Mr. WENTWORTH. In revising the revenue system of this country, we should remember that the amount paid into our Treasury during the fiscal year ending the 30th June last, is the largest ever collected by any country. It nearly reaches $530,000,000. It is larger by $150,000,000 than GreatBritain ever collected. And as we are acting upon the tariff it may be well to remember that we have collected from customs $170,000,000 in gold. Gold has averaged 140 through the year. Reducing this to legal tenders, and our imports have amounted to $238,000,000. As our custom revenues, however, have always been collected in gold, my calculations will all be in gold. Our receipts ffom customs before the war never reached $60,000,000 save in the years 1854, 1856, and 1857; and we all know that financial disasters followed, which were at tributed by some to excessive importations under an erroneous tariff system. Indeed, the never reached, $50,000,000 save in the ad itional years of 1853, 1855, and 1860. They were, in$80,000,000. 84, “.000 And this year the have reached $170,000,000; more than double those of last year and more than $100,000,000 in excess of any year but the last 2 of our governmental existence. Our Government is the greatest lauded proprietor in the world in its own right, to say nothing of its interests in the land of its citizens yet undeveloped. Itslands, richerin their vegetable mold than the most highly cultivated lands of the Old World, abounding in the most valuable timber and water power, are given away to those who will cultivate them. And yet we are importing agricultural products. With the mechanic arts as highly developed as those of any country on the lobe, we are patronizing foreign mechanics. ileeding laborers, we are carrying work to foreign labor which starvation would drive to us if we did not go to it. Here is a wrong which every one will admit should be remedied. And how shall it be rem edied? Every one romptly replies, revise the tariff. But how shall it be revised? “Hie labor, has opus est.” As President Johnson said of the word “veto, ” I would inform you, Mr. Speaker, that this is Latin, and, applied to the present day, means that 9 members of this House, constituting the ComWays&Means, cannot frame revenue bills to suit everybody. For 6 months have we labored more assiduously than an committee of this House ever did labor. ehave been in session mornings, evenings, and holidays, and also during the sessions of the House. I have devoted so much attention to the subject of revenue that I have neglected to introduce a sin gle constitutional amendment or to make a single reconstruction speech, although, like others, I have had several old ones on hand that mightbearrepeating. Norhavemy colleagues upon the committee been very prolific in this respect. Yet we have all done our full share of voting; and the Washington Chronicle has come to the relief of such of us as Were in danger of losing our status on the slavery question at home because we did not neglect the duties assigned us to attend to those satisfac torily performed by others. We shared long and patiently upon the internalrevenue bill. But it did not satisfy this House. Itwas amended in important particulars. It then went to the Senate where it was amended in over 600 particulars. The tariff bill now before us, the product of equal labor, is also unsatisfactory, and has been amended by the House. Manufacturers denounce it as a free tradetarilf. Commerce more Strongly denounces it as a prohibitory tariff. Agriculture knows that in many re spects it is neither, but regrets that it cannot make a tariff'of its own. For while agriculture is the largest of all interests requiring the fos tering care of Government, and does the most of the tax paying in peace, and the most of the fighting in war, it has ever been, is now, and and is likely to be, numerically the smallest of all interests in legislative assemblies. Yet farmers can judge more disinterestedly of the workings of the tariff system than can any other class of people. A revision of the tariff is called for as the panacea of the times. But if a man is very sick and calls a physiciaii, he does not get much information when the phy sician says, take medicine. What medicine shall be taken, is the inquiry. What revision shall the tariff have, is our inquiry. To answer l this let us take a fair start; let us find a section corner and survey from that. 1st, we want revenue. And those means of revenue are the most popular which are the least felt in collection. Ipwill not argue the comparative merits of free trade and protection now, because free trade is an absurdity unless all other nations favor it; and because our debt and interest are so excessive that we are now in no' situation to favor it if other nations did. Our few years of experience in internal taxation demonstrates its injustice and oppression. That part of it which is inquisi torial is as odious as it is cruel. Aged coplo may object to a sinkin fund, as they tiiink it is enough for men of 5161la'ge to be taxed for interest. But Young America will insist that the use of stamps, the inspection of private books, and the publication ofanuual losses and gains shall be stopped at the earliest possible period; and will endure the greatest privations to get our debt out of the way so that they shall be stopped. And I believe that the people will annually the more strongly insist that such a policy shall be adopted as shall require no more revenue in this annoying way than is absolutely necessary to pay our interest and gradually extinguish our debt. And the annually perceptible decrease of our interest will be an impetus to a liberal sinking fund and a consequent decrease of inspectors and inquisitors. With this policy we must pay as far as practicable the ordinary expenses of our Government from duties upon imponts; And as these expenses in a time of peace will not vary much from year to year, we ought to be able to give all our industrial and business pursuits what they especially need, a comparatively stable tarifl“. V We can never expect the needed extension of manufactures to the West until capitalists have some greater assurance than they here tofore have had that the ground upon which they build at one Congress shall not be taken from under them at the next. We must have a permanent tariff policy. If we say that our custom dutie's shall equal our ordinary governmental expenses we have got a starting point. It only remains then to say upon.what articles these duties shall be raised, and how much shall come from luxuries, how much from necessities, and how much from articles coming in competition with those manufactured by our selves. A commission composed of one farmer, one manufacturer, and one commercial man, upon the doctrine of compensation, could in time arrange all this, after an average annual amount has been agreed upon. The interests that would be represented by these 3 commissioners are inseparable in war as well as in peace. Commerce nurtures seamen; manufactures make the ships and the guns; and agriculture furnishes the rations. All I have in this country shares the fate of agriculture. I am a farmer, and I believe I cond make a fair bargain for the farmers with the manufacturers when the amount to be raised shall be agreed upon. I should get the advantages of a home market, which is a great consideration in these days of tolls, traushipments, storage, and commissions. And if I saw an honest difference between them and myself about the tariff on hoes, spades, shovels, &c., I would insist upon compensation by having the duties reduced upon some of the foreign articles of prime necessity to the farmer. I could pay a little more for my cultivators and mowers if I could get my tea and coffee a little cheaper; and the increased demand for these foreign necessdies would help commerce. Only fix the amount you want, live up to it in your appropriations, and let a sensible and honest commission apportion it to our ’variousinterests and localities, and the tariff would soon cease to be an apple of discord. In other words, take the tariff out of politics. Let politicians.naine the amount if you please, as Our tax ridden people rvill force them to econom '. But let commerce, agriculture, and menu uetures a portion it. Is this scheme practicable? before the war we had no internalrevenue tax. We paid all our expenses from imposts, the public lands, and miscellaneous resources, and liquidated debts considered formidable in theirday. The returns are not all in for the fiscal year ending with 30th June last, but they are near $030,000,000. From customs. “.3170,0001!” From internalrevenue.. 810.000.000 From miscellaneous. 50,000,000 Exclusive of loans..$530.000.000 From this sum the SecyTreasury had reduced the public debt to 1st June $87,000,000, and pai interest about $142, 600,000. But as the miscellaneous receipts are so largely creditable to sales of useless war materials, and as so many expenditures are chargeable to the war, I prefer to estimate by the present year, beginning July 1. In his estimate for this year the Secretary calls for $204,000,000 for expenditures. But this congress has so exceeded his estimates tha the will want $300,000,000 for expenditures. To meet his expenditures he estimates the following receipts: Cu fnmq slm‘mm Intiewrlnlnanlnrmevmenue. This will leave $96,000,000 to apply upon the public debt. But without a change of the tari this estimate will be too low for customs. There is no reason without that change why they should not 0 on as they are now going. But if we call t rem $139,000,000, and our miscellaneous as above, $21,000,000, we have $160,000,000. This will pay all the ordinary expenses of Government. For the Secretary wants $300,000,000 in all, and of this he wants $140,000,000 for interest, which I repose to pay out of the internalrevenue fun, and then we can either reduce the internalrevenue fund to $140,000,000, or we can set apart the surplus for a sinking fund. Now, if you revise the tariff, you must have some regard to a revenue basis. How much do you want to raise by it? We will say $140000,000. To this add your receipts from lands and all other sources usually denominated miscellaneous, and you have $160,000,000. And this is all the money we want for ordinary excuses of Government. The balance goes for interest, $140,000,000, which would be all that we should require from internal sources if we pay nothing for the liquidation of our debt. Cannot the tariff be so revised as to reduce a sum like this, on an average, for the next 4 years, taxing heavily luxuries, lightly necessities, and everywhere encouraging domes tic industry, thus making both a revenue tariff and a protective tariff? For these interests have got to be compromised, and the sooner the better for both parties. Indeed, I have taken particular pains among' the large number of mannfacturers' who have come before our committee this session to inquire if they would not prefer a revision of our present very unfair tari upon principles that would so bring revenue with additional protection as to give‘them a 'reasonable hope of an early deliverance from the annoyance of the stamps, the inquisiters, and the spies that are a necessity from our internal taxation system. I have received but one response, and that has been, God speed the day! With $140,000,000 (being $30,000,000 less than this year) from the tariff, and with $20,000,000 from miscellaneous sources, let us see where our internalrevenue tax will land us at the end of this fiscal year. But, while I have assumed $160,000,000 for the ordinary expenses of Government, I protest against any such extravagance. With our currency placed upon an honest basis, the ordinary expenses of Government should never exceed $100,000,000. I also protest against the assumtion of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, Mr. S'rnvm's] that our debt will yet be increased to $4,000,000,000. If almost anyone else had made such an assumption 1 should have inferred that he was/in favor of paying the rebel debt. But I suppose he means our debt is to be increased by paying for the losses to loyal men from rebel sources. When this subject comes u it will be found that losses ofheslth, of lite, and of limb, will have to be taken into consideration as well as losses of fences, of garden vegetables, of haystacks, peach orchards, buildings, the It is lamen tably true that many persons suffered greatly from losses of property. But how inestimably greater were the losses of those who risked their all to defend such property. When a commission is appointed to estimate the losses of this war, the cripples, the orphans, and the widows must be heard; for our pensions are wholly inadequate. The SecyTreasury, at the commencement of this Congress, estimated $275,000,000 from internalrevenue. Our legislation will vary this somewhat, as well as uncon trollable circumstances. For instance, the income tax returns (bein last year $58,000,000) show a falling off of u out 30%., or $17,000000. Then from the reduction of prices and ecrease of business attendant upon the close of the war we must estimate a oss of about 40 million dollars. We have added largely to the free list. The loss therefrom is estimated at $66,000,000. This makes a total of $102, 000 to come from $275,000,000, leaving $ 73,000,000 of the Secretary’s estimate. And as we want but $140,000,000 for our interest, '(the tariff and miscellaneous have ing paid all other expenses,) we should have left $83,000,000 to apply upon the liquidation of our debt in this case. But I believe the legislation of this Congress upon internalrevenue will largely increase this amount, although we did not need the increase except for a sinkin fund. Now that the cot ton tax is out of tie woods I can safel say this. It will be remembered that this house The Senate put the cotton tax at 5 cents. egrudgingly put it at 2 cents. We had to compromise on 3 cents. Commissioner Wells estimates that we will raise $7,000,000 from this source; from our more stringent whisky law $25,000,000, and from the new'law upon legacies, successions, tobacco. licenses, 820., $13,000,000. This would make $45,000,000 from new legislation. Add this to the former $33,000,000 and we have $78,000,000 to apply upon our national debt, with a tariff yielding $140,000,000. But will this tariff yield $140,000,000? It is the highest ever even asked for, even with gold at par. To the duties asked for in this bill what shall we add for the difference between gold and currency? During the last fiscal year gold has averaged 140. With gold at less than 125 Government. cannot convert its 7 30 notes. This guaranties at least 25%. to the duties provided for in the bill. The Secretary is prohibited by law from reducing the currency fast enough to keep gold even at this point. Supposing gold aver ages the same as last year, then the duties, nnprecedently high in the bill even for car rency, are raised 40%. What is gold to be the present year? What landmarks have we? Where is the plummet for our soundings, or the polar star for our direction? And here is a breaker in sight. We have near 100 million dollars of goods in bond. The gold duties due upon them will average $40,000,000. These utics are due one year from the date of the bond at any rate. Ifthis bill ass, these goods must either be taken out of t to country or pay this S40,000,000 before the bill goes into effect, or be subject to the new duties, which are greatly increased. And large orders have been given cut and some of the goods are on the way. Now, we know that the SecyTreasury has the most of the gold in the country, and if he should sell, judging by the past, it would go abroad quite as fast as he would sell. To meet this $40,000,000 and all other gold demands, good judges say that there is not $10,000,000 in the market. Some limit it: to less. And the SecyTreasury is daily making drafts upon this, while the gold interest of uly is already paid. If this bill passes in its present shape, may not gold go to 100, and thus all the duties be doubled until a reduction of imports shall reduce its price? Does this bill tend to revenue to roteetion, or prohibition? The 2 iormerI want. Ihe latter I oppose, as among other evils it will ‘prolon the abominations attendant upon the mterna revenue sytem. Upon many of the items in the bill I know nothlng save from the statements of the numerous gentlemen of great tact who have appeared as interested parties before the committee, and the adverse 'comments upon them since the bill has been published. I wish I could be convinced that the duties would be productive of revenue as well as protective in all cases; for I know that the interests of agriculture and, in fact, of all industrial pursuits require a change of the present law. With so much unimproved land as we have we ought to induce, by all practi ‘cable means, foreign cultivators to emigrate here. Our manufacturers too, see the necessity of inviting foreign‘ laborers, especially skilled laborers, here in greater numbers than sufficient to make good the half million we lost in the war. I want to see American legislation fraternize with American industry. I want to see American farmers patronize Amer ican manufacturers, and American manufacturers in turn patronize American beef pork, mutton, wool, flax, flaxseed, the e are daily told that to enrich and populate our country we must labor to dlVGI‘Slfy American pursuits. This is the truth, and it is equally true that we should diversify agriculture. For, while it is true that we cannot all be farmers, it is equally true that all farmers cannot depend upon the same crop.‘ We cannot all be grow in cereals and prosper. oes this bill ten to diversify agriculture? Are its advantages equivalent to its burdens upon agricultujre? For, ifthe bill is not satisfactory to the manufacturers of all kinds ithas not been for the want of effort on their part, nor for the want of an appreciation of their real neeesities on the part 'of the committee. And I will leave the great interests of commerce to those who so ably'represent it on this floor, and who are better able to speak for it than I am. I will speak for the few agricult urists on this floor, and yet in behalf of the most numerous interest in the count. “Ne sutor ultra crepidam.” As the Presient told us about the word “0010, ” I tell on again, Mr. Speaker, that here is Latin, an it means, in this case, let a man only talk upon what he best knows. Our chairman, in his opening speech, has alluded favorably to the provisions concerning wool, as bein an honorable compromise between the wool rowers and the manufacturers of wool. From is stand point, where the wool is near the manufacturers, his views maybe correct. He resides in a State where every acre of land is inclosed and used to its full capacity; where it commands the highest price, and where land is so scarce to the wants of its ever enterprising inhabitants that his State i daily sending out emigrants who never fail wherever they plant their feet to become mod els in industry, in enterprise, in morals, and in everything else that tends to advance and adorn a State. Vermont sheep, owing to the untiring skill of her breeders, have added more to her credit than her renowned Morgan horses. whose flcotness for short distances may have occasionally been surpassed, but whose patient endurance, like that of our chairman, is proverbial. It was her Campbell, who after a series of triumphs at American State fairs, took back the American descendants to the Old World, and at the World’s Fair, amid the competition of nations, heard laudits from connoisseurs.of ever clime as the righteous judge tied the triump al ribbon arena the emblems of innocence from the Green Mountain State. It was then that her enterprising breeder, more wor tbily than the Emperor Alexander, could cry because he had no moreto conquer. This triumph is to Vermont wool and Vermont sheep, em racing all their numerous descendants in all the States of the Union, almost a guarantee nguinst competition. And here is it pro)er place for me to indor'se all our chairman has said respecting the superior strength and dura bility ofcloth made from American wool. If there were means of always designating it, those having investigated the merits of the domestic and foreign article would always purchase the former. But as there are not, I think it fully needs all the protection given it by this bill, which I consider hardly equal to that given to the manufacturers of wool. Yet. fairness requires me to say that I am leaving out. the advantages of a contiguous wool mauufactory. which the western wool growers, op ressed with high freights, high fares, high to la, and high commissions, With the tedium of frequently breaking bulk and an unstable currency, greatly need, and which protection is designed to secure to them; and I believe the new States can never get their needed manufactories of any article until protection from foreign competition shall excite a greater competition at the East, when ourabnndnnt water, chenp breadstuffs, and recently developed cool ficlds will incite them West. 1 would, however, have made but one class of wool, and fixed but one rate of duty thereon. I would have given the poorest quality of wool the same protection as the best. For the whole doctrine of protection implies that the moment you depart from the strict revenue pointit must be to encourage the new and struggling industries rather than the old and well established. France, with her denselysettled land, finds it for her interest to keep one sheep to the acre. England one to every 3 acres. We, with our millions ofacres of waste lands, have scarcely. a sheep for every 30 acres. Under our past unfavorable tariff, dictated by the manufacturers at the East, our fine wool interest, constnntly improved by the skill of American breeders, has extended itself quite as well as could have been expected. Itwould do much better under the tariff bill now before us. Our mutton sheep interest or what is more generally known as the South Down or middle wool interest, owing to low duties, and more especially to the reciprocity treaty has had but a slight extension, and then only among farmers who kept them for their own eating. Many manufacturers, while noted for their clamor for the protection of their own fabrics from foreign competition, have gone to Can ada for their mutton, and to South America, Egypt, and Syria for their wool. This interest greatly needs all the protection that is given it, and it will require more honest valuations than are generally secured and more honest and shrewder appraisers than are generally appointed to render that protection effective. 'Ihe great popularity of American beef naturally increases its foreign demand, while the desolations of the rinderpest have for years removed it from competition in the Old World. To all this add the have c of the American war, and the awful fact stares us in the face that henceforth good beef is to be denied to the orer operative classes save as an occasional high priced luxury. The laborer may successfully strike for higher wages and fewer hours. But he vainly strikes for that strength and that endurance which animal food furnishes as things now are, the late Dr. Graham to the contrary notwithstanding. Physiology and all animal economy teach but one lesson upon this subject. You can have health but not strength without animal food. Ask the octogenarinn sailor who has rioted all his life upon an ocean full of fish for his opinion upon this subject, and he will tell you that he iiad rather make the awful sacrifice of losing his grog than lose his beef. It is a painful reflection that our poorer classes are to bedeprived of the strength creuting' properties of beef. And yet we have an excellent substitute in American mutton, which will never be beyond the reach of the operative classes if we can confine American manufactories to American wool. Wool properly protected will pay for the rearing of the sheep. Wool protection will be the angel of mercy to our suffering poor, as it. will give them mutton without money and without price. it is more important, then, for the operative classes to strike for wool protection than for more wages or fewer hours. 3 There is another kind of wool which has never yet got but a nominal foothold in this country. It is placed under the head of class No. 8, and designated as “carpet and other simi lar wools." This kind of wool has never been raised in this country, because manufacturers have made untirin and successful efforts to have our people be icve thatit could not be, and they have been successful in their efforts to so discriminate against it by congressional action that it could never be proven whether it could be or not. I believe there is a climate somewhere between the north line of Minnesota and the south line of Texas under which wool capable of supplying the place of every kind of wool used in the U.S. for any purpose can he successfully raised; and I believe that the U.S., as a great landed proprietor, which for want'of a market is so generously giving away its lands, should encourage the experiment. There is nothing now said in discouragement of this enterprise that was not once said in discouragement of raising merine s, so for as climate is concerned. We have waste lands as well as other Governments. We can raise shepherd dogs, ponies, and horses as cheaply as any other Government. We can also furnish children and disabled soldiers to ride our ponies and horses while herding them. It might be an act of civilization as well as of public policy to encourage our Indians to raise these coarse wools, the trade in which is now monopolized by persons of no higher civilization than themselves in other countries. We certainly could better illustrate to the ludi ans the teachings of Christianity while acting in the capacity of shepherds; for no other calling is so honorablymentioned and so conspicuously brought forward in the New Testament. Upon them was conferred the honor of the 1st sight of the angel of the Lord revealing the good tidings of great joy that n.Saviour was born. It was t' cy who 1st went to Beth lehem. It was they who 1st saw the Babe in the manger. It was they who 1st glorified Him. How many appropriate hymns have we that we could teach these savages toning, while acting in the capacity of shepherds, that would lead them almost imperceptibly to become interested in Scripture teachings. For instance: “ While shepherdswatched their flocks by night, All seatedon the ground. The angel of the Lord camedown, And glory shonearound.“ Now, there is no other class of men around which either mythology, fiction, or history has made any such glory shine; not even around the world’s greateststatesmen, greatest invent ors, or greatest conquerors. And again: "Shei'pahterrhdins.gine 'ethr eyofiuerld abiding. flocksby night; God with man is now residing: Yonder shinesthe infant light." And again: “Shepherds. hail the wondrousstranger! Now to Bethfem speedyour way." We have now in this House a gentleman who was once a distinguished clergyman. His health requiring more activity, he has become one of the greatest shepherds in America. have no doubt but that it was the beatifiention of that calling in the Scriptures and hymns that he read that turned his mind in that direction. All travelers in heathen countries tell us that shepherds are the most devout of idolaters. It is impossible for a man to be a shepherd and not realize that there is a Power some where that “tempers the wind to the chem lamb.” I am for making the most energetic efforts to ascertain if these coarsest of wools cannot be raised somewhere in the country, and if it is not possible for‘ the never donated genius of America to make a carpet exclusivel of American products. Itlun officer of the ( eu erul Government or of any State, should purchase a.carpet made in a foreign country our manufacturers would soon find it out and have him denounced, when the very carpet with which they would replace it would be composed largely. if not entirely, of liireipn wool. A member ot'Congress could not weariu peace a woolen garment that was manufactured abroad. Yet I venture the assertion that halfthe woolen garments worn by the members of Congress are composed of foreign wool. Manufacturers say, “American carpets for American" and I rejoin, “Americnn wool for American carpets." If these manufacturers tell us that these coarse wools cannot be raised as cheaply in this country as foreign countries, I tell them that the same reasons that the urge in favor of protecting themselves against the degraded labor of the Old World apply with greater force to the growers of coarse wools, inasmuch as government has so much land that needs occupancy. But I am opposed to these differences in classification, because all experience proves that where there are different duties upon different qualities of the same article the grossest frauds are perpetrated, and every one labors to brinc his importations under the lowest class. loving uniform standard samples will remedy these frauds to some extent. But appraisers in customhouses areas often appointed because of their political services or because they are the poor relatives of an influential man as for their honesty and co acity. It is not every man who is honest who is a good judge of wool even by the sample. There are not a dozen members of this intelligent House who would not be wrong half the time in judging even by sample between some combing and some carpet wools. And yet the duty on one is 12 cents perpound and 10%. advalorem, and on the other (which I contend can be profitably raised in this country) only 3 cents. It takes about 4 pages of our bill to bringubout this discouragement of coarse wools in this country and this chance to evade the law, whereas only a few words are necessary. 4 letters spell wool, and a few more spell out the uniform duty. All that then will be required of an appraiser will be to know what is wool. And every one knows what wool is, without distinction of race or color. But as the committee of wool growers have agreed to this arrangement, I find the House generally ussenting to it; butI cannot pass the subject by Without giving it as my opinion that the committee of wool growers rather acquiesced in it as the verybest thin they could do rather than approved of it, an that the wool growers will never consent that the manufacturers shall have the market of the world for any kind of wool unless they themselves can have the same market for woolen fabrics. If this bill should pass at this session, it.will be too late to do the poorer class of wool growers any good this year, as they are not able to hold their clip. Much of it is already in the hands of speculators. From wool pass to another great agricult ural interest that greatlyneeds protection. I mcan that of flux, ilaxseed, and the oils there from. Flax is the northern man’s cotton. The late civilWar caused many experiments as to its utility which developed the most cheering' prospects. Flax is also the poor man’s linen. If we owe an obligation to the colored man for relacing the white soldier who fell in the dur est hour of the late rebellion, are we not under an equal obligation to encourage the efforts of our citizens to bring to greater utility our only substitute for cotton? Dunn the sessions of the ComWays an‘ Means we have had the most gratifying specimens of cotton and linen imitations; but, like all new developments of genius in industrial and agricultural pursuits, they were too expen sive to cope with well established and highly protected industries. Our Government ought not. only to protect flux in all its relations, but it ought to make a liberal appropriation for experiments as to its utility. As we have an eXperimental garden here, I 'hope our Commissioner of Agriculture will devote as much of his attention as he can spare to the collection of fiaxseed from all usrlers of the globe and to experiments in the difference of the fibee' and oils of the product of the different sec 5. The culture of flax has been retarded in this country by the revalent idea that it is the most exhaustive oft e soil of all crops. It is anold scarecrow that you cannot raise flax upon the same soil but once in 7 years. Now, the wool crop has been called the most remunerative of all crops to the soil. The longer you feed your shee upon a given quantity of land the richer it becomes. Hence this Government should insist that not one pound of wool should be brought into the U.S. from any quarter whatever unless under circumstances of an' extraordinary character. For, although the sheep maybe deficient in wool and deficient in carcass, she everywhere leaves the soil richer than she found it. She can restore what is better than gold to our exhausted mineral regions and carry vegetation to the peaks of our mountains. Now, strange as it may seem, agricultural experiments, backed by chemical analysis, prove that the flaxseed crop is more remunerative to the soil than the wool crop. What awouderful advantage over its successful competitor in peace, the cotton crop. While‘ France has exhaused legislation to save her sewerage and chemistry to learn how to make up its deficient ammoniacal properties and to turn it to the best account, more crafty England, while profiting by French lessons and experience, may "es herself the best patron of oil cake in the world; and we, as false to agriculture as we were when we made the reciprocity treaty with Canada, have been allowingadrawbacku onalloil cakeexorted. We had better have a lowed a drawbac upon exported gold; for we can live without gold, but not upon an exhausted soil. Were it not that I might be charged with mistaking this House for an agricultural society, I should be pleased to give the results of my own experience upon this subject, and also to make a few extracts from the recent lectures of Professor Mechi, the great agricultural lecturer of England. If we are to leave a large debt to pos terity, let us at least leave to it the soil as rich as we found it, so that they can dig out their annual taxes. This bill rightly abolishes the drawback. My assertion is this: that he who sells his flaxseed and takes home with him to feed out the product of that seed in oil cake, and uses his manures judiciously, keeps his farm continually im roving, and more so than if he kept sheep. once we should not only encourage the raising of flaxseed, but also the manufacture of oil from the seed. We want no foreifln fiaxsced competing with us. American see alone should be ground at American mills and no oil cake should be exported. Besides its usefulness it is ornamental. 1000s of dollars have been paid by American breeders in England for cattle when they had better at home; and the fact would have been apparent had they used oil cake instead of corn for food. Oil cake has not only all the fattening qualities of corn when use in the utmost profusion, but it gives a luster and velvet touch to the hair of animals which can only be attained by the most costly oils when fed upon corn. Corn is the girl in the kitchen, the animal in the shambles. Oil cake is the same girl in the ball room, the same animal upon the fair grounds. Admitting that under the homestead law a man gets his land for nothing, this bill hardly affords the flax and flaxseed grower proportionate protection to other interests. We 1st dig the holes for the posts with spades that are protected. Then come the cedar posts protected also. Then come the boards protected also. Then come the nails that are protected also, as well as the saw, the ex and the hammer. We then go to work inside. The plows, the barrows, the planters, the cultivators, and the harvesters are all protected. And we pay our protection in advance. After running the risk of the drouth, floods, and frosts, we may get a crop to sell. We make no account of our liability to sickness. transportation long and exensive is still against us. The agricultural interest asked for 40 cents duty upon a bushel of seed, and 40 cents upon a gal on of oil. The bill gives it 30 cents, which is a large increase upon former protection. Yetit is not proortionatelylarge to some of the articles in the bill which are absolute necessities to farmers. The same may be said of the duty upon cat tle and all agricultural products. It is such an improvement as strong y inclines me to favor the bill, and I should do so if the excesses upon other articles could be curtailed to a protective revenue point. For the moment you make a tariff prohibitory upon articles manufactured by a few, and thereby destroy all foreign competition, home combinations at once raise the prices to oppressive rates, and the agricultural interest at once loses more than it has gained by its protection. Several instances have occurred, at this session, where gentlemen have proposed to take the duties from all agricultural products on the round that provisions ought to be cheap. I do not see how it would cheapen provisions to ruin all our farmers, as it certainly would if the farmers were to be taxed highly by duties to protect all their agricultural implements and other necessities and then they be comelled to compete on equal terms with Cana inn and other farmers who have no war taxes to pay. If you want cheap food, lighten the taxes upon your farmers and t herebywmultiply them and encourage competition. enusylvania has taken a step in the right direction. She has taken the State taxes off from farms, the better to enable their owners to patronize her manufac‘ tories which are aggrandizing her State. The farmers are not a comlaining class of people. The nature of their ca ling accustoms them to burdens of all kinds. But when they see the candies, swectmeats, and champagne carried around, they know of no reason why they should be passed by. They know of no reason why the same protection extended to other vocations should be denied to them. One of the advantages of this bill is that it provides for a Bureau of Statistics which every legislator, and especialhy upon the subject of the tariff, much needs. To show the want of such a bureau let us take the official statement of the exports and imports of the year just closed: Exports. Imports“. S466;646.l32 400, 411,513 657.234.0229 Here isabalance in ourfavor of $57,000,000, when our official coin and bullion statement stands as follows: Exports. “$77, 496,093 Imports. 8.823.975 Balance. 568, 672, 108 Now, all this surplus has not gone abroad for interest. Yet our official tables tell us that our exorts have exceeded ourimports. Making alla allowances for our shameful foreign undervaluations and home fraudulent appraisements, we still know that the balance of trade has been lar ely against us. The discrepancy arises from he fact that our imports are reck oned in gold and exports in currency. But this discrepancy cannot be easily cast by out siders, as gold has varied from.125 to 150 the past year, averuing 140. Yet we must know the price of gold the day the duties were paid. It is as probable that they were all paid when gold was lowest or highest as when at the aver age. The existing manufacturers in the West, although comparatively not very numerous, are unanimous and persistent in their entreaties for a change in the present tariff. Capitalists, all ready to lay the foundations for new establishments there, assure me that their work shall never commence without such a change. Whilst. I regret that I cannot support the bill in the sha e in which it is likely to be presented, I should regard it as a calamity for this Congress to adjourn without a change. Should this bill be defeated, I shall strive to move a reconsideration, with every confidence that the bill can be so modified as to pass by a large majority. Should it be successful in this House, I shall rely upon the ability of the distinguished chairman of the Senate ComFinance, the late SecyTreasury, to so reform it that, while encouraging every struggling American industry, it will quiet the apprehensions of some of our wisest economists as to its deleterious effects on the finances of the Government.