New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-02-23
REVISION Advisable.

To q great many people it seems strange that
there should be any confusion or uncertainty III
Congress respecting the reduction OF IRON ana
steel duties. If the majority believed IL pest 10
reduce much or little, il may be said, they coulu
easily have made consistent charges through
ont the section. But the apparent lnc0psht-
encv of recent efforts to secure some mUdHlca-
+ion is really an earnest endeavor to make the
bill more con sisteut with itself, and more
nearlv in accord with the recommendations OF
the Tariff Commission.
To understand the matter it ia necessary to
90 back TO the reasons given for any revision OF
the tariff at this time. The reasons are two,
|. That there was too large surplus rev.
enue. so that some reduction of taxes was nee
essary. But a reduction of Duty it must be re-
membered, does not always or even generally
result in a re duction of rerenae because the
lower duty tends to invite increased importa-
tons.
2. That the tariff had grown to be defective
through changes in industry, trade, or the COM
narrative Importance of different articles in use,
SO that the duties on some articles had become
altogether too high, while the duties on other
articles had become much too low. For IN
stance, the duty on Bessemer steel rails was not
ton. nor was it out of harmony with other parts
of the tariff. But when the cost OF these rails
had dropped so far that rails could be sold here
at S3S, duty of $2s per ton was entirely out
of proportion to other features of the tariff. As
such rails now cost about $50 free on board III
Great Britain, the duty is moro than 100 per
cent. whereas 1t formerly was only about 80
per cent But there are many other articles
upon which an dd udlOrem duty OF 80 per cent
was formerly levied which have SO changed in
modes of manufacture or in use that such
duty has become altogether inadequate for the
defence of home industries and disproportion-
ately low as compared with other provisions OF
the tariff.
II was to correct these two evils that the ma
iority in Congress- while ardently defending
the system of protective duties, undertook re-
vision of the tariff. Very different motives
governed the fres-trade members, but they
were not then and are not now in the majority.
The practical question is whether the majority
can frame and pass bill that will effect the re-
forms that it desired
The work to be done was partly of readjust
menl-to lower duties that had become dispro-
portionaselv high and to raise duties that had
reduction-to lessen the sum paid by people in
duties on imports This work the Tariff Com
mission considered and its recommendations
were in the main warmly approved by the peo-
pie. The Committee Of the Senate followed
them quite closely in the bill presented to that
body, and it's intelligence, as well as that of the
Commission, was properly directed to the
double work OF adjustment as well as reduc-
ton.
But many Senators, being incapable OF COM
pretending the position or needs OF diversi-
fed industry, began to act on the matter from
the start as if Congress had no business to con-
slider anything except reduction. They could
not comprehend why any particular duty
should be disproportonatelY high or danger
ously low; sll that they seemed capable of I'M
derstanding was whether it had been reduced
much or little. The fatal blunder OF these Sen
ators was that they conceived OF the existing
scale of duties as harmonious and perfectly
adjusted system which was too high at all
points, and therefore needed lowering at all
points alike. In this spirit they hammered
AWAY fer weeks and made some of the most in
consistent and foolish amendments ever con-
ceived by any human being. IL any duty pro-
posed by the Commission and the Committee was
higher than the existing tariff, they instantly
acted on the supposition that it was wicked
attempt to raise duty which was too high al
ready. OF intelligent and proportionate adjust
ment they had no conception. The alpha aud
omega to them was to get duties down lower
than they are now.
Hence it came to rass that the bill, in many
respects an admirable one, became in some par
ticulars "a grotesque botcb. These blunders
were ia part corrected before the bill came out
of the Senate, but some OF them still remain.
II they cannot be corrected before the House.
comes to direct and final vote on the bill,
there are members who strongly desire an in
telligent revision and substantial reduction of
the tariff. but who say that they nevertheless
cannot vote for bill containing such danger
ous blunders. Possibly their refusal TO support
the bill might cause its defeat but they insist
that wall of defence for our industries Is no
stronger than its weakest point. Lawrence