Mr. DAVIS. I move to strike out “ 25” and insert “ 50 ” in line 9, page 22; so as to read: “On Russia, Manila, Italian, and all other hemps, unmanufactured, 50 dollars per ton.” Mr. President, I take it for granted that this is a measure both for revenue and for protection of American industry. If it be so, the advantages and the burdens of the bill ought to bear as equally upon the great interests in the country as practicable, according to the particular condition of those great interests and their necessity for protection and their ability to bear taxation. I have not made the calculation myself, but a friend of mine, who is very judicious and accurate, has, and he informs me that the average rate of protection secured by this bill will amount to something like 70 5%. not less than 75%. The amendment which I have proposed bears upon the Russia, Manila, Italian, and all other hemps unmanufactured, and proposes to increase the duty from 25 dollars to 50 dollars per ton. These hemps are not discriminated among by the provision in the bill. We all know though, or at least persons familiar with the subject of hemp know, that by being hackled or dressed its value is greatly increased. Hemp may be produced by all the northwestern States of the U.S. as extensively as by Kentucky and Missouri. There is no State in the Northwest, from its climate and soil, but what is well calculated for the production of hemp and flax. The capacity of our country to produce this article is adequate to the demands of the whole world. The Kentucky and missouri hemp at Present average from 240 to 275 Therefore, if dollars per ton. The duty imposed by this bill upon hemp amounts to about ten%. average, while the average duty upon the articles protected by the bill is at least 70 5%. The duty upon this important article of hemp, for the production of which the capacity of the country is without limit, is only ten%. My proposition is simply to double the protection, which would be equiva lent to a rate of about 20%. on the cost of the foreign article. If the hemp growing regions of the country and the hemp growers of the country are to receive anything like an equal and prorata protection the rate imposed by the clause under consideration is surely greatly inadequate. Gentlemen who are interested in this bill, and the interests of whose country and consti tuents are protected by it, must consent to make the bill to some extent reciprocal. Something like the same protection, approaching it at least, which they receive, they must be willing to concede to others, or else they cannot expect the support of those Senators the interests of whose constituents they are unwilling to have protected to anything like the same degree that theirs are. I therefore hope that as the increased protection which I propose is so moderate. does not approximate anything like the average prorata protection of the bill generally, the Senate will adopt my amendment.