The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1897-09-20

whatever about section ~ OF tAe ne"
tarlff act The genesis OF that part OF
that section which has created such n
stir is easy to ind. Let as proceed to
relate it. In March of 1885 Senator Ste
phen b. Elkins, OF West virginia intro
dueed bill in Congress TO amend Sec
ton 25O2 of the revised statutes Of the
United States. That sectIon,In previous
tariff bills, has been known as the as
eliminating duty section 1t has been
handed down from the frs; tarir' IN
1850, to the Dlngley tariff, 1t has under
gone many changes. At first It protected
American ships by rebatlas the duly on
imports In American ships 10 per cent
At that time everything was duuapIe
Late. II added 10 per cent to the duty
when goods came In foreign shiEs Then
from time to time exceptions were
made under which imports tn certain
foreian ships were exempted from the
discriminating duty The exceptions had
become so numerous as TO almost COM
plesely nulllfy the original discrimlha-
ton. ,,
Senator Elklns periodically believed
that to Withdraw the exemptions, ana
thereby give an advantage to American
ships In the carrying OF our Imports,
would revive the American merchant
marine, !,
Senator Elkins found he had touched
the pulse OF the people In advocating
discriminating duties for the protection
OF our shipping. How? Why by the In
dorsements the principle received, In
fourteen Republican state conventions,
the Republican national convention, ana
by President Mckinley.
Shortly after Senator Elkins introduce
ed hls bill. an opportunity vas offer
ed him to show his willingness to help
an American transpacilc steamship
line, In competition with Canadian
British transpaciac steamship lines, He
worked and spoke and voted for an In
crease of $4,000 in the subsidy Of the
American trauspacifc fine,and then and
there declared that he intended to do his
utmost at a later date to withdraw the
privileges and advantages by which Ca
madam steamship and railway lines Sc
cured the cream OF the trade for which
they competed with American steam
ships and railroads,
That, too, the senator found, was a
popular issue. And he stuck to It,
Then came the election of the Repub-
leans to the control Of the government,
and the Endorsement by the people Of
their platform utterahces Then came
the extra session, and the work TO put
through a new tariff bill, In the new
tariff, of course. the discriminating duty
appeared, as 1t has always appeared,
plus the multiplying exemptions. There
were few high In the party's councils
who said that TO interject discussion
of the discriminating duty policy into
the tariff debate. would 50 prolons the
consideration OF that bill. which the
people desired to have speedily adopted,
as to perhaps hazard Its passage.
So, 1t was promised that the dlscrlmi-
mating duty policy would come up for
consideration as early as possible In the
regular session. The leading members
of Congress, however, anxious 10 show
their adhesion to Republican principles
and pledges desired to put the dlscrim-
mating duty section In such shape as
would facilitate the work Of giving fun
effect to that policy at the regular SEES.
sion Of Congress
It was found that acts of Congress
and treaties stood in the way The abb
rogation of the treaties. II was deemed
wise by those in control, to defer, until
the regular session The acts Of Con-
aress however, they decided, after full
understanding OF the case, to repeal, so
that nothing but treaties should then
stand in the way Of the re-adoption OF
the discriminating duty policy. III open
o.. n YT,ntlDtN Of ZAnntnT
Allison, and by the unanimous consent
OF his colleagues the words ANY act of
Congress" which had stood so long In
the section, and which had served to eX-
empt imports in foreign ships in large
part from the collection Of Our diserm-
mating duty. were formally dropped,
Senator Elkins' bill then, intended to
repeal acts OF Congress and 90 abro-
gate treaties that were in the way OF
the full restoration OF the discrImlnat-
ing duty policy, and this the Republl-
can party and President Mckinley had
promised to do II has been done by
Congress to the extent of repeating acts
of Congress In the way.
Is there anything strange about that?
Would II have been strange If the trea-
ties had been abrogated, also? Not a
bit II would have been all right. The
people had ordered that both acts OF
Congress and treaties that stood In the
way of the restoration % the dlscrm-
mating duty policy SHOULD be repealed,
and the intent NJ their representatives
In Congress- unquestionably, was to re-
peal acts of Congress nj the extra sesS-
ion. Hence, no other Interpretation Of
the meaning OF the section In that re-
spect IL possible.
II Congress had Intended to continue
to exempt by law imports from the
collection of the discriminating duty,
why did Congress formally drop the
words from the old law that had pre-
Viously given that exemption? There
was no purpose surely In view, In
dropping tho words amy act Of Con
gress" Tho purpose Is revealed by the
omission Of the words. because, there
after, so Congress directed only a
treaty OF convention" should cntltle
imports In foreign ships TO exemption
from our discriminating duty. II Con-
gress had intended 20 Perpetpate the ex-
omptlon. by acts Of Congress, would It
not have left the exemption, by acts Of
Congress, In the section, while IT was
there? or course Hut dropping the
words clearly and Enthusiastically disclog-
CB the purpose, which was TO limit fu-
tuFo exemptions 10 Imports entitled
thereto by troaty or convention, and
that only
II had been pointed out publicly az
Tong ago az December (, 1896, that a.
then framed no provision existed IN
Senator Elhn3' bill to subject imports
coming through the ports Of contiguous
foreign territory by rail to tho extra ton
I'D al. .NlH ..Vlt d. lad
duty Benntor i9lknR' bill NJ thnt time
merely imposed The extra duty on ina
ports In ''voHsoE not Of the United
NLnlnn y aud I'M. N annn nnlInmnn tnnnII