Mr. LeBlOND. Mr. Chairman, I am opposed to both the pending amendments for the reason I believe the are too 'high. I believe the duty is too hi, h even as proposed by my friendfrom NewYork [Ma mrosnl on my left. I am not a little siu'prised to fin tlemen moving on all occasions increase of uties and assigning as a reason that the men who are engaged in the manufacture of the particular article cannot live unless there is a liigher duty made in order to afford protection. Sir, I have sat here during the entire time this bill has been undergoing examination, and I have yet to h'ear from that side of the House a single gentleman say that the men who are the consumers of these articles have been before them for the purpose of determining what rate of duty should be levied to raise revenue or to afford them protection in any shape. The time, it seems to me, has come when we should look to the interests of consumers and not alone to the interests of the manufacturers. How does it stand? By the census of 1860 we have today about 34 million people in the U.S.; and by thesame census we are told of all classes of manufacturers there are some 8,600,000. Of this number about 2 millions or less are all that are benefited by the tariff. Here is a proposition that 32 million people shall pay abonus to 2 millions in the shape of protection, which comes out of the consuming classes of this country. I am 0 posed to this bill from the beginning to the end, and for the reason assigned by the gentleman why the committee should pass this protective tariff and not for revenue purposes. blot one gentleman has offered an argument why it should be raised for the purpose of increasing the revenue, not one, but ever argument from that side of the House is that increased duty must be laid for the purpose of protecting particular branches 0 business. on you come down to the article of grind stones, every man comes here who has a manufacturing establishment of that article in his district and asks an increase of duty on that to protect an interest of a few men engaged in it, and yet the large number of men who use these articles, who consume all the articles provided in this bill, are never consulted for a single moment as to their wishes and wants. I know that in the latter art of the bilIthey have thrown a tub to the wiiale, and protected broom corn and the article of corn which hardly ever been known to be imported in this country. All that to the agricultural interest is a mere blind. Merchants in NewYork regard this present law as a prohibitory tariff to some extent, and the proposition here is to increase it; and aRepublican paper in Chicago which has given this subject a great deal 0 consideration, has stated that under this billwe will lose about 137 million dollars. I ask whether you are willing to lose that for protection alone. Here the hammer fell.] the amendment of Mr. Rmroun was not reed to.