188 



CONGRESS. (THE TARIFF BILL.) 



best, let them decide. Which is most satisfac- 

 tory to the people, let the country decide.. It is 

 a matter that does not concern us." 



The House adopted the motion of Mr. Wilson 

 further to disagree. 



In the Senate, July 20, the letter of the Presi- 

 dent to Mr. Wilson 'became the subject of dis- 

 cussion. Mr. Hill, of New York, said in defense 

 (.fit: 



' Mr. President, having demonstrated, as- 1 

 think I have, that the true Democratic theory 

 of revenue reform requires that free raw mate- 

 rials should be its distinguishing feature, let us 

 next inquire what is the condition which now 

 confronts us. 



" The Senate bill which has been passed vio- 

 lates this Democratic theory, and, while it re- 

 duces the duty on iron, coal, lead, and some 

 other raw materials, from those imposed under 

 the McKinley law, and in that respect is com- 

 mendable, it nevertheless imposes some duties 

 thereon and thereby fails to redeem our pledges. 

 It is not a question of the amount of duties 

 which may be imposed; a question of principle 

 is involved, and a single penny's duty violates 

 our promises and places us in a false position. 

 As the President well says, there can be no 

 compromise on a matter of this character, where 

 a vital principle is at stake. 



" The House of Representatives, fresh from 

 the people, which represents more distinctly and 

 peculiarly than we do the taxing power of the 

 people, repudiates our bill, and a Democratic 

 President has emphasized that repudiation, and 

 the condition which confronts us is one of ex- 

 treme embarrassment. Shall we retreat, or ad- 

 vance? Shall we surrender to the House while 

 we can do so honorably, or shall we wait until 

 we are driven to it ? 



"Mr. President, in the light of the letter of 

 the President of the United States, the House 

 can not honorably retreat. It has no other 

 alternative except to insist upon its bill wherein 

 it provides for free raw materials. The Presi- 

 dent can not approve the Senate bill after what 

 he has said in this remarkable letter, a portion 

 of which I have read. 



" He arraigns the Senate, and intimates that 

 the enactment of the Senate bill means ' party 

 perfidy and party dishonor.' These are strong 

 words, sir, which the President of the United 

 States would not use toward a measure which 

 he ever expected afterward to approve. 



"This letter, unusual and unprecedented in 

 its character and method of promulgation 

 though it may be, nevertheless clearly fore- 

 shadows a veto of the Senate bill, even if the 

 House should finally concur in our amendments. 

 What person would expect the President to ap- 

 prove the Senate bill after its vigorous and 

 scathing denunciation contained in his letter? 

 You would think less of him for his glaring 

 inconsistency. 



"No, this letter is significant; it is a bold, 

 vigorous, even if imprudent letter; it means 

 war to the knife against the Senate bill; it 

 justifies much that has been said against the 

 Senate bill during all the last three months; it 

 means that it can never receive Executive ap- 

 proval ; it means that the Senate can not be 

 permitted to abandon or surrender the great 



underlying principles for which we struggled 

 and lost in 1888, and fought and won in 1892. 



"The President is right; there is no middle 

 ground which we can occupy. No bill which 

 does not provide for free raw materials can be 

 permitted to become a law. 



" It is unnecessary to enter into any argument 

 to define or designate what articles' constitute 

 raw materials. Every Democrat knows what 

 they are. Any article may be considered raw 

 material when it is in the lowest or crudest 

 form into wh'ich it enters into commerce. That 

 definition is ample and sufficient, and will re- 

 deem our pledges if it is honestly applied. 



" Mr. President, I have thus far indorsed all 

 that the President of the United States has so 

 appropriately said upon the subject of the im- 

 portance of securing free raw materials for the 

 benefit of the manufacturers, the consumers, 

 and the people of the country. Nothing more 

 need be said by me upon that point. 



" If the President in his wisdom had seen fit, 

 while the debate was progressing in the Senate, 

 to have aided my efforts to secure adhesion to 

 this principle by expressing his views in favor 

 thereof in some proper and legitimate way. I 

 should have been gratified, and it unquestion- 

 ably would have been of practical benefit to the 

 cause. I rejoice that he has expressed them 

 even now, although I am not required to defend 

 the manner and form of their presentation, 

 which I do not assume. 



"I respectfully differ from the President in 

 his assumption that a tax upon sugar is neces- 

 sary at this time, conceding for the purposes of 

 the argument that an income tax is to be re- 

 tained. Clearly both are not needed for any 

 legitimate purposes of the Treasury. That fact 

 has been demonstrated over and over again dur- 

 ing this debate. The President speaks of the 

 ' Democratic principle and policy which lead to 

 the taxation of sugar.' He asserts that in the 

 taxation of sugar ' we are in no danger of run- 

 ning counter to Democratic principle.' 



"I am not now controverting that idea, but 

 desire only to suggest that if it was desirable 

 that sugar should be taxed ' as a legitimate and 

 logical article of revenue taxation,' as he now 

 says, it seems strange that the President did not 

 in his last annual message make some intima- 

 tion, suggestion, or recommendation to that 

 effect. Not a word of that kind appears." 



On July 23, an elaborate defense of the posi- 

 tion of the Democratic majority in the Senate 

 was made by Mr. Gorman, of Maryland. He 

 said: 



" Mr. President, the declarations of the chair- 

 man of the conference committee on the part of 

 a co-ordinate branch, which I have a right to 

 allude to as a matter which concerns both 

 Houses, accompanied as it was by the most 

 extraordinary, the most uncalled for, and the 

 most unwise communication that was ever 

 penned by a President of the United States, 

 place this body in a position where its members 

 must see to it 'that the dignity and honor of this 

 Chamber shall be maintained. It places me, Mr. 

 President, in a position where I must tell the 

 story of events exactly as they occurred. Never 

 in the course of my life and I have had con- 

 nection with party management almost all my 



