Mr. SPRAGUE. I move to amend the bill on page 37, section7, line 293, by striking out “45 ” and inserting “65;” and by adding at the end of the clause the following proviso: Provided, That all material contracted for in good faith before January 1, 1867, shall be admitted at the rate of duty provided for by law at the date of contract. said So that the clause will read: On all machinery not herein otherwise provided for, composed in part of iron or steel, or of any other metal or.complete or in parts, 65%. advalorem. Propided, That all material contracted for in good faith before January 1, 1867, shall be admitted at the rate of duty provided for by law at the date of said contract. The proposition is to increase the rate of duty on machinery from 45 to 65%., an increase of 20%. Commissioner Wells says, in his report: “Of the machinery designedfor the numerous manufactories now in processof construction, especially those for the manufacture of cotton, and for the refining of sugar, a very largeooilo half in quantity and value will be of foreign construction, the price being 1/3rd lessthan that for which the same can be contracted for in the U.S. ” Again, in another portion of his report, he says: “The commissioner estimates the value of machinery for American manufacturing establishments, now in the courseof construction in Europe, at about 3 million dollars.” The commissioner also states that machinery constructed in this country now costs 100%. more than at the beginning of the war; that $50,000 worth of machinery before the war would produce as much cotton or woolen fabrics as $100,000 invested now in machinery for cotton or woolen or any other of the varieties of manufacture. I am aware, Mr. President, that by this amendmentitrenders it difficult for the American manufacturer to purchase machinery. He will not dare to make a permanent investment at rates so high; but I am also aware that if he does purchase it, by the character of this bill he will not long be able to run his machinery. He has now shut down a large portion of his machinery, and the balance but lingers, and the blow that is now aimed at it cannot but be one of death. The increase of prices of iron and steel and wool, with no increase for the manufactured articles, or but very little, into which these articles are introduced, must show conclusively that, having staggered these interests in the past, the future must see their death. I speak ofcotton, of linen, andofeverything that comes out ofiron and steel that has not received an increased rate of duty. Did I hesitate a moment to advocate greater protection to this interest I should be doing great injustice to myself. By excessive taxation it has been destroyed, and by a premium greater than heretofore, now offered to the British manufacturer for the introduction of his machinery, the American manufacturer is kept prostrate. There is not one branch of manufacturing prod uct but he can supply did he but know it, did he but cater to our ideas of form and plan. Many of them are already on this scent; many more will follow, until all your manufacturing industry will be done by Englishmen. He cannot carry on manufacturing without the machine shop. He is by the provision of this bill, as I will demonstrate, driven clear out of this country. While communities are today offering large sums of money to induce manufacturing development among them, the Senate, led by Wells, is driving them out of the country. The English offer the largest sum and the American community the least. Let me read a statement of one of the best manufacturers of machinery: “The present and proposed tariff bears heayily upon and discriminates against the machinist. The 8 and a half cents. proposed duty on iron used by us, which, with steel, is the main element of machines, is from 70 to 150%. advalorem, being from 28 to 60 dollars perton, The duty proposed on steel varies from 67%. advaloren, upward, while the duty on machinery composedof iron and steel, in the reported bill, is but 45%. Thus the proposed law discrim inates against our own machinists and in favor of foreign labor; for it says to the importer that if he will have his labor done in a foreign land, the material and labor together may be adinitted for lessthan half the rate of the raw material.. The following table shows the cost of cotton machinery at duty requirehdome and abroad, . spindle, and the to compete with England: to maker in U.S... States, p” The above table is eurrency on the supposition that gold and are equal; but if gold be reckoned at $135, and the price of the raw material enhangedby the proposed increase and the duty of 65%, be put on machinery, even then at gold prices the coarsest slubber above named can be imported for less than cost to the maker here by 3 dollars per spindle, and so of the others in proportion.” To illustrate this in a plainer point of view, take the case of a spindle disconnected from the machine. A steel spindle weighs 9 pounds, which, at 4 and a half cents a pound, pays 40 and a half cents. Ten%. advalorem at 8 cents per pound makes 40 The same spindle costs in England one dollar all finished. The duty on that would be 45%, with no fraud practiced by undervaluation, making 45 cents; so that the proposed tax on machinery of steel is less than the tax on the raw material by 3 and a half cents. It is evident that 45%, will give to the English manufacturer the business of manufacturing machinery for this country; though I do not believe, as I said before, we shall long have any use for it. The present duty of 35%. has heretofore given the manufacturing of machinery to England, as Commissioner Wells says England can build cotton and sugar machinery for 1/3rd less than our own mechanics, and $3,000,000 worth are now in course of construction. Those $3,000,000 in gold at rates of contract, such contract being based at 2 and 1/3rd here as to one in England, would carry the sum in currency up to $7,000,000. The mechanics of the U.S. here lose $7,000,000 of work, 4 5th s being for labor, $5, 600,000, which would otherwise go into the hands of our mechanics and enable them to live and to purchase the means of living in their own country. This is from cotton machinery alone. Why is this so? Because their labor is so burdened by taxes and the raw material being affected likewise, 1st from similar causes, and maintained in that condition by a duty of from 70 to 150%. as proposed by this bill, 65 to 70 by the present law, so that the labor of the me chanic cannot live one moment in competition with the untaxed mechanical labor abroad. Iron and steel are raw materials as applied to the production of machinery, but they are manufacturing products, and those products obtain a protection of from 70 to 150%., and the kind of manufactures under consideration and which it is expected will consume the product thus protected, has a duty of 45%. imposed upon it. What a fallacy Who is so foolish, who so absurd as to on the one hand enhance the value of one product, and at the same time render another product value less? In order to continue a value to the one you must assure it to the other. Where are you to find a market for your iron and steel or wool if you admit into the country products made from those articles at a lower rate of duty than the material of which that product is made in this country? Your labor and supplies are enhanced in value in proportion as your raw material is advanced. But you say 4 5th s of the cost of the productihatis made from iron and steel is labor. That is true. Then if one 5th bears a burden of from 70 to 150%. I take the present bill, the rates on steel and iron to illustrate my point the average being more than 100%., one 5th of that is 20%. You thus at once dispose of 20 of the 45%. as provided in this bill, leaving 20 5%. only to counterbalance, 1st, 5%. Government tax, which, when augmented by a similar tax on all the products which become a part of your manufacture of machinery, carries your Government tax to 8%. The increased interest upon the high cost of your production will not be less than 9%. above the foreign. Here you have 17%. in currency to offset 25% in gold. Reduce it to the gold standard, and you have 12%., leaving 13% to be offset, 1st, by supplies, coal, oil, { and the greatest of all is labor which, at the lowest calculation, as Commissioner Wells has determined, is 60%. higher today than it was in 1860; reduced to gold is 40%. This, in connection with the 13%. that we must offset, leaves 27% that is necessary to enable us to preserve our business as manufacturers of machinery. So says the mechanic. We ask, he says, for 20%. We hope we may be able to breast the storm, though we show conclusively that upon the article of cotton machinery we lose ten%, or 3 dollars on a spindle that now costs $30 80. We ask nothing for interest on our capital; we ask nothing for our own labor in carrying on the business. Commissioner Wells says labor has advanced, and is now 60%. higher than in 1860. He does not tell us how much higher our labor in 1860 was than the laborabroad. He says also that the cost of interest has increased to the American manufacturer to 14%. The English interest is 4 or 5%, which, increased to currency, is, aIs have said,7%. The American manufacturer pays7%. more interest than the English manufacturer. I am now basing my calculation f upon the present rate of duty on., machinery, is 35%. The present duty on steel and iron is 65%. We use one 5th of that in the construction of a spindle, or 13%. Qur labor is 60%., and our supplies for the manufacturing of this kind of product, this spindle, is also 60%., (I have no doubt the supplies are larger;) and if 4 5th s remain, 4 5th s of 60 is 40%. We pay to the Government for immediate tax 5%., and we accumulate that tax 3%. by the accumulations of Government tax into the product produced; making 8%. in this particular instance, although it is 11%. in some depts of manufactured machinery. We have, then, 1st, extra interest, according to Mr. Wells's statement, which is correct,7%.; we have the Government tax, 8%.; we have the extra cost of labor over 1860 (withoutmentioning the addition of% age to bring our labor then down to the actual labor that existed abroad) 60%.; reduced to the gold basis 48%., making 63%. Reducing this to a gold basis at 35, we have 41%. We have 35%. in gold that we pay on one 5th the material that enters into the consumption on our prod uct, which is7%. by the present tariff. Adding that to the 41%. makes 48%. Without a dollar of protection on the difference in the price of labor, we find we have been giving a bounty to the English manufacturer of 13%. in gold to bring his machinery into this country. If this is not a starth ng fact I must confess my ignorance of the subject. But let us go on. You have thus 13%. in gold to overcome. How do you do it? By increasing the duty on the iron and steel that enter into one 5th of this product. The duty will average 100%. on articles used in. construction of machinery, especially of the one in question. One 5th of 100 is 20. "We had7%. on the basis of the last tariff. We must therefore add to the premium we give to the English manufacturer 20 less7, making 13%., which added to the other 13%. makes 26%. The present tariff increases the duty from 35 to 45%. Deducting that ten%. we have 16%. of a premium that we now give to the English manufacturer to import his machinery into this country. We only ask 4 peocent. between the cost of labor in this. }. the war and what it was in England at the same time, and of course we lose largely by that.