'w T ""' .' f "'
"fWTT
M
M
The Commoner.
v-
vf
'AUGUST 6, 1'90
The Tariff in Congress
The conferees on the tariff bill come to an
agreement, Friday, July 30. On that day Mr.
Payne of New York presented a report to the
house. It is pretty well understood that tho
bill is by no means "downward revision," but
that on tho contrary it puts heavier burdens
upon the consumers. A desperate effort is be
ing made by republican leaders to make it ap
pear that the measure is an improvement in
tho way of tariff legislation. Even Mr. Payne,
who is chairman of tho ways and means com
mittee of the house, is posing as a' "tariff re
former," and he claims the bill is a real reform
measure. Mr. Payne has issued this descrip
tion of the bill as reported by tho conferees:
The most marked reductions are in metals,
which in some instances show decreases of 50
per cent.
Lumber duties are cut over a third.
Wool is about unchanged, but tho cotton
schedule is reconstructed.
Glove duties are reduced.
Oilcloths and linoleums are heavily cut.
'Practically no change is made in sugar and
tobacco.
Hides are on the free list, and manufactures
of leather reduced.
Petroleum comes in free.
There is an increase in spirits and wines.
Window glass of the common sort is given
a reduction.
Wood pulp and paper are cut almost half.
Soft coal is cut down 22 cents a tori.
Binding twine remains on the free list.
There are moderate increases in some agri
cultural schedules.
The Washington correspondent for the Omaha'
World-Herald wired his paper under date of
'July 30 as follows:
The more the conference report is examined
the worse it is found to be. Dolliver told the
Iowans that the Payne statement indulges abso
lute misrepresentations of plain facts concern
ing the effect of the new cotton schedule. Mc
Cumber of North Dakota is mad because every
thing he wanted has been taken away from him
in the conference. He ig even accounted a pos
sible insurgent against the report, despite that
he is on the finance committee and was one
of the leaders in making the bill as Aldrich
wanted it.
Convinced that republican Insurgency has
spent its strength and that the time has arrived
for the democrats to fight the measure, the sen
ate democrats are forming plans for a deter
mined effort to filibuster the bill into its grave.
So nearly as has developed thus far, the fili
buster originated with Bailey of Texas. The
senator found an excuse in the duty on cotton
bagging. He warned the republican conferees
at the session at which the democrats were per
mitted to see the work rf the majority that
he would fight this item.
"I'll stay here till December, if I can get a
half dozen men to help me, before I'll let that
discrimination be written into the law," he de
clared. Then he proceeded to explain:
"You have written in here free binding twine
for the farmers of the north, but you put a
duty on the cotton bagging in which the south
ern farmer must put his crop. Cotton is what
makes the national balance of trade favorable.
Year by year, that is the record; if there were
no cotton to sell, the balance would be against
us. In those few years when there has been a
few millions against us it would have been hun
dreds of millions against us for the sale of cot
ton abroad. The discrimination against the
southerner is one that can't be permitted. You
must either put binding twine under a like duty
or else take off the duty on cotton bagging;
otherwise there will surely be a fight on the
bill."
The republican conferees listened with inter
est, but without conviction. They didn't think
Bailey would do it.
But before the conference report had got into
print for the general public it became known
that Bailey was feeling out the cotton senators
with a view to making good his threat. Before
the afternoon was half over it was known that
he had seen a good share of the democrats, and
that without exception they had pledged their
support to him.
"Yes, it undoubtedly means a test of physical
endurance," said a senator who knew the plan.
"They will doubtless try the continuous session
method of closure on us;., but at that we can
stand It. Wo will make It an hard for them
as they make it for us."
On the evening of Saturday, July 31 the
house adopted tho conference report of the tariff
bill by a vote of 195 to 183.
Not enough of the insurgent republicans re
mained true in order to enable tho 'democrats
to defeat the measuro Tho way in which tho
standpatters won their victory is described in a'
special dispatch from Washington to the Lin
coln (Neb.) Journal, a republican paper. That
dispatch follows:
The defection of two Nebraska insurgents and
two from Wisconsin who at tho critical timo
turned their backs on their records of insur
gency and joined the organization, enabled the
Cannon forces to win tonight In t'jeir fight to
adopt the conference report on the tariff bill.
The four whose desertion made this result pos
sible were Kinkaid and Hlnshaw of Nebraska.
Cooper and Morse of Wisconsin. All four of
them have been almost uniformly insurgents
from tho beginning of the special session Had
they stayed tonight with the forces with which
they have heretofore voted the house organi
zation would have sustained a crushing defeat,
and the tariff bill would have been rejected and
sent back to conference for further consider
ation. The outcome was a sad blow to the insurgents
who stood by their fight to the end. Their
chance of winning was on this vote if over.
Their defeat by reason of defection from their
own ranks at a time when a number of regulars
joined them in opposition to the bill, and when
victory was fairly within their grasp, was tho
most bitter experience they have had since their
fight began.
When 8 o'clock came, tho hour for beginning
to vote on the conference report, Mr. Mann of
Illinois rose to move that tho bill bo recommit
ted to the conference, with instructions to ac
cept no duty on print paper higher than $2 per
ton. On this motion, If he could have had the
chance to make it, he would surely have won,
for the votes were pledged.
But the speaker know Mann's plan, and in
stead of recognizing Mann gave his recognition
to Payne, who Instead made tho straightout mo
tion to recommit. On this he at once moved
the previous question. The position was much
stronger on the Mann than on tho Payne mo
tion, and that was why Payne was recognized,
only one motion to recommit being allowed.
The previous question was, on roll call, ordered,
and then the roll was immediately called again,
on the main question, "Shall the bill be recom
mitted to the conference?" This was the test
vote of the fight. It was rejected ayes 18 G,
nays 19i.
Those republicans who voted with tho dem
ocrats to recommit were: Carey, Lenroot and
Nelson of Wisconsin; Davis, Lindbergh, Miller,
Nye, Pickett, Kendall and Woods of Iowa; Madi
son and Murdock of Kansas; Mann of Illinois;
Norris of Nebraska; Polndexter of Washington
and Southwick of New York.
Those insurgent republicans who voted on
this call with the regulars were: Cooper, Esch,
Kopp, Kustermann and Morse of Wisconsin;
Hlnshaw and Kinkaid of Nebraska'.
Cooper, Morse, Hlnshaw and Kinkaid were
the four Whom the insurgents had expected
would stand with them, and had they done so
the bill would have been recommitted.
The organization having squeaked through
this close test, the next motion was by Payne
to adopt the conference report. On this tho
insurgents went to pieces still worse, it being
apparent that they had no chance to win, and
several more of them joined the army of reg
ulars. The insurgents who still stood by their
colors and voted against accepting the confer
ence report were: Carey, Lenroot, and Nelson
of Wisconsin; Davis, Lindbergh, Miller, Nye,
Steenerson, Stevens and Volstead of Minnesota;
Grcmna of North Dakota; Haugen, Hubbard,
Kendall and Woods of Iowa; Keifer of Ohio;
Mann of Illinois; Murdock of Kansas; Poln
dexter of Washington; Southwick of New York.
Those republicans, heretofore ordinarily in
surgents, who voted at this point with the reg
ulars, were: Cooper, Esch, Kopp, Kusterman
and Morse of Wisconsin; Good and Pickett of
Iowa; Hlnshaw, Norris and Kinkaid of Nebras
ka; Madison of Kansas.
The conference report was adopted 195 to
183
The outcome was a victory for President Taft,
solely and entirely. .
Friday night Dwight, the republican whip
of the house, went to the speaker and the presi
dent and told them that there were forty re
publicans who would not vote for the report
and who could not bo lined up for it by any
moans in IiIh power. Tho prosldont thon be
gan sending for men and malting the lust final
appeal for help and ho changed enough to se
cure tho result that the vote shows.
Mr. Payne of New York mado a speech In be
half of tho report and he was given an ovation
by tho tariff men.
CHAMP OLAftK'S HI'KKCir
Following Is the Associated Press roport of
Saturday's proceedings as far as thoy relato
to Champ Clark's speech:
-Tho democrats bad (hoir Innings when Champ
Clark of Missouri, their leader arose to present
their view of the bill. Tho ovation to him was
no loss sincere than that accorded Mr. Payno.
Recalling tho story of the Brahmin who had
been fooled into bolioving that tho dog was a
Bheop fit for sacrifice, Mr. Clark said President
Taft was a "pious Brahmin," who had boon
imposed on by being made to boliove that tho
conference roport was really a rovlslon down
ward. Mr. Clark submitted a table which, lie
said, was approximately correct, showing, ac
cording to Mr. Clark, that '.ho average rato of
the roport Is 1.71 per cont higher than the aver
age rato of tho Dlngloy law.
If scores of now Items in the report but not
in tho Dingley law were added, Mr. Clark said,
tho Increase would bo at leaBt 20 per cent, and
yet the brazen assertion is made that this is a
revision downward, which Is a sham, a hum
bug, a bald and bold perversion of tho facts."
The president, ho continued, had been grossly
misled as to tho naturo of this report. Ho said
that if "wo reflect upon tho fact fhat if ho
insisted upon lowering tho duties upon only
half a dozen items, or thereabouts when the
rates have been lowered en hundreds of items,
end the conference roport still reeks with -largess
for tho few and extortion of the many,
his glory will experience a' greater diminution
than have the rates of tho Dingley law.
"That tho president's respect for tho square
deal, and his jealouBy of his own fame impollod
him to honestly demand a tariff law which would
at least measureably redeem his own and his
party's ante-election promise for a downward
rovlslon of the tariff will bo readily conceded
by every candid person," continued Mr. Clark.
"That he has been deceived by tariff experts
and near-exports as to this conference roport
being a' downward revision fn any reasonable
sense of tho testimony, can, I think, bo mathe
matically demonstrated."
Mr. Clark said if tho president could secure
reductions on a few articles in a week, if he
had begun sooner he could have accomplished
far more, because it is far more easier to in
fluence a man's opinion on any subject before
he has publicly asserted it than after.
"Certainly Mr. Chairman Payne's statement
is one of the most deceptive documents over
submitted to the gaze of men," said Mr. Clark,
"I do not charge him with intentional deception,
but ho, too, has been deceived by slight-of-hand
performers in arithmetic."
Mr. Clark submitted a table containing a com
parison between the Dingley revenue for 1907,
and the revenue that would have been derived
that year under tho duties of the conference
bill. Under the Dingley duties, he declared, tho
covenue would have been $329,109,342, and
under tho duties provided by the conferees, it
would have been $334,758,344, an excess in tho
conference report bill over the Dingley law of
$5,649,002. The conferees, ho said, had In
creased the chemical schedule 5.63 per cent;
agricultural, 6.63 per cont; spirits, 26.88 per
cent; cotton, 10.80 per cent; silk, 15.48 per
cont; pulp paper, etc., 10.02 per cent.
It had decreased, he said, the earthenware
schedule 0.23 per cont, metals, 6.65 per cent;
wood, etc., 15.56 per cent; sugar, 0.004 per
cent; flax, .24 per cent; wool, .35 per cent;
sundries, 11.41 per cent.
"And yet," said Mr. Clarke, "this conference
report on the tariff bill is heralded and head
lined In the public press as a tremendous victory
for President Taft."
Quoting from newspaper reports telling of a
large body of lobbyists that had been here since
tariff legislation was begun, Mr. Clarke declared
that the consumer had been slightly represent
ed. Thoy had by continuous entertaining ex
ercised an influence, he said.
"That this great army of lobbyists," sad the
Missouri representative, "have Influenced the
schedules in this bill can not well be doubted.
Those who have access to the ears of lawmakers
have a better chance to carry their point than
those at a distance. But no man is fit to be a
lawmaker for a mighty people who yields to tho
f"
lit
i
fn
H
A
m
a
M
w:
m,1 '
n,
m
ilH
m
n
-4
i