Mr. WILSON, of Iowa. I rise for the purpose of stating an amendment I intend to offer when the pending amendment is disposed I design on all low priced linen to strike at 6%. persquare yard and increase advalorem duty to 35%. It is 35 under the existing aw. This is a most exorbitant increase of the rate of duty on these goods. They are goods generally used by the middle and poorer classes of of the country. A small proportion the 0‘petohpelsee goods consumed, an exceedingly small one, are manufactured in this country. They are almost exclusively brought from abroad. do not think in relation to goods of that kind it is designed to protect our manufacturers, and we should not put these enormous duties on the importation of these goods. Mr. Chairman, I desire to say the manufacturers of the country are maljng a cat misMke in pressing upon this House it ill which proposes this enormous increase of duties. I am satisfied the manufacturers of this country need not so much this increase of duty as they do stability in the law levying duties on im rts. Let the manufacturers of this country know what they are to depend on so they can make investments and conduct business in pursuance of the interests they have, and they will be a great deal safer under the present laws of the U.S. than when we are constantly changing our import duties. There are a great many features in this bill to which this objection of mine will apply; and I am apprehensive they will operate as much, if not more, to the benefit of those who are holding the enormous stock of goods now in this country as to the manufacturers themselves. the result will be, as I apprehend, at the next session of Congress, after the benefit has been derived by those holding the enor mous stock of goods at the present time, an effort will be made to reduce the duty, and we will probably swing to the other extreme. It is better to support the present system of duty and to notify the manufacturers of the country there is to be some stability in the law, than that there is to be a change at every recurring session of Congress. I not only ho ic that the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork will prevail, but that he will follow it up so as to bring this bill as near to the present law as possible. I desire to submit another consideration to the House, and it is this: by pressing the duties to the high standard proposed in this bill very many sections of the country, now disposed to protect properly and equitably our manufacturing interests, will be driven to the other extreme, and the manufacturers will find the great body of the population of those sections, instead of as now favorin protection, driven into free trade ideas. There is more danger from reaction to the manufacturing interests than from letting them rest upon the basis of the present law'. I give that warning to gentlemen who are asking us to make these enormous rates; I give them the warutng so that they may know when the storm comes hereafter it is the result of their own action and not the design of any portion of the people of the country to injure or cripple our manufacturing interests. I hope the amendment of the Gentfrom NewYork will be adopted. Eallcre the hammer fell.]