New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-03-20
WHA7 THE NEW BILL MEANS.

irving to find ont what rates of duty Mr.. Nor
risOn's bill would impose. This cOmmendabe
effort has resulted in report as volumlnOus rs
an encyclopedia, ard almost as Incompetent
sible as the proposed tariff itself, for the ac-
curacy of which we can by no means vOuch.
But it may be presumed that it does not intcn-
tonaly exaggcrate the reductions proposed,
and it may be fairly quoted az evidence of the
acknowledged intentions of the Democratic
majority in the committee
Beginning with the metal schedule, it is
stated that the duty on iron ore is to be reduced
from 2S.41 to 22.73 per cent, on pig and
scrap iron from 81 % 10 1928 per cent, on steel
rails from 5O.3j to 1928 per cent on tin plates
from 27.19 to 21.75 per cent, on cotton hoops
from 80 to 80 per cent, on anvils and anchors
from 37.15 to 2696 per cent, on blacksmiths'
hammers and slcdges from 2j6 to 20.fS per
cent. on rivets and bolts from 72.19 to 57.75
per cent, on wrought nails from 1915 to 31.2S
per cent, on band saws from 40 to 80 per cent,
and on files from 1891 TO 30.13 per cent. But
il is then admitted that it is impossible TO tell
how much the rcdlct would be on many
articles, or how many articles are covered by
some provisions of the present tariff. Neverthe-
less, these provisions, said to be so blind that the
committee cannot find out what they mean, are
retained and made the basis of the proposed
duties. And Notwithstanding this uncertainty
as to what the pending bill does mean, with
true Democratic Incompetence it is affirmed
that the total reduction in duties under the
metal schedule would be $1,036,0G0 IS. This,
we may add, is almost demonstrably false, at
all events, because that sum would be only
about per cent of the duties now said to be
collected, whereas the proposed reduction is ID
per cent. Blu, it is not for the purpose of criti-
cising the computations that the figures are
quoted How do the producers like the pros
pcct held out by this Democratic measure, for
the industries which have been and are most
sorcly pressed1
We look next to wool and wOOllcns remem-
bering that the Democratic party stole Ohio by
promising to restore higher rates of duty. The
bill proposes to cut off onc-lifth of the duty on
wool which the last tariff has left There arc no
exceptions; even those duties that are now
relatively much too low are reduced as much as
the rest. On secured and washed clothing
wool the reduction in duty has already been
great, but tho Morrison bill would cut off so
much moro that actually less than half of the
duty in force last Juno would remain. The
same lack of reason pervadcs tho treatment of
duties on woollens. Some of the most prOmis-
ing industries in the country would be simply
ruined. if such bill should become law, while
other duties would remain nearly or quite pro-
hibtOry.
Louisiana has been expressing strong Opln-
ion about the duty on sugar, and leading DEM
ocrats of that State have publicly declared that
any further reduction of that duty would en-
tirely destroy the sugar culture. But the duties
which were 80, G7 and 70 per cent year ago
Mr. Morrison proposes to cut down to 35, 80
and 80 per cent
Yet this is the bill which Democratic states
men call so conservative" that opposition to
it Is treason to the party. This Is the bill which
Democrats are told they must support, or else
"pick up their grip and go over to the
Republican party whore they belong" If 1t
had merit as measure of profound statesman
ship, or If it were one of grave public necessity,
there would be some excuse for threatening in
dustry with it. But there IS not vestige of
principle in it, not even pretence Of public
necessity demanding it. The bill is simply
politicians trick, contrycd by one set of DEM
ocrats to defeat their opponents within the
Democratic party and yet so reckless are these
men that they are willing to PROSTATE or inn
peril all our great industries for months in their
scramble for spOils.