New-York tribune., 1883-03-14

the complicated calculations involved in the
distribution of the charges on the goods In
athe In voice bearing different rates OF duty,
the delay, annoyance and expense to the i'm
sporter arising from the necessarily tedious liq-
"uidation thus occasioned, and because, in the
giudgment of the Commission, these charges
should not be regarded as part or the cost OIL
@the gonds.D There will hardly be two opln-
ions as to the wisdom of this recommendation
in fact, no opposition to the proposed repeal
was manifested either in the Senate or IN the
House. But the Commission recommended ana
Congress enacted q moderate increase OF duty
on some articles, particularly on earthenware,
on which the addition by charges was large ana
their repeal would cause especial reduction. In
some instances, tho Commission believed, this
reduction would amount to nearly ii not quite
one.fourth" Of the duty, while on finer and
higher priced goods it would be much less.
By the mistake of Congress, the repeal and
reduction take effect at once, while the partially
compensating increase of duties does not take
effect until July l. Hence, on few classes of
bulky and coarse goods, duties will be lower IN
effect for the next three and half months than
they will be afterward. But the quantity con-
sumed of the kinds of goods materially Affected
by the change is not large. OF earthen and
stone ware, according to the census, the value
of all products was $7,942, ,72O, and the i'm
ports for consumption the same year were
S5,5O0,994. The change of duties will mate
rally affect the production and trade as to only
a part of these goods, and for about a quarter
of year. and this item, it ID believed, Is
affected more than any other. Hence, though
the bunder in the act was wholly indefenslble,
and it will do some harm for short time, the
evil effects will probably be much less serious
than some suppose, and they will be temporary.
The Sections repealed formed part Of the Act
of July %, 1866. This was bill not intended
to be permanent but to serve temporary pur-
pose until tariff bill which had been deferred
by the Senate to the next session could be
acted on. Mr. Sherman, however, ON behalf OF
the Committee on Finance, moved to strike out
the section now In question, saying, AS this Is
q temporary provision, only designed TO be en-
forced until the new tariff act will take effect,
we think it better to strike out the whole sec
ton, - and he then explained that 1t would
cause great deal of trouble uncertainty, de-
lay and litigation. Bya vote of 26 to IL, the
Senate did strike out the section, but it was re-
stored with a modification on report OF COM
mittee OF COZ ference and has stuck in the law
ever since. The Commission was clearly right
in holding that these provisions ought to be re-
pealed il higher duties Oh any class of articles
were needful, such duties should have been
imposed simply, directly ard openly. The re-
moval of these vexatious and costly provisions
and the substitution of higher duties on some
. haO faat Of
COMMISSIONS report, and It is to be regretted
that the Senate did not take proper care 10 ad-
lust the section of repeal to the rest Of the BILL