The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1897-08-19
THAT DISCRIMINATING DUTY,
Doafd OF Trade Protests Against Its
Application to Canadian Railroads.
Hoftiand Merchants Views Strongly
Stated.

Stated.
matter of great Importance to the bus
iiiess interests of the city of Portland
caine before the board of trade at a meet
ing OF the business men held at II o'clock
ana the following resolution was unan-
| ihously adopted and a copy forwarded
10 uhe attorney general, before whom q
nearing is now pending. The resolution
was as follows:
=, RESOLVED, That the Portland Board of
aiaue earnestly protests against any con-
structlon of section % Of the tariff act.
| approved July "a, 1897, which shall make
vne discriminating duty of 10 per cent
provided therein, applicable to merchants,
| wien imported from or through a coun-
NY contiguous to the United States, by
| sells.
| HHst-Because such construction would
| oe an unjustifable enlargement of the
scope and purpose of said section.
oecond-Because such construction
would be greatly injurious to the trade
ana ana. commerce. of the country, and espec-
1ally TO Che New England states and the
vest, and would be highly detrimental
70 the interests and trade of the city of
Portland.
Ih1rd-Because such construction was
not contemplated by Congress at the time
OF the passage of the act, and could not
nave been understood by the members of
congress from New England and the
West.
Fourth--Because such construction
would tend to cripple and impair the eff
cleney ofrailroad communication between
the West and the Atlantic seaboard, there
py destroying wholesome and needed
| competition, and permitting the establish
!nent OF monopoly of rates, to the great
injury of the producers of the West and
the consumers Of the East.
Hlfth-Because such construction would
De manifestly unjust and contrary to the
spirit and intent o. Congress in prevent
ing monopolies as manifested in prior
enactments and in the tariff act itself.
1t has been the policy of the United
States to protect, as far as possible Amer
lean shipping, and section % Of the Ding
ley bill provides as follows:
Section 22-That discriminating duty
of ten per eentum I'D valorem, in addi-
rion to the duties imposed by law, shall be
levied, collected and paid on all goods,
wares, or merchandise which shall be i'm
ported in vessels not of the United States,
| or which being the production or manu-
facture of any foreign country not con-
tiguous to the United States, shall come in
| to the United States from such contiguous
country; but such discriminating duty
shall not apply to goods, wares or merohan-
disc which shall be imported in vessels not
| of the United States, entitled at the time
of such importation by treaty or conven-
ton to be entered in the ports Of the
| United States on payment of the same
duties as shall then be payable on goods,
wares and merchandise imported in yes.
sells of the United States, nor to such
foreign products or manufactures as
| shall be imported from such contiguous
countries in the usual course OF strictly
retail trade
| Unless carefully examined it would
| seem that this provision is only applica-
BILE to goods imported into the United
States in vessels, and would not apply
to goods coming by railroad from Can
ada, but it is now commended that the
language is broad enough to cover all
merchandise of foreign country directly
imported in vessels other than vessels OF
the United States, or by railroad if COM
ing from a country contiguous to the
United States. 1t would seem that the
is little doubt that Congress intended to
limit the application of the act to m ar
| chandise imported by vessels. That, was
the purpose of the section. 1t was for the
protection Of American shipping, and not
for the purpose of fostering monopoly Of
American railroads, and preventing a
means to railroad transportation from the
East through Canada. 1t is said that the
peculiar language of Section 20 was ON
mitted in the first draft of the BILL and
was only changed when the bill came to
the conference committee, where in the
closing days of congress little attention
| was given to mere phraseology.
| Certainly the peculiar phraseology
could not hive been fairly understood by
the members Of the New England delega-
| ton as applying to railroads as we'll as
vessels. 1t has been known that for many
years contest has been waged between
the railroads connecting the east and
west by way of Canada with the more
favored railroads passing through less
severe climate. Thus far the Canadian
railroads and their connections in the
| United States have afforded competitive
rates of transportation with the trunk
lines which have been very much to the
advantage of the farmers and other pro.
| ducters of the West, and the manufactur.
ers and consumers of the East If the
construction sought for is applied to the
railroads and an additional 10 per cent OF
discriminating duty charged upon ner-
| chandise forwarded over these lines, it
will accomplish just what the southern
trunk lines have been so long attempting,
and make discrimination against the
Northern systems. If this would suffi-
ciently cripple the Canadian roads, 1t
| would establish to the extent at least of
| the 10 per cent discrimination, complete
monopoly for the southern roads, and
confne the Canadian roads largely to
Canada for their traffic. That such re-
suit would be largely disastrous to the