New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-06-05
TARIFF BILL AND WEARING APPAREL.

STRONG EFFORTS BEINI MADE FOR THE RES
TORATlON OF THE 500 LIMIT.
Washington June 4 (SpecaD.. "While 1t is neces-
sary and right that Congress should devote great
deal Of study to the dutiabe schedules and con-
centrate It's attention upon them for the time be-
Ing. do hope and pray that it will not forget or
neglect to stop some Of the big holes in the free
list" remarked one of the leading merchant taiors
of Washington to-day.
What particular hole have you in mind jus;
now" asked Tribune correspondent.
We'll. / happened to be thinking Of the one
through which not only rich and fashionable
smugelers both men and women. import millions
of dollars worth of dutable goods every year as
personal effects and wearing apparel free OF duty
but also Of the foreign tailors dressmakers MILL
ners. haberdashers and so on who themselves and
through their agents infes the United States. So
Letting orders and filling them at prices with which
our people cannot compete. by taking advantage
of the hole to which have referred. have no
doubt that the aggregate Of the orders obtained
and filled by these principals and their agents
amounts Of millions Of dollars every yea-.
The consequences loss OF revenue TO which the
Government is entitled and serious losses TO our
merchants, manufacturers and working peo-
pie have 1t estimated that at least Ss 900 600
worth of dutiable goods-most Of them costly goods
and a largo proportion articles Of luxury-are
brought into the United States every year free OF
duty as wearing apparel and personal effects.
1ncre was provision III tHe DiiiBiey Diii " Pic-
vent this abuse. but understand that the Senate
committee has cut 1t out. / hope the House will
insist on having 1t restored"
This matter Is one which has attracted an I'M
usual amount Of attention for several years past.
not only among customs officials. but also among
American citizens who have discovered the IN
furious effects upon their business of the unfair
and they contend, unlawful foreign competition
made possible by the construction given by the
United States Supreme Court TO the provisions OF
existing law which relate 10 the admission free
Of duty Of wearing apparel and 1do personal effects
In framing the new Tariff bill Chairman Ding Ding
on this point and carefully investigated the sub
ect which was BY no means n new one to some
between the Senate and House Of Representatives
for number Of yearsoas often no, Te N, of
the decision of the Supreme Court In the Aston
Sscn s law Mas dsssnG to
staring and assumed such large prop9r,11ns AZ one
mittec II was asserted by an importer whose
statement Was not denied or disputed by ANYBODY
brought into the United States free of duty every
year in this way. The committee RECEIVED many many
merchant not taIors asSocatens retail drygocds
dealers and SO on against the existing p provision
IN the Dingley bill as it passed the House Of
Finance Committee TO reconsider its action. and
restore the House pSSyison Among those who
dent OF the Merchants and Manufact urers Board
of Trade. In conversation with Post" reporter
said Under the head Of wearing apparel the
Dingey bill provides that a passenger coming into
this country from abroad might bring into the
country duty free wearing APPAREL to the. value Of
500 Treasury experts report that the amount OF
dut liable goods brought into this country last year
under the plea Of being wearing apparel, which
under the Wilson law was admitted free OF duty
TO any amount. OF the value OF &o,0O.tDO,
while business men who have given the subject
much thought are confident that the amount was
fully 100000. Notwithstanding that the 500
limit was conceded being the most practical
solution Of the question and bound 10 result in
proper protection to our tradesmen and artisans
and the protection Of the Governments duties, the
senate finance Committee struck out the vital
feature OF the clause-the 800 limit. 1t is unjust
discrimination when the man who is rich enough
to go 10 Europe every year with his family Is
permitted to bring in his trunks full Of all kinds
of merchandise duty free by reason Of his desg
mating them wearing apparel. II the rich are TO
be allowed TO continue to do this, why. In all
provide that those who are not able to go to
Europe may order their goods by mail and re-
cclye them duty