The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-08-15
A MATTER OF CONSISTENCY

The American statesmen who have put
their feet down upon, the suggestion OF.
any reduction whatever in tariff duties,
gested, and for which they voted in 1883.
1892, 1896 and 1900, must admit that their
attitude is a little unreasonable.
They certainly took the: application of
the act of April IL, s19oo.x with great equaa-
nimity, although the provision that, after
March 1, 1902, all goods coming into this
country from Porto Rico should be free of
duty, is now in full effect. They did not
do much kicking, either, when the Sec
ond section of. the act of March 8, 1902,
went into effect admitting all articles OF
growth and product: Of the Philippine
archipelago into this country upon the
payment of Is per cent of the scheduled
rates Of duty, so reducing the tariff duties
Is per cent on such products. This COM
paratively passive attitude on the sub
ject Of tariff reduction in these two in
stances is in strange contrast with the
uproar engendered last winter and kept
up for months in congress, simply be-
cause it was proposed to reduce the duty
on raw sugar from Cuba 20 per cent, such
reduction being a rather small fulflment
of an implied pledge Of our government
to aid the Cubans, upon their assumption
of independence, by giving to them com
mercial advantages which would insure a
good start in a prosperous career.
The professed fear lest the proposed 20
per cent reduction on raw sugar from
Cuba would ruin the entire sugar inter-
ests of this country, cane and beet, looks
very curious when it is considered that
the treasury, last year, paid drawbacks
on raw and refined J sugar iaggregating
| LIT 99e, raw sugar getting 81, Ia, 201 OF
| this amount. Under the drawback sys-
! tenn, which benefited the tin plate indus
try nearly 100000 last. year, where
goods are exportedsin which imported ma
terial has been used, the government re-
funds 80 per cent of the duty which was
originally paid. The drawback is collect
able when the necessary proofs are given
| that the duties were paid and that the
material, whatever it may be, was useo
in the manufacture Z Of the goods exported
There is no further requirement Of iden-
LITIGATION. Thus every manufacturer using
imported material in his manufactured
and exported product, can proceed as II
there was no tariff whatever, so far as
his imported material IS concerned. I'm
der the drawback system more than q
hundred different classes Of goodr receive
! the benefit of practical free trade In the
material used. Last year the drawbacks
paid to the manufacturers by the govern
ment aggregated SIS, 215,502. @
Thus under the drawback system Amer
lean manufacturers are put on an equal
ity with their foreign rivals who get thet1
raw material free of duty. This gives
them very large advantage. but, while
the cost of producing their specialties Is
thus greatly reduced, the price to the
1 American consumer Is not proportion:
ately9reduced. In many cases the foreign
buyer is accorded the benefit.
The gentlemen who are bitterly opposed
to any tariff reduction whatever, contem
i plate the knocking OF Of $5,000,000 ii
duties by drawback last year without {
single murmur and the question may vel