The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1903-01-26
THE DOUBLE TARIFF
SYSTEM FULLY
EXPLAINED
Interest Attaches to the Sub
ject by Reason of Its Re-
cent Introduction Into the
United States Senate-HoW
It Operates Elsewhere.



ate and it's discussion lends interest
to a statement recently, published by
the treasury bureau of statistics re-
garding the maximum and minimum
tariffs of the world and their applica-
ton.
The maximum and minimum tariff
system, it says, is distinguished from
others, first of all, in its form. In
stead of having two rates for a few
articles, it has two rates on most ar
ticles on which duties are imposed,
and for this reason is frequently called
the double tariff system. In the ap
plication of these rates the maximum
schedule corresponds to the general
schedule and the minimum schedule
to the conventional schedule of con-
ventional tariffs, since the minimum
rates are given only to those countries
which receive the most favored-natio
treatment. The characteristic differ
ence between the two systems, how
ever, arises from the difference in their
origin. The minimum schedule is not
drawn up by negotiations between the
executives of the two countries, but is
framed by the legislative body at the
same time that the maximum schedule
is made. That is, the legislative pow
er fixes two rates of duty on each ar
ticle in the tariff. The higher rate
is the one which fixes the maximum
extent to which those articles may be
taxed on entering the country; the
lower, or minimum rate, is the one that
fixes the minimum extent to which the
duty may be lowered. If it is desired
to make commercial treaties at any
time. these two rates show the exact
limits between which the treaty rates
are to be fixed.
These Use the System.
The countries at present using
multiple or maximum and minimum
tariff system are Spain, France, Rus
STA, Brazil, Greece and Norway.
The present tariff of Spain dates
from 1892, when the commercial treat
les were denounced and a consistent
schedule of double rates was drawn
up. AT the same time the Spanish ad-
ministration announced it's intention Of
no longer making unconditional most
favored nation treaties. Commercial
relatios with other countries at once
became strained. A tariff war broke
out with Germany, and the penalty
tariffs of several countries were ap-
at present are mainly on the basis of a
provisional most favored-n nation treat
ment
In 1893 Russia adopted system
somewhat similar to that of France
Instead Of having a special rate on
each article, however, as was the case
in the French law, the Russian tariff
made the general schedule (Which was
in use prior to 1922 the minimum
schedule of the new tariff, and placed
increases ranging as high as 80 per
cent over the minimum. Russia was
not able to uphold the plan in it's en-
ttrety, and was compelled to make COM
mercial treaties with France and Ger
many, in which reductions on the mini
mum rates were given. AT present,
therefore, Russia's tariff system is
composed of a maximum, minimum
and q conventional schedule. The con-
Tentional rates are given to countries
having most favored nation agree
ments, the minimum rates to other
countries, while the maximum rates
are intended to be used in case of a
tariff war.
The Brazilian tariff of 1900 Is ar
ranged in a manner similar to the Rus
sian. The tariff contains maximum
and minimum rates, the latter to be
applied to imports from those coun-
tries which treat Brazilian exports, es-
pecfally coffee, on a favorable basis.
The experience of Greece with the
maximum and minimum system has
been similar to that of Russia The
law Of 1893 provided maximum and
minimum rates, but the later CONNER
cial treaties reduced the latter, so that
at present the rates applied to most
favored-nation countries are partially
the conventional rates and partially
the minimum rates.
In Norway the maximum rates are
intended to be used only in case Nor
wegian goods are treated less favor
ably than those of any other country.
that is, these rates are to be used in
case OF a tariff war
France Keeps II Up.
Although Spain was the first country
TO attempt to use the system of maxi
mum and minimum tariffs, France may
be regarded as the country which has
given the system it's present promi-
nence. The first efforts to have it
adopted as the tariff system of France
were made by NJ. Meline early in the
'7Os, and again in 1881, but the at
tempts were unsuccessful; ten years
later however, the demand for higher
rates of duty became stronger and
Meline's party viewed the plan with
more favor. The method of having
conventional tariffs with the various
countries with which France had COM
merctal intercourse was the cause of
much dissatisfaction at the time, as
the investigation Of the superior coun-
Gil of commerce showed. The existing
treaties were denounced and Meline's
bill, after some notifications, was
adopted in January, 1892. The under
lying idea Of the plan was that the
legislative body should fix the limits
of the tariff rates below which the ex-
ecut1ve could not 60 in the effort to
establish commercial connections with
other countries. That is, the home in
duSTies were to be assured that thew
would not be disturbed by any at
tempts to alter the tariff rates in the
minimum schedule, and perfect Stabil-
ity of conditions was thus hoped for.
On the other hand, in order to make
IT 10 the advantage of foreign coun-
tries 10 grant concessions to France in
return for which they would receive
the rates Of the minimum tariff 1t was
proposed to make the difference he
aWeen the maximum and minimum
rates as large as possible, so that there
would be gain If the minimum rate
were secured and a loss if it We're not
The author of this bill also desired
that the largest possible number OF
items should be included in the two
schedules, as that would increase the
power of compelling other countries
to grant low duties in return for the
rates of the minimum tariff If any
country refused to grant either the
most favored nation treatment t.
French goods, or to apply tariff rate.
which the French officials considered
A'H ~iASA6 III bIC 1IleIAlIItOiII
were TO be imposed on all goods com,
ing from or through that country.
The rates in the two tariffs differ b.
about rs per cent-that is, the maxi
mum rates average about rs per cen
higher than those of the minimum tar.
If Agricultural products were, how.
ever, given the same rates in both thu
maximum and minimum schedules. By
special decree the administration wa.
authorized to grant tho rniOiTa,1,,, "a -
if to al countries which before 189,
had enjoyed the conventional tariff
and which after that date had givel
French commodities The N ost ia ,,nrnd