Mr. SPRAGUE. The chairman of the ComFinance informs me, however, that the latter clause is raised to 30 dollars. For the purposes of my argument, however, I may o: the bill to stand as it was reported in this respect. Flax, hackled, is a manipulation of flax whereby 40%. of the tow is taken therefrom, leavin 60%. of what is called “dressed line.” In that condition it is in a manufactured state. The tow of flax or hemp is allowed to be introduced by this bill at 5 dollars a ton. 40%. of 5 dollars, which would be the amount of flax or hemp that would come from the dressed line, would introduce the hemp at 2 dollars a ton. At 20 dollars a ton 60%. of that only being dressed line, ” the duty upon the 60%. would be 12 dollars. 12 dollars for the 60%. of “dressed line, ” added to the 2 dollars, upon the flax or hemp, would bring in the “dressed line” at 14 dollars a ton, taking the bill in this respect as reported by the ComFinance. The result would be that “dressed line, ” which I will observe requires an expense of 56 dollars to produce it in that condition in this country, would come in at one dollar per ton less than the unmanufactured article, Now, I desire to state that in this country there is not a pound of flax used for the finer fabrics at this time that is cultivated in this country. The flax used for the finer fabrics must be pulled before the seed ripens. In all other countries the flax is produced as well for the seed as the fiber. The fiber must be taken when it is in its green state, or before it has grown to a coarse size, and, therefore, all the kind of flax that is imported, either in its unmanufactured or manufactured state, is not at o: produced in this country, and cannot e for some years to come. I ask the Senate whether under these circumstances it would not be wise for them to put unmanufactured flax on the free list, with a view of inducing the manufacturers to consume it; and when they get their machinery in operation there will then be a market for flax, and at the same time the American flax grower will have some inducement to produce the article. But under the provisions of this bill, as reported by the ComFinance, the manufactured flax would be brought in at one dollar per ton less than the unmanufactured, which would do away with all the duty upon it. Not only would this be the result, but the duty would bear very heavily upon the linen interest not yet perfected, not yet in a state to bear any of the burdens that are put upon other articles, because it is new, because the machinery has not yet been put in operation, and because the skill necessary to perfect it has not been concentrated and brought into the country. Now, I ask the Senate to leave off the duty on unmanufactured flax and to leave the duty on the dressed line as it was reported, instead of increasing it to 30 dollars; and that will answer the 1st conditions that I require. Will the chairman of the ComFinance agree to this?