CONGRESS. ( ALCOHOL rsr.n IN THE ARTS.) 



201 



this second section proposes to raise can find that 

 out. It is as follows : 



.'. That a joint select committee is hereby 

 authorized, to coiisi-t nf '} Senators, to lie appointed 

 by the presiding officer of the Senate, and :} mem- 

 bers of the House of Representatives, to be ap- 

 pointed by the Speaker of the House, which select 

 coin in ittee shall consider all questions relating to 

 the use of alcohol in the manufactures and 

 free of tax. and to report their conclusions to Con- 

 on the first Monday in December, 1896. 

 ~viid joint select committee is authorized to sit 

 by subcommittee or otherwise during the recess or 

 n of Congress at such times and places as they 

 deem advisable: to summon witnesses, administer 

 oaths, print testimony or other information, and to 

 employ such stenographic, clerical, and other as- 

 sistance as may be necessary, one half of the ex- 

 pense to be paid from the contingent fund of the 

 Senate and one half from the contingent fund of 

 the House of Representatives.' 



" While that section was foisted upon that bill, as 

 I said a while ago, as an internal-revenue excres- 

 cence upon a tariff system which was vicious 

 enough, as exemplified by the Wilson bill, luckily it 

 was placed upon the bill in such hot haste that the 

 author of it. whoever he may have been, used lan- 

 guage not sufficiently explicit and apt to make it 

 operative : and that is the only thing that saved 

 this country ^20,000,000 up to date by way of mere 

 gift to those that were no more entitled to it than 

 are we, the members of this committee who are 

 deliberating upon this question to-day. It is all a 

 bounty, nothing else. When the Secretary of the 

 Treasury undertook to frame regulations he found 

 that he could not do it. He was unequal to the 

 duty. The Commissioner, after a most elaborate 

 effort and careful investigation of the subject, was 

 unequal to the task, a most fortunate failure, in my 

 judgment, for the good of the country in this day 

 of deficiencies of revenue, when our expenses exceed 

 by $2.500,000 per month our income. 



" We are told that there is great justice in these 

 claims. Individually I have a conviction which I 

 intend to declare here and let it go upon record, 

 namely, that there is not one particle of justice or 

 merit or anything like equity in a single claim that 

 has been presented under section 61. And why { 

 Because in not a single instance did the man who 

 presented that claim lower his price in consequence 

 of the rebate. Not in one instance was the price 

 lowered to the consumer or the general public. 

 The proof is clear enough about that. So that to 

 start with there is nothing but a promise to give 

 these people something, and there never was any 

 consideration to uphold that. 



''But that is only an exceedingly minor and in- 

 significant point compared with what I am about to 

 state. Anybody who proposed to operate upon sec- 

 tion 61 read in the most unmistakable and signifi- 

 cant language the following : 



"'Any manufacturer . . . may use the same un- 

 der regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of 

 the Treasury, and on satisfying the collector of in- 

 ternal revenue for the district wherein he resides 

 or carries on business that he has complied with 

 such regulations . . . shall be entitled to receive 

 from the Treasury of the United States a rebate or 

 repayment of the tax so paid.' 



" He had no claim and knew that he had no claim 

 until he complied with the regulations, and for that 

 very reason, among others, he charged to his cus- 

 tomers and consumers the whole $1.10 per gallon, 

 and those two things, in my judgment first, the 

 absolute knowledge upon his part that he had no 

 right, except as it was based upon regulations which 

 he knew did not exist, coupled with the fact that he 



charged the customer the whole price of this alco- 

 hol and then sought to get back the r< 

 mere gift and bounty effectually exclude* the idea 

 of any justice, equity, or anything of thai sort in 

 these claims against the Government. So that the 

 niment of the United States will inflict no 

 wrong or injustice upon any claimant if it shall in 

 the progress of time deny every one of these claims, 

 through the courts or otherwise, upon the grounds 

 that I have just indicated. The condition prece- 

 dent to the allowance of these claims does not ex- 

 ist, has never existed. There have never been any 

 regulations, and these claimants knew it. They 

 knew they had no claim until regulations were 

 made and they complied therewith, and, in my 

 judgment, they have no claim. But. fortunately, 

 that is for the courts to determine, and if the courts 

 determine that these claimants have any just or 

 equitable claim, that is all right." 



Mr. Russell, of Connecticut, said in the course of 

 an argument in favor of the report : 



" Now. I say repeal section 61, if you see fit, be- 

 cause it is crude and possibly impossible of execu- 

 tion : but in its stead at the same time as you repeal 

 it, or as soon as practicable thereafter, give us a law 

 which shall allow free alcohol for use in the manufac- 

 tures and the arts. Do not let the only single, well- 

 defined tariff enactment of this Republican House 

 of the Fifty-fourth Congress be a repeal of a pro- 

 tective feature of existing law without the substitu- 

 tion of more effective and pronounced protection. 

 Do not let patriotic duty to a Democratic administra- 

 tion entirely overweigh protective consideration for 

 American industries. It is very proper to consider 

 the deficiency of revenue and the distressed finan- 

 cial conditions of the Government and seek to re- 

 lieve and reimburse the Treasury ; but it is not 

 necessary to do it according to 'the dictum of a 

 Democratic administration and in a way hostile to 

 Republican policy." 



Mr. Hill, of Connecticut, speaking in opposition 

 to the bill, said : 



" The only feature of the whole bill that was 

 intended to operate in the interest of American 

 labor and for the benefit of home industries was 

 this section 61, put in by a Republican, left in by 

 accident, and damned by the Administration from 

 that day to this. Can it be possible that this Re- 

 publican House will select this sole exponent of its 

 own principles, the only leaven in the whole lump, 

 the one redeeming feature of Democratic free-trade 

 legislation, and, repealing that, allow the rest to 

 stand, to bring paralysis, decay, and death to every 

 American industry for two years more f Was it for 

 this and this only that this House was made two 

 thirds Republican by an indignant people ? Think 

 you that the members from doubtful States yes. 

 from any State will glory in such a record as this 

 upon the stump this fall ?" 



" But the Secretary of the Treasury, the Demo- 

 cratic members of the Ways and Means Committee, 

 and, I am sorry to say. a few Republicans upon that 

 committee, claim that because the enforcement of 

 this law would inure to the benefit of the industries 

 of this nation to the estimated amount of ten mil- 

 lions annually, and because large claims for rebates 

 under its provisions are being prosecuted in our 

 courts, it must, therefore, be repealed. I admit 

 that large claims are being made: it only shows the 

 necessity for the enforcement of the law. 1 deny 

 that ten millions of revenue or one quarter of that 

 amount is possibly lost thus far by this one section 

 of the bill, but I'do know that one hundred and 

 thirty millions have already gone by reason of the 

 other sections, and that the next two years will add 

 another hundred millions, and all at the expense of 

 our own people ; and yet this committee deliberately 



