Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1896-12-05
WALLACE ON DINGLEY BILL
Hon. Geo. H. Wallace, Ex-U.S. Consul
to Austria, Discusses the Tar
iff Question.
VERY ABLE, LUCID AND THOUGHTFUL
nlngley Bill Condemned as Patchwork
Framed to Benefit Woolen Manu-
facturers Regardless of the
Wool Producers.
To the Editor of the New Mexican.

. |
Santa Fe, Dec. 2, 1896.-Every repre-
sentative of an agricultural district an
state in the United States congress shoul
enter his emphatic protest against th
enactment into law of the so.called Ding
ley bill. The plea made twelve month
ago for its passage without amendmen
or debate that an emergency existed vii
not now hold, for the bill failed to be
come a law and the government still e1
lists. We know now that it would no
have furnished the needed revenue ant
we also know
ITS RANK INJUSTICE.
The suspicious of the wool growers
were first excited when, in answer to tht
request of their representatives. to be
heard by the committee on ways and
means before the bill was formulated
they were informed that the committee
did not need their help and could and
would report bill without their advice
or assistance.
Our suspicious were confirmed whom
the bill was reported horizontal in its
general effect upon customs duties; a
scheme or method of changing rates
which protectionists have ridiculed and
condemned as not meeting the constantly
changing conditions and developments of
trade and commerce, both foreign and
domestic. Protectionists have always
affirmed that no tariff law could be enact
ed which would not need continual revis-
ion, yet this bill would perpetuate for
two years all the proportionate and rela-
tive rates of the condemned Wilson bill,
enacted two years previous.
| Our suspicious were intensified whom
we discovered that schedules and K,
especially the latter, which is
THE WOOL AND WOODEN soHEDULE,
had been singled out for special treatment
by the wise committee, and when we
found it's terms were SO involved, by
combinations of the act of 1890 and the
act of 1894; by the use of per cent Of
the specific duties on the pound or square
yard of one law, in addition to the ad
valorem rate of another law; and by the
insertion of provisos which might mean
something else entirely.
Our suspicious we're established when
We sat down and carefully figured out the
effect of this queerly constructed BILL
The most astL nishing result was to learn
with what ingenuity the manufacturers'
interests are cared for, while the wool
growers are cajoled with fraction of a
law against which they have always pro-
tested, and which
WAS FORCED UPON THEM!
Set ii bu rem mcmbered, there arc ssvsraf
features Of past tariff legislation, inserted
at the demands of the importers and
manufacturers, to which wool growers
earnestly object, viz:-First, the classifi.
cation OF wool; second, the exemption of
skirted wool from the penal clause; third,
the compound duties on woolens; and
fourth, the verblsge through which duties
have been evaded.
The distinction made between first and
second class wool was one only OF manip-
ulation in the factory and has passed
away owing to the improvements in ma.
chinery. Thirty years have made pro
digious changes in wool growing, and the
distribution of merino blood all over the
world has almost oblitersted oil traces of
so.calied third-class wool, hence the
reasons for lower rates Of duty on such
wool have ceased, and we're utilized to
bring in clothing wool at such low rates.
The skirting of wool as heretofore
practiced" was not oh jectionable, as it
separated only the stained portion from
the fleece, but, "as now practiced," Aus
tralian wool was imported, according to
"The Manufacturer" of Philadelphia,
"ready for the cards, the only "shrinkags"
being of the protection to the wool
growers.
We ject to the system of compound
duties in the wooden schedule for the rea-
son that gross injustice upon the con-
sumers and the revenue has thus been
perpstrated. "Ad valorem rates
"NoT ONLY PERMIT BUT INVITE FRAUDS
Through system of almost undisoov-
srable undervaluations." See report of
general appraisers.
The compound (speciac and ad valo-
rem combined) duties make rate of
duty which must be altogether beyond
the bounds of reason, certainly beyond
what the taxpayer is willing to pay it he
knows it.
The statistics of the treasury depart
ment show large transactions 10 the Gus
tom house where these ratee, computed
to an ad valorem basis, run from 100 to
1870 per cent, and in single instances to
275 and even 1913 per cent. The manu-
facturers have hidden behind this system
Of compound duties, and We and the pub
lie generally could not know what rates
we're being paid, nor what amount Of
protection the manufacturers we're re-
ceiving.
LIT TEEN COME OUT BOLDLY
and say what they want and must have
to continue in business, 40 other indus.
tries do, and IL will then be for the pub
lic TO say il they will foot the bill, II the
possession of WOODEN manufactures
IL worth the cost. Il 10 q fact, that the
sole and only argument for placing wool
on the free list wss the high rate OF du.
ties ON woolsns.
We are tired Of the use OF terms max
ling the duties to apply specifically, such
g ar,nR waste" "garnetted waste" and
then have "tops," the most highly puri.
fled and partly manufactured wool. sd-
mitted ss "waste," because the sharp i'm
porter added "wssts" to its designation.
These and other Questionable features
Of past legislation, the Dinglsy bill pro-
poses to re-snaot BY its words: "And sub.
iect to all the conditions and limitations
thsrsof;" referring TO tie act Of 1890.
TIE MANUFACTURERS CLAIM
tho specific duty on woolsns 10 merely to
com pepssts them for the duty on wool
ana The ad valorem duty is their protec-
tion.
When they import Australian wool
s'sortsd and skirtsd" 90 % to shrink lit-
| lie or nothing 10 cleansing and ask for
| four and one half times the duty on grease
WOOL q I compsnsatory duty, We feel
disposed TO discuss the matter with them;