merce, and business of the country money absolutely necessary to their successful operations.

James B. Beck [Ky.], of the minority of the committee, presented a separate report.

Not having seen the bill proposed by the Republican majority of the Finance Committee of the Senate until within the last few days, I can only enter my protest against the principles presented, and give in a general way the reasons I have for supporting the principles presented by the House bill. That bill is an earnest effort to reduce taxation by diminishing the cost of the raw materials used by American manufacturers, so as to enable them to compete in the markets of the world with their foreign competitors who produce similar goods. It proceeds upon the recognized fact that raw materials are not consumed in that form, but are necessary for the production of commodities to which the industry of the country may be properly applied; and it is an honest effort to reduce the cost to the American consumer of the goods which they must necessarily have, retaining, as far as possible, such taxes as are imposed upon articles which the people may use or not just as they please, and the proceeds of which taxation, less the cost of collection, reach the treasury of the United States. It seeks to promote trade with all the world, to restore and build up our lost commercial marine, and thus exchange commodities with other people upon somewhat fair and equal terms.

The Senate substitute, when carefully examined, will show that in every feature it aims to increase the cost of the goods he needs to the home consumer, and to close the markets of the world against imports and exports as well, except such as are purely agricultural and have to be sold abroad for any price they will bring in free open market with foreign competition. Under it we can have no successful commerce, no return cargoes, indeed, no ships in the foreign trade, and no sailors except such as hover around our coasts protected by the combinations and monopolies in our coastwise trade where all competition is excluded.

The pretence that the Republicans are going to aid chemists, machinists, and others by giving them free alcohol is a sudden conversion, because every report that has been made by the Treasury Department from the time of Secretary Sherman to the present shows that any effort to do that would simply be the breaking down of all barriers against fraud in the collec

tion of revenue on distilled spirits. It would, however, have the effect, which perhaps is desired by the Republican gentlemen who deny the existence of trusts, of giving the whisky trust of Peoria, Ill., the right to sell their alcohol at any price they please free from all competition at home or abroad.

Here Senator Beck presented a comparison of the principles of the Democratic and Republican parties.

He spoke in praise of President Cleveland's stand upon the tariff question. In conclusion he said:

If any President ever satisfied the American people that he subordinated private ends to public interests, and had the courage to express his convictions, regardless of personal consequences, President Cleveland in this message, in his veto of the dependent pension bill, and in his enforcement of absolute integrity in the conduct of public officials, high and low, has satisfied them that he is acting with an eye single to the public good. He can say, as the Marquis of Montrose said to those who urged temporizing measures on him as the safest:

He either fears his fate too much,

Or his deserts are small,

Who dares not put it to the touch,
And win or lose it all.

The debate in the Senate repeated the arguments on the general subject of the tariff, which had been presented in the House, and entered extensively into the discussion of the schedules of the Senate bill. Owing to the fact that the presidential campaign was at its height the speakers often lost sight of the particular issue before them and entered into general indictments of the opposing party and eulogies of their own.

The session closed before the bill came to a vote. Republican success in the presidential election of 1888 killed the bill. Senator Benjamin Harrison [Ind.] was elected President.

CHAPTER XIII

THE TARIFF OF 1890

[THE MCKINLEY BILL]

William McKinley [O.] Introduces in the House a New Revenue BillDebate: in Favor, Mr. McKinley, Julius C. Burrows [Mich.], John H. Gear [Ia.], Joseph H. Walker [Mass.], Sereno E. Payne [N. Y.], Daniel Kerr [Ia.], Robert M. La Follette [Wis.], Nelson Dingley [Me.], David B. Henderson [Ia.]; Opposed, Roger Q. Mills [Tex.], Benton McMillin [Tenn.], Roswell P. Flower [N. Y.], Benjamin F. Shively [Ind.], Charles F. Crisp [Ga.], William McAdoo [N. J.], William M. Springer [Ill.], Amos J. Cummings [N. Y.], John M. Allen [Miss.]; Joseph McKenna [Cal.] Opposes Free Sugar; Joseph G. Cannon [Ill.] Opposes Free Works of Art; Mr. McKinley, Henry Cabot Lodge [Mass.], William C. P. Breckinridge [Ky.] Defend Free Works of Art-Bill Is EnactedGrover Cleveland Is Re-elected President.

N April 16, 1890, William McKinley [O.] reported from the Committee on Ways and Means the tariff bill which bears his name. It came forward for discussion in the Committee of the Whole on May 7.

THE MCKINLEY TARIFF BILL

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MAY 7-21, 1890

Mr. McKinley explained the measure.

In the bill which the Committee on Ways and Means have presented we have not been compelled to abolish the internalrevenue system that we might preserve the protective system, which we were pledged to do in the event the abolition of the one was essential to the preservation of the other. That was unnecessary. [Applause.]

The bill does not amend or modify any part of the internalrevenue taxes applicable to spirits or fermented liqucrs. It abolishes all the special taxes and licenses, so called, imposed upon the manufacture of tobacco, cigars, and snuff, and dealers

therein, reduces the tax upon manufactured tobacco from 8 to 4 cents per pound, and removes all restrictions now imposed upon the growers of tobacco. With these exceptions the in

ternal-revenue laws are left undisturbed.

From this source we reduce taxation over $10,000,000, and leave with the people this direct tax which has been paid by them upon their own products through a long series of years.

The tariff part of the bill contemplates and proposes a complete revision. It not only changes the rates of duty, but modifies the general provisions of the law relating to the collection of duties.

Here Mr. McKinley went into detailed discussion of several of the modifications. Among these were the following:

1. A repeal of the provision which allows the United States to import any article for its use free of duty.

2. The value of personal effects accompanying the passenger returning from foreign travel to be limited to $500.

3. Foreign merchandise imported into the United States to be stamped with the name of the country in which such articles are manufactured.

4. All articles manufactured in whole or in part in any foreign country by convict labor to be prohibited. Mr. McKinley continued:

By way of encouraging exportation to other countries and extending our markets, the committee have liberalized the drawbacks given upon articles or products imported from abroad and used in manufactures here for the export trade. Existing law refunds 90 per cent. of the duties collected upon foreign materials made into the finished product at home and exported abroad, while the proposed bill will refund 99 per cent. of said duties, giving to our citizens engaged in this business 9 per cent. additional encouragement, the Government only retaining 1 per cent. for the expense of handling.

We have also extended the drawback provision to apply to all articles imported which may be finished here for use in the foreign market. Heretofore this privilege was limited. This, it is believed, will effectually dispose of the arguments so often made that our tariff on raw materials, so called, confines our