Mr. MYERS. I move to amend the paragraph by striking out the following words: Photographs. ambrotypss. daguerreotypm or other sun picturesof any description. Mr. Chairman, I move this amendment now, in order that when we reach the section refer ring to stamps on photographa and other can pictures I may move to stric that out and insert an amendment imosing on photographers a tax of5%. Jealorem on theirsalee the same amendment which I withdrew at an earlier stage of the bill, rather than compel the ComWhole to rise for want of a quorum. The chairman of the Committee of ays and Means stated the other day that the objection whichI made to the present mode of taxation had no force; but by subsequent in qui and information I find in statement fully conrmed. I have received etters from the chief hotographers of NewYork, Philadel phia, oston, and Washington, stating, from statistics, that there is not one itinerant pho tographer to 100 resident photogra phers, though it was stated here the other day that the itinerants were as 50 to one resident. But, Mr. Chairman, even if this were the fact, it would be of no consequence; for all or nearly all of the pictures taken by itinerant photog raphers are ferrotypes, which are taken upon tin, 6 at a time frequently, and which sell for less than ten cents apiece. They are sold in this city 6 for 50 cents. Hence most of the pictures taken by the traveling photographers are so small as by a subsequent section to be exempt from tax; so that the Government at any rate could lose but little tax a on their business, even if they should not made properreturns. They are as likely, however, to give a correct account of their sales, as to affix the stamps required by the present law, for in man instances the pictures are mounted on blan cards and the wrong docican never be known. But, Mr. Chairman, there is among those engaged in the business of photographing a generaldemsnd that an advalorem tax shall be substituted for the present system. Those who are dishonest evade the law now by will fully omitting to affix stamps on their pictures; while those who are honest frequently omit them unintentionally. I bought this morning hephazard 5 photographs; and I foundthat 3 of them had no atom a afixed. In other words, on these pictures, the Government lost 6 cents out O tea which it should have received. Of the pictures having no stamps af fixed, one had no imprint of the photographers name. With reference, then, to 2 of the pictures, the emission to aflix the stamps was accidental; in one case it was omitted purposely. I think it apparent that the Government would be the gainer by the advalorem system. Wherever there is a photographer carrying on business, the assessor can find from his books the amount of his sales as well as in any other business. If no books are kept by a traveling or other photographer, some return must be made, and the assessor will no doubt get at the facts. It is just to these pho tographers that they should no longer be required to pay upon their business a greater proportionate amount of tax than is levied upon other branches of business. They frequently sell 6, 7, or 8 pictures for one dollar, and are require to pay 12, 14, and 16 % or more on their sales, a%age which is much too large when we bear in mind the fact that nearly all the chem icals used in this branch ofbusiness have within the last few years advanced in price 250 to 300%. I will not repeat. Mr Chairman, whatI said the other day about the defacement of these pictures in consequence of the affixing of stamps. At any rate the stam s upon the pictures make them very unsight y. this for the interest of the photographers and the government and the public that this requirement in reference to aflixing stamps should be no longer continued. I trust that myamendment will be adopted.