Epes, Ermentrout, Fitzgerald, Fitzpatrick, Fleming, Fowler (N. C.), Fox, Gaines, Greene, Griggs, Gunn, Handy, Hay, Henry (Miss.), Henry (Tex.), Hinrichsen, Howard (Ala.), Howard (Ga.), Hunter, Jones (Va.), Jones (Wash.), Kelley, King, Kitchin, Kleberg, Knowles, Lamb, Lanham, Lentz, Lester, Lewis (Ga.), Linney, Little, Livingston, Lloyd, Love, McClellan, McCormick, McCulloch, McDowell, McRae, Maddox, Maguire, Marshall, Martin, Maxwell, Meekison, Meyer (La.), Miers (Ind.), Moon, Newlands, Norton (Ohio), Osborne, Otey, Peters, Pierce (Tenn.), Plowman, Rhea, Richardson, Ridgely, Rixey, Robb, Robertson (La.), Robinson (Ind.), Sayers, Settle, Shafroth, Shuford, Simpson, Sims, Skinner, Slayden, Smith (Ky.), Stallings, Stark, Stephens (Tex.), Strait, Strowd (N. C.), Sullivan, Sulzer, Sutherland, Swanson, Talbert, Tate, Taylor (Ala.), Terry, Todd, Underwood, Vincent, Wheeler (Ky.), Williams (Miss.), Wilson, Young (Va.), Zenor. Nays, 182-Adams, Alexander, Babcock, Baker (Md.), Barber, Barham, Barrows, Bartholdt, Beach, Belden, Belford, Belknap, Bennett, Bishop, Booze, Boutell (Ill.), Boutelle (Me.), Brewster, Broderick, Bromwell, Brosius, Brown, Brownlow, Brumm, Bull, Burleigh, Burton, Butler, Cannon, Capron, Clark (Iowa), Clarke (N. H.), Cochrane (N. Y.), Colson, Connell, Connolly, Cooper (Wis.), Corliss, Cousins, Crump, Crumpacker, Curtis (Iowa), Dalzell, Danford, Davenport, Davidson (Wis.), Davison (Ky.), Dayton, Dingley, Dolliver, Dorr, Dovener, Eddy, Elliott, Ellis, Evans, Faris, Fenton, Fischer, Fletcher, Foote, Foss, Fowler (N. J.), Gardner, Gibson, Gillet (N. Y.), Gillett (Mass.), Graff, Griffin, Grosvenor, Grout, Grow, Hager, Hamilton, Harmer, Hawley, Heatwole, Hemenway, Henderson, Henry (Conn.), Henry (Ind.), Hepburn, Hilborn, Hill, Hitt, Hooker, Hopkins, Howe, Howell, Hull, Hurley, Jenkins, Johnson (Ind.), Johnson (N. Dak.), Joy, Kerr, Ketcham, Kirkpatrick, Knox, Kulp, Lacey, Landis, Lawrence, Littauer, Lorimer, Loud, Loudenslager, Lybrand, McAleer, McCall, McCleary, McDonald, McIntire, Mahany, Mahon, Marsh, Mercer, Mesick, Miller, Mills, Minor, Mitchell, Moody, Morris, Northway, Odell, Olmsted, Otjen, Packer (Pa.), Parker (N. J.), Payne, Pearce (Mo.), Pearson, Perkins, Pitney, Powers, Prince, Pugh, Quigg, Ray, Robbins, Royse, Russell, Sauerhering, Shannon, Shattuc, Shelden, Showalter, Simpkins, Smith (Ill.), Smith, Samuel W., Smith, William Alden, Snover, Southard, Southwick, Spalding, Sperry, Sprague, Steele, Stewart (N. J.), Stewart (Wis.), Stone, Charles W., Stone, William A., Strode (Nebr.), Sturtevant, Sulloway, Tawney, Tayler (Ohio), Tongue, Updegraff, Van Voorhis, Walker (Mass.), Walker (Va.), Wanger, Ward, Warner, Weaver, Weymouth, Williams (Pa.), Yost, Young (Pa.), The Speaker. Answered "present," 4-Bankhead, Latimer, Wheeler (Ala.), White (N. C.). Not voting, 38—Acheson, Adamson, Arnold, Barney, Barrett, Bingham, Bradley, Campbell, Carmack, Chickering, Codding, Curtis (Kans.), Davey, Driggs, Griffith (Ind.), Hartman, Hicks, Jett, Lewis (Wash.), Lovering, Low, McEwan, McMillin, Mann, Mudd, Norton (S. C.), Ogden, Overstreet, Reeves, Sherman, Sparkman, Stevens (Minn.), Stokes, Vandiver, Vehslage, Wadsworth, White (II.), Wilber. The following were paired in favor of the resolution, and would have voted yea if present: Bankhead, Latimer, Sparkman, Adamson, Campbell, Jett, Stokes, Vehslage (Ala.), McMillin, Ogden, Lewis (Wash.), Bradley, Driggs, Griffith, Davey, Hartman, Vandiver, Norton, and Carmack. The following were paired against the resolution, and would have voted no if present: Hicks, Overstreet, Barrett, Sherman, Reeves, Mann, Codding, McEwan, Lovering, Bingham, Mudd, Wadsworth, Low, White (Ill.), Acheson, Stevens, Chickering, Barney, Curtis (Kans.), and Arnold.-Congressional Record, p. 1372. Analysis of the Vote in the Senate.-The majority was 15. These fifteen Senators, who constituted the free-silver majority in the Senate, represent the States of Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Washington, South Dakota, Nevada, and Utah. The entire population of these States aggregates only 1,621,311, which is 2,400,000 less than the State of Illinois alone, with but two votes in the Senate. The Senators who voted against the resolution represented in the aggregate 5,000,000 people more than those who favored the resolution. It is thus made clear that the action of the Senate can not be taken as a fair expression of the sentiment of the people of this country on the great question embodied in the resolution. STANLEY MATTHEWS RESOLUTION. Senator Stanley Matthews, of Ohio, introduced the following resolution, declaring them payable in silver, which passed the Senate February 18, 1878-Yeas, 42; nays, 20; passed the House January 29, 1878-Yeas, 189; nays, 79: "Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring therein), That all the bonds of the United States issued under the said acts of Congress herein before recited are payable, principal and interest, at the option of the Government of the United States, in silver dollars of the coinage of the United States, containing 4122 grains each of standard silver; and that to restore to its coinage such silver coins as a legal tender in payment of said bonds, principal and interest, is not in violation of the public faith nor in derogation of the rights of the public creditor." See "Teller Resolution." TIN PLATE. See also under "Prosperity." DECLINE IN IMPORTS SINCE THE MCKINLEY ACT. The imports of tin plate reached their high-water mark in 1891, when the McKinley bill took effect and practically turned the industry of tin-plate making over to the American manufacturer. From the date of the enactment of this measure the importations steadily decreased in proportion as the American manufacturers were able to supply the demand. This decrease of imports is shown in the following table compiled by the Bureau of Statistics of the Treasury Department: MANUFACTURES OF DOMESTIC TIN. The amount of manufactures of domestic tin exported in 1897 was valued at $284,020 as compared with $268,581 for 1896, an increase of $15,439. See also under "Prosperity". BRITISH POINT OF VIEW. The following matter is taken from a paper read by Sir John J. Jenkins, M. P., before the British Iron Trade Association: "The total production of tin plates in this country, including black plates, is estimated by Mr. C. B. Brooke at about 450,000 tons for the year 1897. This means that, with the loss of the United States business, so far as it has gone, the trade has been thrown back about ten years. In other words, we stand to-day much where we did about ten years ago. We must no doubt look forward to losing more of the trade of the United States, although we may succeed in keeping a share of the trade of the Pacific States and of the drawback plates. We may even not fall much farther behind than we have already done. On the other hand, it is not to be overlooked that the American tin-plate manufacturers are making efforts to capture the South American and Canadian markets. "In the United States, the total production of tin plates for the year ended June 30, 1897, is computed at about 447,000,000 pounds, of which about 88 per cent was of the class weighing lighter than 63 pounds per 100 square feet. This is an increase of 45 per cent on the output of the previous year. During the same period the exports were 139,250,000 pounds and the imports about 244,500,000 pounds. The capacity of the mills completed and in course of construction at midsummer, 1897, was computed at 650,000,000 pounds. The American output of black plates for the year was 436,500,000 pounds, an increase in twelve months of about 102,500,000 pounds. "In speaking of the American market, we are apt to forget that it is only of comparatively recent years that it has assumed such large dimensions. In 1870, which is only twenty-eight years ago, the total quantity of tin plates shipped to the United States-which was practically their whole consumption-amounted to only 75,372 tons. In that year our total exports of tin plates amounted to only 100,076 tons, or just 14 per cent more than the increased demand by other markets than the United States between 1890 and 1897. These figures do not include black plates, a recently developed branch of the trade, which would make them look much more favorable by raising our total export in 1897 to 330,632 tons, which is considerably more than three times our total export in 1870, and 11 per cent more than our total export in so recent a year as 1885. The following table compares the years 1890 and 1897: Exports of tin plates from the United Kingdom in 1890 and 1897. "A similar increase during the next seven years would leave us in as good a position as we hold to-day, even if the American market were absolutely blotted out. It will probably, however, never come to that, mainly because we have the prospect of continuing to hold a large share of the trade of the Pacific coast and of maintaining a demand on rebate plates and plates of special quality. "The importation of tin plates into the United States from Great Britain has naturally been affected in a measure corresponding to the growth of the American industry. A recent diplomatic report has pointed out that during the four years preceding the passage of the McKinley act the importation of British plates averaged some 650,000,000 pounds. In 1891, in prevision of the raised duty under the McKinley tariff, it was much in excess of that average, and the following year showed a correspondingly large falling off. During the four years, however, ending June, 1893 to 1896, the importation has rapidly declined, thus: Year ending June, 1893... Year ending June, 1895. Year ending June, 1896. Pounds. 628,425,902 454,160,826 508,038,938 385,138,983 TRUSTS. What have the Democrats done to put down Trusts? In his speech on the Dingley bill, March 25, 1897, Hon. Sereno Payne of New York challenged the Democrats and Populists, who were assailing the measure on the ground that it favored trusts, to show what the Democratic party had done to put down trusts during the four years that it was in power-absolute power in the White House, in Congress, the entire executive and legislative branches of the Government. But there was no reply. In the course of his remarks he said: "I would like to have some gentleman tell me what trust, what combination of capital, was interfered with by the Wilson bill. Can you think of any? Is there a single one about which you have been declaiming for the last ten years that was interfered with by the Wilson bill? Oh, you destroyed the business of individuals. You sent small corporations into the hands of the receivers by the hundreds; but where is there a trust in the United States during all these years of depression, of loss, of ruin, that has failed to pay its regular dividend on all the watered stock of the corporation? [Loud applause.] Was there any sugar trust when your committee in 1894 put four-tenths of a cent a pound differential on sugar? I know the price of sugar has declined since then, and that for the last six months the difference in price on that 100° under No. 16 Dutch standard and that above is 1s. 6d. on the hundredweight (112 pounds), or about 34 cents a hundred; 40 per cent on this 34 cents would equal 131⁄2 cents a hundred; this added to your 121⁄2 cents will make 26 cents a hundred differential duty, or a little over onefourth of a cent a pound for the last six months. "Now, if you had started out with one-fourth of a cent a pound, you would have not been open to so much criticism. There would have been no concealment." ANENT THE SUGAR TRUST. Again on July 19, 1897, Mr. Payne took up the subject of trusts in connection with the sugar schedule. He said: "Men stand up here and seem to think that the way to demolish a trust is to start a windmill and interject invectives into this debate. [Laughter and applause.] And every name that they can get out of their vocabulary, whether in the dictionary or not, is applied to the trust. But you will never destroy a trust in that way. Gentlemen talk about destroying the trust by taking away the differential between the raw and the refined sugar; they say, 'Let them all come in on a common plane.' Well, of course, when you do |