Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not know that there is anybody here to represent the planters, and it may be a little unpopular to undertake to speak in behalf of their interests, but it seems to me that a proposition to impose a tax upon planter's hoes, fo: than is imposed upon other hoes, is an unjust discrimination. I understand the honorable Senfrom connecticut to say that in this country the other hoes can be and are manufactured, and that there is no competition from the foreign mar ket. I suppose that about the same ingredients enter into the manufacture of one hoe as of another hoe, though there may be some difference; and I suppose there is. Of course both require labor. If these hoes are such as the Senator represents, I do not know that I ever saw planter's hoes; but if it be a hoe that is made of an excellent article, and is the product of skilled labor, then it seems to me it is very different, so far as the labor is concerned, from the other hoe, and I do not think that this proposition to impose a tariff of 2 dollars per dozen upon planter's hoes, while a tariff of only $1 50 is imposed upon other hoes, is a reasonable or just distinction to make, and I would rather the clause should stand as it was originally reported by the committee than to see this change made, as though there was an effort here to strike a blow at the interests of the planters, or impose a burden on them which is not imposed on other people. These planters are men whose circumstances will not allow them to pay any higher tariff than the men who use hoes in the northern States; but on the contrary they are in embar rassed circumstances. The cultivation of cot ton in this country is an interest that we are all interested in promoting; and if any class of persons in the U.S. need cheap instruments of labor, certainly that class is the planters of the South who are engaged in the cultivation of cotton. I presume that the estimate of the Senator is correct. I have no doubt his arithmetic is correct; but I have had enough experience in connection with this tariff bill to know that when you assume, as some of these persons interested in the manufacture of an article do sometimes, that a certainingredient costs a certain sum, which is altogether an assumption, an imaginary thing, and then proceed with the argument, you can arrive at a very satisfactory conclusion and show any result that you desire to show. But there are very often mistakes in assuming that the value of a certainingredient is a certain sum. I suppose the honorable Senator has been furnished with this information by persons who are interested in the manufacture of the article. I undertake to say that you may take up any article in this tariff bill that is the product of labor and is made up of materials upon which a tax is imposed, and it is not difficult (if you allow a man to make his own showing and assume the prices to be just what he thinks they are or ought to be) to show that nobody is protected in this bill or that but few persons are protected. And yet when you read the bill everybody is forcibly struck with the high tariff that is imposed upon almost every article.