Mr. SCHENCK. For the aragrapli as now amended we are very thankfu, so far as it goes, because so faras it does go it rights a great wrong. But still, as it is not sufficient for all the purposes of justice, I Will move to strike out this paragraph as amended, and substitute the following: On cigarettes, or small cigars, made of tobacco, inclosedin a wrapperor binder, and not over 3 and a halfinehcs in length, and on ci arsmadewith twisted heads, the market value of which (exclusive of the tax) is not over 6 dollars per 1,000.atax of 2 dollars per 1,000. On cheroots and eigars known as short sixes and cigars madewith pastedheads, the market value of which (exclusive of the tax) is not over 8 dollars per 1,000, an on all cigarettes and ci ars, the market value of which (exclusive of the tax is over 6 dollars and not over 12 dollars per 1,000, a tax of 4 dollars or thousand. On all ci arcttes, c eroots, and cigars, the market value of which (exclusive of the tax) is over 12 dollars and not over 20 dollars per 1,000.a tax of ten dollars per 1,000, On all ci nrettes, cheroots and cigars, the market value of which (exclusive of the tax) is over 20 dollars and not over 40 dollars per 1,000.a tax of 20 dollars per 1,000. On all cigarettes, cigars, and cheroots, the market value of which (exclusive of the tax) is over 40 dollars per 1,000, a tax of 40 dollars per 1,000. I had the honor of having printed some time ago an amendment to this i l, which was substantially the same as the one I have just offered, except that I have changed the rate and made it excluswe of the tax instead of inclusive of it. I found that by followmg the idea introduced by the ComWays&Means, and making the price inclusive of the tax, it would involve us in this absurdity: for instance, when the price of cigars is made up by including the tax, by imposing a tax of 20 dollars 1,000 on cigars over 20 dollars 1,000, you would include the cigars orinall costiu 6 dollars 1,000in the bigher c asses. but the whole matter is made fair by leaving the tax entirely out of the computation of the price, and making the tax rest upon the price of the cigars exclusive of the tax, and while the same result is arrived at we are not involved in the absurdity I have stated. Now, sir, to go back to the subject and purpose of this amendment generally, I might repeat to some extent what I said before in regard to smoking tobacco. It is needless, however, to do so. It is sufficient to state that by the existing law, putting all upon a dead level, making all cigars pay ten dollars 1,000, you have utterly crushed out the whole western interest in the production of tobacco and its manufacture into cigars. live in Day ton, Ohio, a little city of some 30,000 inhabitants. Before you put your tax on as you have done, we were making there 9 million cheap cigars. Now we do not make one. The whole interest has been destroyed. With the destruction of the interest in the manufacture of these common twisted head the interest connected with the growth cigars, of the tobacco has likewise been destroyed.In the district which I represent we raise nearly 1/2 of all the tobacco raised in Ohio; and the tobacco raised in that district, in that State, in all the western States, in the Northwest, and in Pennsylvania, is a tobacco from which are manufactured cigars of this cheap character. B imposing a level tax, putting the same bar on upon the cheap cigars used by the poor man as upon the finest cigar made of Connect icut or other leaf, you have crushed out completely the western interest; so that you are at present getting no revenue from us, while you are at the same time depriving our people of the opportunityof indul ng this practice, which I do not advocate myse f personally, any more than my friendfrom Oregon, [Mr. Hsimivaisv song] but which my people are interested in, because they cannot now obtain cigars at all at a price within their reach. Now, sir, my own impression is that it might be better, if it were practicable, to levy your tax upon the leaf. Vithout, however, a system of domiciliary visitation all over the country and a numberless swarm of office holders, you could not collect the tax if levied in that way. Therefore the ComWays&Means perhaps properly decided not to attempt taxation on the leaf. The next best thing, probably, would be to levy your tax altogether advalorem, making every cigar, everything connected with this interest, pay taxation in proportion to the value invested and the price at which the articlemight be sold. That not being done, I propose, by a system of gradation and classification, to reach as nearly as possible what would be something like an advalorem duty. Gentlemen of the ComWays&Means and others connected with the legislation upon this subject say that you cannot resort to an advalorem duty for fear of the numberless frauds which will he committed. I do not know how strong that argument ought to be considered. They say the same thing with reference to classification, that it opens the door for more frauds. I think, however, that by a little wholesome legislation we might prevent frauds in either case. But certainly, asa question of principle, just in proportion as you approach the levying of taxation according to the value of the articles taxed, you approach that principle of justice which every man will feel ought to be regarded in apportioning the burdens of the Government. [Here the hammer fell.]