Mr. WASHBURN, of Massachusetts. Mr. hairman, it seems to me some gentlemen we been laboring under erroneous ideas. hcve if the committee generally understand the question they will be in favor of that form of tax that will produce the most revenue. Now, for one, whatever course may be adopted, if we can encourage our home industry in producing the article by a certain system of taxation and at the same time secure the most revenue I believe the great majority will be in favor of that system whatever it may be. It is true that this or that individual may be in favor of a particular plan, because it is bounded by his own particular section. But I wish the committee for a moment to look at the amendment of the Gentfrom Ohio, [Mr. Summon] The gentleman complains, as I understand him, of the present tax on account of the fact that the article of tobacco which sells for ten cents a pound is taxed the same as that which sells for 20 cents. But what is the remedy he proposes? The gentlemans amendment does not obviate the difficulty. He proposes byhis amendment to tax the individua who manufactures cigars worth $12 50 1,000just as much as the one who manfactures ci rs worth 20 dollars. Or if one manu actnrer makes cigars worth 40 dollars 1,000and another makes cigars worth 41 dollars the Gentleman would make the latter pay 40 dollars extra tax, thereby carrying out the very plan and system which he objects to under the present law. The gentleman says that underthe presentlaw he who raises tobacco worth ten cents a pound pays the same tax as he who raises tobacco worth 20 cents and yet he brings in an amendment which proposes that the man who manufactures cigars worth 40 dollars 1,000shall pay 20 dollars tax, but he who makes cigars worth $4501,000shall pay 40 dollars tax. What is that but introducing the same principle which he objects to under the present. law 1 I wish to say a word in regard to the statement of the Gentfrom Pennsylvania, [Mr. Swanms] He says that the system which has been adopted has destroyed the trade in Pennsylvania, while it had operated in favor of tobacco growers in Connecticut. Now, the fact is that in the Connecticut. valley there was only 1/2 the tobacco raised last year that was raised the year before and scarcely a pound of it has been sold. hVhile the gentlemans constituents comlain about having their tobacco on hand, an not being able to sell it, the same fact is true in regard to the raisers of tobacco through the Connect icut valley, and instead of its being worth 40 to 50 cents a pound they would be glad to sell it now at from 20 to 25 cents.