The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-04-19
TARIFF AND PROTECTION.
Modern Systems of Duties-How Our
 Laws are Regarded.

Modern Systems of Duties-How Our Laws are Regarded
 Speaking generally, the rates in the conventional tariff are lower than those in the general one It happens some- times, however that where reduction of a rate is refused it may be regarded as important that it should not be in creased during the life of the treaty.
 An agreement to this effect is termed
 binding" and so it comes about that
 the conventional tariff is said to be composed of reduced and of "bound" or
 liked rates. As a rule, among the Flu
 ropean countries the conventional tariff
 becomes so extended in it's applicat ion
 that the application of the general tariff
 becomes the exception, and the tenden-
 cy is to regard the general schedule as
 a preliminary sketch of the real tariff
 High rates are often inserted to form
 ready basis for reductions and the de-
 mand of corresponding concessions.
 A marked illustration of the employ
 ment of the general and conventional
 tarif system is supplied by Germany.
 It's general tariff is practically that of
 1879, with amendments. The conven-
 tional tariff is made up of the schedules
 contained in the commercial treaties
 with Austria, Italy, Belgium, Switzer-
 land, Russia, Roumania, Greece and
 Servia Partly through treaties of this
 character and partly through adminis-
 trative action, the application of this conventional schedule has been eXtend-
 ed by Germany until it includes within it's concessions all the European nations
 except Portugal. As will be seen. the general tariff has had a very limited application, and the disposition is to look upon it as sort of penalty tariff A similar course has been followed by Austria, which has built up a widely extended conventional tariff on the ba- sis of the general tariffs of 1882 and 1887.
 Examples of the use of multiple or maximum and minimum tariff are fur nished by Russia, France, Spain, Bra gil, Greece and Norway. From one point of view this system might be re- garded as corresponding to that last described, the maximum answering to the general and the minimum to the schedule. Instead of hay ing two rates on a few articles, howev- CT, this tariff has two rates on most ar ticles on which duties are imposed there is a characteristic vari- ation between the two systems in the of their origin. The conven- 1 tional schedule, as we have seen, Is u-us ally the result of negotiations between the executives of the countries con cerned. In the system now under con- however, the minimum | is framed by the legislature at | the same time that the maximum | is made, so that each rate in | both schedules is fixed by legislative act. l The two rates, therefore, determine the 1 limits between which treaty rates must | be fixed. The review of these systems 1 Is of interest as Illustrating one note 1 worthy fact in modern fiscal regulation, ! the gradual displacement of | 1ard-and- fast tariff systems, based { ipon internal considerations alone and | he substitution of more flexible sys- ems that take account of external con- litions, which in reality have a bearing internally, of systems, in a word, that night be classed as reciprocal in their Ia ature.-Bradstreet