New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-01-13
NOT A LARGE MATTER.

NOT LARGE MAITER.
More importance has been given by some cor
respondents to the action of the Senate on tho
Tariff hill than the change itself seems to war
rant. Those who are eager to defeat action on
the tariff by any device, not unnaturally have
seized the opportunity TO make the vote or the
Senate seem as important and as ooJectonaole
to the friends of Protection as possible. But 1t
can hardly be considered of vital consequence.
The Senate had under consideration clause
that puts duties upon nOn-enumerated articles
of like kind or use to those enumerated and
upon which duties are specifically fixed. In the
clause as reported by the Tariff Commission, 1t
was provided that the unenumerated articles
should pay the duties fixed for those nearest
like them in material quality, texture or use,"
and where q non-eDumerated article equally
resembles two or more enumerated articles on
which different rates are chargeabe," there
shall be levied the duty chargeable on the SIM
liar article pa ying the highest rate. The Sen
ate by partisan vote, changed the word
highest" to "lOwest" in the last clause. The
practical effect is that in the comparatively few
cases in which an unenumerated article equally
resembles two more others, 1T shall be al
mitted at the duty levied on the lowest of them.
articles. Everything that is important enough to
have attracted the notice of the Commission, OF
the Committee of Ways and Means in the
House. or of the Committee on Finance in the
Senate ought to have been provided for at
some definite rate of duty, and doubtless has
been so provided for in the bills submitted.
But of the vast number of unimpOrtant articles
not enumerated, by far the greater number so
closely resemble, in material, quality, texture
or use," some other article enumerated, that
there can be no question as to the duty, and the
clause in dispute has no application. 1t applies
only where the unimportant and unenumerated
article happens to so closely resemble two other
articles of different duties that the examiner
cannot say which of the two it more nearly re-
sembles. But such instances, every person OF
common sense must realize, are very few In
deed. Yet the clause about which SO much
fuss is made applies to no other articles what
ever. If an examiner can fiEd that an imported
article not enumerated resembles, either IN
material, quality, texture or use, certain
article enumerated in the tariff more nearly
than any other enumerated, his duty is clear,
and the law leaves no room for doubt.
1t has been said that the articles not
enumerated are very important In amount.
That may well be. But the articles which
equally" resemble in all respects named
two or more other articles are exceed
ingly few, and in value exceedingly nsig
nfcant. Indeed, one can hardly suppose
that the Senate has been working itself up
TO a state of excitement about matters 30 insig-
nifcant, unless it be in a complete misunder-
standing of the clause in question; for in
stance some Senator may have supposed that
the clause applied to all unenumerated articles
whereas 1t applies only to those which equally
resemble two Others already enumerated.
The present tariff does not follow the rule
proposed by the Commission, but neither does it
consistently follow any rule In the case OF
cotton goods. for example, the present duties on
articles not enumerated is 80 per cent while the
proposed tariff would have made the duty as
much as 40 per cent on those few articles which,
appearing to contain just as large proportion
of cotton as some others enumerated, and being
Just the same in quality, and just the same in
texture, and just the same in use, must be
classed with the highest rather than the lowest
of them. The amendment classifying these
few articles with the lowest rather than the
highest grade of the two which they so sin
enlarly resemble cannot apply to any consider
able quantity of goods. But it does not apply at
all to any others, which are covered by other
provisions of the present and by like provisions
of the proposed tariff.
1t is safe to assume, then, that the question
upon which the Senate divided so closely on
Thursday is of exceedingly little importance.
The right of the matter it should be added,
Is clearly with the Commission, which proposed
the highest rate where there was no ground for
determining to which of two classes an unenum
Grated article most properly belonged. The
reason is that some frauds have been success
fully accomplished, and many costly disputes
have arisen, where unenumerated articles were
Intentionally made to resemble several others
80 closely that claim for admission at the
lower rate of duty could be plauslbly set up.
The Commission reported that such confusion
and controversy would be in great part avoided
if the few articles that competent inspectors
could not properly classify should be required
to pay higher rather than lower duty be-
cause of such uncertainty. 1t would then no