pound is to be increased 1centin price the and ~egave the data upon which he justified the assertion. ' moment the duty takes effect, and $34,000,000 is to be put in the Neither the Senator from Maryland nor the Senator from hands of the sug-ar trust, without any additional benefit what Missouri furnished the Senate the relative rates of duties on ever to the sugar producers of thia country? raw and refined sugars upon which they based their opinions Mr. President, the Journal of Commerce tells the ra:1son (al We have, then, a wide disagreement between the Senator~ though I do not propose to quote further the exact language of ~ho ~re responsible for this. schedule as to its effects. Not only the paper),and thereasonis thattheSenateof the United States lB this so, but so far as thiS schedule is concerned a majority is to-day under the control of the sugar trust. of the committee who reported it have stated publicly they are There are quotations from the Sugar Trade Journal given opposed to its provisions; that they are in favor of free sugar by the Journal of Commerce, showing the announcement made but that they have been forced to adopt its provisions by som~ by that journal, that no tariff bill should pass the Senate unless unknown and mysterious_power. it contained an ad valorem protection to sugar. The words of I propose to discuss in as dispassionate a way as I can the pro the Sugar Trade .Journal have been made good so far, and they visions contained in this paragraph, which is certainly one of are likely to be made good in the future, and the charges made the most important, if not the most important, in this whole in the Journal of .Commerce are not far from baing correct. measure.. It is important that the people of the country,should Mr. President, we have a committeoengaged in investigating know pre~nsely what the paragraph means, and just wha;t rates the question of the bribery of Senators. I do not believe that will be levied under it and their effect. Senators have been bribed. I do believe that some Senators I~ the outset I will say that I am a prot-ectionist, and that I have speculated in sugar stocks. I trust that there may not be ~heve that the business of refining sugar is as legitimate as any final action upon the sugar schedule in the bil1 until that inves m "the United States. It is a. businesa which should have proper tigation is ended. I believe that it is due to the Senate and to and adequate protective duties. In the pr¶tion of the act of the country that whatever votes may be given to-day, there 1890 the committee who had charge of that measure used great shall not be final action upon the sugar question until the com care in investigating the question as to what those rates should mittee of the Senate, headed by the able, upright, and impartial be. I intend! in answer to some suggestions made by the Sena Senator from Delaware [Mr. GRAY], shall have finished its in tor from Missouri, later on to state what was done at that time vestigations, and shall have reported to us the full length a-nd and why it was done. ' b_readth !1nd heighth and depth of all the sus_Picions and asper ' I ~e~ieve that the business of sugar refining, whatever its swns which have been cast upon the Senate m connection with conditlOn may be to-day-that is, whether it is controlled by a the sugar trust. single corporation or by eight or ten corporations-is entitied I call the attention of the Senator from Missouri [Mr. VES'l'] to protection and to recognition.. The conditions of to-day may to an extract from a paper published in Kansas City-the Kan be greatly changed to-morrow, and if we intend to treat this ·' sas City Times-a Democratic paner, and, if I am wrono- the great industry and the people who are now enga~ed or who may Senator will correct me, which paper, on the 25th of May 0 i894 her~afte r be engaged in it fairly, '!e must impose adequate uttered this language: ' ' duties on refined sugar, but up to this time, however, the ade quacy of the dutie~ imposed by this bill has not been under dis The Times h as no doubt the sugar trust has resorted to every available cussion. The question has been, and is, what relative rates ~xpedient to deb!'l'uch. the leg:isla~ion of Congress. It fully believes that o:::.enators were bribed ~to votmg m the interest of this mammoth agency will be imposed by the paragraph now under consideration? of plundering the public by every means through which it could be accom· It is very singular that in this particular paragraph provisions pUshed. It can understand how the nefarious work could be and probably so complicated should have been adopted by the committee as was pr omoted b_y distributing s~res in the trust among Senators whose votes could be mfiuenced by their pecuniary interests. This journal cor to make it almost impossible for any man who is not thoroughly rectly estimates the turpitude of a corporation which after robbing the conversant with the whole subject, who is not practically an Treasury of millions, will resort to bribery in every form in order to per expert in his knowledge of the sugar markets of the world petuate the system through which it operated. and of the different kinds oi sugar sold in those markets, t-o es M;. President, here is a most lamentable condition of public timate intelligently the effect of the paragraph. ~ffairs, when the Kansas City Times, a Democratic paper pub That can be readily shown by the fact that no two Senators hshed at the home of the Senator from Missouri, declare; upon who have spoken upo~ this subject on either side of the Cham- ,·, _... 5754 ·CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. ~ JUNE 5, b&r have agreed as to the rates which are imposed. We have ably more familiar with the prices of sugar in all the markets of first an ad valorem rate of 40 per cent upon raw sugars below the world than any other man in the United States. His state No. 16 Dutch standard in color. We have then on sugar above ment in this regard must bs accepted as conclusive. Mr. Have No. 16 Dutch standard in colm·an ad valorem rate o.f 40 per cent meyer states the value of different grades ol sugar, raw andre ad valorep1, plus' 12t cents a hundred pounds, and plus, under fined, as follows: certain conditi~ms, 10 cents a hundred pounds. Raw sugar-Palmyra jaggery, raw sllgar, SOJ test, 1.75 cents There are but two· or three paragraphs in the bill as it• now a pound. stands before the Senate that impvse compound rates of duty. Iloilio, or Philippine Island, 830 test, 2.20 cents a pound. Th.e only notable one with the exception of this is that fixing Brazil, 8P test, ~.56 cents a pound. the rate upon collars and cuffs. There are two items in the bill Puerto Rjco muscov~does, 90J test, 2.75 cents a pound. standing out distinctively against the whole scheme of the meas- Beets (83v net an~lys1s) 9-10 test, 2.75-cents a pound. · ure. • Cuba cenirifugals, 960 test, 3 cents a pound. · It must be evident to the Senate that these compound rates Refined sugars: were imposed upon sugar and upon collars and cuffs for a pur German granulated, 3.32 cents a pound. pose. There can benoquestionaboutthat. Itwould have been English granulated, 3.64 cents a pound. ever so much easier and simpler to have imposed a specific rate_ This table includes all the distinctive types or sugars as sold of duty upon the various grades of raw and refined sugar, or a in the markets of the world. uniform ad valorem rate that would run through the whole Mr. TELLER. Refine-d? schedule, such a rate as the Senator from Missouri has insisted Mr. ALDRICH. No; ra:wa~d re:fined--;-allraw, however, except upon in regard to almost every other paragraph in the bill. the last two. The first s1x kinds are di:fl'erent distinctive types I called the attehtion of the Senator from Missouri the other of raw sugars. The last two are different types of refined sugar day-to itell}B in the metal schedulewherehe had imposed 5-0 per one b~ing German. gra~ulated, which is not a standard granu~ cent upon Iron ore and 22t per cent upon boiler tubes! an ad lated m the sense m which we use the word in the United States vanced -produet of iron and steel, and the Senator defended the a refined sugar that is sold in the United States when it is sold latter rate upon the ground that the much higher price of boiler here at all for largely manufacturing purposes, and it does not tubes per pound above the prices of pig iron justified a reduction enter into competition with the granulated of the American re in the-ad valorem rate from 40 to 22.t per cent. AU through finers for grocery purposes. The English granulated is usually the iron and steel schedule the1:•e ru·e higher ad valorem ra..tes made from cane sugar, and is of the grade of t.he granulated upon the raw material than upon the finished produc\. The turned out by our refiners. suggestion and arg-ument of all_free trader-s in the past_ has been T_he following table showa ~he rates that are imposed on these (it was so in 184& and has remamed so to the- p-resent trme} tha.t yarwus grades by the precedmg paragraph, and the difference a uniform ad valorem rate on account of the higher price of the m rates between raw and refined, and the difference under the advanc'ed manufactured product afforded equal protection in all provisions of existing law between duties on same grades: casas. . That has always baen the argument of the Senators upon the Dutyun- Di.trerence Difference other side of the Chamber; hut in these two particular cases For~ign derJones between under pnce. amend· rawa.nd present a different plan is adopted. A complicated system is adopted ment. refined. law. by which the Senator :from Arkansas can go befo-re- the people of his State and say there is no protection to the refiner-, and Palmyra. ja.ggery, 80o. ___ ·----- __ 1. 75 70 88 50 the Senator from Ne-wY~k ea.ngo before the people interested llollo, 83° ____ . ·-·-·. ____ --~- _·-·· 2.20 88 70 50 'n the refining oi sugar in his own State. and say, "We have Brazil, 8'7° ····--··-·----·--·-··- 2.55 1.02 {;6 50 Puerto Rioo muscovado, ooo .. _ 2.75 1.10 48 50 grven of th& 0 you ample protection by the terms b-ill," and no Beets (8Sana.lysis), 9-! ----·---· 2.75 1.10 48 50 _man in the respeetiv-eaudiences can tell which statement is true, Cuba. centrifllga.ls,96° ------· 3.00 1.20 38 50 or if either of them is true. German granulated._·--- ______3.32 1.55 ...... --- ...... ___ ..._ ...... This schedule is apparently carefully and delil::erately pre English granulated--··-··--·-· 3.64 1.58 ..... ·----- ...... pared to deeeive the. American peo-ple as to its effects. 1 venture to say that there is no-t a. man on the other side of the It will be seen that under the Jones amendment the duty on Chamter who can attempt to explain its e.ffects intelligently. Palmyra jaggery, which is the lowest form' of sugar, the crude The statement of the distinguished Senatorfrom Arkansas, who sugar of the Eastern countries would be, assuming a cost of $1.75 I regret is not nmv- in his seat, furnishes an example of how per hundred pounds at 40 per cent ad valorem, seven-tenths of easy it is for a good man to go astray in a complicated question a-cent a pound. . ,of this kincL If his explanation of the effects of the paragraph The duty on English granulated, the standard granulated of had been made before a committee of sugar refine-rs or suga-r im commerce, is by this bill one and :flfty-eight one-hundredths porcters or merchants, or- before the members of any boar.d of cents a pound. The difference between the duties levied on trade in the United States, it would, I fear-, have created a very P almyra Jaggery and English granulated is eighty-eight one erToneons impression as to the wisdom and intelligence with hundredths of a cent a pound. The difference at the present which the people ol t:Q.e United States are governed. time, that is under the law of 1890, is fifty one-hundredths of a When the Senator from Maryland [Mr. GORMAN} made the cent a pound, showing that on this particular grade the differ statement that there was no protection for the refiners of sugar ential rates between Jaggery sugars and standard granulated is beyond one-eighth of a cent a pound he must have been either thirty-eight one-hundredths of a cent a pound greater under the strangely misled or else he had not examined ~e problem with proposal of the committee than it is under existing law. the usual intelligence with which that Senator approaches sub- On the next grade, the Philippine Island sugars, with a price jects of great public interest. It is important that we shall not of 2.20 cents a pound, the ra~a of duty would be eighty-eight deceive ourselves or attempt to deceive the country in re-gard to one-hundredths of a cent a pound, and the difference between the nature of the duties that are imposed in this proposition, the duty imposed upon these sugars and English granulated is and I propose to state as clearly and as definitely as I can what, 70 cents a hundred pounds or seven-tenths of a cent a pound. in my opinion~ will be the inevitable effect of the imposition of The difference under existing law is fifty one-hundredths of a these duties. cent a pound, showing upon this particular grade of sugars the The examination naturally divides itself into two branehes. increase of the differential rate between raw and refined is two Fh·st, we should ascertain precisely the rates that will be col tenths of a cent a pound. lected or assessed by the provisionsof the bill if itbecomesalaw On the next grade, Brazilian sugars, the price is 2.50 cents; upon the vai'ious classes of raw and refined sugars. Second, we the duty imposed by the bill is 1.2 cents, or a differentialt•ate as should consider the question as to what effect the-se different against the English granulated of liity-sixone-hundredths, with rates will have upon the consumers of sugar and upon the sugar fifty one-hundredths in the existing law, or six one-hundredths refiners. These are two distinct and separate ,• 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. This grade of sugar-the "fair refining~' of the trade, has th& Mr~ VEST. I kn-ow the Senator took care of that in the act test 900 of the average of the world's production of sugar. o11890 and imposed practically a prohibitory duty. That average is, however, constantly increasing, owing to im- Mr. ALDRICH. We imposed the same rate of duty on Eng- provements in methods, so that I presume it would befair to-day liah granulated as on German granulated. to say that the average test of the sugars of the world would be ,Mr. VEST. I understand that; and kept out all of it practi nen,rly 92-J. But the particular sugar that we now have under cally. consideration testing 90:::>, Cuba muscovado, has heretofore been Mr. ALDRICH. So will this bill. If any Senator supposes taken as the standard raw sugar. of commerce. To-day, how- for one instant, either- the Senator from Missouri or anybody ever, Cubacentrifugals, the better class of Jav:as and beet sugars, else, that any refined sugars will be imported -under this bill he have largely ta.ken the place in American refineries of the lower is very much mistaken. grades of sug·ars. If we should assume, however, that musco- Mr. VEST. That is: a matter of assertion and not argumentJ vado sugars would fairly represent the average oi all raw sugars ¥i:· A~RICH. It is a ma. t~r of opinion, and I think my of the world the difference between raw and refined in this bill oprruon 1s as good upon that subJect as the-Senato.r's. I am will would be forty-eight one-hundredths of a cent, or within two ing to place it in comparison with his in this particular case. one--hundredths of the rates imposed by the act of 1890. Mr. VEST. There is no use to bandy words. The next sugar upon. the. list. is Cuba centrifugal, testing 96., Me. ALDRICH. No; we will await the result. and I would price 3cents, the duty1.21~and a differential duty of thirty-eight not ha;ve it otherwise. 1 desire that the American refiners one-hundredths, as against fifty one-hu:ndredths in the existing should have the American market, but I do not want to give law. This, of course~ is a very important grade of sugar, grow- them any more than an adequate protective duty upon their ingm.oreandmo.reimpol"tant everyday. It will be seen that in product. 1 am not now, however, discussing the adequacy of this particular grade the differential rats is not so, great by this duty. I am trying to ascertain exactly what the effect of twelve one-hundredths as it is in the existing law, but in all the this paragraph will be upon the typical sugars of the world, other grailes it is substantiBJ.ly the same ctr greater. and; I say the- position 1 h:1ve taken, based on the statement I do not wish to be understood, however, as saying that these which I have-submitted, is. impregnable ~ There is no possibility differential rates as between raw and Fe-fined sugars furnish an of arriving at any COfrel-usien o-th-er than that I have stated to the accurate measure of the value of these duties for protective puu- Senate. · · poses to American refiners. I should not be doing justice, I am I was about saying,, however, that this statement taken alone sUTe, to them if I should assert thatthea& dilierentiall."'ates had w:ould notcreate an. ac:eurate impression. as to. the effect. of the been imposed for their protection or that their imposition would bill;~ I do ~ot cl~ and I think. no one can claim fairly, that have this effect. That is not the-precise question whi~.h I now the eighty-elght.one-hundradthsoi a. cent perpounddifferential have in hand. I am trying in the first instance to as.certain duty impose{) between jaggery sugar and English granulated is what relative rates are actually imposed by this measure upon: to that extent_ a protection to-the American refiner. raw sugars and refined. I have gtvennio.reor-less thought to the question of the effect The table r have submitted shows conclusively- that as far a& of a uniform ad valorem :rate- upon manufactured products in. the rates imposed by the bill are concerne-d there is an average different-sta.gas of manufacture-. difference in rates on: ra.wand refined of forty-eighthun..dredths, This is the 1~al que.stioo involved in. the: discu:ssiim here. I approximating very nearly the statement made by the Senator believe it will b& found on carefnle.xaminati~n that the o.aly:rule from Ioyva in that regard. There can be no qu.estio_n about the bjJ which t01measure the effect of this ad valorem rate as a pro fact that the bill does impose diffe-rential rates· upon. refined tecti.vedutyist.o:ascer-trunfirstthecostof refiningsugarsa.broad,. sugn.rs on an average forty-eight hundredths of a cent higher tha.tJs the mechanical process of hling raw sugar& and refining than those imposed upon raw sugars. them without regard to shrinkage, and add to this ~he ordinary In considering the effect of th.ese rates unon the various in- . profit to th~ refiner, and then take 40 per ce!l ton this aggregate dustries concerned, another important fact must be- taken into and you Will have the amount of protection afforded by the consideration, and that is that the lowe1·-grade sugars contain· ad valorem .rate. . . . . a much smaller per cent of sacch-ari.n.e matter or pure sugar. ~he loss m refi~mg these var1o~ grades of. sugars m. the For instance, Palmyra jaggery contains only8Q per- eent of pure , Umted States and mGermany ~~d ~n England IS su!Jsfuntially sugar, 20 per cent being impurities of various kinds. iloilo . th~ &1tma. A man: who. buysPhil}.ppme Island sugars m Engl~d sugars contain but. Sit per- cent of sugar with 17 per cent of im- o.r m.Gel!many ~d makes t~em n;tti? granulated sugars loses the purities. So, in order i'O gauge as accuTa.tely as may be the- same-numb~r of po.u~ds by Impurities that a man loses whore- effect these various rates would have. upon the refining indus- fines them m the Umte_d States . . trie3 of the country, it is necessary to go a step further in the The !Dethods of refinmg ar~ substantially the sam~ In all the consideration of this question. · ?ount1:1es. If vye can. ascertam (and we can asc~r~am approx- Mr. FRYE. When the Sen.ator is finding the differential rate · Imateiy) what it costs /German refiners. or E~hsn refiners to :he:findstheaverageatforty-eightone-hundredthsunderthe bill, take the sugars of the. world and make. them mto g~anulated I ask him whether he has included in that the differential rate s~ar, then I repeat we shall have a b.aslS very nearly if not en- which the bill itself makes in favor of refined. sugar? tirely accurate for ascertaining the protective effect of this 40 Mr. ALDRICH. Yes· that is all taken into aecoun-t. per cent ad valorem to the sugar refiners. Mr. FRYE. So it makes it tw·o one-hundre-dths less than th& I ...as~ the Senate to keep in mi!ld this distinction: that the cost McKinley act. of ~ raw sugars and makmg them into refined,. growing . . . out of losses inherent in. the pro.cesst tha~ is, from impurities, is Mr. ALDRICH. Yes; I have ta.ken. Engl:sh gra~uilated as the same the world over; but that there is a difference in the the standard for refined sugars. Of course,~ English gran?· cost of the mechanical processes involved in taking sugar in its ~ate.d the one-tenth does not appear, .as there IS no b .' - I 5756 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 5, I believe that the rule which I have applied to refined sugar is refiner of about two-tenths of a cent a pound, which added to tha the rule which must apply as to the effect of uniform ad valorem specific rate& make an aggregate duty of about forty-six and rates upon all products in various stages of manufacture. For one-half hundredths as agafnst sixty hundredths imposed by instance, to illustrate what I mean, we will suppose that a duty the act of 1890. of 50 per cent is imposed upon pig iron and that pig iron is The Senator from Missouri yesterday called attention to the worth abroad $8 a ton._ That would be a duty of$4 a ton. Now, fact that at the time of the passage of the act of 1890 there was we will suppose that the foreigncostof making pig iron into bar what was called a sugar trust in existence in the State of New iron is $8 a ton-of course I am not taking the figures as even ap York, and I flnd upon an examination that the Senator from proximately correct, but I only take them for illustration. Missouri is correct at least to this extent. There was in 1890 a Suppose it costs $8 a ton abroad to make pig iron into bar combination of certain refiners in New York. It was not the iron, and the same rate of 50 per cent is levied, the additional same organization as that now in existence. It did not include protection and the only protection to the person in the United the large Philadelphia refineries and others now included in the States who makes bar iron from imported pig iron would be 50 American Sugar Refining Company. 'rheSenator undoubtedly per cent of that additional cost, or the$! a ton additional. We is correct in stating that there was an organization in existence would have 50 per cent of the total cost of $16, or $8 a ton duty, and that tbeir certificates were offered for sale on the New York of which $! a ton would be to offset the duty upon pig iron, and market, but I suggest to that Senator that thatfact has nothing $4 would be 50 per cent upon the additional cost abroad of mak whatever to do with the rates imposed by the act of 1890, and I ing the pig iron into bar iron. think I shall convince him of that before I am through. So the rule which I have laid down as to the effects of this ad Mr. HALE. Let me ask the Senator if at that time there valorem duty is I think a safe one to be followed in ascertaining were any such remarkable transactions and fluctuations and larg~ extent of protection in all cases. purchases of the stock of the company as have characterized The committee in many cases have suggested uniform ad the present season within the last two months. valorem rates. In many instances additional ad valorem rates Mr. ALDRICH. No; there were not. have been added at every stage of the process of manufacture. Mr. HALE. Nothing of the kind. In some cases the ad valorem rate has been reduced upon the Mr. VEST. There were over $800,000,000 of certific~.tes sold finer manufacture. There seems to have been no consistence in in 18"90. the action of the committee in this respect. Mr. ALDRICH. Now, let us examine what was done by the The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. JONES] is the only Senator act of 1890, so far as the differential rates on raw and refined who has had any connection with this bill who has yet under sugars are concerned. taken in any way to explain its effect and furnish any data to Mr. VEST. What did I understand the Senator to reply? sustain his position. That Senator arrives at his conclusion as Mr. ALDRICH. I stated there were no considerable fluctua to the effects of the sugar duty by taking the 12! cents per hundred tions in the price of the stock or the trust certificates as they were pounds specific and adding to it two one-hundredths of a cent a then called, as I remember it, between the time when the bill pound, which he says is the only additional benefit given tore was first reported and its final passage through the House. finers by the 40 per cent ad valorem rate. That I may not mis Mr. VEST. If the Senator will permit me I do not know what represent lrtm, I will read from his printed statement. I had he calls fluctuations, but that stock went up 31 points. stated from Mr. Havemeyer's published article in regard to this Mr. ALDRICH. Between what da.t-es? · matter that the difference between beet sugar (88 analysis) and Mr. VEST. In a month. German granulated, the two kinds of sugar selected by the Sen Mr. ALDRICH. At what date? ator from Arkansas for the basis of his computation, was fifty Mr. VEST. In a little over three weeks. sevenone-hundredthsof a cent a pound. The Senator from Ar Mr. ALDRICH. What are the dates? kansas said: Mr. VEST. I think it wasin themonthofMay; from May until I assert that the difference between the two is twenty one-hundredths in along· about the 1st o! June. I had all the stock market reports stead of fifty-seven one-hundredths. here yesterday. The Senator was absent. They showed the And he said further along: same fluctuations and showed the sale of the stock certificates It, as I have stated, the marH:et quotations show but six-hundredth~ of a in 1890 to the amount of $800,500,000-8,629,000 shares. cent difference in the two, then the sugar refiners get instead of forty one Mr. ALDRICH. The action which the Senator complains of hundredths of a cent, as asserted by the Senator from Iowa awhile ago, a did not take place until July or August, and it certainly would small fraction over two one-hundredths of a cent margin. That much they will get as a. protection by reason ot this 40 per cent tax. and in addition to have had no effect upon the stock market in Mav or June. . that they get the one-eighth of a cent, or twelve and one-half one-hundredths Mr. HALE. I was asking the Senator to compare the two ot a. cent. periods with reference to the report and passage of the bill, that This raises the question at once as to what is the relative dif- of 1890 and that which we have seen during the last two months , ference iw price between German beet sugar of 88 analysis in the year 1894, and whether any such situatiDn of the stock and German granulated. I have here on this point a telegram market with reference to sugar was disclosed at that time as dated three days ago from Czarnikow, the well-known sugar now. broker of London, who is, I think, the highest English author Mr. VEST. I say there was, and I had the data here yester ity, in which he E~ays: day to show it. Whiie the bill was pending in the House of Beets generally fully 28. under granulated, but sometimes 2s. 3d., seldom Representatives that stock was put up and down upon reports lB. 9d. Beets first tour months 189! avera.g~d 128. 5jd. ; granulated, lis. 6fd. from Washington. I brought the files of the newspapers here The difference for this four months' average is 2s. and 3ld. be showing identically the same old processes, the stock market tween German granulated and beets, or a difference of ap:prox manipulated upon rumors from Washington that the committee imately fifty one-hundredths of a cent. In the quotations prmted was going to do this and that. It is a duplicate of the reports by Mr. Havemeyer the difference is shown to be fifty-seven that we have now. We did not have any committee of investi one-hundredths. I have also a statement furnished by Willett & gation at that time, it is true, but we had the same lies, the same Gray, of the Sugar Trade Journal, in which they say: fabrications, the same attacks upon public men. · 1. The average price of German raw beets 88° analysis, tree on board Ham The Ways and Means Committee of the House was charged burg, J~uary 1 to May 29, five months, is 128. 4!d. per 112 pounds, or, say, with receiving the refiners through the back door and having 2.69 cents per pound free on board Hamburg, t>r 2.82 cents per pound deliv- · the matter manipulated. The Finance Committee of the Sen ered in New York. 2. The average price of German granulated free on board Hamburg, Jan ate was charged the same way. So all this stuff about there be· llary 1 to May 29, five months, is Hs. 5~d., or, say, 3.15 cents per pound free ing no paralel to this case amounts to nothing. on board Hamburg, or 3.28 cents per pound d~livered in New York. Mr. ALDRICH. I am not dealing with that question at this Or a-difference of 46 cents a hundred pounds. Here are three moment; but I will say to the Senator from Missouri that I was different statements, all from parties entitled to great consider reasonably familiar with the legislation after the bill reached ation, taking difl'erent periods, however, as the basis of their the Senate, and I never heard any intimation from any source computation, showing substantially what I have already stated, of the nature which the Senator now suggests. · that the difference in price between German beets from which In fact it had gone from my mind entirely that a trust was German granulated is made and German granulated is about organized at that time. My impression was that it was organ half a cent a pound. ized at a later day. Certainly, if there were any fluctuations in Mr. ALLISON. H that be true, then the differential is two the stock market they did not occur from any action taken by tenths of a cent. Congress, as I think I shall be able to show even the Senator Mr. ALDRICH. T w-o:tenths of a cent, confirming the state from Missouri on his own statement of facts. ment which I had already made in regard_to my own opinion as Mr. HALE. Will the Senator from Rhode Island let me sa,y to the effect of this bill. In fact, from whatever· standpoint you a word in reply to the Senator from Missouri? exa;mine the question you are irresistibly led to the same con Mr. ALDRICH. Certainly. clusion, that the ad valorem rate proposed by this act does give Mr. HALE. I did not ask the question because- I had any 11. c:li1Ierential and discriminating duty in favor of the American doubt about it, for I had looked up the matter of the compari· 1894. CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD-SENATE. son of the two years. Whatever the Senator from Missouri may tion involved in the change considered by the committee was say about there being any conditions in 1890 like the lamentable whether or not we were to have free sugars. conditions which we have beheld in this year, everybody with The bill as it was first reported imposed a duty of 35 per cent an average recollection knows that no such state of affairs ex- upo~ raw s:ugar. Then came up the very serious question for the isted then as has existed this year. If there had been any such consideratiOn of the Committee on Ways and Means of the change in the market at the critical time when the bill was House, as to whether they would give the people of the United being manipulated in that year by Republican hands, we would States free sugar. They considered that question for days. have never ceased to hear the Senator from Missouri declaim- They finally decided to take all duties off raw sugar and give a ing against us and making his point. But everybody knows differential rate upon refined sugar. That was the question _ that it passed without notice. which agitated the committee. Now, let us see what effect that The transactions were small compared with what they are now. had upon the refiners,-.and if there was any reason in the change The trust itself was not recognized. Hardly anybody knew of why the certificates of the sugar trust should have advanced. its existence. Even the members of the Committee on Finance The act of 1883 imposed differential rates upon refined sugars did not know of it, and there was then no scandal tainting the obove raws of three-fourths of a cent J:er pound on sugars be air as there has been this year; and everybody knows it. The tw~en 13and 16,and Hcents on sugars above No. 20 Dutch stan- common recollection settles that question. dard. So the refiners at that time had a protective duty ranging Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President- from three-fourthsof acentto1t cents. The action of the Ways Mr. VEST. Will the Senator from Rhode Island permit me? and Means Committee of the House to which the Senator alludes ThePR~SIDlNGOFFICER ( Mr. BERRYinthechair). Does took all the differential dutv off sugars between 13 and 16, or the Senator from Rhode Island yield to the Senator from Mis- a reduction of three-fourths of a cent a pound in their protec souri? tion, and it reduced the duties on sugars above No. 20 from_H Mr. VEST. We are to vote at !o'clock, and therefore I ma)re to four-tenths of acentperpound. If there was anything in that no excuse in interjecting what I have to say. I have in my action which led the sugar-trust certificates to go up I should hand now an attack made on the Finance Committee by leading like to have the Senator from Missouri point it out. Republican papers of this country in regard to the changes the Mr. SHERMAN. I wish to call the attention of the Senator. committee made in the sugar schedule of 1890, in which they from Rhode Island and the Senator from Missouri to a state imposed 60cents protection upon refined sugar when the House ment I have here in a report made to the other House. The of Representatives had only put 16 cents on the hundred pounds. Senator from Missouri has repeatedly insisted that the exist The Senator from Maine has the hardihood to stand here and ing sugar trust was organized before the passage of the McKin say that this trust did not attract any attention when they sold ley bill. I have here the evidence in a report we have, and it on the stock market in 1890 8,629,000 shares of $100 a share, was mainly gotten up by the Hon. JoHN DE WITT WARNER, a making $800,000,000 or more. Heretofore we have been told Democratic member of the other House, in which he gives the there was no trust then; and now that the Senator fr9m Rhode histqry oi this organization: Island has his attention called back to it, he says he recollects On this date, January 12, tan- there was a trust after I have brought in evidence to show it. That was after tlle passage of the McKinley bill- ... Mr. ALDRICH. I am greatly surprised at the hardihood of the "Sugar R-efineries Company " (sugar trust) ceased to exist. the Senator from Missouri standing in his pla{}e and asserting That wasa comparatively small and unimportantorganization. that "!'e r~ised the duty from six~en one-hundredths cent a He says: , pouna to SIXty one-hunred~hs cent In 1890. "The American Sugar Refining company" began business with the Mr. VEST. I say you did. . . prop~rtieso! the!ormercompanytra.nsferredtothem. The American Sugar Mr. ALDRICH. I say nothmg of the kmd took place and I I Refirung Company is regll}arly organized under the laws or the State of New 't I ·11 t k h S<> to ' t te t- Th 'S Jersey, with capital of 12<>,000,000 preferred stock, bearing 7 per cent cumn- can prove 1 • • WI a e t e -..na r S own B a men · e .ena- la.tive interest, but having no further claim to division of profits, and $25,- tor says that In March, 1890! the Ways and Means Committee 000,000 of common stock entitled to such QJ.vidends as may be declared from reported a bill with 35per cent duty on sugar up to No.l6 and timetotime. Also$IO,OOO,OOOo!6percentbonds. 40 per cent ad valorem above No. 16, and he states that this The previous concern had only $8,900,000capital. It was com- schedule imposed a different.ial duty of sixteen one-hundredths paratively a small affair. The real sugar trust, as it is called of a cent a pound. was orga.nized on the 12th day of January, 1891, some three 0 ~ Mr. VEST. On refined sugar. four months after the passage of the McKinley bill. Mr. ALDRICH. On refined sugar? Mr. BRICE. May I ask my colleague a question? Mr. VEST. Yes. Mr. SHERMAN. Certainly. I do not want to interfere with Mr. ALDRICH. Now, I will convict the Senator from the the_Senator from Rhode Island, however. statements of his own colleagues upon this very question. Com- Mr. ALDRICH. I do not wish to prolong the discussion. It mon rumor says, and I believe ithasbeensubstantiatedrecently is only ten minutes until the vote is to betaken. by the Secretary of the Treasury and by the leading Democratic Mr. BRICE. I merely wish to ask one question. What was membera of the Finance Committee, that the Secretary of the the capital of the sugar trust in June, 1890, the stock of which Treasury recommended a schedule in this bill of 40 per cent on was dealt in on the New York Stock Exchange? raw sugars and 45 per cent on refined sugars. The Democratic· Mr. SHERMAN. My impression is it was $8,900,000. members of that committee say in their printed testimony, under Mr. BRICE. It was $50,000,000. oath, that the reason why they did not adopt it was that it gave Mr. ALDRICH . . That does not a{}cord with my remembrance. the refiners more benefit than the schedule which was finally Mr. BRICE. What rise in stock, il any, was produced bvthe adopted of 4.0 per cent plus one-eighth and one-tenth. action of the Republican Congress in June, 1890, in passing the Mr. VEST. That has nothing to do with it. McKinley bill? It was 32 per cent, from 63 t_o 93; making nearly Mr. ALDRICH. It has everything to do Fith it. Here is a $20,000,000 rise in the stock produced by the action of your com- difference of 5 per cent ad valorem, which was suggested by the mittee and the passage of your bill. - committee in 1890, and the Senator says then it only makes a Mr. ALDRICH. The junior Senator from Ohio is usually difference of 16 cents on the hundred pounds. The committee accurate in his statements of what takes place on the New York says on a similar proposition to be submitted to the Senate that Stock Exchange, but this time he is quite mistaken. The Me it would impose higher differential rates than the existing sched- Kinley bill passed the House of Representatives in April 1890 -ule 40 per cent plus one-eighth and one-tenth. This simple and not in June, as stated by the Senator. ' ' problem in mathematics will show the Senator that he is greatly Mr. BRICE. June is the time when I take it the bill was in in error in his statement about 16 cents on the hundred differ- the Senate. It was in the year 1890. ence. Mr. ALDRICH. The. Senator said in June, and the Senator :Mr. VEST. I am not way off. It is 16 cents on the hundred from Missouri said between May and June. The McKinley act pounds. passed the other House in April, 1890, and was taken up in the Mr. ALDRICH. Let us see whether it is or not. Thirty-five Senate for action on the 18th of July, 1890, and there was no ac per cent on 2! cents a pound, which wa.<:~ the average price of tion of any kind taken between these dates. So il there was anv i·aw sugars at that time, is eighty-seven and one-half hundredths rise in the value of trust certificates, it arose from some other cent per pound. Forty per cent on 3! cents, which was the price cause than from any change which took place by the action of- of granulated at that time, is 1.4, or a difference of fifty-two and Mr. BRICE. Will the Senator from Rhode Island allow me one-half hundredths per pound, instead of sixteen hundredths, to interrupt him? and the schedule, as finally-reported to the House, gave only Mr. ALDRICH. Certainly. four-tenths of 1 cent per pound differen~ial. The action of- the Mr. BRICE. What rise took place between May and Octo- \Va.ys and Means Committee therefore reduced the differential ber, at the time when the representatives of the sugar trust had rate 12~ cents a hundred pounds instead of increasing it from 16 made their agreement with thecontrolling committee in charge centsperhundredpoundstofour-t~nths ofacentperpound. But of the bill, which produced a rise of 32 per cent in stock, from that was not the question involved in that change. The ques- 63 to 95, on a total capitalization of $50,000,000? 1 5758 O'ONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 5, Mr. ALDRICH. The Senator's first statement was that the Mr. ALDRICH. I am simply uudertaking to show by iacts rise took place between May and June. and by figures exactly what the effect of the bill is. I1 the actoJ Mr. BRICE. At the time the committee of the Republican 1890 gave an ideal protective duty to the refiners the pending party was in charge of this subject, and engaged in making bill treats the refiners equally well. That is what I say. I do their agreement with the sugar refiners. not desire to have Senators upon the other side masquerading Mr. ALDRICH. I do not know what the Senator from Ohio as opponents of the sugar trust when they are yielding every inch means-by "agreement with the sugar refiners." I can .assure that the sugar trust has asked them to yield. the Senator of one thing, that no agreement was made m 1890 Mr. VEST. They have not done anything of the kind. with the sugar refiners, and that all the ag-reements which have Mr. ALDRICH. The rates in the bill have been fixed at the been made with the sugar refiners by anyone connected with dictation of the American Sugar Refining Company, and no one the Senate have been made in years and month.s long subsequent knows that better than the Senator from ll'iissouri. to October, 1890. I stated yesterday that, with the exception of· Mr. VEST. Who dictated the 60 cents that the Senator put two Philadelphia refiners, there was no representative o1 the upon refined sugar in 1890? trust or the sugar refiners before the Finance Committee, or Mr. ALDRICH. Nobody presumed to dictate to that com who made any,statements to any members of the Finance Com mittee. mittee, or undertook to use any influence with the committee as Mr. VEST. The Senator admitted here that he did it. He to the proper rates to be fixed on refined sugars. called it the solicitation of Philadelphia sug,ar refiners. But I have been diverted from the statement I was engaged Mr. ALDRICH. By no ma.nner of means. in making in regard to the action in 1890. I say to the Sena Mr. VEST. The Senator said it, and it is in the REcoRD. tor from Missouri that the change from 35 and 40 per cent to Mr. ALDRICH. Oh, no. - four-tenths of a cent on sugars was in all cases in the direction Mr. VEST. He said he could not resist their argument, and -of lower d.ifferential rates instead of higher. · that their logic was irresistible. Mr. HIGGINS. Was that change made by the Senate? Mr. ALDRICH. Oh, no. I stated that the Philadelphia re Mr. ALDRICH. It was made by the House of R-epresenta finers came before the committee and said they desired a cer tives. tain rate. We gave them a portion oi the rate which they asked, · Mr. VEST. Will the Senator from Rhode Island permit me not on account of any dictation on the part of the Philadelphia to read a statement made in August, 1890? I read from the New refiners or any member of the Senate, but being protectionists York Times: because we believed the rate was proper and just. The Senator The protective duty of 5 per cent- from Missouri is not a protectionist. That is in the House provision. :Mr. VEST. No; I am not. The protective-duty o:r 5 per cent was estimated by the well-known house of Willett & '3-ra.y (to1·merly Wlliett & Ha.mlen} in its trade ctrcula.r to be 1\ir. ALDRICH. He is opposed to protection and is opposed equal to about one-sixth or a cent per pound, and that est imate was gener to levying protective duties. Yet he puts a prohibitory rate ally accepted. For convenience, it may fairly be oa.lled 16 cents per hundred upon refined sug-ar at the dictation, I repeat, of the sugar re pounds. The telegram in which the decision or the Republican members or finers. the committee was announced was sent to the press at a late hour in the night, and is said to have been prepared by someone representing Mr. Mc The VICE-PRESIDENT. The hour of 1 o'clock has arrived. Kinley and his assoc!J.tes. The following extract from it appears to have The pending question is on agreeing to the amendment pro represented their opinion as to the p-robable etrect of the proposed rates: posed by the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. JONES], which will '.rhen it quotes a telegram sent to the press which corroborates be stated. ' my statement that the change was 16 cents on the hundred The SECRETARY. In paragraph 182, line 1, page 39, after the pounds. That was equivalent to the 5 per cent. word "effect," strike out" July" and insert "January;" in the Mr. ALDRICH. This is a matter of simple mathematical same line, after the word" and," strike out" ninety-four'' and calculation. You can take 35 per cent on the raw sugars and 40 insert "ninety-five;" in line 2, after tlie word "and/' strike out per cent on the refined and find .out what it is just as well as "thereafter;" and after the word " act," in line 4, insert "after Willett & Gray, or the New York '.rimes, or the Senator from January 1, 1895;" so as to mak6 the paragraph read: Missouri. It does not need any expert to ascertain what the 182. That so much or the a.ct entitled "An act to reduce revenue, equalize effect of that duty was. As I said, the only question in this duties. and for other purposes," approved October 1, 1890, as provides for change was a question of the change from a duty on sugars to and authorizes the issue of licenses to produce sugar, and for the payment free sugar. That was the only thing that was before the com- of a bounty to producers of sugar from beets, sorghum, or sugar cane grown in the United States, or from maple sap produced within the United States, mittee. _ / be, and the same is hereby, repealed, to take etl'ect January 1, 1895; and it Mr. VEST. Let me ask the Senator from Rhode Island one shall be unlawful to issue any license to produce sugar or to pay any bounty question? I~~~~he PI'Oduction of sugar of any kind under the said act after January 1, Mr. ALDRICH. Certainly. Mr. VEST. Did not his Finance Committee give to the re The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the finers an ideal protection when they gave them free raw sugar amendment proposed by the Senator from Arkansas. and 60 cents protection on the refined? Mr. TELLER and Mr. ALDRICH called for the yeas and Mr. ALDRICH. Fifty cents. nays. Mr. VEST. Sixty cents. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded Mr. ALDRICH. Fifty cents. to call the roll. Mr. VEST. You ga ve them 6[) cents; you gave them 50 cents Mr. DANIEL (when his name was called). I am paired with and the one-tenth against German sugars, and that was the only the Senator from Washington [Mr. SQUffiE]. Otherwise I should competition they had, which makes 60 cents. . vote •' yea." Mr. ALDRICH. If that is an ideal protection the pending Mr. GORDON (when his name was called). I am paired with bill gives refiners an ideal protection. That is all I have to say. the Senator from Iowa [Mr. WILSON]. Mr. VEST. It does not, because we put a duty on the raw Mr. FRYE (when Mr. GoRMAN'S name was called). The material. senior Senator from Maryland [Mr. GORMAN] is detained from Mr. ALDRICH. There is no 'Substantial difference in protec the Chamber by illness. He is paired to-day with the Senator tion given. from Nevada[Mr. JONESl. Mr. VEST. If the pending bill does the same thing, why is Mr. McLAURIN (when his name was called). I am paired ~he Senator from Rhode Island opposing it now? with the junior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. DIXON]. I Mr. ALDRICH. I am not opposing it, but I am attempting transfer my pair to the junior Senator from South Carolina to show that the Senators upon the other side of the Chamber [Mr. lRBY] and vote "yea." are trying deliberately to deceive the American people as to the The roll call was concluded. amount of protection given in the bill. Mr. HARRIS. I desire to statethatmycolleague [Mr. BATE] Mr. VEST. The Senator wants to retain the McKinley act, is paired with the Senator from Vermont [Mr. PROCTOR], both which is the paradise of the trust-- of whom are absent under the orders of the Senate. If my col Mr. ALDRICH. I certainlv want-- . league were here he would vote '' yea." Mr. VEST. Sixty cents on. refined sugar and free raw mate Mr. ALLISON. I wish to state that my colleague [Mr. WIL rial. We are fighting that trust here to-day and we are doing SoN] is detained from the Senate by illness. He is paired with the best we can to cut down that protection. Now, if the Sena the Senator from Georgia [Mr. GORDON]. If my co!)eaguewere tor is honest in his pretense, if he believes that the pending bill here he would vote "nay." does what he tells us it does, why does he not let it alone and let The result was announced-yeas 40, nays 31, as follows: the sugar schedule. go through as it is? In one breath he de YEAS-40. nounces it as a protective measure, as a sell-out, as a give away Allen, CatTery, George, Jones, ..\.rk. to the tt·ust, and in the next breath he says the bill ought not Berry, Call, Gibson, Kyle, to b2 passed; it ought not to become a law, it is an outrage, and Blackburn, Camden, Gray, Lindsay, B:ancha.rd, Cockrell, Ha.rrls, McLaurin, then he takes the converse of that pro,Position and argues for Briel\ Coke, Hunton, McPherson, another ho,m' upon the other side. But5 Faulkner. Jarvis, Martin, 1894. OONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 5.759 Mills, Palmer, Roach, Vilas, • The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair will state, in response Mitchell, Wis. Pasco, Smith, Voorhees, to the inquiryof the Senator from Nebraska, that, as corrected, Morl!an, Pugh, Turpie, Walsh, Murphy, Ransom, Vest, White. the vote stands-yeas 38, nays 31. NAYS-31. The Senator from Illinois [Mr. PALMER] has called fo:r the · Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Platt, reading of the amendment proposed by the Senator from Ne Allison, Frye. McMillan, Power, braska [Mr. MANDERSON]. Theall}endmentwill be again read. Cameron, Gallinger, Manderson, Quay, The Secretary read theamendmehtproposed by Mr. MANDER Carey, ·nale Morrill, Sherman, Chandler, Hansbrough, Patton, Shoup, SON. Cullom, Hawley, . Peffer, Teller, The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question ison theamendment Da.vis, .Higgins, Perkins, Washburn. Pettigrew, proposed by the Senator fromNebraska,on which the Secretary Dolph, Hoar, will call the roll. NOT VOTING-14. The Secrehry proceeded to call the rell. ·. Bate, Gorman, Mitchell, Oregon Wilson. Daniel, Hill, Proctor, Wolcott. Mr. HARRIS (when Mr. BATE'S name was called). I an Dixon, Irby, Squire, nounce for the last time to-day that my colleague [Mr. BATE] is Gordon, Jones, Nev. Stewart, paired with the Senator from Vermont [Mr. PROC'l'OR]. Those ·So the amendment was agreed. Senators are both absent under order of the Senate. My col Mr. MANDERSON. I offer the amendment which I send to league would vote "nay" ii present. Mr. BRICE (wjlen his name was called). I am paired with the desk. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the the junior Senator from Colorado [Mr. WOLCOTT]. _ Senator from Nebraska will be stated. • - Mr. DANIEL (when his name was called). 1: am paired with The SECRETARY. It is proposed to strike out paragraph 182, the Senator from Washington [Mr. SQumE]. Otherwise I should vote ''nay," and I presume he would vote "yea." and insert: Mr. GORDON (when his name was called). I am paired with That until July 1, 1905, the proVisions of the act entitled "An act to reduce revenue, equalize duties, and for other purposes," approved October 1, 1890, the Senator from Iowa [Mr. WILSON]. authorizing the issue of licenses to produce sugar, and for the payment of a. Mr. McLAURIN (when his name was cailed). I am paired bounty to the producers or sugar !rom beets, sorghum, or sugar cane grown in the United States, or from maple sap produced within the United States, with the junior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. DIXON], but I contained in paragraphs231, 232, 233,234,235, and 236of said act shall continue transfer that p.:1ir for the day to the junior Senator from South in full force and effect. Carolina rMr.lRBY], and vote" nay." The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is o~ the amendment The roll call was concluded. proposed by the Senator from Nebraska. Mr. FRYE. TheseniorSenatorfrom Mal'yland (Mr: GORMAN] Mr. MANDERSON. On that I ask for the yeas and nays. is paired with the Senator from Nevada. [Mr. JONES]. The yeas and nays were ordered. The result was announced-yeas 32, nays 40; as foll-ows: Mr. HALE. Before the roll call is commenced I trust the YEAS-32. Chair will see that there is complete order in the Chamber, and Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Pettigrew, that it is maintained during t.he roll call . . There has been great Allison, Frye, McMillan, Plat~ cameron, Gallinge1·, Manderson, Power, confGsion about pairs and the announcement of pairs,_and unless Carey, Hale, Mitchell, Oregon Quay, Senators can hear the announcement of pail·s from time to time Chandler, Hansbrough, Morrill, Sherman, it is impossible to see whether members who are absent are pro CUllom, Hawley, Patton, Shoup, tected in the vote. Davis, Higgins, Peffer, Teller, Mr. PALMER. I ask that the amendment be again raad. Dolph, Hoar, Perk.i.nS, Washburn. The VICE-PRESIDENT . . The amendment proposed by the NAYS-tO.. Senator from Nebraska will be again stated. Allen, Faulkner, Lindsay, Pugh, , Mr. GALLINGER.. Before that is done, I desire simply to Berry, George, McLaurin, Ransom, add a word to what the Senator from Maine has stated as to Blackburn, Gibson, McPherson, Roach, Blanchard, Gray, Martin, Smith, order being preserved in the Senate Chamber. For instance, Butler, Harris, Mills, 'l'urpie, on the laBt vote, I think I am correct in saying-doubtless it Caffery, Hill, Mitchell, Wis. Vest, was owing to the confusion which occurred-the Senator from Call, Hunton, Morgan, Vilas, Camden, Jarvis, Murphy, Voorhees, Wisconsin [Mr. VILAS] voted. He stands paired with the Sena Cockrell, Jones, Ark. Palmer, Walsh, tor from Oregon (Mr. MITCHELL], who did not vote. It is very Coke. Kyle, Pasco, White. desirable, l take it, that we be extremely careful in having a proper record of the Senate made on these important questions. NOT VOTING-13. T he VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair can only request that Bate, Gordon, Proctor, Wolcott. Brice, Gorman, Squire, order ba preserved in the Chambel' during the roll call. Daniel, Irby, Stewart, :Mr. VILAS. I did vote inadvertently. I ask leave to with Dixon. Jones, Nev. Wilson, draw my vote. I now observe the Senator from Oregon [Mr. So the amendment was rejected. Ml'l'CHELL] is not here. The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request of Mr. MANDERSON. I offer an amendment,andaskconsentto read it before passing· it to the desk. I move strike out section the Senator from Wisconsin? The Chair hears none, and his to vote will· be withdrawn. · 182 and insert: That the bounties authorized to be paid to producers of sugar by section Mr. VILAS. I am obliged to the Senator from New Hamp 231 of the act entitled'' An act to reduce revenue, equalize duties, and for shire for calling my attention to it. other purposes," approved October 1, 1890, shall be reduced one-tenth part Mr. BRICE. I wish to state that I have a general pair with of the1r respective amounts, as prescribed in said act, each year, beginning with July 1, 18<15, and extending to July 1, 1905, incluslve, and shrtll there the Senator from Colorado [Mr. WOLCOTT]. I inadvertently after cease and dete1·mine, and with this modification paragraphs 231 232 voted upon the previous roll call, presuming my attention would 233, 23!l, 23:J, a:ijd 236 of said act -shall continue in full force and effect. ' ' be called to it by the seniorSenatorfrom Colorado[Mr. TELLER], in case of objection. I will withdraw my vote U he is of opinion The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amend that I should do so. ment proposed by the Senator irom NebraBka. The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection? Mr. MANDERSON. I call for the yea.s and nays. Mr. TELLE.H.. The confusion was so great that neither in The yeaB and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded the recapitulation of the vote nor at any other time did I hear to call the roll. · that the Senator had voted. I knew he wa.s paired. Mr. DANIEL (when his name was called}. I am paired with The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request the Senator from WaBhington [Mr. SQmRE], otherwise I should of the Senator from Ohio, that his vote be withdrawn? The vote " nay," and I presume he would vote " yea." Chair hears none, and it is so ordered. The roll call was concluded. Mr. MANDERSON. Howdothesewithdrawalsofvotesoper Mr. BUTLER. I rise for the purpose of announcing the pair ate upon the last amendment? of my colleague [Mr. IRBY] with the Senator from Rhode Island The VICE-PRE~IDENT. The Chair will announce-- [Mr. DIXON]. _ Mr. VILAS. The Senator from Oregon is now in the Cham The result was announced-yeas 34, nays 37; as follows: ber. I supposed he was here when the vote was taken and I YEAS--3!. voted inadvertently. ' Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Platt, Mr. TELLER. · It is too late for him to vote now. Allen, Frye, McMillan, Power. Allison, Oa.1linger, Manderson, Quay, Mr. HARRIS. It is too late to record a vote. Cameron, Hale, Mitchell, Oregon Sherman, Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I suppose it is too late to vote Carey, Hansbrough, Morrill, Shoup, I have .been detained unexpectedly from the Chamber. Of Chandler, Hawley, Patton, Teller, Cullom, Biggills, Peifer, Washburn. course, if I had been here, I should have voted with the majority Davis, Hoar, Perkin-s, of my party. Dolph, K:yte. Peuigrew, -- '· 5760 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE .5, NAYS-37. The yeas .and nays were ordered; and the Secretary proceeded .• Berry, George, Martin, Smith, to call the roll. Blackburn, Gibson, Mills, Turpie, Blanchard, Gray, Mitchell, Wis. Vest, Mr. BRICE (when his name was called). I am naired with Butler, . Harris, Morgan, Vilas, the junior Senator from Colorado [Mr. WOLCOTT]. • Caffery, Hunton, Murphy, Voorhees, Mr. GORDON (when his name was called). I am paired with Call, Jarvis, Palmer, Walsh, the Senator frombwa [Mr. WILSON]. Camden, Jones, Ark. Pasco, White. Cockrell, Lindsay, Pugh,• The roll call was concluded. Coke. McLaurin, Ransom, Mr. DANIEL. I announce my pair with the Senator from Faulkner, McPherson, Roach, Washington [Mr. SQUIREl. NOT VOTING--H. · The result was announced-yeas 34, nays 37; as follows: Bate, ·Gordon, Jones, Nev. ·wilson, Brice. Gorman, Proctor, Wolcott. YEAS-34. Daniel, Hill, Squire, Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Platt, Dixon, Irby, Stewart, Allen. Frye, McMillan, Power, Allison, Gallinger, Manderson, Quay, So the amendment wa,s rejected. Cameron, Hale, Mitchell, Oregon Sherman, Mr. MANDERSON. I offer an amendment, which I send to Carey, Hansbrough, Morrill, Shoup, Chandler, Hawley, Patton, Teller, the desk, and I will simply state that it may be understood, not Cullom, Higgins, Peffer, Washburn. designing to debate it at all, that this is a continuation until Davis, Hoar, Perkins, 1905 of the bounty under the McKinley act, and extending its Dolph, Kyle, Pettigrew, provisions to the producers of beets and sorghum sugar only. . NAYS-37. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the Berry, George, Martin, Smith, Senator from Nebraska will be stated. Blackburn, Gibson, Mllls, Turpie, The SECRETARY. It is proposed to strike out-section 182 and Blanchard, Gray, Mitchell, Wis. Vest, Butler, Harris, Morgan, Vilas, insert the following: Caftery, Hunton, Murphy, Voorhees, That until July 1, 1905, the provisions of the act entitled "An act to reduce Call, Jarvis, Palmer, Wa.lsh, revenue, equalize duties, and for other purposes," approved October 1,1890, Camden, Jones, Ark. Pasco, White. authorizing the issue of licenses to produce sugar and for the payment of a Cockrell, Lindsay, Pugh, bounty to the producers of sugar from beets, sorghum, or sugar cane grown Coke. McLaurin, Ransom, in the United States, or from maple san produced within the United States, Faulkner, McPherson, Roach, contained in paragraphs 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, and 236 of said act, shall con tinue in full force and eiJect: Provid4d, That the said bounty shall be paid • NO'l' VOTING-H. to the produeers in the United States of sugar from beets and sorghum only. Bate, Gordon, Jones, Nev. Wilson, The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment Brice, Gorman, Proctor, Wolcott. Daniel, Hill, Squire, proposed by the Senator from Nebraska. Dixon, Irby, Stewart, Mr. MANDERSON. On that I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded So the amendment was rejected. to call the roll. Mr. ALLISON. I offer an amendment to come in at the end Mr. DAN.JEL (when his name was called). I am paired with of the paragraph, the object of which is to enable the producers the Senator from Washington [1\fr. SQUIRE], as I have already of sugar to secure a bounty of 2 cents and to make the sugar announced. I should vote 11 nay " and he should vote ' 1 yea." if schedule of duties take effect immediately. he- were present. . The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the 'The roll call was concluded. Senatoz: from Iowa will be stated. Mr. GORDON. lam paired on this question with the Senator The SECRETARY. It is proposed to add at the end of para from Iowa [Mr. WILSON]. graph 182 the following proviso: The result of the vote was announced-yeas 31, nays 39; as fol Provided, That in lieu or the bounty provided for in said act, a bounty of lows: eight-tenths of a cent per pound shall be paid for sugar produced in the YEAS-31. United States during the year 189! under the provisions of said act. Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Platt, Mr. PETTIGREW. I wish to announce that on the vote just Allison, Frye, McMillan, Power, previous to the last I was temporarily absent from the Chamber. Cameron, Gallinger, Manderspn, Quay, If present I should have voted" yea." Carey. Hale, Mitchell, Oregon Sherman. Chandler, Hansbrough, Morrlll, Shoup, The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is em the amendment Cullom, · Hawley, Patton, Teller, proposed by the Senator from Iowa. Davis, Higgins, Pe:IJer, ·washburn. Mr. ALLISON and Mr. MANDERSON called for the yeas and Dolph, Hoar, Perkins, nays. NAYS-39. The yeas and n:1ys were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded Allen, Faulkner, McLaurin, Ransom, to call the roll. Berry, George, McPherson, Roach, Dlackburn, Gibson, Martin, Smith, /Mr. GORDON (when his name was called). I am paired with Blanchard, Gray, Mills, Turpie, the Senator from Iowa [Mr. WILSON]. Butler, Harris, 'Mitchell, Wis. Vest, The roll call was concluded. Catrery, Hunton, Morgan, Vilas, Call, Jarvis, Murphy, Voorhees, Mr. BRICE. I will state that on this question I am paired Camden, Jones, Ark. Palmer, Walsh, with the junior Senator from Colorado [Mr. WOLCOTT]. Cockrell, Kyle, Pasco, White. The result was announced--yeas 32, nays 40; as follows: Col{e, Lindsay, Pugh, YEAS-32. NOT VOTING-15. Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Pettigrew, Bate, Gordon, Jones, Nev. Stewart, Allison, Frye, McMillan, Platt, Brice, Gorman, Pettigrew, ·wilson, Cameron, Gallinger, Manderson, Power, Daniel, Hill, Proctor, Wolcott. Carey, Hale, Mitchell, Oregon Quay, Dixon, Irby, Squire, Chandler, Hansbrough, Morrill, Sherman, So amendment was rejected. Cullom, Hawley, Patton, Shoup, Davis, Higgins, Pefter, Teller, Mr.MANDERSON. Iofferanotheramendment. Iwillstate, Dolph, Hoar, Perkins, Washburn. before passing it to the desk, that it proposes a continuance of the McKinley bounty provision, confining it produqers of NAYS-40. to Allen, Faulkner, Lindsay, Pugh, sugar from beets and sorghum, and that the amount of the Berry, George, McLaurin, Ransom, bounty to be paid after January 1, 1895, shall be 1 cent per pound. Blackburn, Gibson, McPherson, Roach, The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amen9,ment proposed by the Blanchard, Gray, Martin, Smith, Butler, Harris, Mills, Turpie, Senator from Nebraska will be stated. Caffery, Hill, Mitchell, Wis. Vest, The SECRE'l'ARY. It is proposed to strike out paragraph 182 Call, Hunton, Morgan, Vilas, and insert: - Camden, Jarvis, Murphy, Voorhees, Cockrell, Jones, Ark. Palmer, Walsh, That until July 1, 1905, the provisions o! the act entitled "An act to reduce Kyle, Pascof White. revenue, equalize duties. and tor other purposes," approved October 1,1890, Coke, authorizing the issue of licenses to produce sugar and for the payment of a NOT VO'l'ING-13. bounty to the producers of sugar from beets, sorghum, or sugarcane grown Bate, Gordon, Proctor, , Wolcott. in the Unitecl Stat-es, or from maule sap produced within the United States, Brice,- Gorman, Squire, contained in paragraphs 231, 23'( 233, 234, 235, and 236 or said act shall con- Daniel, Irby, Stewart, ·, tinue in full force and effect: Provided, That the said bounty shall be paid to Dixon, Jones, Nev. Wilson, the producers in the United States of sugar from beets and sorghum only, and the amount of said bounty after January 1, 1895, shall be 1 ~ent per So the amendn:rent was rejected. pound. Mr. FRYE. I wish to ask the Senator from Iowa a question. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment As I understand it, if the House of Rept•esentatives agrees to proposed by the Senator from Nebraska. the action of the Senate on the amendiQ.ent which has just been Mr. MANDERSON. I ask for the yeas and nays. · 'Offered and voted upon, the sugar growers of Louisiana on this / 1894: - CONGRESSIONAL RE.OORD-SENATE. 57"61 year's crop get tl~e bOunty, and, in addition to. it, the benefit -of Mr. TELLER. As I undertook to say, the question whether the duty? · - the sugar growers of Louisia.na will get 2 cents bounty and the Mr. ALLISON. There is no doubt of that, I will say in an benefit of a tariff is not one of inference. A 2-cent bounty and swer to.the Senator. They will get 3t eents bounty instead of then whatever the duty may be is not a question of inference. 2 cents for- this year's crop. The 2-cent bounty is saved by this bill purposely, intentionally, Mr. MANDERSON.· I do not think that such notice is neces and avowedly, and nobody pretends that it is not. The duty sary, althoug-h the custom has grown up in the Senate to give takes effect at the time when the bounty is to be paid, or, at least, it, but I give notice now that upon all these questions on what it is to be paid upon all sugar raised this year. It may not be we term the sugar schedule I shall ask a separat,e and independ actually paid then, but it may be paid later. No man on this ent vote in the Senate when they will be open for debate. floor or anywhere else can demonstrate that the sugar growers Mr. ALLISON.- I also give notice that I shall offer my amend of Louisiana are not to receive a bounty' of $12,000,000, or there ment in the Senate when it will be open to debate. abouts, and a bounty in this case as absolutely certain as in the Mr. McLAURIN. I should like-to ask the Senator from Iowa other, because this is a kind of tax from which they are to have if his statement of the fact that the sugar growers of Louisiana the immediate benefitof eight or ten million dollars more. Here would get 3t cents bounty instead of 2 cents is not a mere mat are $20,000,000 to be paid to sugar growers of L ouisiana this yeat• ter of opinion with him? for their crop. Mr. ALLISON. I will say in response to the Senator from Mr. CAMDEN. Mr. President-- . Mississippi that it is a matter of as absolute demonstration as Mr. TELLER. I will not be interrupted now. that 2 and 2 make 4. We were told again and again feom that side of the Cham Mr. McLAURIN. Then, I·shouldlike to ask the Senator from ber that a bounty was obnoxious to Democratic sentiment and Iowa how that demonstration is shown? Is it not based upon to Democratic honesty. Mr. President, what is that but a the proposition that this duty of 1 cent a pound, going intoeffect bounty? Every man on that side of the Chamber has voted for on the 1st day of next January, will produce a cent and half a that bounty; every man has voted for it without the excuse that pound,. and then the bounty on this crop will produce the other it was necessary to preserve or protect that industry-a bonus 2 cents? · given to the Senators from that State for their votes in this Mr. ALLISON. Undoubtedly. Chamber on this bill. That is a great price to be paid for the Mr. McLAURIN. Then, that certainly is a mere matter of passage of this bill by the people of the United States; it is a great opinion. It can not be any matter of mathematical demonstra pricetopaythat this bill may put upon thepeopleof the United tion, as contended by the Senator from Iowa. Shtes who use sugar a tax of sixty or seventy million dollars Mr. TELLER. It is not a matter of opinion; it is a matter of everyyearaslong as it shall remain upon the statute books. . absolute certainty. Mr. President, I hope that the Senators from Louisiana will Mr. VEST. I beg the Senator's pardon, but I should like to cease to lecture us upon the enormity of bounties. I hope tlie know under the terms of the agreement if debate is in order? Democratic party in this Chamber will cease to lecture us upon Mr. ALLISON. We have passed paragraph 182. the enormity of paying bounties when here is a clean-cut bounty Mr. TELLER. We have passed from that paragraph. which is to be paid. It can not be· said that the sugar growers Mr. VEST. I do not know what was the agreement about it. of Louisiana at'e entitled to the whole o! it. If they could make Mr.ALL'ISON. We have passed from that paragraph, so that an equitable claim fol' 2 cents a pound, they could not make it the debate is not on that. for any more. When the Senator from Iowa who is sitting in The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senate is acting under the front of me [Mr. 'ALLISON] attempted to equalize this and do ten-minute rule, as the Chair is advised. . what they might claim with some equity they were entitled to, Mr. VEST. I asked for information. I was not present in the every Democratic vote on that side of the Chamber was agninst Senate when the agreement was made. that equalization, . and Senators on that side asserted, not in Mr. LODGE. Mr. President-- words but by their votes, their intention to secure to this in The VICE-PRES£DENT. The Chair has recognized the Sen dustry not only the bounty, but eight or nine million dollars ator from Colorado [Mr. TELLER] as entitled to the floor. more. Mr. TELLER. I do not want this interruption taken out of Mr. President, the Senators on that side of the Chamber can my time, for I only have ten minutes. not escape the result of theirvote,and itwill notdo for the Sen Mr. PEFFER. Mr. President, what is before the Senate? ator from Missouri [Mr. VEST], or any other Senator, to stand :.. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The paragraph will be read. up here and tell what we did in 1890. The American people Mr. TELLER. Not in my time, Mr. President. will bring you to book for that thing, Senators. You will have The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair will recognize the Sen to meet it on every stump in the United States. If you can ex ator from Colorado after the paragraph has been read. cuse it on the ground that you could not pass this bill in any Mr. HALE. Has paragraph 182 as amended been voted upon? other manner, you will have to show that this bill has great The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendments.have been agreed virtues and that it is to bring this country greater prosperity to. and save it from great adversity which would come to it under Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I wish to offer an amendment. I existing law, or the people will not acceptyourexcuses that you offer as paragraph 182~ what is printed on pages 39 and 40 of the give to the sugar planters this large sum of money as a gratuity, bill in small type. a sum which the Senators from that State declare to be improper., The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the a bounty, and yet they vote for it without hesitation. Senator from Arkansas will be stated. I do not think that this bill is the worst bill in many features T~e SECRETARY. It is.proposed to strike out paragraph 182! of it which has ever been passed, but it bas not merit enough and msert: in it to meet the vice of that vote, and no Senator need excuse 182!. On and after January 1, 1895, there shall be levied, collected, and paid himself or shield himself behind the plea that this is a matter on ~11 sugars and on all tank bottoms, sirups of cane juice or of beet juice of opinion. It 1s a matter of absolute demonstration. First, melada, concentrated melada, concrete and concentrated molasses; a duty or 40 per cent ad valorem; and upon all sugars above No. 16 Dutch standard the bounty is to be paid; and then the price of su(J'ar will be 1n color and upon all sugars which have been discolored there shall be levied raised in Louisiana by every Louisiana sugar raiser"' to the ex collected, and paid a duty of one-eighth of 1 cent per pound in addition to tent of the duty beyond question. There is a clean bounty. the said duty of~ percent ad valorem; and all sugars, tank bottoms, sirups of cane juice or of beet juice, melada, concentrated melada, con.vrete or con First, a pure bounty, and then a bounty by the way of a duty centrated molasses, which are imported from or are the product of any for they are both bounties-of$3.20 a hundred tmder anycalcula country which at the time the same are exported therefrom pays, directly tion which can be made, and under my calculation, whioh may or indirectly, a. bounty on the export thereof, shall pay a duty ot one-tenth of 1 cent per pound in addition to the foregoing rates: Provided, Tbatnoth not be good, it is more than 3i- cents a pound. ing herein contained shall be so construed as to abrogate or in any manner Mr. President, when Senators rise to defend that proposition impair or a.!Iect the provisions of thP treaty of commercial reciprocity con I do not want them to urift off to what was done by the Republi cluded between the United States and the King of the Hawaiian Islands on the 30th day of January, 1875 or the provisions of any acli of Congress here can committee in 1890. Let them go before the people and tell tofore passed for the ex:ecut1 on or the same. That on and after January 1 them what defense they have for this proceeding, and explain 1895, there shall be l~vied, collected, and paid on molasses testing. ' to them how our statements are untrue. Show to the people, if Mr. JONES oi Arkansas. I desire to leave out of the pro you can, that you did not understand it. That excuse will not posed amendment the words after" testing." in line 19 down to answer, because the statement was made here last night so plainly and including the word "testing," in line 21. ' that you could not but understand it, that you are to get $3.20on The SECRETARY. It is proposed to modify the amendment by every hundred pounds of sugar you make in Louisiana by this ~trikingoutafter the word "testing," in line 19, the words "test vote of yours to-day in this Chamber. . . mg 40') or less by the polariscope, and containing more than 20 Both the Senators from Louisiana told us yesterday that wool per cent of moisture, and on molasses testing; " so as to read: was not a proper subject of revenue duty, but that sugar was. That on and a!ter January 1.1895, there shall be levied, collected, and paid Wool brings $8,00::>,000 annually into the Treasury. The' Sen on molasses-above 40° and !lOt abo>e 56° polariscope, a duty of 2 cents per ators say in one breath that the revenue is not necessary, that gallon; U testing above 56° polariscope a duty of 4 cents per gallon. • they do not want it; and yet in the next breath, they tell us XXVI--.:.361 5762 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE ·5 ' that we must have a duty on sugar as a revenue duty, that we Mr. CAFFERY. I have not much to say, and I hope the Sen need it and must have it. ator will excuse me until I conclude. I do not intend to discuss this question any further, but I in Mr. President, whenever a system of revenue, ·Or any other is tend to say in the plainest English I can that I intend the coun attacked as erroneous, the institutions which have grown up un try shall know what this transaction is, and no pettifogging or der such a sys.tem can not at once be eradicated and destroyed. metaphysical discussion on the part of anybody will prevent the The Democratic party in the formation·of this bill have pre American people from understanding this transaction just as it served, as far as they could, the equities that were due to ex is. isting industries; they have sought to ruthlessly destroy none Mr. CAMDEN. Will the Senator from Colorado answer a of them; they have attemp-ted, so far as they could, to proceed question now? in a conservative manner, with due regard to the existing con Mr. TELLER. Certainly I will. dition of affairs brought about by the fiscal and revenue regu Mr. CAMDEN. I want to ask whether he ·claims that that lations in the United States. portion of the crop which will be marketed before the 1st of I do not want to enter into a discussion with thedietinguished January next will recei've the advantage of the bounty and the Senator from Colorado in regard to the sugar schedule. That duty? Senator knows as well as I do that thero is a contrariety of opin Mr. TELLER. Oh, Mr. President, the Senator from West ion existing between the Democratic party and his own as to Virginia is a business man-- the effect of the tariff upon wool; he knows as well as we do Mr. CAMDEN. I am. that we hold that the tariff upon wool has not benefited the Mr. TELLER. And he knows that nobody will market that w-oolgrower; he knows as well as we· do that the tariff upon crop until he can get the advantage of the duty. sugar has benefited the sugar grower. Upon that point there Mr. CAMDEN. All.right. is no contrariety of opinion. Mr. TELLER. The crop can not be marketed much before When an institution of this SDrt, like the sugar industry, has that time under any circumstances. grown up under the protecting wing of a tariff, the Democratic Mr. CAMDEN. In the second place, I wish to ask the Sena party has just done justly by the Btlgar planter, by the beet tor, if the price of sugar does not increase, will the sugar pro grower, and by everyone interested in sugar, in not destroying ducers get any advant:J..ge? that system at one fell stroke. Does the Senator complam of · Mr. TELLER. Oh, Mr. President, "if." [Lau2"hter.] The that? Is t~at the subject-matter of his.complaint, that the Dem Senator from West Virginia knows, as every Senator on this ocratic party has not destroyed this industry? The Democratic :floor knows who has any business capacity-and the Senator has party do not propose to destroy industries1 even though they it in a great degree-that the produce1·s will get the bene:fi.~ have been built up upon the erroneous idea of revenue regula th.at this duty will put up the price of sugar just as high, in ad tions. dition to its present vrice, as the amount of the duty. Now, siX, I will state as a mcttter of iact, notwithstanding the Mr. CAMDEN. I do not admit that proposition. The mar great desire that the people of Louisiana who make sugar may ket will vary according to the demand and the supply, and the have to keep their sugar until the ta.riff can operate ben-eficially amount of duty will not go to the price of. the article. What the upon it, that they are unfortu:nately in such a :posi ti.on that they can Senator ha.s stated is not a mathematical proposi:twn~ it is a not do it. .Ai3 I -smted yestert4y, they are und-er advances made question of opinion. by the commission merchants. The commission met'chant's Mr·. TELLER. If we produced all the sugar that waR needed notes generally mature before the 1st of January, almost en-. in this country, the tariff might have little or no influence on tirely. The sug-ar planter is bound to run: sugar into market in the question; but we do not produceall the sugar that is needed; order to meet his maturing obligations; and it is not a mathe but producing as we do but a small part of the whole consump matical demonstration by any means.,. when you consider the tion, it is as certain that whatever duty you put upon sugar you · condition of affairs down there, that thev will enjoy the beneii ts put upon ~he price of sugar; and nobody hereto!ore has denied both of the tariff and the bounty.. ~ - that proposition. It is a cardinal feature of the Democratic Mr.l\UTCHELL of Oregon. Will the Semttor allow me to party that whatever duty you put upon anything is a tax, and ask a question before he sits down? that was notdenied yesterday, although the Senator from Louis Mr. CAFFERY.. Yes) sir. iana sitting nearest me [Mr. BLANCHARD] insisted that I had Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. The Senator !l•om. Louisi~ahas stated that a duty was always a tax. I said nothing of the kind; denounced bounties~ I want to .ask him if, in the vote he cast a but I said in this case, and in every case where the home pro few minutes agot he did not vote in favor of extendin-g the sug-ar du.ction is small and inconsequential, the tax is always paid by bounty until the 1st day of January next, and not only to give the consumer and not by the importer. the bounty, but to give in add.i tion the duty imposed by this bill? Mr. CAMDEN. I wish to say one more word, if the Senator Mr. CAFFERY. M.y vote answers that question. will allow me, and that is, I think he is incorrect in assuming Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. The Senator has voted in that tbe position that the sugar crop will be benefited by the actual way. conditions of the tariff in this one year. The general idea is a Mr. CAFFERY. I voted fm· the provision as it now stands. correct one. Taking the average of years, it will be so, but Mr .11ITCHELL of Oregon. The Senator himself admits that, the crop of wheat for this year will be marketed, and will not notwithstanding all his denunciations of bounty, he has voted not affect the price of the crop of next year; just so the crop of sugar only to continue the bounty until the 1st day of January next, for this year will meet the demand for this year, and it will not but, in addition to that, he has voted to put on the 44 or 45 or 50 go over and affect the demand of next year. per cent, or whatever the ad valorem duty is which is imposed Mr. TELLER. I say that not a pound of this sugar will go on sugar in tb:is bill, all of which will redound to the banefit of into the market until that duty takes effect upon it. the sugar planters of Louisiana, while, so far as wool is con Mr. FRYE. I wish to put in this simple statement, which is cerned, it is placed on the free list, and the wool and sheep in conclusive upon this question. The sugar plaaters do not .com dustry of this country is to be destroyed by this act of the Dem mence with their crop until after October opens, and they do ocratic party. not close with the gathering- of the crop or the manufactm•ing Mr. CAFFERY. Mr. President, there is a very manifest dis of the sugar until about Christmas time; and a man would be a tinction between being in favor of the principle which underlies fool who would undertake to sell or think for a moment of sell a bounty, and not in favor of destroying institutions w liich ha. ve ing his crop of sugar between Christmas and January 1. grown up under the bounty. I have never pretended to advo Mr. CAFFERY. Mr. President, the Senator from Colorado cate the bounty policy, and I do not do it now. [Mr. TEJ;..LER] remarked that he did not desire to sit here and ir. MITCHELL of Oregon. Has not the sheep and wool in listen to any more lectures upon the part of the Senators from dustry gTown up under the fostering care of the Republican Louisiana in regard to the enormity of the bounty. The Sena party by the imposition of duties on foreign wool? tors from Louisiana in this body now and her repres~ntatives Mr. CAFFERY. I decline to yield further. heretofore have voted against the imposition of a bounty in favor Mr. GRAY. The wool industry has grown up in spite of the of Louisiana sugar planters; but that system wasengrafted upon duty, I will say to the Senator from Oregon. the country by the Republican party; that system, according to Mr. CAFFERY. The Republican party can not complain of their legislation, was to endure to the year 1905, having ele~en a tariff of a cent and a half. at the beginniug, and did not do, it. ye.ars yet to run, and the Senator from Colorado pumps up an They have levied the tariff from 2 cents to 2t cents, and where extraordinary amount of enthusiastic patriotism because the are we now? Democratic party cuts off this bounty in the present, and does Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. We are not complaining of that, not let it continue for eleven years longer. but when the Senator from Louisiana and his colleague de Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. May I ask the Senator from nounce the bounty, denounce the duty, and denounce protection, Louisiana a question. then w-e have a right to complain when they c9m"B here and vote Mr. CAFFERY. I decline to vield at present. for the thing they d"Bnounce. Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. All right. Mr. CAF]'ERY. Mr. President, the statement that we get 1894. CONGRESSIONAL _RECORD-SENATE., 5763 threecents-anda.ha:lfapoundisn.hsolutelyincor:rect. In the first fe1·red by the planting an,d producing interests- in. sugar. The p-lace, 90 per cent oi the amount of sugar made in Louisiana is ad valorem rates are preferred by the refining interest in sugar, made now, and will cantirme to be made until after 1895 by the I offer this amendment} and I desire simply to have a votE} planters and refined, and will not enjoy a tariff of ove-r one-tenth upon it. at the farthest, bem:ruse· the sugar that comes into competition M:r. MITCHELL of Oregon. May I ask the Senator a ques- with the Louisiana sugar is the Cuban centrifugal sugar. tion, whether the effect of the amendment is to adopt the prop- The tariff on that would be but one-tenth. So, at the most,. osition o! the committee and not the amendment proposed sub- we can not g-et but three-tenth&, and I submit to the Senators sequently? . upon the- other side, who are attacking the Louisiana Senators Mr. LODGE. It is to take the first paragraph proposed by the so vigorously, that it is· absolutely impossible when you change committee in the original bill, which provided for specific duties a tariff law, and. give a tariff upon articles not then subject to a instead of ad valorem. tariff, or increase a tariff, that you will not benefit the holde-rs Mr. McLAURIN. ':rhe Senator from Colorado lMr. TELLERl oi that sor-t of property. • I makes light of the "if" sugges-ted by the .Senator from West Mr. ALDRICH. Will the Senator permit me a question? Virginia [Mr. CAMDEN], when the fact is, that the opinion of Mr~. CAFFERY. I hav~ yielded thafioor. the Senator from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON] and the opinion of all the Mr. ALDRICH. I simply desire to ask whether the Senator- Senators on the other side of the Chamber whose opinions are meant to say that not. ovel.' 10 pel.' cent of the sugar product of based upon hisopinicmdepencl uponacollection of "ifs.n If the Louisiana was over No. 16 Dntch standard in color? sugar producers of Louisiana and the sugar producers of Ne· Mr. CAFFERY. No, sir~; I did not mean to say that. braska and other sections of the country that produce sugar Mr. ALDRICH. I unders-tood the, Senator to- S"aY that 90 per shall retain their sugar after it i& harvested until after the-tariff aent of the sugar made in Louisiana. will come into competition duty goes into effect! and if the importers of sugar from other with the Cub::tn centrifugal sugar under 16inco-lor. I do not un- countries shall not have imported all theh· market into this derstand the sito:a-tion in Ui>uisiamli that way at all. Tha other connt't'yr or as much as they would have imported. but for this Senator frnm Lomsiana [Mr. BLANCHARD] stated the other day tariff duty, and if th{tt shall raise the price of the sugar· tha~ that 86 peT cen.t of the sugar prodn.eed in Lquisiana was about- otherwise would not. have been. raised a cent and. a half a pound~ N o. 16 Dli1t(}h standar·'.l, and I mtdetst:md the< 8-ena.toti' from 1 then thc·se pe prohib- cated depends upon a collection of "ifs." i ted from refining the: sugar on. his -premises',. bu:t,. the license-au- The Senator& on the other side of. the Cha-mber speak abou 1 th:orized him w pi"Oduce S{lgalf. The Senator fro-m Rhode I~Y- . this bill as· having- been fvamed f.or the purpo-se of deceiving th~ land is perlootly familiar ~vith th.a:.tcla;nse. of. the McKinley act . .people. They are very solicitous for free· sugar, when·the fae~ Mr·. AL-DRICH. Certainly. is that the bounty on- sug..ar is a Republican measure· not con• Mr. CAFFERY. Under thi-s bill the: Louisiana planter can timred- by this legislation. The ques-tion i.& not how long will turn out the centrifo:.gal-, tile product of sugar·· testing alrollft93 the bounty be continued by the legislation of the. Democratic -polariscopic test, in O'i'del' to' get thSJ iro1lilty paid for that soril_ of par"ty (}r hy a Demool--&tic Senate, but how long will the McKin sugar, b-ut ctf no greatel"colo:r~ I twill not coma: to No.1& Dutcb ley law nnd.ei' which the- bonnty is given to the sugarprodu{!ers · standard. If th~y wrooe to go· into the:rt!f:ini:ng,, which they· wil~ oi the country be-permitted to exist. The question is1 when is be permitted to do hereafter when the McKinley act fnr:egard tl:te- proper time to fix for this schedule upon. s-ugar to go into to sugar expires, then they can ntaka their sugat ;into centrif- effeet1 and not hO\v long will we continue the bounty system. I ugal~ and th.ey can tum it into sugar abov~ N cr.16ras my calleague am not an advocate of the bounty sys-tem. as stated. I am not m1 advocate of the eontinuation o1 it for one day, but Mr. ALDRICH. Does. not the Se-nator kno-w,. if this bill be· it is a &publican measure. It is necessary for ils to :fix some ~omes a law and gnes into effect, that.,._gf caarse quite a large time when the schedule" shall go into effect, and- the amendment proportion of the suga1·s produced in: Louisiana will be. above No. w that it shall go into effect on the lat. day of next January. It 16 Dutc-h stlmdard irr co! or? is useless-for Republican Senator'S to twiti this side of the Cham- Mr. CAFFERY. I know that. ba:r- with the assertion that oo two Democra-tic members of the Mr. ALDRICH. Every Senator- khows th~t, and, of coursef Senate / -.... 5764 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.-SENATE. JUNE 5, bill, made a very urgent and eloquent appeal for the retention their thinnest places oi passage (and this has perhaps been the of the duty on lumber, a necessary of life because people must thinnest place) they have been obliged to resort to the bribe of have houses. They may live without sugar. They can not live bounty and duty combined. If the bill passes, as I have said, the without houses. They' can not live without shelter. result of that will go to Louisiana. Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. Will the Senator from Missis I do not envy the State of Louisiana the position in which she sippi allow me to ask him a question? will be hereafter. That State has chosen to set herself by the Mr. McLAURIN. As I have only a few minutes time, I can action of her Senators here squarely against the proposition of not yield. I respectfully decline. · - free sugar for the American people. Never up to this time had Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. It is a very short question. the country been able to get the State of Louisiana, throuO'h her McLAURIN. Yes, sir; and I have but a very short time. representatives here, upon that position taken squarely ~but it The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Mississippi de- has been taken here; and the Senate takes notice of it and the clines to yield. country will take notice of it. Mr. McLAURIN. When Senators charae that the action of Mr. President, there is one thing that is as certain as the Senators on this side of the Chamber is for the purpose of de coming of tides and of sun r is~, and that is that w hate ver happens ceiving the people, I insist that it is far more reasonable from to be put finally into the bill and is comprehended in its features the arguments that have been ma~e h~re in this Chamber and when it passes, the American people will not long go without from the course they haye taken that they are making this ob a return to the feature of free sugar for the breakfast tables of jection to the tariff upon sugar more for a pretense and for the people, thereby saving to those breakfast tables an annual campaign purposes this fall than to protect the people against tax of between sixty and seventy millions of dollars. The Sena the high prices of sugar. When they put a tariff on lumber, a tors from Louisiana have taken their square position aD"ainst necessary of life; when they put a tariff on coal, a necessary of that, accompanied by a bounty which has ooen ample fOl':'their life; when they put a tariff on clothing, which the people must staggering industry. have, and that for the purpose of raising the price and prohibit Mr. President, it is not the duty of the Republican party under ing the importation, not for the purpose of revenue, not for the any system of protection to uphold the decaying and stagnant purpose of obtaining money to defray the expenses of the Gov and soon to be relatively defunct industries. The sugar indus ernment, but for the purpose of prohibiting the importation of try in Louisiana in years to come will bear no comparison to the these products, then it seems tome that it is hollow mockery for great beet-sugar industry, the exposition of which was so lumi them to speak of this bill being framed for the purpose of de nously presented by the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. MANDER· ceiving the people. SON] the other day. Whatever blow the beet-sugar industry I hR.ve not time to argue the proposition of the bounty in ten may receive now, it is in the hereafter to grow. It is to grow minutes, the time that is allowed. It is utterly impossible to do for years and years; and it will be the subject of the fostering so. The Senator from Iowa said that there is a moral oblig-a and protecting hand of the Republican party. The Republican tion upon the people of the country to continue this bounty sys party can stand upon that ground. It can stand upon the grmmd tem, not until the 1st day of next January but for -the next of fostering a great, magnificent industry that within twenty-:fi ve eleven years. years will put into the pockets of the American people over The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator's time has expired. $300,000,000, and the little, decaying, lessening industry in Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I wish to ask the Senator from Louisiana, which is not so large to-day as it was twenty or thirtv Mississippi a question in my own time, as the Senator from Mis years ago, will bear no part in that great project of the Repub- · sissippi would not yield to me during his speech. I want to lican party. _ know whether the Senator from Mississippi means to be under Mr. BLANCHARD. Mr. President-- stood in the speech which he has just made as saying that sugar The VICE-PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Maine yield is not a prime necessity of life, and is an article to be used only to the Senator from Louisiana? by the "four hundred'' and not by the people generally. Mr. HALE. I have only ten minutes. I was rejoiced ;his Mr. McLAURIN. As the Senator has given me his time I morning to see a solid Republican vote for a bounty to th~ great will answer him. I have said that sugar is a necessity. It is growing, hereafter to b~ grand industry of beet sugar. Mr. not an absolute necessity, but it may be considered a necessity. President, I do not care what the reckoning is by the Senator But I say ths.t it is no more of a necessity than clothing, and from Mississippi, the Senators from Louisiana, the Senator from not as much so. I say it is not as much a necessity as coal. It Colorado or the Senator from Iowa upon this one trifling, un is not as much a necessity as lumber. On all three of those ar important matter of double bounty that is given to Louisiana ticles of necessary consumption the Senator from Oregon has for its vote. The common sense of the proposition is that the voted and spoken from the beginning of this discussion for the time has been so skillfully arranged with reference to the pay purpose of retaining the tariff. ment of bounty and with reference to the time of taking and fr. MITCHELL of Oregon. In other words, the "common manufacturing the crop that the Louisiana planters will get the herd !l can getalongwithoutsugar, but the" four hundred "must benefit oi both. have it. Mr. HARRIS. Will the Senator from Maine aliow me to ask Mr. McLAURIN. No sir; the" common herd," as the Sena him a question? tor is disposed to denominate a certain -class of people in this Mr. HALE. Yes; I will yield. country, are a.s good as anybody else. If he means by that the Mr. HARRIS. If it be a mistake, a blunder, or a crime to fix common people of the country, one of whom I claim to be, they the time at which the bounty shall cease on the 1st day of Jan are as good as any people in this country. I say that thosehe uary next-which is an extension of only six months-how much denominates as the" common herd" can as well and better do greater is the mistake, the blunder, or the crime of voting, as without sugar than they can do without clothing, and without the Senator did within an hour, to extend the bounty for eleven coal, and without houses to shelter them. years? This bounty that the Senator would continue not until the 1st Mr. HALE. The whole ground of extending the bountv for ', day of January, 1895, but until January, 1905, Senato'l's on the eleven years is, as I have said, to build up not a staggering and other side say there is a moralobligation upon the, people of this decaying industry, but a grand industry that will bless this coun QOtmtry to sustain. Now, sir, if anyone has any equity under -try and bring more money into the pockets of its people than the bounty act, it is he who has heretofore invested his means any other one measure that has been urged or considered in the under this law in the production of sugar from beets and cane. present Congress. No man can claim any equity and moral obligation of the United Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I am not a believer in the sys States to continue in force the bounty in order to allow him here.; tem of bounties. I do not believe it would be wise policy to of after to invest his means in the production of sugar. fer a bounty for the production of any article, nor do I believe I deny that there is any equity, but if there is itcouldonlyap- it to be clearly within the power of the Government to do so. ply to those who have heretofore invested their means. If there An industry which was in existence at the time the McKinley 1s a moral obligation it is based upon an unjust and an unfair sys bill became a law, in my judgment, has no claim upon the con tem of legislation. It is based upon a system that takes the tinuance of the bounty, admitting for argument's sake that the money out of the pockets of one class of people and gives it to Government possesses the power to grant bounties, which I de another, a class of people as worthy, as honest, as devoted, and not admit. Yet after a bounty has been granted and an industry as laborious a.s those to whom it is given. If those who have in _has been developed upon the strength of that bounty to a very • I vested their money in sugar production under the bounty act great extent, it becomes a moral question if not a legal question have acquired any vested right, any moral right, it is Hme for whether a graat Government like this can properly and instan us to repeal the law and not allow anybody else to acquire such ta.neouslv repeal the bounty before the industry is developed a right. and before the st ~)- - 1894. CONGRESSIONAL REOORD-SENATE. 5765 colleague. I do not believe that the sugar planter of Louisiana the levying of a tax upon some of the necessaries of life to meet is entitled to a bounty. The cane that grows in Louisiana is in the current expenses of the Government. digenous to that soil and climate. It has had the fostering care The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator's time has expired. of the Government in oneformoranother for many ~enerations. Mr. BLANCHARD. Mr. President, I have no desire to pro If. it is not developed to-day to its highest degree, it never can long the discussion upon the sugar schedule. I have already be developed upon its own resources, and it never can be sus had occasion to address the Senate on several occasions in ref tained unless the Government continually supports it -in the erence to the schedule, and had the Senator from Maine [Mr. form of a bounty or tax. HALE], who addressed -the Senate a little while ago, yielded to I desire to see the time come in this country when sugar shall a question I desired to put to him then, r ·would not now have be free. Although I represent in part a great commonwealth taken the floor. where the sugar beet can be cultivated with profit, and one of I rise now, Mr. President, for the purpose of repelling, per the largest beet-sugar factories in the United States is situated haps for the third time in the course of this deb:tte, the shte in the county in which I have the honor to reside, I do not be ment so often made upon the other side of the Chamber that the lieve that it is either wise on the part of this Government to sugar industry of Louisiana is a staggering one. That has been adopt the bounty system as a policy, nor do I believe the Gov asserted by a number of Senators, and it was just now repeated ernment has power under the Constitution to encourage the de by the Senator from-Maine. If that Senator had been present velopment of anything by. a system of bounties. in the Senate yesterday and on Saturday last, when a discussion I recognize, however, that when the Government has offered in reference to this matter took place between myself and the a bounty, and upon the strength of the offer contained in the Senator from Rhode Island, he would not have made that state statute an industry is developed which perhaps would not be de ment to-day. veloped but for the granting of the bounty, whether the Gov Mr. President, what are the facts? Let us begin at the close ernment had the power or not, it cert!l.inly has morally no right of the war, when the sugar industry of Louisiana was utterly to suddenly take the prop from under that industry and. permit prostrated, the sugarhouses burnt,-plantations disorganized and it to fall without any warning of its purpose to eventually recede dismantled, levees down, and the Mississippi River_at every re from the bounty system. curring period of high water sweeping over the plantations. . Let Therefore when my colleague offered hid amendment, which us begin then and see how much sugar was·raised in Louisiana looked to a gradual reduction of the bounty systam, until it in 1864,and then what was raised in Louisiana in 1893, and from would expire in 1905, dropping one-tenth each year, I voted for that comparison let us see whether or not this is a staggering in it. When he offered his amendment proposing to make the dustry, as declared by the Senator from Maine. bounty l cent instead of 2 cents a pound I voted for it, because At the close of the war the amount of sugar produced in Louis both propositions looked to the gradual extinction of the bounty iana was only 10,800,000 pounds, and last year, 1893 1 less than system, add because to so vote would not seriously wrench. the thirty years after that period, there were produced in Louisiana industry which is being developed in my State k>-day. 600,000.000 pounds of sugar-an increase from 10,000,000 pounds Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. May I ask the Senator from Ne in 1864 to 600,000,000 pounds in 1893. braska a question? · Mr. ALLISON. I wish the Senator would give us the figures Mr. ALLEN. Two or three. in 1890, so that we may also ascertain the effect of the passage Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I wish to ask just one. I want of the act of that year. to know from the Senator from Nebraska, who represents in Mr. ALDRICH. I also wish the Senator would give us the part aS tate which is developing the beet-sugarind us try, whether figures for 1854 and 1861. m his judgment the bounty is not more beneficial to the sugar in Mr. BLANCHARD. Mr. President, both those Senators are dustry of that St!l.te than the duty proposed by the pending bill. members of the Finance Committee of the Senate, and leading Mr. ALLEN. I do not know that the question of the Senator members of the minority of that committee. The questions from Oregon is g~rmane to the question now immediately before which they ask could easily be answered by turning to Bulletin the SBnate. I do not know what my answer would be if the No. 32, prepar·ed under the aut~pices of the Finance C_ommittee. question were germane. I do not undertake to speak f01~ the The production is there given for all the years beginning with the Democratic party at all, because they are speaking very well for first year of the war down to the present time; and if the Sena themselves; but nevertheless, I recognize the fact that when the tors desire it those figures can be incorporated in my remarks. Cleveland Administration came into power in this nation they I will say to· them that sugar production in Louisiana steadily found the Treasury bankrupt. I recognize the fact that Mr. increased from the time when sugar making first began, away Foster, the Secretary of the Treasury under Mr. Harrison, had back in antebellum times, until 18tH, when there were produced for weeks, if not for months, literally propped up the Treasury in Louisiana about 550,000,000 pounds of sugar; and then by the of the nation, and possibly through the advice or instruction of destruction brought upon that country by the war the produc~ his chief refused to issue bonds that he had prepared himself to tion decreased to 10,800,000 pounds in 1864, from which period issue. of almost utter prostration to the present time ft has advan-ced Mr. Ml'l'CHELL of Oregon. Undoubtedly the Administra until now it has assumed the very largeproportionof 600,000,000 tion which preceded the present Admistration was not obliged pounds. Do you call that a staggering industry? Any gentle to sell bonds in order to replenish the Treasury, which the man on the other side of the Chamber who makes any such as· presentAdministration has beencompelled to do. The Sen :~. tor sertion as that shows that he has_ not looked into the question will admit that, I presume. . . about which he talks. Mr. ALLEN. That is the discussion of a moot question, and Mr. President, a good deal has been said on the other side of I hope the Senator will not interrupt me at this time. I recog the Chamber in reference to the time when this schedule is to go nize the fact that the Treasury of the United States was prac into effect. The argument is made that the sugar producers of tically bankrupt when Mr. Cleveland and his party came into the country will not only get the bounty of 2 cents a pound for power. Now, there must be some legislation adopted looking the sugar produced in the present year, but that in addition they to the raising of revenue to meet the current expenses of the will get the benefit of the duty which the schedule provides Government and the national debt. shall go into effect on the 1st of January next. That must be done; and the question was presented forcibly' As was said just now by the Senator from Tennessee fMr. to the Democratic party and to the few Populists who are in HARRIS] sometime had to be fixed when the sug-ar schedule this Chamber as to the best course to pursue in raising the nec should go into effect, and it was urged upon the Democratic ma essary revenue. The Democratic party-f infer at least from jority of the Finance Committee that the cane-sugar producers their bill-concluded that a levy of a duty upon sugar was the in Louisiana and Texas, and the beet-sugar producers of Ne best and most certain way of raising the needed revenue. . When braska, Kansas, and California had already planted their crops this Government gets to a point where under wise legislation under the conditions of the existinglaw,wh1Challowed a bounty, we can pay our current expenses and our national debt, I do not and that there was no probability of a change of that law until ·believe that it is just to the people of the country to lay one the greater part of the present calendar year had expired. mill of tax upon the necessaries of life. If the $100,000,000 that Under the circumstances, it was urged it would be but just that were found in the Treasury when Mr. Harrison came into the the bounty should be continued for the present year, and the Presidential office had been judiciously used there would be no sugar crop of the year given the benefit of it. necessity to-day for the levying of a tax upon sugar. Mr. President, within thirty days from the present time the Over $26,000,000 of that surplus was taken out of the Treasury manufacture of sugar from beets in the beet factories of the and paid aSia premium upon bonds, and through that and other West will begin, as I am informed. The beet-sugar producer!:$ means equally vicious the Treasury was rendered bankru_pt on commence making sugar in July, and that being t~e case. it the 4th day of March, 1893. 'rhe country wa.s bankrupt. The would be manifestly unjust to those who are engaged m that m $100,000,000 had disappeared; the national debt had increased; dustry to strike It is true that in Louisiana we do not begin to grind the cane peop:te were in no sense entitled. The difficulty is to get rid of for sugar-making purposes until about the lOth of October, but it and to establish a new policy, and for thatreason I acceptthis the great bulk of our sugar is manufactured before Christmas, provision of the bill. It is the price the country must pay for a and produced under conditions that give to the factors and folly, !or a violation of sound political principles. commission merchants who advance to the· planters ta enable Gentlemen may taunt us with the cost of the experiment and them to ma.ke the crop a lien upon the sugar '-vhioh is produced, tell us that we shall.be req~ed to pay immensely beca.use of it, and the planters are under the necessity tcr hurry it to market but those who occas10ned the necessity are responsible for the as fast as possible and sell ~tin order to meet their obligations cost . If the doctrine of pounties countinues, unless it is re to the merch~nts who have made these advances. - versed by the intelligent people of the: United States no man Mr. MANDERSON. Will the Senator kindly repeat the' can tell where it will end. It is. assumption of the cont~·ol of all statement as t.o when the factories begin to make sugar from the property in this country 1 and the offer of bounties at the dis beets? cretion o_f Congress to whatever interest may think proper to 1\fr. BLANCHARD~ I have understood from a gentleman deJ?and 1t, and may have strength enough t-o compel submissions interested in a large beet factory in Nebraska that they begin t-o 1ts demands .. I~ was the price paid by the protectionists with the manufacture oi sugar from beets in July. the hope of obt:umng the support of the suuar States· and it is Mr. MANDERSON. The Senator must certainly have mis like other examples. of t_he s~me. ~d. While I deplo~·e and de understood his informant. The beets are planted in May and precat-e the cost, I realize· that 1t 1s the penalty the country is June .. They mature ready for the beet factory in October. required to pay for its submission to a vicious, dangerous cor- There is no beet-sugar making commenced in Nebraska before ru:pting policy. ' from the 15th of October to the 1stof November. InCa.lifornia Mr. ALLISON. I desire to ask the Senato~ fr om Illinois if the beet-sugar crop is harvested and br-oug~t ~o the ~actory he thinks it is necessary to postpone the taking effect of the about the middle of August. It would be utt-erly 1mposs1ble to · proposed duty for six months in order to get rid of this misera commence making sugar from beets in. July. ble· system of bounties, and thereby postpone the time when Mr. BLANCHARD. I certainly had given me the info-l'ma money is to be paid into the Treasury under the SUQ'ar sched- tion that beet-sugar making began in Nebraska. or California in ule? "' July. · Mr. PALMER. ~:Ir. Presid.ent, I have made the remarks Mr. MANDERSON. Then your informant was very much which I intended to make. When I took my seat I was through, mistaken. · and I have no desire to- continue the discussion by entering into -l\1r. BLAl.'{CHARD. 1 was so informed by a. gentleman en m&re abstract side-issues·. gaged in the manufa-cture of sugar :from beets both in Nebraska Mr. ALDRICH. Will the Senator from Illinois allow me to and Califo-rnia-. ask him. a question? The Senator is ahvays ingenious in his de The VICE-PRESIDENT. The time ol the Sen.. -1894. OONGRESSION.AL RECORD-SENATE. 5767 not desire to misquote me. The Senator from Louisiana at no the Rocky Meuntain region. Yet because the commission men time, neither yesterday nor at any other time or place, ever said have advanced money on the prospective crop o! sugar we must that the Senators from Louisiana had made any demand upon give to the Louisiana sugar planters double duty or double pro the Finance Committee. tection for the ensuing year, while you propose immediatelv, Mr. CAREY. Will-the Senator from Louisiana please quote indeed before the sugar bounty shall end under the bill so fa""I" what he said day before yesterday? It is not in the RECORD. as the date is concerned, to place wool upon the free list. Mr. BLANCHARD. The Senator from Louisiana stated that The VICE-PRESIDENT The time of the Senator from the justice of the imposition of a duty upon sugar had been pre- Wyoming has expired. · sented to the Finance Commi'l;tee of the Senat-e. It was shown Mr. PEFFER~ Mr. President, I propose at the proper tim~ that we have a great industry in Louisiana, which had a duty j to offer an amendment providing that all sugars shall herea1ter maintained upon it from 1798 down to 1890, when the Republi- be free, but I can address the remarks which I wish to submit can party, for the first time in the history oi the Government, to the Senate just as well upon the amendment now pending as struck off the duty and put raw sugar upon the free list. The upon the one proposed~ present measure came from the other Rouse with suga1• on the . I am for free sugar, with or without bounty. It is not a mat free list, and nothing even in the way of the continuation of the 1 ter of dollars and cents to me, to my neighbors or my friends, bounty, and it wouid. be a manifest injustice to the peop-le of or to the friend or the neighbor of any other Senator. There Louisiana and to the beet-sugn.r producers of the United States is a principle involv-ed in this matter which I discussed at some to destroy their industry and the. nio:ney invested in the same. length a month ago) and at less length, but with more detail, a. It was further stated that the Democr.atic· doctrine is 1t tarifi few days ago. . for t•evenue, with incidental protection, and that i:n any tariff I wish to recapitulate what was said then by way of argument. bill designed to give to the Treasury the re-venue itneeds sugar The proposed duty upon sugar is a tax which will bear more is entitled to a place, because it is the best of all a1•ticles from heavily upon the poor people ol the country than upon auy othel" which to obtain a revenue by a duty upon it. class. It is a tax upon an article which we do not now produce Mr. CAREY. I do not think the Senator from Louisiana has in very larl!e quantity as compared with the. quantity imported. denied atallmystateme;ntofwhathesaid twodaysagoinaspeech · We do not need the proposed revenue. I differ with some Sen which I presume will hereafter apperu: in the-RECORD. ator-a aS-t.o that matter. I do not balieve there is any additional Mr. President, it is a favorite dodge of the men w hocome from revenue needed beyond what is provided for in the bill in depend the South, when there~ any weakness whatever discovered in ently of the sugar schedule. their condition as to growth in population or wealth, to go back Nor do I believe the assertion. that has been made so frequently to the civil war. It has been more than twenty-nine years-since by Senators as to the deficit in the Treasury a year ago. I Mr. Lincoln was assasSinated and Lee surrendered to Gen. Grant did not then believe there \Vas a defict; I do not now believe at Appomattox. Those who participated in that rebellion were there was; for what is known as then gold r-eserve" never- got permitted to return to their respective- homes and take with below about $65,00o-,ooo, and tha;t was an abundance for all prac them, I believe, the personal pt'opet·ty upon theh· persons ot' in tlcal purposes. But in addition to that smn there was, as I connection with them at the time of the sur1·ender. showed very plainly at the t.iniers:omewhere in the neighborhood If the Senator from Louisiana. will study the history of this of $138,000,000 to $140,000,000 of silver bullion and silver coin at country he will find that from the breaking out of the war to that time iying in the Treasury idle. the present time there have been ten States admitted into- the So if the law had been executed as it had been prepared, and Union. Pioneers went to the Western country without money, if the Secretary of the Treasury had exercised the power with and beginning there without personal effects of any kind, with- which Congress has intrusted him, there would have been no out houses, they have built up ten great States, four of which . difficulty whatever, so far a.s the scarcity of money is concerned. to-day have more wealth than the State of Louisiana, which has : BU:.tthe bankers and the speculators ofWallstree.tdemanded an been protected in het• sugar industry for the past one hundred other issue of bonds. Business was oocoming a little dull in that years. - "neclr of the woods/,. and it was necessary to have something to The Senator from Louisiana insists that this industry has not oi1 the ma.chinery of business there. Hence an issue of interest been on the wane in Louisiana. Notwithstanding the amount bearing bonds became necessary, and in n. little while we will that has been paid in duties to protect this industry, between h-ave that proceeding repeated, if I mistake not. one and two million dollars, I say it has made but little progress. I wish to call the attention of the Senate t-o the consumption I have the figures, and I desire to call the attention of the Sen- of sugar in this country during the years from 1880 to 1890. I a tor from Lm~tisiana to the fact. In 1851, nine years l:lefore the will take this occasion to _sta,te that I made a mistake in one of civil war broke out, the average production of cane sugar was the tables which I presented last Friday. The computation was 103,000 tons. Ten years afterwards there were produced118,331 made by another person and without revision. I was below the tons. In 1871, which was six years after the war was over, 75,- pro-per figure in showing the consumpti-on o{ sugar in this coun- 000 tons were produced. In 1889 there_were 121,000 tons pro- try. I ha-ve the Shtistieal Abstract of the United States 00- duced, which is about the same amount that was produced in fore me, showing in tons the consumption of sugar in the United 1861. In 1890 there were 128,343 tons produced. Under the im- States, beginning with 1880 at 960,764 tons and ending in 1890 petus given by the bounty law 215,000 tons of sugar were pru- with 1,516,539 tons. duced in 1891. In 1893, on the estima~ by the senior Senator Running along through the table, as I di-d with my pencil an from Louisiana [Mr. CAFFERY], there were produced 250,000 hour ago, I find that the average yearly increase has been about tons of sugar. The only real growth that the industry has had 5 per cent, whereas the computation I gave to the Senate before has been under the impetus given to it by the bounty under the was made upon a basis of 2t pet" cent. Our rate of increase in McKinley law, which the Senatorsfroril.Louisiana are to-day so consumption, therefore, has been 100 per cent greater than I anxious to repeal-not, howe-ver, for the present year. gave it. At that rate-5 per cent-fox the years up to 1905~ the If Senators will examin~ the figures with reference to the period to which the bounty would have run, beginning with the' sugar-beet industry, a small industry it is true, they will find consumption of 1893, at 4,000",000,000 pounds in round figur~es, that in 18£0 there were produced 2,800 tons of beet sugar. In and g-oing along from year to year until 1905, I find that the 189::123,500 tons of beet sugar were produced. If the Louisiana number of pounds consumed that year would be about 7,178,000, industry had increased one-third as rapidly in proportion as the 000 pounds, nearly double the amount aonsmned in 1893. sugar-beet industry did, the question. o:f supplying the Ameri- Taking the consumption- of 1893 at the figures I have given, can people with sugar would long since have been solved in the 4tOOO,OOO,OOO pounds, and continuing the old duty of about 2cents United States. , . . a p.ound, under the act of 1883, which was repealed in 1890, in- How inconsistent is the Senator from Louisiana. He says the stead of the figures which I gave the other day, the result will commissionmenhave advancedmoneytothesugarmen on their be as follows: First, $80,000,000 would be the amountof the duty prospective crop. I wish to say to the Senator from Louisiana paid on the consumption o.f 1893; that is to say, our consumption that because of the agitation with reference to free wool, be- would have been increased in price to the people, b,y reason of cause of the pronounced declaration upon the part of the Dem- the duty, $80,000,000. In 1905 the extra cost by reason of the ocratic party that they would put wool on the free list, the com- duty would be $1,416,520,000. The 2 cents bounty at that time, mission men, instead of advancing 7 and 8 cents a pound on the according to figures which I have given before, would be $401, crop of wool that is now being taken from the sheep, refuse to 215,000. The difference between $407,000,000 and $1,416,520,000 advance: more. than the freight on the wool from the Rocky is $1,009,305,000, what would be saved by the bounty system. Moun tam region. . With the duty of H cents a pound, which is provided for in Mr. MITCHELL of Oreg·on. They wlll not do that in Oregon. this bill, I find that the difference would be nearly $500,000,000 "!Vf~· CAREY.. A repre~entative of one of the princiJ>al com- during the period from now until 1905. In other words, a mission houses m the Umted States told me only· a few days ago 2 cents a pound bountv would cost the people $500,.000;000 less that they called in all their tnen from the West and that they than a duty of U cen~ts a pound during the years up to 1905. were afraid to-day even to advance the freight on the woolfrom There would be a great saving to the people of the United 5768 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 5 . ' States, a saving of millions and hundreds of millions of dol and the increase in the production of beet sugar has been con lars even if we were to take the duty that is proposed in this siderably greater than that of cane sugar. bill.' In view of that fact and the further fact that it is a tax The VICE-PRESIDENT. Thequestion is on agreeing to the upon the poor people, I am wholly, utterly, and constitutionally amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. LODGE] to opposed to a levying of a duty upon sugar. the amendment of the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. JONES]. The followinD" statements show the saving secured by the Mr. MANDERSON. I ask that it be read. bounty plan as . ~ompared with the duty plan-the bounty at 2 The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment will be stated. cents a pound till-1905, and the duty of 2 cents as under the act The SECRETARY. On page 39, in paragraph 182-!, line 23, of 1883, and a duty of H cents as proposed under this bill: strike out all after the figures "182-!," down to and including Statement showing th~ yea1·ly cvnsumption of s~gar in the United states during the word "rates," in line 12, on page 40, and insert: the years named. All sugars. tank bottoms, sirups of cane juice or of beet juice, melada, concentrated melada, concrete and concentrated molasses testing py the Years. Tons. Years. Tons. polariscope not above 80° shall pay a duty of 1 cent per pound, and for every additional degree or fraction or a degree above 80" and not above 90° shown by the polariscope test, shall pay one one-hundredth of a cent per pound ad ditional, and above 90° and not above 98°, for every additional degree or 880------.------960,764 1886------1,288,789 fraction or a degree sho·wn by the polariscope test, shall pay a duty of two 881 ------1,009,802 1887------1,353,228 one-hundredths of a cent per pound additional, and upon all sugar testing 882 ------1, 060,292 1888------1,420, 889 above 98° by polariscope test, or above No. 16 by the Dutch standard in 883------J, 113,306 1889------1,491,933 color, there shall be levied and collected a duty of one-eighth of 1 cent per 884 •••• ------1,1G8, 971 1890 ------1, 516,539 pound in_addition t o the duty imposed upon sugars testing above 98°. 885------1,2Z7,4l9 Mr. LODGE. Mr. President, before the _vote is taken on the statement showing tiLe pro?able yearly const,mption of suga1' in the United States amendment, I merely wish to restate very briefly the nature of during tiLe years nam.~d at the rate of 5 per cent increase. the amendment. It is to put in place of the new paragraph moved by the Senator from Arkansas the first paragraph re Years. Pounds. Years. Pounds. ported by the committee; that is, it takes out the ad valorem duties and puts in specific duties. It yields revenue, which has been one of the arguments offered in favor of the proposed duty 893 ------4, 000,000,000 1900------5, 626,000,000 1894------4,200,000,000 1901 ...... 5,S07,000,000 It gives protection. It destroys no industry. It is the form of 895 ------·--- ·4,410,000,000 1902------· ---- 6, 202,000,000 duty preferred by the producers, whereas the ad valorem pro 896 ------4, 630,000,000 1903 - ----~------6,512,000,000 posed in the amendment offered by the Senator from Arkansas 897 ------·----- 4, 861,000, ()()() 1904------.. ---- 6, 837,000,000 It 898 ------·- -- 5, 10-l, 000,000 1905------·------7, 178,000,000 is urged alone by the refiners. is the specific duty of the pro 899 ------··-- 5,359,000,000 ducer as against the ad valorem duty of the refiner; and, as I stated before, I offer the amendment merely for the purpose oJ statement showing the amount of duty that would be collected yearly on tht con- getting a record vote upon it. I ask for the yeas and nays. sumption of sugar durmg the years named, with a 2-cent auty. . The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll. Years. Duty. Ml". QUAY (when his name was called). I am paired with the Senator from Alabama [Mr. MORGAN]. The roll call was concluded. 1893 ____ ----.------$80, 000, 000 1894 .••• ------84, 000,000 Mr. DANIEL. I announce my pair with the Senator from 1895 ..•. ------88,200,000 Washington [Mr. SQUIRE]. 1896.------.------·------92,600,000 Mr. BRICE. I announce my pair with the Senator from Colo 1897------__. __ ------· ------·- 97,-220,000 rado [Mr. WOLCOTT]. 898.------102, 080, 000 107, 180, 000 Mr. COKE (after having voted in the negative). I d!lsire to 112, 520, 000 withdraw my vote. I am paired with the Senator from Maine 1Wl=== .• ------======____ ==~==== --~- •. __==== • _. == ______======---- ••==:=== ---- ======__ ------__ ====---- 118, 140, 000 1902.----- ~ ------.------_. ___ ------124,040,0()() [Mr. FRYEl. 003 ____ ------130, 24.0, 000 Mr. GORDON. I am paired with the Senatorfrom Iowa [Mr 904 •• ------.------136, 740, 000 WILSON]. 1905 ••.. ------··· ------143, 560, 000 Mr. DANIEL. The Senator from Georgia [Mr. WALSH] is 1, 4~6, 520,000 absent, and I beg leave to transfer to him my pairwith the Sen Bounty at 2 cents per pound for same years------.... 407,215,000 1 atorfrom Washington [Mr. SQUIRE], and vote. I vote "nay.:' Difference __ ---- __ ------__ ------____ ,1, 009,305,000 Mr. GORDON. I transfer my pair with the Senator from Iowa [Mr. WILSON] t<>the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. BERRY] Statement showing the amo unt of auty that would be collected yeat•ly at the rate and vote. I vote "nay." · 1t cents a pound. The result was announced-yeas 28, nays 37; as follows: YEAS-28. Years. Duty. Aldrich, Dubois, Lodge, Pettigrew, Cameron,Allison, Frye, McMillan, Platt, ------=------1------' Gallinger, Manderson, Power, 1893 ------$50, 000, 000 Carey, Hale. Mitchell, Oregon Sherman, 1894.------52, 500, 000 Chandler,-.. Hawley, Morrill, Shoup, 1895 .••• ·------55, 2b0, 000 CUllom, Higgins, Patton, Teller, 1896 .•..•• •••••••• •·•• v·••• •• •••• •••• • • ••·· •••• •••• • ••• •••• •••• •••• 57, 875, 000 Dolph, Hoar, Perkins, -washburn. 1897------__ _. .------.------60,762,500 1898------·------.------. ------63, 700,000 NAYS-37. 1899 .. ------:------66, 987,5"-A> Allen, George, McLaurin, .Roach, 1900.------70, 325,000 Blackburn, Gibson, McPherson, Smith, 1901.------;------73,837,500 Blanchard, Gordon, Martin, Turpie, 1902 ______------77,525, 000 Butler, Gray, Mills, Vest, 1903 .• ------81,400,000 Caffery, Harris, Murphy, Vilas, 1904 .••. ------85,462,500 Call, Hunton, Palmer, Voorhees, 1905------. ----. ------. -. 89,725,000 Camden, Jarvis, Pasco, White. ------Cockrell, 885,350,000 Jones, Ark. PetTer, Bounty at 2 cents a pound the same years ______Daniel, Kyle, Pugh, 407,215,000 Faulkner, Lindsay, Ransom, Diflerence __ ----.-----. ___ ------______---- __ ---- ____ ------478, 135, 000 NOT VOTING-;-20. Bate, Dixon, Jones, Nev. Squire, Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. Mr. President-- Berry, Gorman, Mitchell, Wis. Stewart, Brice, . Hansbrough, ' Morgan, Walsh, The VICE-PRESIDENT. The time of the Senat<>r from Kan- Coke, Hill, Proctor, Wilson, sas has expired. _ Davis, Irby, Quay, Wolcott. , Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I rose to ask the Senator from Kansas a question before he sat down; but he can answer it in So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. my time. . Mr. PEFFER. I offer an amendment to the amendment. ·Is the Senator from Kansas able to state from any statistics The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the he may h:1ve at hand what has been the increase in the P.roduc Senator from Kans::1s will be stated. tion of cane sugar and beet sugar between 1890 and 1893! The SECRETARY. In-paragraph 182t, line 24, after the words Mr. PEFFER. Yes; I have the figures by me, but not so that "ninety-five," strike out the remainder of the paragraph and I can pick them uu inshntly. But I will Btate, taking cane insert: All sugars, tank bottoms, sirups ot cane juice or of beet juice, melada., sugar and beet sugai- together, that the yeg,rly av:erage increase concentrated melada., concrete and concentrated molasses, shall be admittecl from 18~0 to 1893-'94 has been at the rate of about 25 per cent free of duty. 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 5769 Mr. ALLISON. May I suggest to the Senator from Kansas Dakota [Mr. HANSBROUGH] w,LtS present. As he is not present • that in the bill as it came from the other House sugar is on the I withdraw my vote. free list, and his purpose will be accomplished by rejecting the Mr. TURPIE tafter having voted in the negative). My atten amendment of the committee. Sugar is on the free list as the tion has been called to the fa~t that the Senator from Minnesota bill comes to us from the other House. • [Mr. DAVIS], my general pair, i'3 absent I therefore withdraw Mr. PEFFER. I so understand, but it is not provided for in my vote. the bill in the form in which we are now considering it. Mr. QUAY (after having voted in the negative). I understand Mr. ALLISON. Of course, the SenatorfromKansascanmove Ulatthe junior Senator from South Carolina[Mr. IRBY]isabsent his amendment, but a rejection of the amendment proposed by without a pair, and I have been requested to pair with him, as it the committee would accomplish the same purpose. However, is stated that he is in favor of free suga-r. So I withdraw my I make no criticism upon the course he suggests. vote. I had already voted 11 nay." Mr. HILL. I understand that the amendment is insisted upon The result was announced-yeas 26, nays 3.7; as follows: by the Senator from Kansa.B. . YEAS-26. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the Aldrich, Frye, Lodge, Platt, Senator from Kansas is pending. Allison, Gallinger, McMillan, Power, Mr. HILL. I trust the amendment will be insisted upon, be Cameron, Hale, Mitchell, Oregon, Shoup, Chandler, Hawley, Morrill, Teller, caUEe it brings up the ·plain, direct question as to whether su Cullom, Higgins, Patton, Washbu'.'n, gars shall be upon -the free list. Otherwise, by voting down the Dolph, Hill, Petrer, amendment of the Senator from Arkansa.B it would not necessa Dubois, Hoar, Pettigrew, rily follow; other amendments could be offered. The amend NAYS-37.· ment offered by the Senator from Kansas will bring up in as Allen, Faulkner, Lindsay, Ransom, plain a way as it can be bro'ijght up the direct question, and I Blackburn, George, McLaurin, RoJ.ch, Blanchard, Gibson, Manderson, Smith, for one desire that it shall be brought up in that way. I trust Butler, Gordon, Martin, Vest, we may have a vote upon that amendment. · Catrery, Gray, Mills, Vilas, Mr. COCKRELL and others. Question. Call, Harris. Morgan, Voorhees, Camden, Hunton, Murphy, White. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the Cocln·ell, Jarvis, Pasco, amendment of the Senator from Kansas to the amendment of the Coke, Jones, Ark. Perkins, Senator from Arkansas. Daniel, Kyle, Pugh, Mr. HILL. I ask for the yeas and nays on agreeing to the NOT VOTING-22. amendment to the amendment. Bate. Gorman, Palmer, Turpie, The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded Berry, Hansbrough, Proctor, Walsh, Brice, lrby, Quay, Wilsqnf to call the roll. Carey, Jones, Nev. Shet'man, Wolcott. Mr. HILL (when Mr. IRBY'S name was called). The Senator Davis, McPherson. Squire, from South Carolina [Mr. IRBY] is absent, and I am authorized Dixon. Mitchell, Wis. Stewart., to state that if he were present he would vote in favor of the So the amendment to the amendment was rejected. amendment providing for free sugar. Mr. PE.RKINS. Mr. President, the section under considera Mr. McLAURIN (when his name was called). I am paired tion seems to embrace two distinct propositions. One is the with the junior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. DIXON]. I duty upon refined sugar. The other relates to the reciprocity transferred my pair for to-day to the junior Senator from South treaty with the Hawaiian Islands. While many of us, I assume, CarolinafMr. IRBY], but a.s he would vote" yea" on this ques can not see our way clear t{) vote to place a duty of five-eighths tion·, I wifl announce my pair and state that I should vote '' nay " of a cent a pound upon refined sugar, which is one-eighth of a if I were at liberty to vote. _ cent a pound mora than the actual average cost of refining the Mr. FAULKNER (when Mr. McPHERSON's name was called). same, I _apprehend that on agreeing to that part of the section I was reque::.ted by the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. McPHER relating to the reciprocity treaty with the Hawaiian Islands SON], who was called from the Chamber by reason of illness, to there will be but few, if any, dissenting voices. state that he is paired with the Senator from Delaware [Mr. The Senate a few days since declared unanimously that they HIGGINS], and that on these questions he would vote" nay." p.roposed not to interfere with this Republic about being in Mr. HIGGINS (after having voted in the affirmative). I voted augurated in the isles of the great Pacific Ocean. We have a expecting that the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. McPHERSON] commercial" reciprocity treaty with that nation which has ex would return to the Chamber before the roll call was concluded. isted now for nearly twenty years. That it has been productive I withdraw my vote, after the statement of the Senator from of the greatest commercial benefit to our people there can be West Virginia [Mr. FAULKNER]. no question whatever. I find by reference to the report of our The roll call was concluded. commercial relations with foreign countries that during 1892 Mr. HIGGINS. I am paired with the Senator from New Jer the imports and exports of the Hawaiian Islands amounted to sey [Mr. McPHERSON], and the junior Senator from ¥ississippi $12~000,000. Of that amount 91.43 per cent was with the United [Mr. MCLAURIN] is paired with the junior Senator from Rhode States. Eighty-five per cent of the shipping to and from those Island[Mr. DIXON]. I have arranged with the Senator from Mis islands, both foreign and domestic, is transacted in American sissippi to_exchange pairs, so that the Senator from New Jersey built vessels, manned by Americans, flying the Stars and Stripes [Mr. McPHERSON] will stand paired with · the Senator from at their peak. Wherever goes the flag there goes the trade. Rhode Island [Mr. DIXON]. I vote "yea.." It is an old saying and a true one, the onlv commerce wherein Mr. McLAURIN. I vote "nay.:' _ the supremacy of-the Stars and Stripes prevails is the trade with Mr. CAREY (after having voted in the affirmative). I voted I:Iawaii. In the port of Honolulu and other ports of the islands inadvertently. I do not know but that I also did so on a previous of the Hawaiian group over ninety-odd per cent of the vessels vote. I am paired with the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. are American built. Out of 197 vessels which entered the ports Ml:TQHELLj, who was called from the Chamber. I therefore of -the Hawaiian Islands in 1892, 172 were American vessels, withdraw my vote. built by American mechanics and flying- the Stars and Stripes. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from Wyoming with- Our business with those islands has been productive of great draws his vote. · benefit to our farmers, who send there ~he products of_ their Mr. TELLER. I am paired with the Senator from Arkansas farms. Every vessel that leaves San Francisco and ports in . [Mr. BERRY]. If he were present I should vote "yea." Oregon and on Puget Sound is laden with the live stock and Mr. GORDON. In order to relieve the Senator from Colo other productions of the American farmer. .- rado [Mr. TELLER] and myself, I have proposed to the Senator While the balance of trade, perhaps, has been a little against from Arkansas [Mr. BERRY], and with his consent and the con us during the past few years, since the adoption of this treaty, sent of the Senator from Colorado, that my pair with the Sena nevertheless it has accrued to the benefit of our people. The tor from Iowa [Mr. WILSON] be transferred to the Senator from machinery for the plantations in Hawaii has been built by our Arkansas [Mr. BERRY], so that both the Senator from Colorado mechanics all throughout the United States, and the merchant and myself can vote. as well has profited by it. I believe the Senate, having unani Mr. TELLER. Then I will vote. I vote "yea." mously voted by implication to extend the right hand of fellow Mr. GORDON. I vote 11 nay." ship to Hawaii, will to-dav by almost the same vote, if not the Mr. DANIEL. I transfer my pair with the Senator from same vote, declare that our commercial relations shall not be Washington [Mr. SQUIRE] to the Senator from Georgia [Mr. interfered with and that our social and business relations shall WALSHJ, and vote "nay." continue as they have for the past twenty years. While, as I Mr. BRICE. I am pa,ired with the junior Senator from Colo .said before, I can not vote_to give five-eighths of a cent a pound rado [Mr. WOLCOTT]. duty on refining sugars, whe-;I it costs only one-half a cent tore '· Mr. PALMER (after having voted in the negative). Inad fine it, I can most heartily vote for the provision for a continu· vert~ntly I voted, understanding that the Senator from South ation, of our relations with those ia!ands:- - .. 5170 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. Jlnm 5, • ~herefore I move that the par~raph be divided, and ask that The Chah· understands that the Senatorirom California asks for a separate vote be had on the proviso commencing in line 12, after- a division o! the question on the amendment. the word H rates" and going down to the word "same/' in line Mr. PERKINS. After listening to the speech of the Sena-to1· 17. I ask that we vote upon that proposition first. from Rhode Island I will withdraw my request for a division. 1\ir. HALE. The Senator from California. wishes to have a Mr. ALLISON .• Is thel'e an amendment now pending to the separate vote on the proviso down to the word" same," in line 17: paragraph? Mr. PERKINS. I wish to have a separate vote on the Ha- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to waiianra-ciprocity clause. . the amendment o! the Senator from Arkansas to. insert the Mr. MANDERSON. It is contained within lines 12 to 17. . paragraph. Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President1 I do not rise to oppose the Mr. ALLISON. I move to strike out the first words o1 the provisions of the paragraph in regard to the Hawaiian treaty, paragraph, "on and after January 1, 1895," and insert before the but to again c:1ll the attention of the Senate and the country to word "there," in line 24, on page 39, "that," so as to read, another one of the gross inconsistancies of the pending bill. ''That there shalT be levied." It is a mere striking out of the The Senate by a solid vote oi the Democratic s1de of the Cham- date . . ber has to·day refused to give a bounty, as we were required t.o Mr. HALE. So that the paragraph will tuko effect upon its do by an equit::tble contract, to the citizens of the United States passage. who are engaged in the production of sugar. The paragraph The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on t.he amend- under consideration proposes to pay out of the pockets of the ment of the Senator from Iowa, whi~h will be read. people of the United States a bounty of licents a pound to every Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I want to vote int-elligently upon woducer o! sugar in the Hawaiian Islands, where, as the Sena- this question. · tor from Connecticut [Mr. PLATT] suggests to me, they use Mr. GRAY. Let the amendment be read. Chinese labor in competition withAmerican•labor. M1·. MITCHELL of Oregon. Very welL . If it is indefensible and un constitutional to. pay a baunty to The SECRETARY. Strike out lin~a 23 and 24 t to and including citizensof the UnitedStates: bywhatprocessoireasoningdoyou the words "eighteen hundred and ninety-five/1 in the following sustain a proposition to pay $4,950,000 per annum to the sugar words: producers of the Hawaiian Islands? Many of the owners of plan- On ~nd after- JanuaJ.•y l, 1895. tations there are not even citizens of the United States. What And insert the word "that;" so as to read: part of the Democratic platform, what part of the doctrine of the 182!. That there shall balevied, collected, etc. Democraticparty,asenunciated by thetwoSenatorsfromLouis- ~r. MITCHELL of Oregon. I understand the Senator from iana and other Senators upon the opposite side of the Cham- Rhode Island to say that the resultof this paragraph, if adopted, ber, is it that permits that- to be don-e? This mosaic of leg- will be to give a bounty of about $4:,000.,000. · islation, which outs in one line a provision that is acknowl- Mr. ALDRICH. Five million dollars. edged to be unconstitutional, and in another puts a provision of ' Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I understand that it would an opposite nature, can not be defended upon any principle amount to giving a. bounty of about ~5,000,000to Claus Spreckels. which has been advocat.edhererofore by any party in the United I shall vote against it. States. Mr. ALLISON. I wish to say just one word respecting the I should like to know how my friend from Texas [Mr. MILLS], ! amendment I have offered. The object of the amendment I who I see is now honoring me with his attention, can support a propose is to make the duty upon sugar take- effect upon the prmrision of this kind. I should like to know how the Senator passage of the act and not on the 1st day of January, 1895. from Del&ware [Mr. GRAY1 whose ideas in regard to what can. I was greatly impressed this morning by the observation made be done within the limits of the Constitution are very strict, can · by the Senator from Nebraska. [11r. ALLEN!, in which he stated vote to take money out of the pockets of the people of the United that because of the Administration of President Harrison and States, and in the form of a bounty pay it to foreign producers the conduct of the Republican party when Mr-. Cleveland came of· sugar. I admit that there are many poll tical reasons for this into power on the 4th of March, 189'J., he found a. depleted Treas action, but if the Constitution is to be obser_ved1 if the policy oi m'y, in facta bankru{}t Treasury, !think, were his words. As a the Democratic party is to stand in any of the provisions of the matter of Ia.ct the report of the Secretary of the Treasury given pending bill, if there. is not to be an absolute abandonment of · to us last December discloses that on the 1st day of July, 1893, even the pretense al tariff reform, then what justification is several months after the inauguration of Mr. Cleveland, there there for this. action? was a. surplus of nearly $3)000,000 in the Treasury, without in- Mr. MILLS. The Senator from Rhode Island need not be eluding the statments made by my friend from Kansas on the sailing into us for trying to get around the repeal of the treaty othe1·side[lv£r. PEFFER] who, I believe, belongstothesameparty which his Republican Administration mader The Senator from to which the Senator from Nebraska belongs~ Rhocle Island knows very well that the treaty with Hawaii was Now the proposition is thn.t the sugar duty, which is recog made under Gen. Grant's Administration. I have been trying nized in the bill to comprehend one-third oi all the" duties to be to. ha-ve it abrogated since I have been in public life. It has not raised. by it, and is a new duty to be imposed, and an increase of been done1 however, and I suppose. the committee in framing duties, is 1:\0t to go into effect until the 1st day of January, 1895, this provision are simply guarding the treaty against-infraction. thus enabling those who desire to import raw sugar to put that Mr. ALDRICH. I presume· the Senator from Texas knows as raw sugar in bond. between now and the 1st day of January, and well as I do that the treaty could be abrogated in the pending then they ea.n have the benefit of the importation and the duty, bill just as well as it cop.ld be done in any other way. - to the destruction of what the Senator from Nebraska says is Mr. MILLS. Will the Senator from Rhode Island vote for its necessary revenue. abrogation? . I want to know what Senators on. this floor favor this exorbi- Mr. ALDRICH. No, I shall not vo·te for that; but I am call- tant consideration to those whorefi.n.esugarin the United States. in"' attention to the inconsistencies of Senators who refuse at The Senator from Rhode Island yesterday stated that between on'£ time to give a bounty to American citizens living in the now and the 1st oi Janua1~y there will probably be imported a United States, and within fifteen minutes of that time vote. to six months' supply of sugar. That means that the sugar duty, give a bounty to the producers of sugar in the Hawaiian Islands. although levied upon the people of the United States beginning Mr.MITCHELLofOreg-on. MayiasktheSenatorfromRhode on the 1st of November, is·not to have the effect of putting into Island a question? the Treasm·y of the United States one single farthing until the Mr. ALDRICH. Certainly. 1st day of July, 1895. M:r. MITCHELL of Oregon. Is it not a fact tha.t the treaty Mr. ALDRICHr For the whole fiscal year. with the Hawaiian Islands made by the RepublicanAdministra- Mr. ALLISON. For the whole fiscal year, when we are told tion was continued by the late Democratic Administratio-n, un- in the newspapers that it will be necessary for the Secretary of der MI". Cleveland, with Mr. Bayard as Secretary of State? the Treasury now1 presently, to again go into the markets of the Mr. ALDRICH. It was not only so continued under the world and sell the bonds of the UnitedSta>tes bearing 4 per cent Democratic, Administration, but, by the action of the Republican interest for the purpose of placing money in the 'rreasury to A.dministratjon in passing the act of 1890, the provision for a carry on the ordinary expenditures of the Governmentr Can it bounty to the producers of sugar in Hawaii was practically be possible that Senators here will vote to postpone the receipts nullified. of the Treasury for one year, as respects the impositio11upon tllis Mr. DOLPH. · I should like to ask the Senator from Rhode necessary article of consumption in the United States, when as Island a question. Do I understand him to say that the amount far as the people of the United States are concerned the duty of duties impose£1 upon. sugar remitted annually under this pro- goes into effect as early as the middle of November or the 1st vision will amount to four and a half_millions? day o.f December of the present year? Mr. ALDRICH. It will amount to $4:,950,000 on the erop of Mr. HARRIS. Will the Senator from Iowa allow me to ask . last year. It will be about $5,000)000 a year. him what date he will propose or favor as th.e time to be fixed The PRESIDING OFFICER~ (Mr. MARTIN in. the chair). a.t which all the duties imposed by the bill shall take effect? . 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. 5771 MI.'. ALLISON. The effect of the amendment which I pro Mr. CULLOM. Under the bill as proposed? pose is that this duty shall take effect upon the passage of the Mr. TELLERr Under the bill as proposed. I am dealing act. with the bill as it is evident the Democratic side have made up Mr. HARRIS. I understand. that. their minds it sha11 pass. Of course I do not know whether all Mr. ALLISON. That is the first I propose. ~he statements are true, but I ~uppose I may allude to it as being Mr. HARRIS. I see. - m the shape the caucus decided that it should pass. In the Mr. ALLISON. Secondly, I will agree that every duty, month of May the receipts of the Government were $6,700,000, where there is an increase of duty, shall take effect on the· pas in round numbers, less than the expenses. So in the thir sage of the act. Where there is. a diminution of duty I think teen ID;._Onths which are to elapse before any revenue will really there should be a reasonable time, as has been given from the be derived from the sugar duty the Government will have beem foundation of the Government to the present, for our own peo in arrears-in other words, will fall behind-$87,000,000, and ple to take care of our internal interests before the diminution thel·e is no provision whatever made in the bill for meeting takes effect. That is what I am for, and I will meet the Sena that. I repeat, if we ever needed revenue we need it now to tor- from Tennessee hereafter as respects what is a reasonable meet the approaching deficiency. time; but I submit to him that whatever may be the policy in I noticed what the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. ALLEN] said regard to the duties reduced it is not wise for us with a depleted about the Democrats coming into power and finding a depleted and depleting Treasury to undertake to postpone any receipts Treasury~ There was in the Treasury more than a hundred mil from this duty until the 1st day of July, 1895, or the lst day oi lion dollars of free gold when Mr. Cleveland was inaugurated. April, 1895. It remained at least one hundred millions for some little timet The great bulk of sugar in the world will be produced be · and then gradually it ran down until it RQJ.Ounted to a little over tween now and the 1st day of November, and the crop of this $65,000,00Uinround numbers; and then we put into the Treasury year will pour itself into the United States under the stimulus $58,000,000 by the sale of 5 per cent ten-year bonds. of this duty which is to take effect on the 1st day of January, It is down. to-day probably to somewhere in the neighborhood and it will stay here in bond, and not only that, but by staying of seventy-four or seventy-five million dollars; it was down to in bond it will increase its value, because there is a pravisionin $78,000,000, according to the last Government statement I have the billlate.r on to the effect that when goods are taken out oi seen. In the month of May there went out of the Treasury $22,- bond they shall be wei~hed out and the amount stated shall not 000,000 of gold m-ore than came in. That is a net loss from the be as weighed in. Thus sugar day by day and month by month Treasm'y of what is called free gold of, I think, $22.121,000 in irra bonded warehouse will have ail increased value by reason round numbers. How_long is it going to take before we shall of the evaporation of the water i:n the raw sugar, and when the be compelled to sell more bonds to fill up the gold in the Treas sugar importers come to take the sugar out of bond it will have ury, ostensibly to maintain the credit, but really to meet the a less weight than when it was placed in bond. current expenses of the Government. With all this, it is proposed now by Senators on the other Yet, when the question is presented fairly and squarely to the side, unless they consent to the amendment which I propose, American people whether we are to iseue bonds to pay the cur that all this advantage shall inure to-thosewhoimportand those rent expenses of this Govei·nment, the Democratic majority, who produce sugar as against those who consume sugar, and charged with the administration of public affairs, postpone the against the Government of the United States, which according collection of this duty until such time ~hat a year must elapse to the confession of all is now requiring re"Venue day by day to before any portion of it can go into the Treasury, and during a meet its current expenditures. considerable portion of that time the people of ~he United States Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. May I ask the Senator from will be p aying the same p1·ice for sugar they would be paying- if Iowa a; question? the duty wa..c; being actually collected and passing into the Treas Mr. ALLfSON. Certainly. , ury of the United States, beoause there is given to the sugar Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. Suppose, instead of allowing su trust the opportunity to fill up their storehouses with sugar. gar-to co-me in free until the 1st of January next, it should be No one need say to me that the trust can not accumulate a sup made to pay a duty on and after the 3Dth of June, how much ply of sugar for six month:;. They can accumulate it, because would the Treasury be benefited, in the judgment of the Sena they have the capital; they can accumulate it, because sugar is ' . tor from Iowa, in the way of duties? an article of such character that it may be accumulated and be Mr. ALLISON. Necessarily that is a matter partly of con saved and the loss upon it be trifling. The sugar trust, under jecture; but I have already stat~d that-the impOl'ters will bring this bill, will as certainly fix the price o! sugar to the American in a three months' supply ora six months' supply, and that the consumer as that the American consumer buys it. Governmen-t of the United States will enjoy no benefit from this Mr. President~ this may be good, wise financiering, but it is - provision until the 1st day of April, 1895. That is a matter of such financiering as has never been heard of in this country be absolute demonstration. And yet we are told that this great fore; it is such financiering that no Senator on this floor dare duty, amounting to more than one-third of all the duties in the stand up and defend it; it is such financiering as will bring ever bill, shall be postponed until the 1st day of April or the lst day lasting disgrace upon this body if it passes it. of July, 1895. If it be necessary. to have a duty upon sugar, that duty should Mr. JONES of Arkansas. I should like to call the attention commence the day we pass this bill. If yotl want to give to the of the Senator from Iowa, before he sits down, to the fact that sugar producers of Louisiana a bounty, give to them a bounty · when we passed the McKinley bill there was provision made for and give to them a duty also; but get the money that is to. come an increase in the price of tin plate, and if I am not mistaken into the Treasury, instead of letting it go into the pockets of the time at which thH.t act was to go into effect was postponed this infernal trust-" infernal," I say, because of the scandal it until some time afterwards. That is hardly in the line of what has brought upon ·public administration. was suggested by the Senator from Iowa just now as being his I condemn nGbody; I make no insinuations at all of improper strictly inflexible rule, always to be governed by it. conduct by anybody in public life, but I do say what everybody . Mr. ALLISON. That was a question of revenue. knows, that. this Senate has baen held up to the American peo Mr. JONES of Arkansas. It was a question of increased tax. ple as being corrupt, and a great majority of our constituent.s Mr. ALLISON. Therewasnotanexcessivedutyupon tin plate. believe thatcorruptionexistsin connection with the sugar tariff, It was merely an increase of duty, which is not this case at all. and that this taritf is to be put through because certain individ Mr. TELLER. The duty on sugar is defended on this floor uals have an interest in it. I do not belie-ve that, but I believe strictly as a revenue measure. I do not suppose there is a Sen that a certain influence has been brought to bear upon the Sen ator upon the other side of the Chamber who would vote for it ate that has compelled; at least the minority of it, to differ with H he could not satisfy his conscience tha.t it is a revenue meas the majority, and to compel nine-tenths, as I have said, of Sen ure. Then he draws the fine distinction, if he happens to be ators on the other side of the Chamber to yield their judgment from a State where they want protection, that incidental pro to the judgment of a few men whom I do not know and do not tection will come with the revenue, and he says ~ as the Senator care to know. from Louisiana aaidt if it comes as protection it is robbery of I do not pretend to know whom the Senator from Missouri the grossest kind. If, however, it comesincidentally, then it is [Mr. V ESTJ talks about when he says ''we have been compelled within the provisions of the Constitution and the rules of equity to do this;'' I do not pretend to know, and I do not want to know, and justice. whom the Senator from Texas [Mr. MILLS] talks about, when Mr. CULLOM. And accm'ding to the Democratic platform. he says "we .have been compelled to do this thing against our Mr. TELLER. It is plain there is to be no revenue under this judgment." I know that you have not the right to compel the provision for a year, and yet it is for the purposeo.t revenue. If American people to pay this duty so as-to put it into the pockets we need the revenue at all we are going to need it this yeat'. of a trust; and that is what you are doing, and that is what the. We never shall need it so badly as we shall need it in the com American people will know you are doing. ing fiscal year. It is morally certain that for thirteen months If you believe it is necessary to pass this bill, you should assert. no revenue will be derived !rom the sugar duty. yourselves _and say _that while you give to the sugl\1' ~odu.cers 5772 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 5, a proper tariff ror protection, and while you give to the trust all Mr. PETTIGREW. I move to amend the pending amend reasonable protection as manufacturers of sugar, you will not ment by striking out, on page 40, after the words ''ad valorem,, allow them to rob the American people and the American Gov in line 2, all of lines 3, 4, and 5, and down to and including the ernment at the same time; for that is whatyouaredoing. Deny words" ad valorem," in line 6. This will take one-eighth of 1 it as you may, every dollar that ought to go into the Treasury cent per pound duty off refined sugar, and it seems to me the will go into the pockets of this trust. duty of 40 per cent ad valorem is already too great for this trust. Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I desire to inquire whether there The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed bv the is any amendment now pending? Senator from-South Dakota to the amendment of the Senator The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amend from Arkansas will be stated. . ment proposed· by the Senator from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON] to the The SECRETARY. On page 40, line 2; after the words" ad va- amendment of the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. JONESj, which lorem," it is proposed to strike out: . will be stated. And upon all sugars above No. 16 Dutch standard in color and upon all The SECRETARY. In lines 23 an<;]. 24, it is proposed to strike sugars which have been discolored there shall be levied, collected, and paid out the words 1 'on and after January 1, 1895," a.nd insert the a duty of one-eighth of 1 cent per pound in addition to the said duty of 40 word "that;" so as to read: per cent ad valorem. That there shall be levied, collected, and paid on all sugars and on all tank The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the amendment bottoms, sirups, etc. proposed by ~he Senator from South Dakota to the amendment Mr. HILL. The effect of the amendment will be, then, to proposed by the Senator from Arkansas. provide that the duty shall go into effect upon the passage of Mr. HILL. I call for the yeas and nays. _ the act. The yeas and nays were ordered; and the .Secretary proceeded to call the roll. Mr. H~LE. Let us have the yeas and nays on the amend ment, Mr. President. Mr. CALL (when his name was called). I am paired with the The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secret.. . -. 1894. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~ENATE. 5·773 under some sort of a :flag of truce, perhaps, but it avails nothing. try. A duty of 1 cent a pound would mean that we should re No matter what may be the overtures made to us upon this side ceive probably in 189! $36,000,000 from the duty. This calcula· of the intrenchment, still the position is secure, and no appeal tion goes on to show, taking the percentage of increase o! pop. for common honesty in fulfilling the contracts of the Govern ulation, the increase of consumption of sugar. and the increased ment-seems to be of avail. production of beet sugar and of cane sugar, if a bounty is main· We have tried, by frequent amendments, to continue that tained with a fair duty, this net result, that in 1893 vie should which was fairly agreed to be continued until1905 by the bounty receive a net revenue from sugar of $26,590,000; that is to say, provision of the McKinley act, but we are voted down. We tried paying out the bounty from the $36,000,000 received, we should to have that which the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. BLANCH have that net result. ARD] called a few weeks ago a dimuendo bounty-! like the Up to 1900 we should have a total net sugar revenue, after term, and it rolled out from the lips of the Senatorfrom Louisi paying the bounty, of $128,413,557, making a yearly ave-rage for ana like a sweet morsel, and I am glad to adopt it in my vocabu the eight years of $16,051,700. It seems to me from the stand lary-we tried a diminishing bounty, but that has failed, and point of economy and the standpoint of fair treatment and hon even the Senator from Louisiana, whose record here seems to est, square dealing, that if we can not do anything else we at be so extremely different from his record when he was a mem least can do this. - ber of another body, voted against the diminishing bounty. Mr. HALE. Mr. President, the amendment submitted by the Now, Mr. President, the amendment that I propose to offer is Senator from Nebraska contains two clear, distinct, absolute one perhaps_ that ought to go under a flag of truce to the in propositions: first, the duty imposed, and secondly, the bounty. trenchment on the other side. It is a proposition for one-half I do not wish to discuss the amendment, but I ask that it may bounty and one-half duty. It is in the direction of a half-way be divided and that the sense of the Senate be first taken upon performance of contract~ in the way of partial honesty, and I the duty. send it to the desk and ask that it may be read, and after it is The VICE-PRESIDENT. The queslion is upon the first read, I shall have another suggestion or two to make concern branch of the amendment proposed by the Senator from Ne ing it. braska. The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment proposed by the Mr. PETTIGREW. I should like to ask the Senator from Senator from Nebraska to the amendment of the Senator from Nebraska whether there is a discriminating duty in favor of_re Arkansas will be stated. fined sugar in his amendment? The Secretary read as follows: Mr. MANDERSON. Yes, thera is a discriminating duty of All sugars, tank bottoms. sirups or ca.ne juice or or beet juice, melada, three-tenths of a cent. . concentrated melada, concrete and concentrated molasses, testing by the Mr. PEFFER. I should like to inquire of the Senator from - polariscope not above 80°, shall pay a duty o! nine-tenthS o! 1 cent per Nebraska whether there is any limihtion as to when the time pound, and every degree or traction or a degree above 80° and not above 98° as shown by the polariscope test, or above No. 16, Dutch standard in color, shall expire? shall pay one-hundredth of 1 cent per pound additional, and all sugars testing Mr. MANDERSON. As to the bounty there is; in other above 28° as shown by the polariscope test, or above No. 16 Dutch standard words, it is covered by the provisions of the McKinley act that 1n color, and upon all sugars which have been uiscolored .there shall be levied, collected and paid three-tenths or 1 cent per pound in addition to the would expire in 1905. above rates, ana1 upon all tank bottoms, sirups or cane juice oro! beet juice, Mr. PEFFER. What about the duty? melada, concent.rated melada, concrete or concentrated molasses which are Mr. MANDERSON. There is no limit as to time. The ~nly imported from, or are the product o! any country which, at the time the same are exported therefrom, pays, directly or indirectly, a. bounty on the limit of that is any session of Congress when it may be changed. export thereof, t.here shall be leVied, collected, and paid a duty o! one-tenth Mr. PEFFER. The intention of the amendment is that the or 1 cent per pound in addition to the foregoing rates: Provided further, duty shall be continued perpetually and that the bounty shall That there shall be paid, from any moneys in the Treasury not other wise appropriated, under the provision3 o! sect-ton 3689 of the Revised Stat expire in 1905? Would not that be its effect? utes, to the producer of sugar testing not less than 90° by the polariscope, Mr. MANDERSON. There is no more limit upon the duty from beets, sorghum, or sugar cane grown within the United States, or trom provided in this amendment than upon any duty in the tariff maple sap produced wlthln the United States, a bounty of 1 cent per pound, and upon sugar test.ing less than 90° by the polariscope-and not less thansoo, bill. Of course, it is limited to the pleasure of Congress. a bounty or seven-eighths of 1 cent per pound, under such rules and regula Mr. CULLOM. I ask that the first branch of the amendment tions as the Commissioner o! Internal Re-venue, with the approval ot the be read. Secretary of the Treasury, shall prescribe; and in order to execute this pro vision, paragraphs 232, 233.234, 23<>, and 236 or section 1 o! the act entitled "An The VICE-PRESIDENT. The first branch of the amendment act to reduce the revenue and equalize duties on imports, and tor other pur proposed by the Senator from Nebraska will be stated. poses," approved Oc.tober 1, 1890, are hereby reenacted and made applicable The Secretary read as follows: hereto, anything to t~e contrary 1n this ~ct notwithstanding. All sugars, tank bottoms, sirups or cane juice or of beet juice, mela.da., Mr. MANDERSON. Mr. President, the bounty provided in concentrated mela.da, concrete and concentrated molasses, testing by the polariscope not above 80°, shall pay a duty or nine-tenths or 1 cent per pound, the McKinley bill was-2 cents per pound for sugar testing above 90 and every degree or fraction of. a degree above 80, and not above 98° as per cent by the polariscope, and H cents per pound for sugar shown by the polariscope test, or above No.16Dutchstandardin color, shall testing under that grade. This amendment-proposes to cut that pay one-hundredth o! 1 cent per pound additional, and all sugars testing above 93° a..'> shown by the polariscope test, or above No. 16 Dutch standard squarely in half. It gives a bounty of 1 cent per pound on suaar in color, and upon all sugars which have been discolored, there shall be testing above 90, and.of seven-eighths of a cent per pound.,on levied, collected, and paid three-tenths of 1 cent per pound in addition to sugar testing under that grade. It proposes as to duty that the above r ates, and upon all tank bottoms, sirups of cane juice or ot beet juice, melada, concentrated melada, concrete or concentrated molasses. where the sugar is under 80 per cent, it shall pay a duty of nine which are imported !rom or are the product Qf any country, which, at the tenths of a cent per pound; that from grade 80 to grade 98, for time the same are exported therefrom, pays, directly or indirectly, a bounty each increasing grade it shall pay one one-hundredths of a cent on the export thereof, there shall be levied, collected, and paid a. duty or one per pound, and above 98, being the refined sugar, three-tenths tenth of 1 cent per pound in addition to the foregoing rates. of a cent a pound in addition thereto; and where foreign countries Mr. TELLER. Mr. President, if we are under any obligation to give an export bounty, there shall be paid upon that grade of continue the bounty to the sugar producers, we are under an ob sugar, meaning, of course, the... sugar of Germany, Austro-Hun ligation to continue it exactly as the sts.tute of 1890 provided. gary, etc., one-tenth of 1 cent per pound, in order to equalize . The attempt to do halfway justice does not commend itself to this export duty. _ . my judgment at all. I think iC we are going to do anything we ·~· Mr. President, the advantages of this are apparent. It seems should do the whole, or else we ·should let it go. to be conceded by everybody that if we impose .a duty upon su lam opposed to any duty upon sugar. The American people gar under the present condition of the sugar production of this had no reason to suppose when this Congress assembled that country, that duty will be added to the cost of sugar.- Sugar is the~e would be a duty imposed upon sugar. We had·put sugar now 5 cents per pound. If you add that to it which is equivalent upon the free list in 1890, and no political party ever fiuggested to H cents a pound, U]llder the proposed duty it would mean that that it would put sugar on the dutiable list; nobody in this coun ~ugar would advance to 6! cents per pound. This graded rate try expected it, and I shall not vote for any duty· on sug-ar, .no IS nn average of 1 cent per pound duty upon sugar. I think it matter how small it may be. probably would increase the cost on sugar to that extent; but The VICE-PRESIDE.NT. Theq~estion is on the first branch 1t would be much less in cost under this provision than under of the amendment submitted by the Senator from Nebraska to that which is proposed by the committee. It would· save to a the amendment of the Senator from Arkansas. · degree, a~ least, as it seems to me, the pledged faith of the Gov- The amendment to the amendment was rejected. - ernment m the enactment of 1890; and from the economic stand The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question now is upon the sec point-for in the time allotted to me I have not the opportu ond branch of the amendment of the Senator from N e bra'3ka to nity to enlarge upon it-it would simply mean that the one hand. the amendment of the Senator from Arkansas, which will be would wash the other, and from the income from the duty we read. should be able to pay the bounty during many years to come. The Secretary read as follows: _ -· .. I have a calculaticm here based upon the proposition of 1 cent Providedf-ut•ther, That there shall be paid !rom any moneys in the Treas duty and 1 cent bounty, giving the total consumption of sugar, ury not otherwise appropriated under the provisions o! section 3689 of the Revised Statutes, to the producer ot sugar testin~ not less than 90° by the u.s was stat~d the other day, at 4,296,000,000 pounds in this coun- polariscope, from beets, sorghum, or sugar cane grown within the United 5774 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUNE 5,. States, or from ma}>le sap- produced within the United: States, a bounty of The cause of all this excitement is to be- found in the tarilr legislation at. 1 cent per pound, and upon such suga;r testing less thlhl 90° degrees by th'9 Washington. Under the McKinley law the company gets its raw sugar free polariscope and notless than 80°, a bounty of seven-eighths of 1 cent pe1· pound, , and has fi protection equal to one~half cent a pound on the 1·efined. under such rules and regulations as the Commissioner of In11ernal Revenue, The Wilson. bill, as passed by the House of Representatives-, put all sugar With the approval of the Secretary o:t the Treasury, shall prescribe, and in on the free list. The Senate Finance Committee changed this and put on a. or-der to execute this provision, paragraphs 232, 233, 23'!, 235, ancl236 of section specific tariff that, it is estimated, gives the company about one-half cent on 1 of the act entitled "An act to reduce the revenue and equalize duties on refined sugar, but by taxing the raw article, according to the refiners, made imports, ancl: for other purpose , " approved Oetober 1, 1890, are hereby reen the schedules more unfavor::].ble to the company than those of the lowet acted and made applicable hereto, anj"thing; to the contrary in this aGt not- House. withstanding, ~ During. the week advices from Washington have reported another agree ment by which the tar.ttr on suga1r would be changed ·to 40 per cent ad va Mr. MANDERSON. I do not care about a yea-and-nay vote lorem, With an eighth additional on the refined above a certain standard, upon either or these propositions, but on the question of bounty and an additional ta.x on refined sugar imported from those countries which, I ask that the vote be taken by a. division. like Germa-ny, pay a bounty on exports of sugar. These schedUles are accounte-d vet'y favorable to the refining company, ThA amendment to the amendment was- rejected; there being, and the:tr announcement has led to the active and buoyant market reported. on a division-ayes 22, noes 31. Another point- said to be very favorable to the American Suga1· Refining The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question reeursontheamend~ Company is that the company has bought enormous quantities of raw sugar in anticipation or a tax on importations. ment proposed by the Senator fro,m Arkansas [Mr. JONES]. In case the tariff. is fixed at 40' per cent on raw sugar lairge profits wiil ac 1\1r. HALE. What is that amendment? crue to the- company, by reasou of its heavy purchases made when sugar was ·' Mr. HARRIS. It is the amendment printed in the bill. on the free list. A few large stock brokerage· houses in Wall street do the larger pattot the Mr. HALE. I only wish, Mr. President, to call the attention bUs-iness in sugar, and the larger pa.rtof the manipulation is in their hands. of theSena.te, possibly of the country, to a little contemporaneous DeaconS. V. White was heavily inte-rested in the stock during last sum history. mer's panic-, anti upon his failure the stock sold at 61~, the lowest for a· very longtime. . . Five weeks ago we were all here in Washington groping in Later in the day the· stock touched 104t, then steadify advanced to 100, the the dark as to what would be the outcome a! this vexed ques quotation ~t 1 o'cioek. Excitement had subsided, though-trading was ac· tion of sugar·. The attention ofthe whole country had been di tive. rected to Washin~ton: to the Senate, to the committee having I quote, as a reflection of the sentiment of the country upon this measure in charge, and to the majority of that committee; the per of the Senator trom Texas to New Eng'J:a;nd '01 free_i:ron ore and tion is reached in the Senate we shaH try on this side of the free coal is broken. Chamber to secure, if possible; a vot3 for free sugae. This strug },!r. President, we have heard a great deal in recent debates gle will not end to·day in the Senate; it certainly will be con of the infamy of the McKinley tariff measure. What shall be tinued before the American people, and their judgment taken. said in defense of this bill if it becomes a law, and of the broken I tell you, Senators, that no act of yours, no pl~ovision in this promise of free raw material? If free raw material is the pr~n bill will be so cert:tin to bring upon you and your party the con ciple, then it is infamous to .put iron ore and coal upon the dutulr demnation of the American people n.s this one; and when I say' ble list; and if that is not the principle, but protection is the '' yol'll." party,'' I include also the rep.resentatives of the third prihciple, then it is infamous to put lumber and wool upon the party. Those gentlemen have always asserted that they were free list. the friends of the people. They have signalized that frienQ.ship Senators mn.y take whichever view they please, or they may to-day by joining their Democratic allies in forcing up:on the declare that they have no principle, and care for no principle people.of the United States this unjustifiable, indefensible, and in the construction of this bill; but what is to be thoug-ht after infamous tax. such promises as have been made, when they make this dis fr. PALMER. Mr. President, I know how precious time i , crimination, which enables the Senator from },faryland, who bu.t I can not permit the statements which have been made by spoke so plausibly the othe! day, and the Senator from Ohio Senators on t he other side to pass unnoticed. [Mr. BRICE], who aided him in the work, to get adutyuponiron A few days ago we appointed a committee to in-quire as to the ore and a duty upon coal, and yet refuse a duty to the innumer source of certain charges which imputed infamous conduct to able producers of lumber and the millions of producers of wool? members of the Senate. I thought therr it was useless, but I If there is any infamy in connection with tariff legislation, his have to-day witnessed the conduct of Senators on the other side tot·y will show that the infamy is in this bill which is now be- and I have heard chalvges against members of this body so much fore the Senate. . worse than anything. th~ newspaper gentlemen have chosen to The Senator from Ma1·yland spoke aoout the sunlight of De attribute to us, that it does seem as if this was an occasiou. for a mocracy. There is not a word or a· line in this bill from begin modest protest against it. ning to end that was constructed in the sunlight. It has been The Senator ft'om Maine (Mr. HALE] :read some newsp-ap8r constructed in the deep holes of this Capitol; it has been con attacks upon the Senate. He did not indorse them~ he did not structed in dark by-places; ·it has been .constructed in secret stand up in his place ancl say, '' I believe thesa charges to be out-of-sight places; and, Mr. President, itough.tto be smHten to truo." He simply read charges imputing improper conduct to 'death, if not by the -sunlight of Heaven, by lightningtha-t ought Senators, and left the matter there. He bec3me the mel'e re to flash from the heavens and utterly tear it to 'Pieces and de tailer of newspaper scandal. stroy it. The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. ClrA_NDLER] 'lt'tte1-ed Mr. ·DOLPH. The Senator from Maine [Mr. HALE] sug and employed the word "infamous" more than once. The gested that we -sh'Ould l-ook to-morrow at the repo'l't of the deal Senator is the licensed Thersites of this body, and such impu ings in the stock of the sugar trust to ·see t-he effect of the vote tations coming from him do not startle us mueb; but the g1-eat to·day; but., as I did nO"t get the floor in time to make a sugges leader of the Re-1>ublicn.n party, tbe Senator from Rhode Island tion 'to hlm while he was-0'11 his feet, I desire to read-fL·om the [Mr. ALDRICH], used the word u infamous·:' as applicable tg Sen l"eJ>ort in the Washington Evening Star concerning finance 3tlld ators on this side and to the party we represent. I ask the Sen trade. It is headed and reads as follows: ator is that consistent with propriety? FINANCE AND TRADE-SUGAR STOCK ROSE AFTER THE VOTE IN THE SEN Mr. ALDRICH. I beg the Senator's pardon. I made no such .ATE-GREAT ADV.ANT.AGE \1.'0 THE TRUS-T-NO IMPORTANT CHANGES IN THE statement. .I said this tax was infamous, and if I could employ REGUl:..A.lt UlS~G'ENElU.L 'MARltK~ RE'PbltTS. any stronger word than that in charact'61'izing it, I should be [Special d!SJ>ateh to the Evenmg Star.] glad to do so. NEW YORK, Jtln£5. Mr. PALMER. The Senator spoke about the majority 'To-aay~s ·ma;rk.e't opened strong at fractional gains tbroughout the list. Sugar was 'the center of :attraction, and ·opened strong at a gain o:f 1~ pel' cravenly submitting. I am nottroubledaboutthat, but the Sen cent over yesterday's final figures. After a further gain of 1 per cent, to 100, ator threatens his associateson thisfl.oor. Mr. President. I have at which price the stock was given excellent suppor~. the advance was sud spent my hfein fighting the arroganceof men who had remained denly stayed to await the Sena"te's action on tbe schedule. The buying dur ing the morning was by brokers identified with every rise of recent date, in power until they had become .insolent. I need not refe1· to and is believed to have been for inside interests. the past, but the protection ;party has retained power until it is As u~al, the trading was conducted on a most liberal scale, l.n.rge amounts unmeasured in its denun..ciations of those wh-o differ with it, being quickly absorbed by the iuaugurator.s of the advance. A rise of~ per cent from previous high figures followed the announcement that the Sen and it seems to me that those of us who differ with that p::trty a'te had agreed uPOn January. 1; 1895, as the date on which the schedule about the wisdom of protection are subject to the most ·viole-nt - shollld become operative. This is a decided advantage to 'the trust, as it arraignmerlts. gives it the privile~e ofim'porting l'MV sugar for six months under the pl'o - visions of the existmg tari.tr bilL Mr. President, so far as I am concerned, as I have sai-d, I have From this clause alone, as has been pointed out in the several speeches spent a lifetime in fighting men who have grown arrogant and made against _the adoption of this schedule, the company will derive an insolent from the long possession of power. That is the char· enonnous profit. If the figutes representing the present earning capacity of this corporation be true, as reported by those Senators opposed to the aeter1stic of th-ose who have been so long protected . by large adoption of the schedule, the present market price or the stock is a "ery drafts upon the labor of the people of the country. They are unfair estimate of its intrinsic value. . not tolerant; they are not patient; they do not submit to the Mr. ALDRICH. Mr. President, it is evident that the die is corrections which come from the change of public opinion. cast. The spectacle of a great party responsible for legislation, Such charges are npt to be enaured, Mr. Pre-sident. The news· but hopelessly and helplessly under the control of influences out papers treat us so much better than our colleagues and associ side of this Chamber, must be an humiliating one to the Ameri ates on the other side of the Chamber that it is a comfor-t, after can people. all, to read the language of some really straight, modest news If the Senators upon the other side of this aisle should vote paper writer. upon the propositions cont.ained in this schedule according to It is astonishing that gentlemen venture .upon language like their conscience and judgment, it would receive the almost uni this. If they would simply read a charge f!'om a newspaper and versal condemnation of Democratic Senators. Not over six Sen say ''We will be responsible for the truth of the statement, n there ators upon that side believe in the justice or equity of the prop might be some little hope. But, Mr. President, I will say that ositions now to be approved in Committee of the Whole. Cer I came to this Senate a living protest against the worn-out po tain persons not known to the Constitution or the laws, not rec litical theories of those who had been too long entrenched in ognized as any part of the National Government, have demanded force:: and I trust to see the time come when Senators on the that certain provisions shall be written in the statutes of the other side, wbo are supporters of this protective policy, will United States, and the members of a great party cravenlv sub- recognize the possibility that those who oppose them are honest 1 mit to these demands. ~ and at least concede that they are independent. I know that no appeal which I can make at this time will The VICE-PRESIDEl--1..-rr. The question is on agreeing to the change a vote upon the pending proposition, but I do say to Sen amendment proposed by the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. JONES]. ators upon the other side that this is not the last hour or the Mr. FRYE and Mr. WASHBURN called for the yeas and nays. last minute for ~he discussion o~ this question. I indulge the The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded hope that when m the Senate this schedule shall be reached for to·call the roll. consideration a quickened public conscience will affect the votes Mr. BRICE (when his name wa.S called). I am pn.ired with of Senators ancl that there may ba a reversal of the 'decision the junior Senator from Colorado [Mr. WoLCOTT]. made here to-day. The closeness of two or three of the votes Mr. CALL (when his name was called). I announce my pair shows the possibility that this verdict may be reversed. with the Senator from Vermont [Mr. MORRILL]. There may be considerations o'r 'COnditions other than those I Mr. HIGGINS (when his name was called). I am authorized have suggested"' which will make a difference in the decision by the ~nator from New York [Mr. HILL] to transfer my pair upon this question; and I say to you now, that when this ques- with the senior Senator from New Jersey [Mr. fcPHE:ASON1 to. ' 5776 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. JUlfE 5, the junior Senator from South Carolina [Mr. IRBY], and I vote The motion was -agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the ''nay." · consideration of executive business. After twenty minutes spent Mr. PASCO (when the name of M·r.JARVISwas called). I was in executive session the doors were reopened, arid (at 6 o'clock requested to announce that on this vote the Senator from North and 5 minutes p. m.) the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Carolina [Mr. JARVIS] is paired with the Senator from Ohio Wednesday, June 6, 1894, _at 10 o'clock a.m. [Mr. SHERMAN]. Mr. McLAURIN (when his name was called). I announce mv pair with the junior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. DIXoNj. NOM_INATIONS. If he were present I should vote " yea." · Executive nominations received,. by the Senate June 5, 1894. Mr. PALMER (when his name was called). I again announce mypairwith theSenatorfromNorthDakota[Mr. HANSBROUGH]. ASSISTANT TREASURER UNITED STATES. If he were present I should vote "yea." Campbell P. Berry, of California, to be Assistant Treasuret• The roll call was concluded. of the United States at San Francisco, Cal., to succeed John P. Mr. GORDON. I transfer my pair with the Senator from Iowa Jackson, whose term of office has expired b~ limitation. [Mr. WILSON] to the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. BERRY], and will vote. I vote '' yea." · UNITED STATES ASSAYER. - Mr. FRYE. The Senator from Maryland [Mr. GORMAN] is Eugene B. Braden, of Montana, to b~ assayer of the United paired with the senior Senator from Nevada [Mr. JONES~ States assay office at Helena, Mont., to succeed William D. Mr. TELLER. I wish to state that my colleague [Mr. WoL Wheeler, removed. COTT] is absent from the Senate by its leave, on a.ccount of ill ness. He is paired with the Senator from Ohio [Mr. BRICE]. If COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS. he had been present he would vote on these questions with the Hampden H. Dashiell, of Maryland, to b3 collector of customs minority. for the eastern district in the State of Maryland, to succeed L. Mr. ALLISON. I desire to announce that my colleague [Mr. Edward P. Dennis, whose term of office has expired by limita- WILSON] is det..