Evening star., 1897-01-09


prohibitive, but not where duties are SIM
ply protective-i e., made to cover the d1f-
ference of cost Of production here and
abroad Combinations of capital are Of
two kindS-one kind to simply secure
greater economy of production, giving the
consumer the benefit In large part of the
reduced cost, and the other Cpopularly
known as trusts to destroy competition
legitimate means. The former kind of
combination results in a public advantage,
the latter in a public injury. and for that
reason Is properly subject to the penalties
of the law. But on account Of the fact
that national law can act only on inter-
state conditions our great reliance for the
suppression of such conspiracies against
the public welfare must be on state legis-
lation.
Trusts Are self-Corrective.
after all, such trusts fortunately ordi-
narily bear within themselves a very ef-
fectual corrective in the fact that when
any kind Of business IS made exceptionally
profitable so many rush into 1t that 1t is
wrecked. The chief reason that the sugar
trust lives and thrives so long is the fact
that its profits are made by controlling the
market for raw sugar, which requires SO
much capital that it Is impossible to have
much competition.
But to come back to the tariff, In
whose revision, as have already said, we
have in mind first revenue, and, In connec-
tion with that, protection to domestic in
dustries.
"And 1 may say right here that we ex-
pect to considerably increase the revenue
by simply changing the existing almost
exclusive ad valOrem duties in many sched-
ules to equivalent specific duties wherever
this Is practicable, or at least to mixed
specific and ad valorem duties. 1t is sur
priSing to me, after the experience Of other
nations, after our own experience and af-
ter the earnest protest of such democratic
Secretaries of the Treasury against eXclu-
sively ad valorem duties. that any one
should now advocate them, except in such
cases as 1t is impracticable to apply spe-
cific duties. The tariffs of Great Britain
France and Germany have almost exclu-
sively specific duties.
Theoretically ad valorem duties anpea r
all right, but practically they encourage
such fraudulent undervaluations as greatly
diminish the revenue, deprive domestic in
dustries of just protection, increase the
cost OF collection and play into the hands
of dishonest importers. The honest i'm
porter Is coming to see that specific duties
are better for him.
After having determined about what ad-
ditional revenue is required the ways and
means committee first of all invites all
interested. whether as producers, manu-
facturers, importers, consumers or as labor
ers, to briefly present such suggestions as
to the workings of existing tariff legisla-
tion or as to desired changes, with the
reasons therefor. as may seem proper
We of course have the official statistics of
importations and such suggestions as the
treasury officials. appraisers, ETC., may
have to make.
THE official statistics as to imports of
foreign goods are fair index to the in
dustries which need protection. AS to
what protection they need, we try to as
certain that first by public hearings. such
as We have been holding. Any one is
welcome to come to these hearings and to
lay his views before the committee. But
We do not rely wholly on the statements
made to us there. When the public hear
lngS are ended, we send for men who are
well informed as to any industry, in whose
Judgment we have confidence-men who
are not biased in any way. From them
we obtain statements about the cost of
production. confirming or correcting the
statements made at the public hearings.
Then we take broad, comprehensive view
of the bill, having in mind. as 1 have said,
first revenue, then protection.
I'VE have pretty clear idea by this
time cn what lines we are going to work
and we fix upon certain interests demand
Ing particular attention. Then we take
up the schedules and the individual articles
In each.
The Tariff Law of 1890 Was Easy to
Make.
I'm the making of the law of 1880 we
had comparatively simple problem, so
far as fixing the revenue was concerned
We wanted to reduce the revenue $50, ,DOO.-
900 then. Taking the duty off sugar at the
outset made the necessary reduction in the
revenue. After that we had to adjust the
duties on other articles, sometimes raising
and sometimes lowering, with view to
placing them on protective basis under
the conditions then existing. BY the way,
the duty on sugar which the Senate put in
the present law, is all that saved 1t from
"a
Sugar brought In $3O,00O,OOO of revenue
last year. Without sugar, as the bill passed
the House, the deficiency this year would
be $95,0OO.OO0 and next year would be $75,-
100000"
rs 1t possible to estimate with any de-
gree of accuracy the income a tariff bill
will bTinE?'
Yes; under normal conditions our esti-
was within a few millions of the amount it
actually brought in the first year after
the abolition of the duty on sugar took
effect. OF course there are many uncer-
tainties about the result Of a new law;
but, looking back over the imports and the
domestic production of articles of import
for few years, We can form a fairly cor
rect estimate. OF course q change in con-
ditions will change the amount of revenue.
We would have had A deficit last year un-
der the law Of 1890. but we would not
have had the conditions of last year II
the law of 1890 had not been changed first
by anticipated and subsequently by par
TALLY realized tariff reductions that de-
moralized our industries and business"
You still think the law of 1890 was a
good law?'
Yes, for the conditions existing at that
time"
why was 1t so unpopular, then?"
"A tariff law passed just before an cleo
ton is bound to be subjected to assaults of
an exaggerated character and made tenn
porarily unpopular. The opposing party
pursued its usual policy of misrepresenting
it to our disadvantage without affording
the opportunity Of showing by results that
the assaults were unfounded. The new
law, therefore, had no chance of being
tested fairly. If We can put new law in
effect by the 1st Of July, 1t will have a
year or more of trial before there is an
other campaign"
DO you expect the new law to go into
effect by July 1?'
1T ought to go into effect even earlier IL
Eos sible. certainly not later than July l."
DO you anticipate much difficulty in
putting 1t through the HouseT'
mo. l think the members of the House
will take a broad view Of its effect on the
whole country"
You speak highly Of the law of 1890.
Am / to infer that you think that law
would be Just what We want today?"
mo. Conditions have changed since
1890. We have made progress in many d.
oil -