The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-05-13
A STATEMENT BY D|NGLEY
AITHOR OF THE TARIFF BILL
SPEAKS OF THE SENATE
AMENDMENTS.
II WILL PRODUCE LESS REVENUES
The Bill Reported to the Senate, He
Thinks, VIII Produce as Much
as the House Billie
Gives His Reasons.

Washington. May 1.-THE first state
ment which Chairman Dingley of the
ways and means committee has consent
ed to make regarding the Dingley tariff
bill since it was amended by the senate
finance committee was made by him to-
day to the Associated Press. Mr.. Ding
ley was requested to give some statement
as to the probable additional revenue
that would be included the first year by
the senate tariff bill as well as by the
house bill. He spoke as follows:
at must be borne in mind that there is
no senate bill as yet. What is imprOp-
erly spoken of as the senate bill is the
house bill reported to the senate by the
| finance committee, with certain amend
ments recommended. What the senate
bill will be when that body shall have
made it no one can yet say.
| while the amendments of the house
bill recommended by the senate finance
| committee about 700 appear to be
multitudinous, yet about 200 of them are
mainly verbal, leaving about 800 which
change rates. This is about the num-
Der of amendments to the Mckinley bill
adopted by the senate of 1890, and of
the remaining 800, Il large proportion in
volve nothing of consequence. There
are, however, many amendments which
are important not only on revenue, but on
other grounds. | do not propose to
speak of these proposed amendments eX-
cept as they affect revenue.
'"rhp effect of these amendments as n
whole-Outside of the amendment impos-
ing duty on tea for two years and Il
half and the amendment increasing the
internal revenue tax on beer Al cents per
barrel for the same period and the in
creased tariff proposed on tobacco and
cigarettes-is to produce less revenue
than would be yielded by the house bill.
For example. the amendments returning
to the free list argols, certain acids and
oils, paintings and statuary for private
use and reducing the duties on liquors,
tobacco, precious stones, ETC., lose more
revenue than could be obtained by the
duty on tea. The amendments reducing
the duty on clothing wool and increasing
the duty On carpet wool would diminish
the revenues. The amendment ncreas-
ling the duty on opium from Sc to So
per pound would not increase the revenue
in the judgment of the admirers of the
law, who informed the ways and means
committee that So was the point which
would yield the largest revenue. The
proposed duties on hides, and a few other
amendments, would increase the revenues
somewhat.
Undoubtedly the contingency which
would exert the largest influence in
banishng the estimated revenue would
be delayed in the passage of the proposed
bill, in consequence of which there
would be large impOrtatiOns of such arti-
cles as wool, wooden goods, sugar, etc,
on which it is proposed to increase the
duty.
IF the ways and means committee
had supposed when they made this state
INIT on March Is that the bill would be
delayed as long as now seems probable,
they would have said that such delay
would inevitably result in largely null-
flying the recommending qualities of the
bill the first year, through importation of
wool, sugar and other articles before the
new duties should 90 into force, unless
such retroactive provisions as were
placed in the bill by the house could be
maintained. The anticipatory importa-
tons of such articles already arrived and
on their way exceed the fears of the
ways and means committee when they
urged prompt action by the house to pre-
year.
"Of course the estimate of an increased
revenue from sugar through an abroga-
| ton of the treaty with Hawaii has
nothing to do with the tariff legislation,
for this could be done as well by accept
ing the house sugar schedule as the
sugar schedule proposed The ways and
means committee did not even consider
the question of abrogating this treaty, be-
cause they took it for granted that if it
was considered desirable to abrogate
| this or any other treaty it would be
done in the straightforward manner pro-
vided by the treaty itself. The fact that
the senate finance committee recommend
ed an ad valorem duty on sugar appar-
| emily little higher than the specific
duty of the house bill does not insure
larger revenue, as past experience with
ad valorem duties has shown. In our
Judgment the revenue from sugar under
the house sugar schedule (setting aside
the question of abrOgating the Ha-
walian treaty. would be larger than
| under the senate amendment.
The proposed temporary duty on tea
would increase the revenue, although
not so much the first year as estimated
because of the large stocks on hands and
the short stocks that would be main
tained with the knowledge that tea
would soon go back on the free list and
the proposed increase of internal reve-
nue. taxes would also increase the reve-
nue. to the extent estimated: but the other
proposed amendment would, as a whole
diminish rather than increase the reve-
| nue..
Some criticism has been made on the
estimates of the ways and means COM
mittee as to the revenue that would be
produced by the tariff bill as it passed
the house. These criticisms overlook
the fact that the ways and means com
mittee estimates of the revenue that
might be expected the first year would be
based on the assumption that the bill
should become law on or before May t.
The committee in the report expressly
said that while there could be no question
that the house bill would in any event
yield sufficient revenue to carry on the
government and leave surplus the sec
ond year of its operation-which no.
body even now contradicts-and prob
ably sufficient for the first year if it
could be promptly put in force. but if
| there be delay in its enactment before
May l anticipatory importations would
inevitably cause a serious inroad in the
prospective revenue for tho first ypor''