to wander in the streets hopeless, homeless, without food or shelter, while all around them the favored objects of your legislation are dwelling in comfort as a result of that legislation? [Prolonged applause on the Democratic side.]

CHARLES A. BOUTELLE [Me.].-Mr. Chairman, Jack Cade exhausted that style of argument more than five hundred years ago.

MR. COCKRAN [pounding on his desk].-Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is faulty in his history. Jack Cade lived four hundred years ago.

THOMAS B. REED [Me.].-Mr. Chairman, I am exceedingly sorry that, with all the répertoire of eloquence which the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cockran] has at his command, he should resort so frequently to that portion of it which is merely physical. [Laughter.]

The gentleman has indulged himself both to-day and on Saturday last in expressions of contempt for our industrial system, because under threat of changes business is paralyzed, and because the accumulated wealth of this country is too little to tide it over the difficulty. But unfortunately, throughout all the language which he has used on this subject, there went this continuous error; he made no distinction between wealth which is consumable and wealth which is intended to produce consumable wealth.

There is an immense amount of unconsumable wealth which is used in the production of other wealth existing in this country and in other countries; but, from the very nature of the case, the amount of consumable wealth that there is in any country at any time is exceedingly limited.

Now, let me come for a moment to this question of wages. The gentleman says that it depends upon supply and demand. I say that is an utterly exploded doctrine. Wages depend upon the amount of the market, and also upon the nature of the workingman himself. I anticipate what the gentleman is going to say in response to the suggestions of other gentlemen on his side, that what they need is a more extensive market; that what they need is to go forth to the rest of the universe and obtain a market; and the method they propose is to obtain a market somewhere else by giving up the market that we have here. [Applause on the Republican side.] But we on our side believe in enlarging the market in a different fashion. We do not mean to go to the ends of the earth and struggle with the cheaper labor of the whole world. What we mean to do is to elevate the market of this country by giving higher wages to the laborers,

free list of several articles classed as raw materials. Perhaps, technically speaking, there is nothing separated from realty and having value which can be called absolutely raw material, but commercially speaking those things are called raw material which lie at the basis of great manufacturing enterprises and which are only utilized after conversion into a finished product. The average tariff left on woolen goods is a little over 39 per cent., which is a reduction of about 60 per cent. on that schedule.

Mr. Chairman, this bill brings to the farmer ten dollars for every dollar it takes from him. We have put wheat upon the free list because we are selling it in Liverpool in competition with the cheapest labor in the world, and if we can sell it there we can sell it here. But we put in a provision in regard to grain, limiting it to grain from any country which will admit ours free, in order to bring an influence to bear upon Canada to admit our grain products free.

JOHN A. PICKLER [S. D.].-I thought you were not in favor of reciprocity?

MR. BRYAN.-I am not in favor of the reciprocity which you had last year, but I am in favor of commercial freedom. [Applause.] And I am willing to say to Canada, "We will treat your products as you treat ours. We will open our gates to you if you open your gates to us,” and that is what we have provided for in that clause. It may possibly do some good, although it is not absolutely necessary, for Canada has, I am informed, a standing offer to admit our grains free whenever we remove the duty from Canadian grains. Trade between the two countries will be profitable to both. But, sir, if that clause is left out and wheat is admitted absolutely free, and corn free, and these other great products of agriculture free, it will not harm the farmers of the United States a single dollar.

Now, Mr. Chairman, there is another provision in this bill to which I shall very briefly invite your attention. The bill provides for a gradual repeal of the sugar bounty-one-fourth of one cent to be dropped each year. It also reduces the tariff on fine sugar one-half. I believe that this is the best solution possible at this time of the difficulties surrounding this schedule.

We had a condition to deal with-a condition brought about by Republican legislation-and we made the best of it. When I was called upon to choose between a tax upon sugar which would raise the price of it to every consumer and a bounty reduced gradually, I chose the latter. I preferred to let the

bounty fall by degrees, and raise the needed revenue in a way that, instead of taxing the poor man as much as the rich man on the same number of pounds of sugar, would make wealth bear its share of the expenses of government. [Applause.] In other words, I would rather give free sugar to the people and make up the deficit by an income tax. [Prolonged applause.]

And now, in conclusion, let me repel a charge which has been made against this bill by our opponents. They have said that it is sectional; that it is drawn in the interest of the South. They have waved the bloody shirt and drafted into service the Confederate constitution. Let us see what section will profit most by the duties retained. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Burrows] complained because we left a high duty on rice, but he forgot to tell you that we left the duty 28 cents on the dollar lower than the duty fixed in the McKinley bill; he com, plained that we had left a high duty on Tennessee marble, but he forgot to tell you that we had reduced the duty on that same marble more than one-third.

Our opponents entirely fail to mention the generosity shown by Southern members toward Northern industries. Texas has more sheep than any Northern State, and yet her members are willing to give free wool to the manufacturers of Massachusetts. [Applause.]

When Michigan iron ore is placed on the free list, Alabama ore is placed there also; when Pennsylvania coal is placed on the free list, West Virginia coal is placed there also; when the rough lumber of Maine and Wisconsin is placed upon the free list, the rough lumber of North Carolina and Georgia is placed there also.

The same bill which gives free cotton ties to the South gives free binding twine to the North; the same bill which gives to the farmers of the South free cotton bagging for export gives to the farmers of the North free agricultural implements. There is one section in this country which gets the lion's share, but it is not the South. [Applause.] For every dollar that the Southern States receive in protection from this bill New England will receive five dollars. [Applause.] One State, Massachusetts, will reap more benefit from the tariff left in this bill than all the Southern States combined. The State of New York alone, and the State of Pennsylvania alone, will reap more benefit from the tariff left in this bill than all the Southern States together. Why, sir, the little State of Rhode Island has more money invested in the manufacture of cotton and woolen goods than all the States south of Mason and Dixon's line, yet they

tell us that a bill which leaves 38 and 39 per cent. on these goods is a sectional bill drawn in behalf of the South.

Aye, sir, if this bill is sectional, it is not drawn to give special protection to the interests of the South; but the South is justified in voting for it. Why? Because, sir, you cannot aïd the South and West by means of protection. You can lay burdens upon them and press them down, but you cannot build them up by means of import duties. The South and West can vote for this bill because, while it gives protection to the Northeastern States, it makes the tax less burdensome than it is now. History is repeating itself. A generation ago New England helped to free the black slaves of the South, and to-day the Southern people rejoice that it was accomplished. [Cheers and applause.] The time has come when the Southern people are helping to free the white slaves of the North; and in the fulness of time New England will rejoice in its accomplishment. [Great applause.]

On January 15 the question of wages arose.

MR. PAYNE said: What I want to do is to put the manufacturers of this country in condition such that they can pay higher wages; and one thing is certain, that the workingmen of this country, organized as they are, when the manufacturers shall have been enabled to pay higher wages, will compel them to do so. [Applause on the Republican side.]

MR. COCKRAN.-Now, Mr. Chairman, my colleague [Mr. Payne] has placed this question before the committee in a shape in which it can be disposed of in the briefest possible space. He tells us that the theory upon which this protective system is maintained is to stimulate the profits in the hands of the manufacturers, and then trust to the trades unions to get those profits out of the manufacturers. [Laughter on the Democratic side. We believe in putting the profits in the first instance into the hands of the laborers. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

JOSEPH H. WALKER [Mass.].-How?

MR. COCKRAN.-By increasing the demand for their labor and increasing production in this country. [Derisive laughter on the Republican side and applause on the Democratic side.]

Why are the laborers hungry and the manufacturers comfortable? What basis of division is that which enables these employers to look forward to this winter with composure, which forces the men over whose fate you gentlemen shed your tears