necticut confounds saltpeter with powder. We are producing powder, but we cannot produce saltpeter. I had the honor to induce the Committee of Ways and Means of the last Congress to put nitrate of soda, the produc tion of one of the South American States, on the free list, together with muriate of potassa, a production of Germany. By combining these an inferior powder may be produced which is useful in mines and quarries, but not in rifles or other fire-arms for any considerable consecutive firing, because it soon fouls the barrel.

Now, what I desire is to see this other article of foreign production, saltpeter, which is found for the present only in India-though it is said that an enormous bed has been discovered on the western slope of the Cordilleras; this, however, wants confirmation-I want to see this put on the free list if it can be, and if not, at a reduced rate of duty, in order that we may have competition between the two kinds of powder and competition in importing from India, South America, and Germany, elements all of which will stimulate our home manufacture, give employment to our people in the production of powder, and give cheap powder to miners, quarrymen, and all others. It is directly in harmony with the argument I had the honor to present in the course of the general debate, and I am glad to see that my honorable colleague on the committee from Indiana [Mr. KERR] and the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] have discovered the absurdity of that theory which would impose duties on those elements of manufactures which cannot be produced in this country and the importation of which in bulk, crude, would stimulate our commerce. Rejoicing in their conversion, I am with them in this proposition because it is in harmony with all my convictions.

Mr. DAWES. I hope hereafter there will be no complaint on the part of any members of the Committee of Ways and Means of their chairman for not sustaining their bill, for upon a hearing of the Hazard Powder Company, the greatest monopoly of the kind in this country, on the one hand, and the manufacturers of saltpeter on the other side, to the satisfaction of all the members of the committee, the committee unanimously placed this matter in this bill without objection from any quarter whatever. But the gentleman from Pennsylvania who has just addressed the committee, not entirely satisfied with the views of the committee as expressed in their report, as members often have to accept a report in the whole of which they do not concur, introduced into the House a bill of his own that more clearly expressed his views, without any qualification, and in that bill he puts this matter exactly as in the present bills

Mr. KELLEY. One word. I do it in deference to what would otherwise be the unanimous opinion of the committee.

The

Mr. DAWES. Now, let me tell you what the reason was which induced the committee to agree to put this in the bill. What was the reason? The reason was that an effort was being made-a spasmodic one, I know-to try to make ourselves independent of Great Britain. saltpeter that supplies the Hazard company and the Dupont company, who control the market of this nation, and who in time of war rolled up wealth by millions, and had the fate of the nation in their hands, because we could get powder from no other source-they came and asked us to admit saltpeter from Great Britain, and nowhere else, free of duty, in order to put out of existence the effort that is being made to make saltpeter in this country, and make this country independent of these men.

I wish my distinguished colleague from the Waltham district [Mr. BANKS] were here now. I like to hear him talk about "rings." Here is a ring of the richest men I know of in this country that came before the Committee of Ways and Means, struggling with an infant effort to produce saltpeter in this country by asking that we now surrender to Great Britain

as we did in the time of the Trent affair. They had us at their mercy. By an order in council they ordered that no saltpeter should be exported to this country. They can do it again in case of war. We cannot go to war without their leave, and we may be at this moment on the eve of one with the only country in the world, outside of this, that produces saltpeter.

But here is an effort in this country to manufacture saltpeter; and yet my distinguished friend from Indiana, [Mr. KERR,] who says he wants everything imported free, gets up here and cooperates with my friend from Connecticut, [Mr. STRONG,] who represents these powder companies, and says, "Make it all free."

Mr. SARGENT. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. DAWES. Certainly.

Mr. SARGENT. Does this proposition put a duty upon nitrate of soda, or what is commonly called Chile saltpeter?

Mr. DAWES. It does not change the law at all.

Mr. STRONG. I will first answer the point made by the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, [Mr. DAWES,] that in time of war we cannot get saltpeter unless we en. courage the home manufacture of it. I say to him in reply that the article called "converted saltpeter" is made from ingredients which come from abroad, and we cannot obtain them except where we can also obtain the natural saltpeter itself.

The ingredients from which artificial saltpeter is made are muriate of potash, which comes from Germany through the English channel, and nitrate of soda, which is imported from Valparaiso. Natural salpeter is found in considerable quantities nowhere but in the East Indies, and for it Calcutta is the market of the world. We can only bring muriate of potash here through the English channel, and if we cannot get saltpeter from Calcutta in time of war how can we import muriate of potash? The argument of the gentleman, therefore, that in time of war we are cut off from saltpeter and must depend upon our own product, falls to the ground. We can get one article if we can get the other. We get both by the consent of England.

The principle of protection cannot be fairly applied in this case. If it could I would not say a word against the proposed duty; for I believe in reasonable protection for the encouragement of American industry. Why, sir, there are but two little establishments making the material called converted saltpeter; and what is converted saltpeter? It is not saltpeter at all. It is no more like the genuine saltpeter of nature than the converted Fejee is like the genuine Christian New Eng. lander. [Laughter.] It is an inferior and bastard article, and powder manufactured from it cannot be used in gunnery at all. It can only be used in blasting, mining, &c. Nor can artificial saltpeter be used in curing meats, or for medicinal purposes. These comprise the legitimate uses of saltpeter, and the only article which can properly be called saltpeter is that which comes in its natural state from Calcutta.

Now, I say to the chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means [Mr. DAWES] that the doctrine of protection cannot be applied to saltpeter at all. Why? Because we cannot produce the thing itself, nor any substitute which can take the place of it. You might just as well say that we should put a high duty on coffee for the protection of pea culture, because ground roasted peas are sometimes used as a substitute for coffee. That would be running protection into the ground. If I am correctly informed there are but two little establishments in this country where artificial saltpeter is made, and they do not produce enough to keep a single powder manufacturing concern running for two months in the year.

It is quite evident that high duties can never develop this industry. We do not want the proposed duty for protection, nor do we want it for revenue. The present duty produces annually only $175,000, and the Government has to pay out a considerable part of this sam to powder manufacturers in the enhanced price of gunpowder occasioned by this tax.

Now, sir, I say give us free saltpeter. It is not in the interest of protection, nor is it in the interest of revenue that a duty is imposed upon this article.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. KELLOGG. I move to strike out the last word, and I will detain the committee but a moment. I find that my colleagues [Mr. STRONG and Mr. STARKWEATHER] are for free trade when they have a corporation of $5,000,000 of capital or more in their districts that desires a duty taken off for its especial benefit. The Hazard Powder Company, which, with two or three other firms, could form a ring time and time again before the war to buy up every bag of saltpeter in the market or os the way from Calcutta, and put up the price of saltpeter, is the party that seeks to destroy a young manufacturing industry. That is the history of the matter, and they know it.

Now, my friend from Pennsylvania, [Mr. KELLEY]-and I wonder he should make this mistake after the study he has given to the subject of the tariff-says that saltpeter is not a product of this country, and is not manufac tured here at all. Sir, it is just as much a manufacture here now as pig iron is; it is not manufactured in this country quite as much, but pig iron hides it from his view. [Laughter.] Now, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. BUTLER] has told us how they began the manufacture of saltpeter in his district. I wish I knew in which district he lives just now; for I have heard a story about the making of powder in one of those Massachusetts districts in which he lives at the commencement of the revolutionary war. Nobody in this country knew how to make gunpowder, for Great Britain had not allowed us to learn. One man in Massachusetts, after experimenting, succeeded in making a couple of barrels of what he called gunpowder, which caught fire one day; but he ran twenty rods and got a bucket or two of water and succeeded in saving one half of it. That is the kind of gunpowder they made in those days. [Laughter.]

I am willing to give protection to the manufacture of powder in my colleague's district. Their interest is in that direction, and they

know it.

Mr. STRONG. We do not want protection for that interest.

Mr. KELLOGG. You have had a protec tion always of eight cents a pound more than fifty years ago, and now you have about sixty per cent., and yet you strike at this small duty and strike down the domestic manufactures of saltpeter, which this Government from necessity called into being during the war! You put it in the power of three or four large eorporations to control the market and put up the price as they please in the same manner they have done heretofore; you put it into the power of England, which controls the Calcutta market, to cut off our supply of saltpeter in time of war, and God only knows how soon it may come. I trust this committee will do no such shortsighted and unjust thing.

I ask the Clerk to read a document prepared by a gentleman of high intelligence in my dis trict, who does manufacture saltpeter, aud who knows all about it.

The Clerk read as follows:

To the honorable Committee of Ways and Means of the House of Representatives:

The New Haven Chemical Company, of New Haven, Connecticut, manufacturers of saltpeter, having learned that petitions have been presented to your honorable committee, asking the repeal of the present duties on saltpeter, and believing that such duties are beneficial instead of injurious to the country generally, and to the purchasers of saltpeter themselves, and feeling that they are vitally

necessary to the continuance of the manufacture in this country, respectfully submit to you the following facts and reasons why such duties shall remain unaltered.

We believe that the present duty is beneficial to the country for the following reasons:

First. The production of saltpeter here is essential to our independence of other countries in the case of war, and without this duty such production must cease. The manufacture of saltpeter in this country was commenced in 1862, immediately after the difficulties which arose from the affair of the Trent. Great Britain, at that time, furnished saltpeter to the world. Immediately on the occurrence of that difficulty the British Government prohibited the exportation of saltpeter from all their ports, detained large quantities which had been bought by our Government, and were ready for delivery, or were actually on board vessels; and, had not that difficulty been adjusted, we should have been deprived, to a great extent, of the principal material from which gunpowder is made. The United States Government advertised then for saltpeter for the use of the Navy, and manufactories for making it were established. These manufactories furnished to the Government large quantities during the war, and have since been engaged in supplying, to a large extent, the wants of the country during peace. If the duties on saltpeter are repealed the business must be abandoned, as we cannot compete with the cheap labor of the East Indies without it, and the country will then become wholly dependent again on Great Britain for this article.

Second. The continuance of the duty is important for the commerce of the country. At present the materials for the manufacture of saltpeter are obtained most cheaply from abroad; these are, nitrate of soda, imported from Peru, and muriate of potash, imported from Germany. One ton of each of these materials is required to make one ton of saltpeter. These materials are imported at full rates of freight from the countries where they are produced; while saltpeter, from the East Indies, is brought principally as ballast, at one third or one quarter of the cost of the freight on nitrate of soda only. If the duty is repealed, for every ton of saltpeter imported, two tons of other freight from distant countries will be lost, at a cost of five or six times the amount of freight gained.

Third. This manufacture is important in case of war, for the development of our national resources, especially those of the West. If war should destroy our foreign commerce, saltpeter can be manufactured from the nitrate of lime which is largely found in caves or other places in the valley of the Mississippi, and from the common potash of commerce, which is made from ashes in the forests. In the war of 1812 this was almost the only resource of the country for the supply of saltpeter, and it is understood that the South obtained in this way much of their sltpeter during the late war. The nitrate of soda from Peru can be brought by the Pacific railroads to the East, if commerce is obstructed by war. Fourth. The continuance of this manufacture, like every other manufacture, is desirable, from its employment of capital and labor at home, from its consumption of domestic products, particularly of coal, and from the business which it furnishes to schooners and railroads.

Fifth. The duty is desirable as a source of revenue, because it affects very slightly the business of the country. Before the late war all powder was made from saltpeter; now five sixths of all the powder used for blasting is made from nitrate of soda. Powder made from saltpeter is used principally for cannon, for fire-arms, fire-works, and for blasting, where exposure to the air prevents the use of powder made from nitrate of soda; which, though stronger, attracts moisture if exposed to the atmosphere. For internal improvements, for mines, or removal of rocks, powder made from nitrate of soda, which is free from duty, or nitro-glycerine, or dualine is used, while saltpeter is not largely employed, either for the natural products or the manufactures of the country, and the revenue derived from it does not seriously affect their cost.

We also believe that the duty now levied on saltpeter is beneficial to the consumers of the article:

1. Because few of the powder-makers of the country import saltpeter themselves, the great majority purchasing their supplies in the market here. Most of the powder-makers scattered over New England, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, or the West, and located near the mines, or on the great railroads which consume or transport their products, buy saltpeter in small quantities, and do not have convenient means for refining the crude saltpeter of the East Indies. They are dependent, more or less, on the domestic production, and if this is destroyed will be compelled to purchase at prices fixed by the few importers of the article, in Boston and New York. Three or four powder corporations, only, are accustomed to import saltpeter, being possessed of ample capital and extensive works, and these, with the importers, will, if the duty on saltpeter is repealed, control the price of the article, and consequently monopolize very much the manufacture of powder. 2. The repeal of this duty will undoubtedly be followed by a rise in the price of foreign saltpeter here, so as to cancel, to a great extent, the reduction in prices which would otherwise follow, though this advance, not being based on actual cost, will be too insecure to allow the manufacture of domestic saltpeter to continue. The price of foreign saltpeter is affected greatly by the price of saltpeter made here, which is sold less than with the present duty the foreign article, if refined, can be, and also by the extensive use of nitrate of soda for blasting powder. If foreign saltpeter is freed from home

competition it must rise by the additional freight and amount of profit which those who control it will add. This has been the case with other similar articles. Nitrate of soda rose promptly after the repeal of the duty, and has advanced thirty-three and a third per cent. on its former cost in bond. Muriate of potash, similarly made free, has risen twenty per cent. When the duty on saltpeter was fixed by Congress in 1864 at its present rate, Great Britain took off her export duty of one and a quarter cents gold in India to retain her monopoly. If our duty is repealed, an export duty there may be imposed again. Prussia imposed heavier duties on the manufacture of muriate of potash when the duty on this article here was repealed. If, as we believe, saltpeter will certainly rise upon the repeal of the duty, and very considerably, the only benefit will be derived by the few large corporations who import it, while the great majority of the powdermakers will receive little advantage; and, aware of this probability, very many of the powder-makers are opposed to the repeal of the duty.

3. The removal of the duty on saltpeter will not affect at all the price of blasting powder, which is at least four fifths of the powder made. The price of saltpeter in bond is now one and a half cents gold, higher than the present high price of nitrate of soda, and it will not certainly be less if admitted free. The powder made from nitrate of soda is stronger for immediate use than that made from saltpeter. Nor will such repeal increase the foreign export of powder, because a drawback both on the sulphur and saltpeter used is now allowed on all saltpeter exported, which is almost equivalent to the duty paid.

We further represent to your honorable committee that the repeal or reduction of the duty upon saltpeter would be destructive to our business. We have invested a large amount in buildings and apparatus, which are not adapted to any other manufacture, and the value of which, therefore, depends on the continuance of that business. At the present cost of materials, labor, fuel, and transportation, the profit is small, but with the present duty we are enabled to manufacture it, and if it is continued, shall be able to increase our production. We cannot do either if the duty is repealed or lessened. We cannot believe that Congress will consider it wise or important to destroy this industry by repealing the duty when such manufacture is important for the national power, desirable for the commerce and for the development of the resources of the country, advantageous to its revenue, to its industrial interests generally, and especially to the consumers of its product; and when it forms the dependence and support of many of its citizens. Very respectfully submitted by the New Haven Chemical Company. JOHN W. DWIGHT, Treasurer.

March, 1872.

Sir, there seems to be no difference of opinion among the members of this House in regard to what is desirable with respect to saltpeter. "Villainous saltpeter" itself is coming to be regarded as a desirable thing; and all agree in regard to what they want with respect to it, except that one defines saltpeter to be one thing, and another defines it to be a different thing. My friend from Indiana, [Mr. KERR,] who desires all things to come in free, and to raise duties, God knows how, wants saltpeter to come in free. But there is an objection to manufactured or artificial saltpeter being imported free of duty. Hence I have moved to amend the text of the bill by inserting "artificial" before "saltpeter."

This will make a sufficient distinction between natural saltpeter, which is imported from India, and that which is manufactured in our own country from chemical ingredients. This amendment will give protection to our domestic manufacture, while at the same time the natural saltpeter will be admitted free of duty. I hope this amendment may be favorably considered. I think that, if adopted, it will remove all objections to this branch of the bill. The question being taken on the amendment of Mr. CONGER, there were-ayes eighteen, noes not counted.

So the amendment was not agreed to. The question recurring on the motion of Mr. STARKWEATHER, to strike out the paragraph, there were-ayes 73, noes 65.

Mr. CONGER called for tellers.

Tellers were ordered; and Mr. STARKWEATHER and Mr. KELLOGG were appointed.

The committee divided; and the tellers reported-ayes 78, noes 53.

So the amendment of Mr. STARKWEATHER was agreed to.

The Clerk read as follows:

On sal-soda and soda-ash, one quarter cent per pound.

Mr. SYPHER. I move to amend by striking out the clause just read and inserting Sal-soda and soda-ash shall be exempt from duty."

Mr. DAWES. I raise a point of order on that amendment.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair sustains the point of order. The gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. SYPHER] can move that amendment when we come to the free list.

Mr. SYPHER. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my motion, and will now move to strike out the paragraph.

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: Strike out these words:

On sal-soda and soda-ash, one fourth of a cent per pound.

Mr. SYPHER. I make this motion, Mr. Chairman, for the reason that sal-soda is one of the principal elements which enter into the composition of soap. It is an article which is used by every man, woman, and child in the country.

Mr. STEVENSON. [Laughter.]

Or ought to be.

Mr. SYPHER. I take it for granted it is, and if any gentleman here does not use it now they ought hereafter to use it, or change their company. [Laughter.] We cannot now compete with England in the manufacture of soaps. That country now undersells our manufacturers in Cuba, Mexico, and Central America-countries which geographically may be considered part of this country.

The

We export rosin and grease, the elements from which soap is made, to England; she manufactures it into soap, and sells it to our neighboring countries, a market which legitimately belongs to our own citizens. West produces large quantities of grease, and the South of rosin and cotton-seed oil, enough, if manufactured into soap, to wash all creation, including the "great unwashed." While I am on this question, I desire, Mr. Chairman, to notice some remarks made yesterday by the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. FARNSWORTH.] Referring to the articles of coal, salt, and lumber, he goes on to say:

"You go to men of the South, the interest of whose constituents is clearly and directly in favor of reducing the tariff on some of these articles, and you will fix them up and induce them to vote even to the prejudice of their constituents, and get them into the same ring."

If there is any fixing up of members on this floor from the South on this question, I do not know it. If I have observed the votes of southern Representatives correctly on the different interests involved in the, pending bill, they have not placed themselves under the would-be leadership of either free-traders or protectionists in this House or out of it, but they have uniformly voted independently and in the interest of their constituents. I repel the charge that we belong to any ring. I'do' not know what the gentleman means when he makes that charge. Aside from that, my colleagues from the South on this floor voted to reduce the duty on coal, salt, and lumber. I make this motion now in the interest of the whole people. I am in favor of cheap soap, and we shall secure it by placing soda-ash on the free list.

Mr. HAZELTON, of New Jersey. Mr. Chairman, I call the attention of the committee to the fact that soda-ash is not an article produced in this country at all. To a great extent it enters into the manufacture of glass, an interest of great importance in this country, and especially in my district. That interest is very much depressed, almost broken down. I hope soda ash will be placed upon the free list.

Mr. RANDALL. I hope the motion of the gentleman from Louisiana will not be adopted. This sal soda duty has been reduced from one half to one quarter of a cent, which I think is a sufficient reduction at the present time in connection with the revenue. I myself have had no application from the soap manufacturers for any greater reduction. Therefore, I take it for granted the committee, after full conference with all parties interested in salsoda importation, have reached a point where the Government and the soap manufacturers will be best served. I will therefore sustain the committee in their recommendation. Mr. BECK. Let me say a word.

Mr. RANDALL. I will yield my time to the gentleman.

Mr. BECK. Mr. Chairman, perhaps the committee ought to know before this is voted out what they are doing. Sal soda is clearly a revenue article. We import now soda-ash to the value of $2,400,000, and the revenue derived from it is $727,179 71. That is the amount which at present goes into the Treasury of the United States, and every dollar that is collected from that article goes in there. It is $200,000 more than is collected on coal, about which so much fuss has been made, and we have reduced it from one half of a cent to one quarter of a cent, giving relief and taking off revenue to the amount of $363,576, or fifty per cent.

I merely wanted to let the House know what the revenue from this article was; and, so far as I know, nobody appeared before the committee wanting any greater reduction than from one half of a cent to one quarter of a

cent.

Mr. BLAIR, of Michigan. It is a mistake to suppose that this article is not made in this country. It is made to a considerable extent. It is made in the town where I live. There is an establishment for its manufacture there which has about half a million of capital invested, and it is making soda ash very successfully. They complain, however, that the protection is very slight as the law now stands. A reduction of it one half is certainly severe enough.

There is no reason why we cannot make soda-ash in this country just as well as they can make it anywhere. We have all the materials out of which to make it, and it is being made, as I have stated, in some quarters of the country. It is an industry that I think is growing somewhat.

And then, sir, I have an old-fashioned respect for the idea of the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. BECK,] that after all the tariff has a slight reference to revenue. I have thought myself a pretty considerable protectionist sometimes, but I have been entirely out-Heroded in the declarations substantially, in the course of this discussion, that after all the revenue is of no account at all in connection with the tariff. I had an idea that the protection was merely incidental, and that it grew out of the nature of the case; that we needed revenue, that we placed it upon an article from which we can derive it; and if anybody should go and manufacture that article I have not been able to see precisely how the country was to be harmed by it.

But it would seem now as if the question was not altogether or mainly in regard to the revenue, but as to who shall get advantages out of it. And from that stand-point I quite entered into the idea of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. FARNSWORTH] yesterday, when he said that he thought there was in this discussion nothing but a bargaining back and forth.

Now, I submit that upon this article of sodaash revenue may as well be raised as upon any article upon the list. There is none better for that purpose. And if the people in my part of the country, or in any other part of the country, while we are raising the revenue upon this, should see fit to manufacture the

article, I really hope nobody will feel bad about it. I hope, therefore, that the small duty the committee have left here, the revenue they have left, and the incidental benefit that may accrue I do not know if any will or not-will be allowed to remain.

Mr. COX. I do not know how the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. BLAIR] voted on tea and coffee.

Mr. BLAIR, of Michigan. I voted to make them free.

Mr. COX. The gentleman voted to make them free?

Mr. BLAIR, of Michigan. I did.

Mr. COX. Now I have the gentleman. [Laughter.] I rather suspected that the gentleman voted to make tea and coffee free. Every dollar of the tax on tea and coffee goes into the Treasury; none of it goes into the pockets of anybody in this country, because the article is not raised here. If my honorable friend from Michigan [Mr. BLAIR] were consistent he would vote to make this also free; for there is a revenue of $727,000 from sodaash, and of $137,000 from sal-soda; and the article is not made in this country, and cannot be made here.

I differ with the gentleman in one respect. I want all these chemicals put on the free list. I do not care whether it protects the manufacturer or not. I am in favor of the largest free list. In England they have only thirteen articles which they tax; we have some thirteen hundred. It costs more here to collect our revenue. My friend from Indiana [Mr. KERR] corrects me. He says thirty-five hundred articles are on the list, and I suppose that is true, including all the particulars instead of generalizing them.

66

Now, the gentleman has said that nobody asks for this reduction on sal-soda and sodaash. The importers in the United States perhaps might be regarded occasionally. I know that gentlemen on the other side, when ever we speak for the importers, say Oh, you people in New York handle all the merchandise; you make the money; you make the ten per cent. as importers." Sir, the importers ask what they make without consideration. When they handle the goods they pay for them by their own labor; they do not ask bounties from the Government. I hold in my hand a letter from one of these importers. He says:

"I am an importer of soda-ash, sal-soda, bleaching-powders, madder extract. Mr. DAWES's tariff is a reduction of one fourth of a cent on ash and soda, free on the rest. Is there any chance of those being the rates? Chemicals should be free as they are valuable to our manufactures-soap, glass, bleaching. Washerwomen use lots of soda and are entitled to some protection."

That comes right back to the argument of my honorable and able friend from Illinois, [Mr. FARNSWORTH,] who spoke yesterday on this question. These men, in this tariff, have so made it, have included so many articles, that they tax even the washerwoman that cleans the body linen of Congressmen. They tax thirty-five hundred different articles, taxing even the soap which the washerwoman uses to clean the delightful linen such as my friend from Pennsylvania who is now on the floor [Mr. L. MYERS] wears.

Mr. L. MYERS. Allow me to say that there is a large manufacturing interest in this country which requires soda-ash, and yet has protested against any reduction of the duty on that article. The glass and soap_manufacturers particularly have petitioned Congress to retain it. It would reduce soap but one tenth of a cent, or one eightieth of the price, to make soda-ash free, and it would reduce the cost of paper but one fourth of a cent per pound, while to retain the present low rate of duty would continue the protection to the manufacturing of soda-ash in this country, and give us an annual revenue of $727,000.

Mr. KILLINGER. Will the gentleman from New York allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. COX. If the gentleman will ask an intelligent one.

Mr. KILLINGER. It is, whether with the views you express you will support a protectionist candidate for President?

Mr. COX. I will answer the gentleman's question by quoting further from the letter I have read:

"Greeley is carrying everybody here. All parties are for him. Although a protectionist, &c., he is considered an honest man, and is demoralizing the present Administration."

[Laughter.]

Mr. STEVENSON. Send that letter to the Clerk's desk to be read.

Mr. COX. No, sir; it is strictly private and confidential. [Laughter.]

Mr. CONGER. Is the letter addressed to Mr. VOORHEES?

Mr. CROCKER. Mr. Chairman, I regret exceedingly myself that the duty upon sodaash has been touched upon; and let me give my reasons in a single word. We have tried in this country, over and over again, to manufacture this article. Everybody within the hearing of my voice knows that soda-ash and bleaching-powder are kindred matters, and generally go together; they are generally made at the same works. Now, I have said that we have made repeated efforts during the last thirty years to manufacture these articles here, and every time we have made the effort firms in Great Britain, when they have found that we were making the article-and I undertake to say that we made a better article in Maryland than is made anywhere else-instructed their agents here to put down the powders until you have broken down the American manufacturers. Now, I use this article by the ton every week, and I say that they have done that over and over again when we have attempted to manufacture the article, and they have broken down the manufacture here; and after they had broken down the Baltimore works, where they made better bleaching-powder than elsewhere, and have broken down the manufacturer after he had invested $100,000 in it, they then put up powders. Our friends in England are supremely careful of their own interests.

cent.

What is the United States paying for this article now? We are paying a hundred per more for them than they really are worth. We are paying for bleaching-powders to-day, or were the last time I had news from home from my own mills, and I have seven of them, six cents a pound, when, if we extended the shield of protection over these articles as we did before, we should be paying no more than three cents a pound in currency for a better article. I said I had seven mills, but do not be alarmed. Paper is not the only thing I make by any means. I make more money out of my farm than I do out of anything else. [Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. FARNSWORTH obtained the floor. Mr. DAWES. Let us have a vote. Mr. FARNSWORTH. Not yet; I want to say something first.

Mr. DAWES. I hope we will have a vote when the gentleman gets through.

Mr. FÄRNSWORTH. My friend from Massachusetts [Mr. DAWES] occupies the floor so little that if he wants to have the attention of the Committee of the Whole for a time now I will yield to him.

Mr. DAWES. No; I do not want to speak; I want a vote.

Mr. FARNSWORTH. I hope that sodaash will be put upon the free list. By this bill it is proposed to reduce the present duty one half. I think it should be taken off entirely. Soda-ash is used very largely, perhaps the majority of the article is used in the manufac ture of paper. The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. CROCKER,] who has just ad dressed the committee, I understand is a large manufacturer of paper. If so, he undoubtedly uses a large quantity of soda-ash in its manu

We

facture. Now, by this bill it is proposed to take off only fifty per cent. of the present duty upon soda ash, while but a very small reduction is proposed in the duty upon paper. ought to take the entire duty off soda-ash and make it free; and we ought to very largely reduce the duty upon printing paper.

How does it work? We pay a duty upon soda ash, although I believe that now the other materials that enter into the manufacture of paper, such as rags and things of that kind, are admitted free. There is a large duty levied upon paper. We get very little revenue from that duty, very little, while a burden is imposed upon the people in the additional price they have to pay for their paper. Why, sir, the very paper upon which the proceedings of this Congress are printed pays a duty of thirty-five per cent. ad valorem.

A few years ago Congress undertook to reduce the duty upon printing paper, and as almost everybody in Congress supposed, it was reduced to twenty per cent. But by cunning arrangement of slipping in the word "unsized"-very few people except those who manufacture understood the purport of it-it left the duty upon all paper used in the manufacture of books, of the documents which we print here, and on good paper for newspapers, at thirty-five per cent. ad valorem. There is a paper which is used, which is unsized, made partly of straw, straw possessing a little of the gluey substance which gives the quality of sizing, and making an inferior quality of printing paper, which is used considerably by the daily press. Upon unsized paper there is a duty of twenty per cent. ad valo em; on sized paper there is a duty of thirty-five per cent. ad valorem. We have to pay more duty upon printing paper than upon the books printed on that paper. A man can to-day go over to England or France and print his book and import it into this country cheaper than he can import the paper upon which to print it. The one is twenty-five per cent., the other is thirty five per cent. That is a direct bounty paid to the foreign type-setter, to the foreign worker in the printing office, to the printing office abroad, and against the man who sets type and spreads ink in our own country.

[Here the hammer fell.]

The question was taken on the motion of Mr. SYPHER, to strike out the clause in relation to sal soda and soda ash; and it was not agreed to, upon a division-ayes 40, noes 71.

The Clerk read as follows:

On santonine, three dollars per pound.

Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri. I move to strike out" three dollars" and insert "" one dollar." I will state to the committee that this is a preparation the use of which is to destroy worms; it is the active principle of all the vermifuges used throughout the United States. The worm-seed, from which it is made, I believe, is imported free of duty. This is a medicine used in the rearing of almost every family of children in this country. The duty proposed in the bill enables the manufacturer to realize a very great profit upon this commodity. I have therefore proposed this amend

ment.

Mr. DAWES. In Michigan?

Mr. CONGER. No, not in Michigan; but it is found in Massachusetts, and, in fact, in all the barren parts of the land. None of it grows in Michigan.

The question being taken on the amendment of Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri, it was agreed to.

66

The Clerk read as follows:

On strychnia, one dollar per ounce. Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri. I move to amend the clause just read by striking out one dollar" and inserting fifty cents." The duty of one dollar proposed in the bill is This mediabout fifty per cent. ad valorem. cine is made from nux vomica, which is introduced into this country free of duty and strictly as medicine used very generally. I think that the manufacturers of strychnia, having their raw material imported free of duty, should not be protected by a duty of one dollar per ounce on this manufacture.

The amendment was agreed to.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

The committee rose informally; and Mr. STEVENSON having taken the chair as Speaker pro tempore, a message from the Senate, by Mr. SYMPSON, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate had insisted on its amendments disagreed to by the House to the bill (H. R. No. 1661) making appropriations for the support of the Military Academy for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1873, had agreed to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and had appointed as conferees on the part of the Senate Mr. SPRAGUE, Mr. WEST, and Mr. CAR

PENTER.

The message also announced that the Senate had insisted on its amendments disagreed to by the House to the bill (H. R. No. 1323) making appropriations for the consular and diplomatic service of the Government for the year ending June 30, 1873, and for other purposes; had disagreed to the amendments of the House to the fourteenth amendment of the Senate; had agreed to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, and had appointed as conferees on the part of the Senate Mr. SAWYER, Mr. CAMERON, and Mr. VICKERS.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed a bill of the following title, with an amendment to the title; in which the concurrence of the House was requested:

An act (H. R. No. 1072) to fix the times of the United States circuit courts in the eighth district.

The message also announced that the Seuate had passed bills of the following titles; in which the concurrence of the House was requested:

An act (S. No. 539) authorizing the construction of a railroad bridge across the Ohio river at or near Evansville, in the State of Indiana;

An act (S. No. 931) authorizing the construction of a bridge across the Arkansas river, at Little Rock, Arkansas; and

TARIFF AND TAX BILL.

The Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union resumed its session. The Clerk read as follows:

On medicinal preparations, all not specified, thirty per cent. ad valorem.

An act (S. No. 934) to provide for the comMr. CONGER. This article is the crysta-pletion of three volumes of Wilkes's United lized bitter extract of wild sage. We have States exploring expedition. millions of acres of wild sage lying between here and the Rocky mountains, all of which can be converted into santonine. It seems to me that a tax of three dollars a pound upon an article for which we have the material spread over millions and millions of acres in the United States is an unreasonable and unnecessary imposition. As the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. McCORMICK] has said, this article enters into many medicines in use all over the country. One or two firms (I do not know why) have almost monopolized the process of manufacturing this article; and they ask a protection of three dollars a pound upon it; yet the material from which it is manufactured is spread all over the western country.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. I move to amend by inserting after the clause just read the following:

On plate glass, cast and polished, but not silver, on all sizes above twenty-four by thirty inches, twenty-five cents per square foot.

Mr. Chairman, the present duty on plate glass is fifty cents a square foot. There is nothing probably that is more necessary

Mr. DAWES. I ask the amendment be again read. I did not hear it.

The amendment was again read. Mr. DAWES. I make the point of order this amendment is not in order at this place.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair sustains the point of order that the amendment of the genileman from New York cannot come in at this point. It will be in order, however, at the end of the section.

The Clerk read as follows:

On medicinal preparations, all not specified, thirty per cent. ad valorem.

Mr. McCORMICK, of Missouri. I move to strike out "thirty per cent. ad valorem" and insert twenty per cent. ad valorem." The committee divided; and there wereayes 31, noes 53.

So the amendment was rejected.

The Clerk read as follows:

On rum essence or oil, and bay rum essence or oil, one dollar per ounce.

Mr. KELLOGG. I move to strike out "one dollar" and insert "fifty cents; "and, Mr. Chairman, I do it in the interest of revenue. The duty is now eight hundred per cent., the highest duty known in the whole list and double that of any other. Fifty cents an ounce would make it four hundred per cent. I find that only one hundred and sixty ounces were imported into the whole country, while we know the use of this article has been general in all sections of the country. I am informed by collectors of the customs that any steward or any cook upon our incoming ocean steamers can easily bring in fifty dollars' worth of this article in his breast pocket at any time without being detected. Nineteen twentieths of it, I learn, if not forty-seven fiftieths of it are smuggled into this country without paying any duty. I move to reduce it from one dollar to fifty cents an ounce in the interests of revenue. The amendment was agreed to.

The Clerk read as follows:

On books printed, and all other printed paper, bound or in sheets, except newspapers, magazines, and periodicals, twelve and one half cents per pound.

Mr. HOAR. I move the following amendment to come in in line eighty-eight, after the word "periodicals."

The Clerk read as follows:

Except books, maps, and charts especially imported in good faith for the use of any society incorporated or established for philosophical, literary or religious purposes, or the encouragement of fine arts, or by the order of any college, academy, school, or seminary of learning in the United States, for its own use or that of its instructors.

Mr. HOAR. Mr. Chairman, this, with a very slight change which I will mention, restores the existing law. I understand, on inquiry of the members of the Committee of Ways and Means, with the exception of one member whom I have not seen, that there was not any purpose on the part of any one of them to abolish the exemption which now exists on books imported by colleges and schools for their own use or public libraries free of duty. They are now on the free list; and it is a mere accident, I understand, this exception was not incorporated in the law.

I have copied the language of the existing law with a single exception which I will state. The existing law is books imported by various institutions or by their order shall be free without expressing for whose use or what purpose they may order them to be imported. I have inserted the words for their own use or that of their instructors." I suppose under the existing tariff the construction of law at present only exempts such books imported for their own use. If that be so this bill would extend exemption from duty to books imported for the use of instructors. I presume no class of men are so poorly paid as the instructors in our colleges and seminaries of learning, and the books they use to help themselves in their instruction are for public and not private benefit. For myself I should desire to go much

I

further; and I believe books and papers should be imported free of duty in all cases, and the whole paragraph should be stricken out. believe there should be no tax on communication of thought from one man to another. [Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. GARFIELD, of Ohio. I would ask the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. HOAR] if his amendment includes books printed in foreign languages.

Mr. HOAR. It includes all books imported for public libraries, or universities, or societies incorporated for philosophical purposes. It is the existing law except that the existing law admits free books imported by the order of such institutions, &c. This admits free books imported by their order for their own use.

Mr. KERR. I do not wish to antagonize the amendment of the gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. HOAR.] I am in favor of it. But I rise to offer an amendment to the text of the bill, to strike out "twelve and a half" and insert "ten."

When

Mr. Chairman, the duty on this kind of imports is twenty-five per cent. ad valorem. It is the opinion of some that twelve and a half cents per pound will be nearly equivalent to twenty-five per cent. ad valorem. I think it is equal to thirty per cent. at least, but a specific duty will operate, as every gentleman will see, upon an entirely different principle from the ad valorem duty. It operates upon a principle of necessary inequality. you impose a duty by the pound on books, or literature of any kind, it becomes of necessity an arbitrary duty; it has no relation to value; and therefore gentlemen will see at a glance that the effect of this duty by the pound is to discriminate in favor of the people in the country who use high-priced books, and to discriminate against the people who use cheap books. And it holds out direct encouragement to the producers of books abroad to make them upon light, flimsy, trashy paper, that will weigh as light as it is possible for paper to weigh, and yet be heavy enough to receive a fair and legible impression in ink. It will readily be conceded by any gentleman that such a policy cannot operate to the advantage of the people. The country needs not only cheap literature, but also books that are mechanically and artistically well executed.

It seems to me that if we adopt this policy at all, we ought to carry it so far as at least to do approximate justice to the common people, to the people who read the cheaper class of books, and cheaper editions of books of value all over the country. My own judgment is, but in this I was overruled by the committee, that a much better and fairer rule would be to reduce the present ad valorem duty to something like twenty or fifteen per cent. instead of twenty-five. I yielded, however, in that matter, to the judgment of the committee, and I am not now inclined to antagonize that opinion, unless some other gentleman should offer a motion to that effect.

The revenue now resulting from the duty of twenty-five per cent. ad valorem is, I believe, some four hundred and fourteen thousand dollars. I believe the effect of this change in the policy of the Government would not be very material on the revenue.

Under any

circumstances I think that a duty of ten cents will produce more to the revenue by many thousands than a duty of twelve and a half cents a pound. A duty of eight cents, I believe, would produce as much. If there is anything in the world which comes within the uses of the people everywhere, and that ought not to be burdened with a tax which is a bounty to any. body, I am sure it is literature, it is books of all kinds. I would apply this to everything in the shape of literature, no matter how cheap or how trashy it may be. Let the people protect themselves in the qualities of the books they will read. The Government can exer cise no rightful censorship in this respect. But I say, in the name of civilization, it is our

duty to give to them the cheapest possible literature in price that it is in the power of the Government to give. This can best be accomplished by taking off bounty.

I believe that the producers of books in this country to-day will be most prosperous, and can carry on their industry with entire vigor and energy and prosperity, if they had not one penny of duty. I do not believe that for prosperity they need protection at all. The difference between the prices abroad and the prices here is not so great as that protection per se is necessary at all any longer. Indeed, it is my most deliberate conviction that if there had never been a penny of protection on books, the manufacture in our country would be more vigorous and prosperous today than it is. The real interests of the trade and of the people have been injured, not advanced, by the tariff. But even now there is not much difference against our producers and in favor of foreign producers. This extract from a memorial placed in the hands of the Ways and Means a few weeks ago by over five sixths of all the American publishers will sustain my statement:

"I. We have carefully examined the comparative cost of two editions of the same book, uniform in every respect, one of which is imported, and the other printed and bound in this country, and the result is as follows:

Say, a volume of Bohn's Library, retailing at 38. 6d. sterling, which costs in sterling 1s. 9d.. equal to forty-two cents in gold, to which add, duties twenty-five per cent.; charges five per cent., and exchange, with gold at one hundred and ten per cent., making the cost of this book, delivered in the United States, sixty cents in currency.

to taxation. We have very properly relieved tea and coffee from taxation, and made them free as the common and necessary luxury of all. We ought not, therefore, to tax that better kind of luxury, the food of the mind, the luxury of intelligence, that by which ail the relations of life are to be elevated and ennobled, by which free government itself is to be sustained, by which enlightenment and civilization are to be carried on, and by which all that is pure and good and excellent in life, in time and hereafter, is to be adorned and elevated. To impose a tax upon this is to my mind unworthy of the American Congress, and to do it in the interests of protection, that some men may grow richer, is mean and sordid-an unworthy motive side by side with a noble and unselfish object.

I say sir, to talk of taxation on an agent of intelligence as an element of protection is inconceivably wicked. It is a proposition to protect a comparatively small number of people at the expense of the whole people, and not of the whole people only, but of the generations who press upon us, and upon whose shoulders are to rest the duty of carrying on the principles of enlightened government. Can sordid motives find any resting-place here? I trust that, with unanimity, the House will make books, these sources of intelligence and means of learning, absolutely free.

Let us not humiliate our country by continuing this tax; it is not needed. Let us place books on the free list, and if the monopolist must have protection to increase his

cious.

Making a total of........

15

55

for an American copyright work, against sixty cents for the imported book, at present rates of duty and gold, &c.

Supposing this book to be a reprint of the English publication manufactured in this country, the American copyright would not enter into the cost, and the expense of production would in this case be only forty cents for the Americann edition, against sixty cents for the English.

From which it is apparent that the present duty yields more protection than is really necessary.'

Mr. HOLMAN. It seems to me, sir, that books of all kinds should be put upon the free, list. I therefore make the motion to strike out this paragraph, with a view to putting || books of all kinds on the free list.

I present this motion with the greater confidence from the fact that if the duty is imposed as is proposed to be done here, by the pound, the injustice is manifest. The expensive and costly book purchased by the citizen of leisure and wealth pays no more tax than is imposed upon the book which the mechanic must have in order to become intelligent in his pursuit.

By the pending proposition of a duty of twelve and a half cents per pound the elegant volume and the cheap book are taxed alike. If, on the other hand, you impose this tax on the basis of an ad valorem duty, you open up a wide field for fraud that cannot possibly be avoided, for, in the nature of things, books are not subjects of exact, or even very near approximate valuation. On both grounds this is an impracticable subject of taxation. I do not think this should be regretted, for there is no form in which such a tax should be imposed. You cannot adjust a tax on intelligence and learning, because it ought not to be taxed at all unless the public exigencies imperatively demand it. Books should be placed on the free list-free as the air, free as God's glorious sunlight. Sir, it is remarkable that at this time this tax is suggested, when even during the war a tax was imposed on books with reluc tance. It is remarkable that now, when we are relieving even some of the conveniences of life, some of the articles that approach to the luxuries of life, and can do so and ought to do it, from taxation, that still we should leave the source of learning and intelligence subject

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. BANKS. The gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. HOLMAN,] although proceeding in the right direction, is too radical to claim justly the assent of the committee to his proposition. My opinion is that the amendment proposed by another gentleman representing the same State [Mr. KERR] is much nearer the truth, and is that the duty shall be as low as it can be made without placing books on the tree list. I think a reduction of twenty-five per cent. ad valorem to twelve and a half or fifteen per cent. would be a proper adjustment under the circumstances.

Mr. KERR. The proposition of the bill is to reduce the tax of twenty-five per cent. ad valorem to twelve cents a pound.

Mr. BANKS. I had not observed that, but I was speaking of the duty under the existing law. I am for making the tax an ad valorem one if it can be done, or at least as low as it can be made consistently with the publishing interests of the country. Now, I believe, of the two classes interested in books, the publishers may be regarded as the most prosper

ous.

As a general thing they are prosperous beyond those engaged in other pursuits, but those who use the books are, to a great extent, among the poorest people of the country, and although I would be glad to support the proposition of my colleague [Mr. HOAR] to except books for colleges and schools, yet I must say that those who use them are not so limited in means as many other classes of citizens who are subject to the same necessity, and ought to be entitled to the same privileges. Mr. HOAR. My amendment also includes public libraries.

Mr. BANKS. Very well, but still it does not except all the classes that have a just claim to our favor. As a general rule those who have the means to get books do not want them, and those who most thirst for them are often without means to gratify their laudable aspirations.

The men who want books and maps, in the first instance, are the poor men of the country, students, journalists, men entering the learned professions-the ministry, the practice of medicine or the law, engineers, draughtsmen, architects, mechanics, artists, merchants, scientists. the pursuits of general literature-all these want