New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-10-10

4 Bill ~ KUN LADORERS.

us asd IcsAs SuJsttted by SeAerH CGctstd Nag H.
Tie subject referred to this committee by the
House ia the letter OI the. secretary oI the
Treasury is sufficient stated ~ the report OF the
majority. The hul reported by inc majority OF the
l. Thst Az cut-hoops, hoops cut 10 lengths and
punched, and baud-hoo1s which were purchased
abroad before March u, 1880. NAV be imported
any time before January l, 1881, at duty or %
> That ali such hoops and hands purchased
since March 10 1850 and imported before this bill
becomes n law. shall nay The duty prescribed by
existing law that is, Il. lI2 and ia cents per
pound. according 10 thickness
3 That hereafter the duty not only on cut
hoops bat upOn all band-hOOps and scT0ll-ron OF
every description, shall be reduced to 80 per cent
al val0rem s.,.
The undersg ned concnr in that provision of the
bill which grants relief TO those importers VINO made
absolute and bsa dde purchases OF cut-hoops beloI
the Treasury orcr Of March IL leSo, but nave n9t
vet imported them; though IT Is not Improbable
that many Of these purchases were maze IN atlci-
patton of the order. Put object 10 the tird see
ton of the bill as wholly unwarranted by any
just principle or by any complaint against inc eA-
isung law. ii the committee mad confined the
provision, Of this section To cut-hOops they would
have done at least this service-they would nave
prevented litigation and ended an expensive con
tr0veTsy by deciding the question IN favor OF the
importers and FOREIGN manu- cturcrs. But IN re.
moving an ambiguity from single paragraph OF
the law, they has thrown dozen PAGES Oh the
statutes into the utmost confusion. IheY nave
separated one group OF products. hoop ana oalia
IRON from tine general provisions OF the iron tarlu,
and reduced the duty more than One-thlrt-W wholly
out of proportion 10 the rates on other manulac-
tres of iron. The only reason assigned 10y the
ma orty for their change OF law is that Inc present
rate of duty It. y. and ~ cents per pound. is
nearly prohbtory; and the proposed reduction OF
rate will largely increase the lmport3uonS ana aug
mcnt the revenues. The allegation tnat the present
duty Is eXOTbtant, Is based up0L the recent tenn
porary advance in the price Of iron and the arg-
ment for the increase of revenues VIII apply Win
equal force to nearly all the NsiOns OF the iron
tariff, which are not touched by any OF the bills
which the committee have trained. The under
signed object 20 the change proposed III the IulIu
l. 1t viii destroy at least six millions of capital
now invested in machinery specially and eNclu~
sigely applied TO TINS paTtlcuIar Ianch Oh manu-
flcture in Massachusetts,, New-Iork, Peunsy lyanla
and Ohio and other States.
H. Ii will tuIn out OF employment not less than
5000 artisans and laborCrS who are now engaged
in this special manufacture, and about 10000 more
who are engaged n the production OF the material
of which hoOp-ron is made.
III II will transfer the profits of these manufac-
lures 10 the importers and to orr rivals In foreign
countries, and will not materially reduce the cost
of the furnished products to American consumers
This is shown by the fact that since the mpOrta-
ton of cut-hOOps under the treasury ruling OF
1878 has been allowed at 80 per cent the importers
and foreign producers have fixed the prices at so
small a fraction below the price at which the
American manufacturer can produce them, that
only very small advantage has accrued 70 the
consumer; and the home production has become
impossible.
". It is wholly ont of harmony with the duties
imposed by existing laws npOn every other form OF
iron manufacture, as may be seen by examining
the Revised Statutes lBoutwelrs edtIon PIP. 464,
4 seq. . .
It violates two principles (which have controlled
nearly all our tariff legislation since the tounta-
ton of the Government: FIRST that all imported
articles which are alike in kind and III their
relation TO the wants and industries OF the United
States shall tie treated alike in the customs laws.
second that imported articles which come mo
competition with the Industries of this country
prODOrtlOncd
amount of skill ard labor employed in their pro-
duction. We do not say that these principles ap-
pear in exact mathematical proportions i'll al our
legislation; hut it has been the manif purpose
of Congress SO TO apply them to the tlrl law that
the more labor and skill are embodied in any COM
peing product the higher rate OF duty il shall bear