there is no question of inter-State commerce that was ever raised there or considered applicable. | Those roads do not go between two cities outside of Massachusetts.

Mr. HALE. Let us see how that is. I know that since this Administration has come into power, in the distribution of Federal officers all New England has been considered as part of Massachusetts, [laughter;] but I believe that is not geographically or logically true. Concord, New Hampshire, is outside of Massachusetts geographically if not politically, and the railroad from Boston to Lowell is a part of the road by which a great portion of the travel goes to New Hampshire, to northern Vermont, and to Canada; and the connecting roads, I think, so manage trade that freight can be put on at Boston, going on the Boston and Lowell railroad, without being broken or disturbed until it gets to Rouse's Point in New York, near the Canada line. So that the Boston and Lowell railroad is just as much a road for the transit of travel from State to State as any railroad in New Jersey.

The State of Massachusetts enacted by this provision that for thirty years all that travel should go over the Boston and Lowell railroad, and that there should be no other competing road created within thirty years. By and by the Legislature of Massachusetts chartered another railroad leading from Boston to Portland-that is outside of Massachusetts-called the Boston and Maine railroad, and that ran not exactly parallel, but diverging a little from the Boston and Lowell railroad. Subsequently the State of Massachusetts passed another railroad charter for a road running from Salem to Lowell, intersecting with the Boston and Maine railroad, and thus made another line to Lowell only about a mile and a half or a mile and six tenths longer than the Boston and Lowell railroad. By this junction between the Boston and Maine and the Salem and Lowell railroads a new route was created to Lowell, and passengers, of course, began to go over it. In that state of things the Boston and Lowell Railroad Company applied to the supreme court of Massachusetts for an order enjoining, prohibiting, and forbidding the new railroad thus created between Boston and Lowell by the new route from carrying passengers, upon the idea that it was in contravention of the right before granted by the Massachusetts Legislature to the Boston and Lowell Railroad Company. The case is found reported in the second volume of Gray's Reports at very considerable length, and anybody who wants to hear an answer to the argument of the Senator from Massachusetts, by reading the decision in this case, and the rest of the Pilgrim's Progress, which is utterly at war with the doctrine he drew from it, laughter,] will find the answer to the speech. And that, sir, is the law of Massachusetts to-day. I know it, because the Boston and Maine railroad runs through the city in which I live, and the people there are somewhat interested in it; and this source of revenue which that railroad had from carrying passengers to Lowell was taken away by the decision of the supreme court of Massachusetts, and is the law there to-day.

Massachusetts has not been alone in this policy. It is essential to every State that it should have the power to exercise this right. There is the great State of New York, what has been her action? She incorporated by a series of acts what is now known as the New York Central railroad, leading from Albany to Buffalo, a distance of between three and four hundred miles. That road was prohibited from carrying certain articles of merchandise, I think wheat, one of the great necessaries of life-almost as necessary to life as paper, [laughter,] except upon condition that a certain toll was paid upon the wheat, and I think it was a toll equal to the amount of the whole freight received, to the Erie canal. That was the law of New York for a long time. It was a question of policy for the State of New York whether that prohibition should be continued or not; but I believe in all the discussions that took place between the advocates of the prohibition and those who were for its repeal, it was never suggested that it was a thing with which Congress had any right to meddle, with which Congress could interfere, in regard to which Congress had any right to exercise any power, but left it for the State of New York to settle for herself, and to settle exclusively as a question affecting her own State policy.

If this matter is argued upon the ground of military necessity, it seems that it is not wanted there, because, according to the speech of the Senator from Massachusetts, the General Government have taken the right and have exercised it, and the Raritan railroad have carried troops and munitions of war for the Government of the United States. The Senator did not tell us what was the result of that application made to the court to compel them to account to the Camden and Amboy railroad. Does the Senator know what it was? The Senator from New Jersey thinks it was not sustained, but it makes no odds whether they were compelled to account or not; that was a matter between two corporations in the State of New Jersey, with which this General Government have nothing to do. Whenever the Raritan and Delaware Bay Railroad Company was wanted for the transportation of troops or munitions of war, the Government had it. The Secretary of War ordered the troops to be conveyed in that way, and they were conveyed; and whether they by that invaded any of the rights of the Camden and Amboy railroad for which they were compelled to account, is a matter with which the United States certainly have nothing to do, because the United States, with all their great powers, have not got to run a Quixotic expedition into every State in the Union to see that equal and exact justice is meted out by them to all their citizens and all their corporations. Whenever a State violates any grant or any right secured by the Constitution of the United States, then, and not till then, have the United States a right to interfere.

But what is this provision? The bill is very brief in its character. It provides:

That every railroad company in the United States whose road is operated by steam, its successors and assigns, be, and is hereby, authorized to carry upon and over its road, connections, boats, bridges, and ferries, all freight, property, mails, passengers, troops, and Government supplies on their way from any State to another State, and to receive compensation therefor.

I should have no sort of objection to this bill if it confined itself to what its friends profess that it is, and that is a bill to enable the General Government to carry on and exercise the powers which the Constitution confers upon it. I should say that they should not only be authorized, but compelled, to carry "all freight, property, mails, passengers, troops, and Government supplies" that are necessary and requisite for the General Government to carry out the purposes for which it was created, and to exercise the powers conferred upon it by the Constitution; but it is manifest this looks beyond that; it looks beyond the public weal, beyond the public interest. It is not the post office that is concerned; it is not the transportation of troops, for that you have; it is not any or all of these interests combined; but the real gist of this bill is to raise the stock of a bankrupt corporation, to make it above par. That is the whole of it, and we might just as well look it in the face and call it by its right name as not. That is to be the effect, and that is what the interference of the General Government is invoked for; and it is invoked, and its exercise is called for, in a manner that will be utterly destructive of every doctrine that has ever been heretofore practiced upon in reference to corporations created by the States.

has been utterly disregarded by the Government of the United States, and the Government has used the Raritan road for that purpose, and has transported troops over it.

So you may take the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States and with the Indian tribes, and that may be carried to an indefinite extent. If that authorizes the interference proposed by this bill with every railroad in the United States, it is difficult to conceive anything that it would not reach; it would reach everything and swallow up every power that has been heretofore supposed to be vested in the States, and would leave nothing to the States, but make this a consolidated Govern

ment.

Mr. President, it may well be asked, if this be a power residing in the General Government, why in the whole history of the States and the Union has it not been invoked before? During the whole history of this Camden and Amboy monopoly, why has not the power of Congress been invoked until this time? Why was it not invoked in the State of Massachusetts? Why has it not been invoked in New York? Why was it not invoked somewhere else? Why, until the Raritan and Delaware Bay Railroad Company found that they had sunk thousands and hundreds of thousands in their road, and it was a losing concern, that they could not pay dividends on their stock or interest on their bonds, did not these patriotic gentlemen, governed by these public interests, these high motives, these great considerations relating to the Union, enlist the eloquence of my learned friend from Massachusetts to come in here with grandiloquent pæans in praise of the Union, and to excite public sentiment and public opinion in favor of the Union-

Mr. SUMNER. How have they "enlisted" me?

Mr. HALE. Why, Mr. President, in a hundred ways. They enlisted him by articles in the New York Tribune, [laughter;] they enlisted him by various articles scattered all over the country; they enlisted him by all the ways and means by which men that have a selfish and a private object to effect appeal to great objects, high considerations, and moral sentiments, and thus operate upon the judgment and the sympathies of the generous, the impulsive, and the unreflecting. [Laughter.] That is the way they enlisted him. Mr. President, as I said before, I have not examined this measure in detail, though I have thought upon it somewhat. I should deprecate as one of the greatest evils that could grow out of our present controversy if we should deem it necessary to stretch forth our hand in this way and usurp to ourselves the control of all the railroads and other corporations in the United States; for the bill not only applies to railroads but to boats, bridges, ferries,everything-all are brought by one sweep, by the operation of this small bill, within the scope of Federal authority, Federal jurisdiction.

Mr. President, I have not been one of those who have been loud or strenuous or persevering in the assertion of the rights of the States; but I believe that the existence of the States and the proper preservation of State sovereignty, State rights, and State power are as necessary to the successful operation of the system of our Government as the Union; and if one or the other is to be destroyed, it had better be the Union than the States, because if the Union is destroyed and the States left, we then have civil government and institutions left for recuperating and reconstructing a Union; but if the States are destroyed and all swallowed up in one military despotism, there nothing left, there is no nucleus around which the friends of free institutions may rally

I know, sir, that there are certain general prop-
ositions which a wide and latitudinarian construc-
tion of the Constitution may so construe that there
shall not be a single thing which can be proposed
that Congress may not do. The "general wel-
fare" clause of the Constitution is familiar to all.
If somebody gets up and by some ingenious soph-
ism demonstrates that in his judgment a particu-is
Jar thing might be for the general welfare, these
broad constructionists may find that the Consti-
tution gives them the power to do that thing for
that reason.

Then there is the power to establish post offices
and post roads. If you want to establish a post
office or a post road, why not do so? Why not
say that all these companies shall be compelled
to carry the mail over their roads? Have they
ever refused to do so? Is there anything in the
provisions of the legislation of New Jersey that
prohibits any of these railroads from carrying the
mail? If there be anything which prohibits their
carrying the troops of the United States, you have
the evidence from the advocates of the bill that it

Mr. HOWARD. You speak only for yourself. Mr. HALE. I am not in the habit of speaking for anybody on earth but myself; but I trust the sentiment I have just expressed commends itself to the Senator from Michigan.

Mr. HOWARD. No.

Mr. HALE. It certainly does to me; but I trust the time will never come when either the Senator or myself will have to choose either horn of that dilemma. The prosperity of the country depends upon the preservation of the just powers of each, and not encroaching on the other. We are in this rebellion mainly and principally owing to the encroachments of the States on the Union.

to aid in the completion of other railroads in the northwest-tending through the States of Illinois, Michigan, ern States; their securities possess advantages in the money markets of the world as ten to six over those of the railroad lines in question.

Mr. BROWN, of Wisconsin. Then I call for tellers.

Tellers were not ordered.

The previous question was seconded, and the main question ordered.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time.

Mr. HOLMAN. I demand the reading of the engrossed bill.

The SPEAKER. The morning hour has expired.

Mr. MORRILL. I move that the rules be suspended, and that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union on the special order.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATION.

The SPEAKER, by unanimous consent, laid before the House a communication from the Secretary of the Interior, transmitting the report of the commissioner appointed under the act of Congress of July 2, 1864; which was referred to the Committee of Ways and Means, and ordered to be printed.

TERRITORY OF WYOMING.

Mr. ASHLEY. I ask the unanimous consent of the House to report from the Committee on Territories a bill to establish a temporary government for the Territory of Wyoming, for the purpose of having it printed.

Mr. SPALDING. I object.

Mr. HOLMAN. Will the gentleman from Vermont yield to me for a moment to enable me to report a bill?

Mr. BALDWIN, of Massachusetts. I must object to any further yielding of the floor.

TAX BILL.

The question was taken on Mr. MORRILL'S motion, and it was agreed to.

So the rules were suspended; and the House accordingly resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, (Mr. POMEROY in the chair, and resumed the consideration of the special order, being bill of the House No. 744, to amend an act entitled "An act to provide internal revenue to support the Government, to pay interest on the public debt, and for other purposes," approved June 30, 1864.

The CHAIRMAN stated the question to be upon the amendment proposed yesterday by Mr. A. W. CLARK, on page 20, lines four hundred and sixty-one and four hundred and sixty-two, to strike out "exclusive of the boiler in case a

duty has been paid thereon," and to insert in lieu thereof "and steam boilers," so that the clause will read:

By inserting after the words "steam engines" the words "and steam boilers."

Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend the amendment by striking out lines four hundred and sixty, four hundred and sixty-one, and four hundred and sixty-two, as follows:

By inserting after the words "steam engines" the words "exclusive of the boiler in case a duty has been paid thereon"

And inserting in lieu thereof the following:

On steam locomotives and marine engines, including boilers and all other parts, a duty of five per cent. ad valorem: Provided, That when such boiler or part thereof shall have been once assessed and the duty previously paid thereon, the amount so paid shall be deducted from the finished engine.

On bollers of all kinds, water tanks, sugar tanks, oil stills, sewing machines, lathes, tools, planes, planing machines, shafting and gearing, a duty of five per cent. ad valorem.

Mr. KASSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer the following as an amendment to the substitute of the gentleman from Vermont:

Add the following:

On iron railing, gates, fences, furniture, and statuary, a duty of five per cent. ad valorem.

The amendment was adopted.

The question recurred on the substitute, as amended, and it was adopted.

The question recurred on Mr. A. W. CLARK's amendment, as amended, and it was adopted. Mr. BOUTWELL. I move to amend by inserting after line five hundred and six, as follows:

And by striking out in the same paragraph all after the words does not exceed the sum of," and inserting the words "$1,000 per annum shall be exempt from duty." So that it will read:

By inserting in the paragraph relating to ready-made clothing," after the word dress," the words "not otherwise assessed and taxed as such ;" and by striking out, &c.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will state to the gentleman from Massachusetts that the words "as such" have been inserted after the word "taxed." His amendment will come in after the words" as such."

Mr. BOUTWELL. Very well. I wish to call the attention of the committee to this fact. As the law now stands a manufacturer of clothing who makes for a gentleman a nice coat pays to the Government a duty of three per cent., while a manufacturer of ready-made clothing, such as pea-jackets and overalls for laboring men, pays a tax of five per cent., which is manifestly unjust. The object of my amendment is to remedy that inequality by putting a tax of five per cent. on clothing of all sorts, allowing those persons who make custom work exclusively, and whose annual product does not exceed $1,000, to be exempted altogether. These are the two effects of the amendment which I propose.

Mr. BOUTWELL's amendment was adopted.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

The committee rose informally; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, a message from the Senate, by Mr. CоBB, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate had passed an act (S. No. 392) supplementary to an act approved July 14, 1862, entitled "An act to establish certain post roads," in which he was directed to ask the concurrence of the House.

On smoking tobacco of all kinds, thirty-five cents per pound.

I will state the object of my amendment, so that it may be fully understood. The Committee of Ways and Means has endeavored, throughout this revision of duty on tobacco and its manufactures, to evade the great temptation to fraud and false swearing resulting from the numerous and unnecessary discriminations of quality to which different grades of tax are affixed. The second paragraph, which I propose to strike out, makes a new kind of smoking tobacco, to be taxed at a less rate, and in my judgment it will be found to embrace all the smoking tobacco manufactured when the returns come to be made to the assessors. The object of my amendment is, therefore, to impose, in the case of tobacco as in the case of cigars, a uniform rate of taxation, moderate but certain in amount, so that there shall be no temptation to fraud or false swearing except simply as to the amount of the tobacco produced. For that purpose the two paragraphs are confined in one, so as to read "on smoking tobacco of all kinds, thirty-five cents per pound."

difficult to detect the manufactured article from the superior species of smoking tobacco.

Mr. MORRILL. I know that some tobacconists are in the habit of coloring these stems and grinding them; but I believe it is not difficult for any expert to detect the difference between the two articles.

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT.

The committee at this point rose informally; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, several messages in writing were received from the President of the United States, by Mr. NICOLAY, his Private Secretary.

TAX BILL-AGAIN.

The Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union resumed its session.

Mr. KASSON. As my colleague on the committee states that he believes there will be no difficulty in the discrimination, I will modify my amendment so that the first paragraph will read,

on smoking tobacco of all kinds not otherwise herein provided for, thirty-five cents per pound," and by striking out in the second paragraph all from the word "stem" in line five hundred and thirty-four to the word "otherwise" in line five hundred and thirty-nine.

Mr. MALLORY. I cannot understand the propriety of the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. KASSON. The gentleman will permit me to state that the object of the entire amendment is to enable the assessors to have a correct report in reference to smoking tobacco, and to prevent the temptation to false swearing which would result from an unnecessary discrimination in the quality of the smoking tobacco. To accomplish this purpose, I proposed in the first instance to make the rate uniform on all kinds of smoking tobacco. But since my colleague from Vermont has stated that there is no difficulty in detecting smoking tobacco made exclusively of stems, I think that this kind ought to be subject to a lower rate of taxation, in order that the manufacture may be continued, and I have modified my amendment so as to make the second paragraph read: "on smoking tobacco made exclusively of stems, twenty cents per pound."

Mr. MALLORY. If that is the amendment proposed, I submit that it is no amendment at all. It is provided in lines five hundred and thirty-two and five hundred and thirty-three: "on smoking tobacco, except as hereinafter otherwise provided for, thirty-five cents per pound." Now it is proposed to strike out the words" except as hereinafter otherwise provided for." Then the tax on stem tobacco in the next paragraph is left precisely as it stands now-twenty cents per pound.

Mr. KASSON. This amendment confines the lower rate exclusively to the stem tobacco. The other did not. I preferred a uniform rate, but yielded to the opinion of my colleague.

Mr. MALLORY. Then I submit my objection becomes stronger. For what will become of these scraps and other refuse materials? Does the gentleman propose that these shall be thrown away? They cannot be manufactured, if the tobacco made from them is to be taxed thirty-five cents per pound. Does the gentleman propose such a rate of taxation?

Mr. KASSON. I think that the price of tobacco to the consumer should be determined alone by the grade of the tobacco, and that the tax should be as far as possible uniform. The consumer pays high in proportion to the purity of the tobacco, and low in proportion to its adulteration. By

tion to put in a little of the inferior article, and then swear that the tobacco is adulterated to the lower grade.

Mr. MALLORY. Let me state what I think will be the effect of the amendment.

Mr. MORRILL. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman from Iowa had proposed merely to strike out all of the description in the second paragraph in reference to smoking tobacco except that made exclusively from stems, I do not know that I would have objected. But I do believe that it is important that we allow this sort of tobacco-making the rate uniform you obviate the temptamade of stems only-to go into consumption at a less rate than other sorts; otherwise it will be wasted. Before we levied so high a tax on tobacco, the stems were not used, or were used only as a manure for the ground on which tobacco is raised. But since the advance in price, stems are not only used here at home, but are shipped abroad. This amendment, if adopted, will compel the parties having any quantity of stems to ship them and not use them at home. I think there can be no difficulty about detecting frauds where the smoking tobacco is made exclusively of stems. If the gentleman will modify his amendment by striking out of the second paragraph all but that, I will not object to it.

Mr. KASSON. I ask the gentleman from Vermont whether there is not a mode of manufactur

ing the stems into smoking tobacco so as make it

If it is proposed to tax tobacco to such an extent as to raise from it a large revenue, I do not know that I have any right to object. We now tax cigars very high. Cigars are smoked by the wealthy classes; and perhaps, if any description of smoking tobacco is to be taxed high, it should be cigars. But the other article, smoking tobacco, in the common acceptation of the term, as understood in the market, is used by the great mass of the people of the country; by those who do not smoke cigars, not being able to indulge in that luxury. And I submit that the lowest rate of tax we can impose upon this article the better it

will be for the interest in the country and for the revenue of the Government. If you tax it so high, you will stop the practice of smoking which now prevails so extensively in the country, and which uses up this sort of tobacco. If you tax it so high, men who use no cigars and who use this, will stop using it, and the result will be that the Government will derive no revenue from it. I think that it is better for the producer, better for the manufacturer, and better for the Treasury of the United States, to impose upon every description of smoking tobacco made from stems, scraps, &c., the lowest rate of taxation. By reducing the tax from twenty cents to ten cents, I think that we will procure more revenue, and I believe that the consumption of the article would be ten times as great as it is now.

Now, one other remark before I sit down. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman's time has expired.

Mr. KASSON. I want to call the gentleman's attention to the fact that the great discrimination between cigars and smoking tobacco is cutting us off from revenue.

The CHAIRMAN. Debate upon the amendment has been exhausted, and the gentleman is not in order.

Mr. MALLORY. I move to strike out the last line of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, the difficulty suggested by the gentleman from Vermont [Mr. MORRILL] is the discrimination between tobacco made from stems and tobacco made from fine leaf. I submit that the discrimination is very easy to be made. I doubt whether there is an inspector in the United States who will hesitate in reference to the character of tobacco as to what is made from stems and scraps and what is made from leaf. Tobacco made from scraps and tobacco made from leaf can easily be discriminated. One is of such inferior quality that it can be distinguished at once. In my judgment there is no difficulty in making a discrimination under this bill. I hope that the distinction will be reserved; and I hope taat the tax will be reduced from twenty cents to ten cents per pound.

an amendment, in which the concurrence of the
House was requested.

TAX BILL-AGAIN.

The committee resumed its session.
Mr. INGERSOLL. Is it in order to offer an
amendment to the amendment of the gentleman
from Kentucky?

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is of opinion
that the question should first be taken upon the
motion of the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. KASSON]
to strike out.

The question being put, and no quorum voting-
Mr. MALLORY demanded tellers.
Tellers were ordered; and Messrs. KASSON and
MALLORY were appointed.

Mr. MALLORY. I withdraw my call for a
division, as I see a majority are in favor of the
amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. MALLORY. I withdraw my amend.

ment.

in the very beginning, you propose to take from the downtrodden African almost the only pleasure and solace left since you have made him a freedman.

Mr. STEVENS. Our object is to correct his taste and elevate him, so that he may equal his master in-smoking tobacco. [Laughter.]

Mr. MALLORY. That remark proves that the gentleman from Pennsylvania desires to make the freedmen superior to the common laboring men of the country who have to confine themselves to the use of common tobacco. They must be invested at once with the pecuniary power of purchasing and using the very finest description of tobacco sold at the highest price.

Mr. INGERSOLL. One word more. As the gentleman has put a finish upon my picture, I desire to improve the color of his.

Mr. MALLORY. Mine was colored sufficiently.

MINGERSOLL. I want to tone it down by suggesting that there are five hundred thousand of our soldiers around their camp-fires who constantly use tobacco, and I would not compel them to pay ten cents a pound.

be a mill a day to the person who smokes it.
The question was taken on the amendment to
the amendment proposed by Mr. STEVENS, and it
was disagreed to.

Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to amend by striking out "fifteen" and inserting “five," so that it will read "five cents a pound." This is the lowest grade of tobacco manufactured; in fact, it is Mr. STEVENS. Let me suggest to the genso low that it has no grade. It seems to me that tleman that a tax of ten cents a pound, considertwenty cents a pound is too large a tax to puting the time a pound of tobacco will last, will not upon this quality of tobacco. Those who use this quality are a class of people who are not able to buy the better qualities, owing to the high price of the better grades. It is the poor man who buys this grade, and he does this from necessity; he prefers the best, but cannot afford to buy it. Smoking is to the poor man a luxury of which I do not desire to see him deprived; and I can imagine for him no greater luxury, which costs so little, than, after a day of toil at a dollar and a half or two dollars a day, he comes home, and, after the evening repast is over, he smokes his pipe by his cheerful fireside, with his wife and little ones around him. While you may be realizing all the anticipations of youth, this poor man, with the wreathes of smoke ascending and circling above him, only hopes to see happier and brighter days; but those hopes turn to ashes in the bowl, and this vision of happier and brighter days vanishes with the smoke. I hope this qual

cents per pound. I would rather see it free, so
that the poor man can enjoy this one comfort
without feeling the burden of taxation. Let us
not take away from the poor man this luxury,
when at best he is permitted to enjoy so few.

Mr. MORRILL. Mr. Chairman, I would be content to have the bill remain as it is, without amendment, but believing there was something|ity of tobacco will not be taxed more than five in the amendment of the gentleman from lowa; that is to obtain a uniform system, and as far as possible to put it out of the power of the manufacturer to practice fraud or evasion, I was willing for one to accept his proposition with the modification suggested by myself. I do believe that so far as it is made of scraps and refuse of cigars, and scraps and refuse of plug tobacco, there may be a door open for considerable fraud. At the same time I will say to the gentleman from Kentucky that this kind of tobacco is much superior and worth more per pound than stems. It is good tobacco, but not in good shape. I think that the proposition of the gentleman from Iowa is a safe and practicable one.

Mr. MALLORY, by unanimous consent, withdrew his amendment.

Mr. INGERSOLL. I move to strike out "twenty" and insert " ten.

The CHAIRMAN. That is not now in order. Mr. MALLORY. I hope that the gentleman from Illinois will move to reduce the tax from twenty cents to ten cents per pound.

The CHAIRMAN. That paragraph is not now before the committee.

Mr. KASSON's amendment was agreed to. Mr. KASSON. I move to strike out the words, "and not mixed with leaf or leaf and stems, and on fine-cut, and shorts, and scraps of tobacco, the refuse of cigars manufactured, and also on all scraps or refuse of plug manufactured, when sold for smoking tobacco, or for consumption, or otherwise;" so that the paragraph will read: "On smoking tobacco made exclusively of stems, twenty cents per pound."

Mr. MALLORY. I move to amend the original text by inserting "fifteen" instead of "twenty."

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

The committee informally rose; and the House received a message from the Senate, by Mr. COBB, one of their clerks, announcing that the Senate had passed a joint resolution (H. R. No. 141) reducing the duty on printing paper, unsized, and used for books and newspapers exclusively, with

Mr. STEVENS. I move to amend the amend-
ment by striking out "five" and inserting "ten."
I think that anybody that wishes to smoke can
afford to pay a ten-cent tax a pound. I under-
stand it is a very delicious luxury, and I know,
from what I have heard about this House, that
everybody is anxious to be taxed, and that there
is very great complaint that we do not tax enough.
If, therefore, the gentleman will say ten cents,
that will include stems, and then the old women
of the country, making their pipes out of corn-
cobs, can use it by paying only ten cents. This
is a great reduction from what we proposed, and I
am almost afraid the committee will be reproached
if we refuse to impose a proper tax.

Mr. MALLORY. I hope the gentleman from
Pennsylvania will not insist upon his amendment,
but accept the amendment of the gentleman from
Illinois. This description of tobacco is compar-
atively worthless; it is very little better than that
which is made of the stalks after the tobacco leaf
is stripped off; and that, I suggest to the gentle-
man, is left entirely untaxed by this bill; and if
he is determined to hunt up tobacco of every form
to impose a tax on, he should tax the stalk. Yes,
and walking-canes are made of the stalks, and he
should tax them.

I think, however, that this stem tobacco should be left with a tax of only five cents at highest. I do not believe it will now, if untaxed, sell for that much in the market. This is the only anomaly in the bill of an article being taxed more than it is worth. Gentlemen have set free a very large class of people in our country-I will not call them niggers, for fear of offending somebody-but a large class of people whose almost entire solace I suggest to the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. INGERSOLL,] in order to finish his picture of the smoking wreath-is derived from smoking this lowest grade of tobacco; and now,

Mr. MORRILL. I move to amend the amendment by inserting "twenty-five cents" in place of "five cents." I offer the amendment pro forma, for I desire to have the clause remain as it is. This subject was very fully considered by the Committee of Ways and Means. All the experts who were before the committee were persuaded that an infinite amount of fraud would arise under this section unless the tax was very considerable, and it was under the idea that it would prevent frauds and that the article would bear this amount of tax that the twenty cents was inserted. This is but about half the amount that we impose upon regularly manufactured smoking tobacco. The price of the article, in the first instance, is very much below that of good tobacco, and we impose only a little more than half the tax. I submit, therefore, that we have given sufficient consideration, not only to our soldiers, but to the colored friends of the gentleman from Kentucky, [Mr. MALLORY,] about whom he manifests such great solicitude. I hope that we shall allow the amount of the tax to remain as it is in the bill.

Mr. CHANLER. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment for the simple reason that a cheap luxury in crowded communities is an absolute necessity. It is impossible that the laboring classes in our crowded cities can do without the ordinary stimulants which make life tolerable under the excessive burdens of taxation which we impose upon them. The laboring classes in our cities find it almost impossible now to furnish fuel and clothing for themselves and families, and they need as much as any of us the solace of a stimulant. By this excessive taxation you will drive them to the use of an injurious, and, it may be, fatal system of stimulants, and by which our revenue will be lessened.

It is a well-known fact that the records of the efforts for temperance in the cities show that with the exclusion of spirituous liquors they introduced the excessive use of opium, and men and women who are forced to work many more hours a day than laboring men in the country districts, are forced, as the books of the apothecaries in the populous sections of New York city show, to take for a stimulant a liquor made up principally of opium. If you lay an excessive tax upon this cheap article of tobacco, the result may be that the poorer classes will be forced into the adoption of a vice which has become national in some countries, and the use of opium may be the fate of the laborers of this country. With regard to the fraud on the revenue just alluded to, I have only to say you have already forced those who sell cigars to cheat you by putting false stamps upon their boxes of cigars and selling them at an increased price, while at the same time the Government loses its revenue. I appeal, therefore, to the Committee of Ways and Means not to take this further step in the same direction by over-taxing this cheap and popular luxury.