Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-10-30
STONE s. FAIRFAX,
Exclusive Agents,
SO6=SOS F St. N. w.
Telephone Main go & PISS
cc29-3t-112

ing the tariff on hides and leather. The
purpose of that memorial was to procure
an increase of duty on India tanned skins,
which was then 10 per cent. Those skins
were important raw material for our
manufacturers in the county of Essex, and
[ had fought the increase in the House as
l did indirectly in the Senate. Such an in
crease. in the judgment of those engaged in
the industry, would have ruined our manu-
facturers engaged in finishing these skins
In this memorial it was said:
d" 1T would be very detrimental to the IN
dustry to have excessive. unequal duties
imposed raw materials; but without
doubt the industry, could very readily adapt
itself to a reasonable duty.
Again, it was said:
"In spite of the inroad upon this narrow
margin of profit which would be made by
the proposed duty on hides, less harm
would result If the duty on cattle hides
was properly classified, and if the. hides
and skins of other animals were also put
on the dutiable list at an equitable rate.
Il commend this whole document to the
attention of those who are studying the
subject 1t shows a readiness to submit to
the duty on hides if only the duty on skins
were increased. 1 know that 1T played some
part in the final result in the Senate. The
duty on skins was not raised, but the duty
on hides was continued in the bill.
There will be very strong objection
within both parties to the repeal of the duty
on hides. That objection will come, not
from the representatives of the packers
interests but from the representatives OF
those who raise the animals for market
They think, enormously. believe, that
this duty has had some effect in raising the
price of their product. [ happened to be
talking not long ago. with Gov. Cummins
of Iowa and a number of other represent
alive men of that state. Iowa, as you
know is supposed to stand more clearly
than any other republican state for re-
vision of the tariff, but learned then that
that state would fight removal of the
duty on hides to the death. It is the one
duty which they desire to continue.
You will find that to be true OF the rep
resentatives of all of the agricultural states,
of democratic Texas as well as of repub-
lican Iowa, and it is id'e to conceal it
Nothing but the most persistent effort, d.
! rected by tact and discretion, will accom-
plish the result.
Shoe Trade of Massachusetts,.
LET us turn for a moment to the record
of our shoe industry-one of the most i'm
portant if not the most important, in our
state-one in which the value of our prod
uct exceeds that of any other state OF the
Union. Let us see how 1t mas Jared under
the operation of the Dingley law. The year
of the census was not favorable year IN
the shoe Industry, yet the value of the prod
uct of the country was S261 10000, or
which we in Massachusetts produced Slff,-
900, goo.
I'VE have the absolute control of our
home market, the best market in the world.
The imports of shoes have become OF SO
slight Importance that they are not now
separately scheduled Last year there
| were about $4,000 worth of shoes import
ed We not only have the control OF our
home market, we are reaching out into the
marke s of the world In the five years
preceding the enactment of the Dilgley
law we exported average of less than
81 900 900 per year of manufactured boots
and shoes. Under the Dingley law We ex-
ported an average of over 900 year,
and there has been each year rapid IN
crease of our exports, and they exceeded
Sc 600 600 in the last year. They not only
have increased in the total, but they have
increased in substantially all the countries
to which we have begun to export.
at is true that the exports bear small
proportion to our total output; but it is an
Increasing proportion. and the increase is
healthIul one. We have secured 1t without
sacrificing profit or cutting prices below
our home rates.
This industry is protected by a % per
cent ad valorem duty. What shall we say
to those who point out to us these facts,
that we Lave the absolute control of our
own market and are rapidly invading the
markets of the world upon equal terms?
"In my judgment there is but one answer
to make. We should reply, We do not ask
you to take off the duty upon your NOES
and offer nothing ourselves. We are Will
ing to reduce the duty on shoes substantial
W. At the most we will only ask such
DUTY as will protect from the surplus
products of other nations in times Of de-
preston
"With such proposition as that believe
that our representatives when the time for
revision comes can enter upon the task Of
removing the duty on hides with reasona-
Bile prospect Of success. Without 1t, be-
lieye that they would fail. 1t behooves,
therefore, the representatives OF our great
duty on shoes as well as on hides. BY
abandoning a duty they no longer need
they will aid In removing one which is bur-
densome.