Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-05-26
THE PROPOSED txronr BOUNTY

A me sure somewhat new to Amuri-
can statecrait Ia the amendment to the
Dingley bill introduced by Senator
Cannon yesterday. the text OF which
appears in full in the NEWS dispatches.
He proposes to give bJunty to all
exports OF cereals, cotton and tobacco,
the came to be paid on custom house
vouchers cut OF the United States
treasury. This OF conrss 10 designed
TO stimulate the exporting Industry,
the presumption being that everything
that Increases the price OF an article to
the seller causes him to bs more de.
sirous to sell In proportion. In this csse,
however, it may be asked whether
tho proposed plan will have
such effect or not. The quantity
OF our exports does not d.-
pend to great extent, II at all, upol
the amount realized by the producer,
who Is governed generally in his prices
by the law OF supply and demand and
whose extraneous aid from tho gov
eminent would no, cause him to sell
for lesa, but rather upon such prices
and the whole amounts desired OF auch
products together with the oosts
and difficulties in the way OF
the purchaser receiving them.
For instance: We levy high
tariff on certain English products
which We produce some but not
enough OF, the alleged cause OF which
is 10 remove the pressure OF English
competition to some extent from our
own people; EnglanI, by way OF rs.
tallation, levies corresponding duties
on Bome OF our productions which are
greatly in demand there, thus not
changing the demand but ourtailing
the peoples power TO buy, and the
importation OF such lines by tue Egg
lish people falls of accordingly. A
stimulus sought to be impaired to the
trade from this end could, under such
circumstances, be Of little II any
avail-would be a stimulus which did
not stimulate in facl-for the sufficient
reason that goods cannot be forced
upon hostile market. With lees OF
restriction upon international trade,
the measure would undoubtedly BIO
great thing for our producers in ell
departments.
1t 10 not to be infe FRED from the
foregoing that such conditions as those
set out prevail in every case, for they
do not; as matter OF fact there
are but few Instances In which
they actually do obtain. 1t should,
however, bs also kept in mind tina,
majority Of Congress lie endeavoriug
to pass q general tariff msasurs VIII ose
operation in some cases would amount
almost II not quite to prohibition, ami
some friends of the measure are frank
enough to admit that this Is the Oh.
ject in view. Whether 1t is the right
or wrong course to take is not the
province OF this paper to discuss; 1t ia
only the probable effects which such
policy will have abroad, and which as
il appears are nationally set out in the
hypothetical case herein presented,
that are legitimate subjects OF discus.
sion. II foreign powers meet prosorip.
tion with prescription, ss they most
assuredly will as u measure of sell
protection II not self respect, 1t Ia diff.
cult as at present advised TO see iusl
how the growers and producers OF the
United States are to be benef ited by
an export bounty. Sill, It Is designed
In the proper spirit, aims at correct
purposes, and judgment regarding It
need not be too hasty.
Certainly is 1t the case that the
farmers aud many other producers
would, II the amendment carries, re.
ceive additional benefits for such ex.
ports as they do make, and to this ex.
tent at least 1t will be foil to the
extremely restrictive measures o. the
bill in chief.