The first full year of the operation of the Wilson bill ended June 30, 1896. The revenue received for that period was as follows:

It is therefore plain that although there was a slight falling off in the internal revenue in the fiscal year last noted as compared with that first referred to, nevertheless during the first fiscal year during which the Wilson bill was in absolute and entire operation there was collected, in excess of the revenue of the last fiscal year under the McKinley bill, $30,143,778.82.

A reference to the receipts of the year ending June 30, 1897, shows the following:

Customs

Internal revenue
Miscellaneous

Total

$176,316,393.18 146,241,263.97 24,627,071.47

$365,807,836.32

It will thus be observed that the total revenue for the year just closed on the accounts above mentioned exceeds the revenue produced by the McKinley bill during its last fiscal year in the sum of $53,520,367.73. Notwithstanding the enormous income last above noted, there was a deficiency for the fiscal year 1896-97 amounting to $18,623,107.70. It is proper to remark that had the Supreme Court of the United States adhered to its views as laid down during its antecedent history with regard to the income tax, the Wilson bill would have produced a surplus amounting to between $35,000,000 and $50,000,000, and the burden would have been largely placed upon those best able to bear it.

Some of the parties who would have been compelled to pay taxes on their incomes have realized within the last three months from sugar stock alone, and because of the increased value of that stock, between $35,000,000 and $40,000,000. These people, by processes. which I can not fathom, have succeeded in eliminating the carefully prepared Senate amendment providing for a tax upon stock issues. The only reason given for the extraordinary performance of the Senate managers is that the gentlemen who conducted the proceedings upon the part of the House made the Senate conferees familiar with some provision of the National Constitution rendering the tax invalid because of the exemption of homestead associations.

While neither of the able Republican lawyers in this Chamber discovered this so-called invalidity during the consideration of an amendment which was suggested, carefully digested, and subsequently introduced and passed here pursuant to a Republican caucus decree,

nevertheless, if the argument is sufficient to show the unconstitutionality of the plan, which I deny, the conferees could readily have adjusted the trouble, and could have removed the discrimination by merely exscinding the few words referring to homesteads. I fear that the real reason for the action of our Republican friends is discovered in their gratitude to late campaign contributors.

At this point it may not be out of place to refer concisely to the effect of the Wilson bill upon the trade of the United States.

Our merchandise exports for twelve months ending June 30, 1897, aggregated $1,051,987,091-the largest in the history of the country, even exceeding the remarkable showing of 1892. Our imports for the same period reached $764,373,905, showing an excess of exports over imports and a favorable trade balance of $287,613,186. While the percentage of profit upon the commodities thus exported may not have been very large, still the payment to citizens of this country of the enormous sum noted tended in no small degree to mitigate prevailing evils.

It is not easy to compute the revenue value of the Dingley bill. Much will, no doubt, depend upon the general state of trade. If that prosperity which has been due so long visits us, large collections may be expected; but the bill contains so many prohibitive rates and is so permeated by the spirit of imposition and so much. of the tax levied goes into the pockets of the favored few that the prospects for surplus are not as encouraging as generally imagined. In any ordinary financial weather the Wilson bill would produce ample revenue.

SUGAR.

So much has been said with reference to this subject that it is hardly necessary to enter into great detail. In 1890 the Republican party announced that sugar, being a necessary of life, ought not to be taxed, and that the cultivation of cane and beet and maple sugar deserved encouragement to be given by means of bounty. In 1894 the Democratic party repudiated this idea and imposed a tax upon sugar in substance 40 per cent. ad valorem, one-eighth differential and one-tenth countervailing. When the bill now under consideration came from the House, a specific duty was levied, which was changed by the insertion of an ad valorem element by the Senate Committee on Finance; but before a vote could be taken, the Republican members of that committee who were responsible for the schedules introduced upon that subject abandoned their previous work and adopted the principle of the House bill, raising the rates, however, materially.

Thus the matter went to conference, and a report was finally made modifying both Senate and House provisions upon this subject in such a manner as to slightly decrease the differential on certain grades and to raise it on others, preserving, however, the high rate on refined sugars. I herewith present a table with reference to all. the bills, prepared by Mr. Schoenhof, showing the differential and duty-paid price of German granulated. In this computation the drawback allowance fixed by the Treasury is allowed. I think it has been. quite clearly demonstrated by the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. CAFFERY] that this drawback table is grossly inaccurate, and if this be true the trust's profits will be much greater.

The tables referred to are as follows: