Mr. GRIMES. I do not know that it is necessary for me to answer interrogations of the gentleman. He is specially interested in the subject of manufactures. I am not interested either in manufactures or commerce. I speak from the knowledge of historic facts I have gathered in the course of my life. If I am in error I can be corrected. Mr. President, I have no desire to weary the Senate by criticisms of other crudities, partial ities, I may say enormities, contained in the bill. I leave to others who may follow me the discussion of other branches of this subject. Why should we make haste to pass this measure? We were told yesterday by the Senfrom Ohio that it was only necessary because of the high price of labor. Does he expect that this bill, when enacted into a law, will reduce the value of skilled labor, or that it will have a tendency in that direction? On the contrary, will it not have the effect to increase the value of that description of labor, and shall we not have the same manufacturing interests, with the same argument in their mouths, clamorin at our doors at the next session for increase duties on those provided in this bill? He also told us that this tariff was not required o the iron masters to protect them against the pauper labor of Europe. This is undoubtedly so. The protection is required against the high prices of American labor, and nothing can show more thoroughly the absurdity of this measure. Why, we are told that the difference between the prices of labor in the iron works at Pittsburg and Johnstown in the same State of Pennsylvania, and within less than 200 miles of each other, is sufficient to enable the Cambria works at Johnstown to divide a fair dividend on their capital, while in the Pittsburg works no profits are realized at all. In.there are leagues and combinations and dissipation among the workmen, so that their labor is not as valuable as the same labor would be at other places, where upon the employers post off to Washington to secure legislation, which in their judgment will protect them against high wages and unremunerative labor. Our true policy is to wait. Let us make haste slowly. The financial and business affairs of this country will adjust themselves if we will only let them alone. Values of all kinds are falling, beginning with agricultural products, and will of their own momentum adjust themselves to the specie standard.. Skilled labor will, like everything else, in a little while find its true reward. The true relief for the manufacturer and the people alike should be sought, and can only be found in a reduction of the internal taxes on manufactures. So much does the integnal tax duplicate itself in the various forms in which it is imposed upon manufactures that a reduction of one cent from the internal tax would probably be of as much benefit to the manufacturer as the imposition of 5%. duty under this bill.: But the passage of this bill will preclude us from making such a reduction of the tax, for its practical effect would be to increase the duty for the benefit of the manufacturer and throw so much greater burden upon the other sources of internalrevenue. Surely we shall not be asked, after giving the manufacturers all they required under this bill, to the loss of the public revenue. I am convinced of not less than 50 million dollars per annum, we shall not be asked to also reduce the tax on their manufactures and thus throw still greater bur dens on the consumers. Mr. President, were I an iron manufacturer I would protest against the passage of this bill. From the day of its enactment agitation for its repeal will begin. The greatest of all evils in business of every description are fluctuations and uncertainties. This measure will derange all the business of the country and afford relief to no considerable portion of the people. It cannot remain long on your statute book. Its atrocious inequalities and partialities and one sidedness will attract the attention and receive the condemnation of the people whenever they shall have an opportunity to pass upon it. The oRprotempore. The question is on the amendment proposed by the Senfrom Vermont to the amendment of the ComFinance.