Mr. SHERMAN. Since the yeas&nays are called for on this amendment I desire to say a word or 2 about it. There is very little difference between the proposition made by the Senfrom Vermont and the proposition contained in the bill. My own individual interest, the interest of the people of my State, is against this proposition. The State of Ohio, of course, uses a considerable amount of lumber. 50 years ago the whole of the State was an im mense forest, with scarcely a plain or an opening; but now most of the lumber used in the State of Ohio is imported from Michigan. This change has all been effected in 50 years. We import a great deal from Canada, and therefore the interest of our people is to have cheaper lumber; but at the same time it will be seen that the duty on lumber is lower than on any other article in the whole tariff list. The rate proposed by the Senfrom Vermont, to my knowledge, will not exceed 5%. I do not think it is 5%. The rate proposed on walnut is $250 1,000, and the market price ranges from 35 to 50 dollars 1,000; sometimes 75 dollars 1,000. So on ordinary sawed lumber. Clear pine is worth even in Detroit from 35 to 65 dollars 1,000. It seems to me 2 dollars 1000is a very small rate of duty. Although I am perfectly willing to vote for the bill as o from the committee, yet it seems to me there is so little difference between it and this classification of duty that I feel disposed to vote for it, and perhaps the chairman will be willing to let it go, because the classification is much better. The division into 3 or 4 classes is just to correspond to the difference in the value of the various kinds of lumber. I could not understand the proposition made by the Senator a little while ago to put a duty on lumber that is worth less than ten dollars 1,000, because I do not know that lumber of any kind can be bought for ten dollars 1,000. With us on the border, right near the market, the coarsest quality of lumber, even slab lumber, would be worth ten dollars 1,000, and that proposition would not apply to any lumber; but as this amendment is now drawn I think it makes a fair discrimi nation, and makes a rate of duty not to exceed 5%. That is certainly not too much.