Mr. STEVENS. I entertain just the contrary view to that of the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. ingERSOLL;] and I move to amend his amendment by inserting, in lieu of what he proposes, to strike out, the word “titty, ” so as to make the amount 50 dollars instead of $100, as it now stands in the bill. Now, Mr. Chairman, we do not expect to raise any large amount of revenue from the licenses of these distilleries. Anybody who knows anything about the matter must know that the amount received from licenses is a mere bagatelle compared with the whole amount of taxation derived from this branch of business. The object of requirin a license to be taken by distillers correspon s with the object of iequirin7 a license for the manufacture of cigars. The purpose is that the officers of the Government may know who are engaged in distilling, so that they may require properreturns. If we induce every distiller to take out a license then the officers of the Government have a clue as to who are manufacturing whisky. But if the amount of license be fixed at $1,000 not one in 20 of these distillers will take out a license. The majority will prefer to risk the chances of being detected in the illicit manufacture, and the Government Officers will not have the means of tracing them which they have when licenses are taken out. Besides that, sir, there are all over the country very small distilleries, making perhaps 25 gallons a day, They cannot afford to pay a large license. There are in several parts of the country small distillerics running out perhaps in the course of a year from 400 to 500 allons. Now 25 dollars license and then raising the tax on the distilled article is, I think, agreat deal. After all, the revenue to the Government comes from the tax on the distilled article. My friendfrom Illinois, [Mr. Iivosnsot.i.] represents larger operations than those I have referred to. Tie represents men who distill 1,000gallonsa day. What is 1,000 dollars to them if they can crush out all other distillcries than those at Peoria? What is 1,000 dollars to them in comparison to the enor mous profits which they are enabled to make? [am sure the gentleman would be glad to have the monopoly confined to Peoria. They have had the monopoly there this ear. Ialso understand thata great many of them there were caught in attempts to defraud the government. I am in favorof leaving the license at 25 dollars, and not increasing it as is proposed to 50 dollars. I agree with the gentleman that down South there may be 1,000s of gallons distilled which do not ay tax to the Government. It is I suppose because the Government cannot “find loyal men enough to take the oath and support “my policy. [Laughter] I am told that 1/2 of the whisky in the U.S. is now made in the southern States. [Here the hammer fell.]