New-York tribune., 1907-07-19
TARIEE REELsLON ~ 1909.

Senator Hopkins, Of Illinois, after visiting
the President at Oyster Bay, announces his be-
lief that Il revision of the tariff will be under
taken in 1909, but not before The same Sen
ator declared last May that Speaker Cannon,
If nominated and elected President, would favor
tariff revision and would call the 61st Congress
together In extra session to alter the schedules
Secretary Taft has frequently said on the stump
that he considers the Dingley tariff obsolete In
many respects. 1t is apparent, therefore, that
Republican sentiment in favor Of amendatOry
tariff legislation is spreading and solidifying
and that the next administration. if Republican,
will pretty certainly attempt to renovate the
Dingley schedules and bring them up TO date.
The Tribune has for some time past advo-
Gated an Overhaulng Of the present tariff law
Tariffs are necessarily short lived, for they are
based on conditions which are always more or
less III tlux. The Dingley law was passed ten
years ago BY June, 1909 it will have been In
operation twelve years and that Is the rul
average life Of an American tariff. Yet in the
last ten years industrial and commercial cOndl-
lions have changed more rapidly and more rad
icalIy than in any two decades in our earlier
history. Our imports and exports have both
doubled since 1897, and the United States is
now pushing to the front as the greatest dealer
in the worlds markets. From the point or view
of the most Obdurate ''stand patter' a protec-
tive tariff under which imports have doubled
ought to be nearly ripe for revision while from
the point of view of the enlightened protection
ist interested as much IN prOhtably extending
foreign trade in maintaining just dlneren-
tial In favor of domestic labor, Industrial con-
ditiOns under which exports have doubled and
an increasing surplus of domestic manufactures
has to be cared for, clearly demonstrate the need
of striking a new balance in our international
trade relations Some of the Dingley rates are
too high because they afford protection which
is now excessive Some have no economical
justification at all, because they affect prod
ucts whose price is determined here without
any reference TO foreign production or competl-
ton. Possibly some are too low, owing to I'M
foreseen changes in our own or in the foreign
market. Thus they are to a large extent neces-
sarily out Of touch with the industrial and com
mercial activities Of to-day and could be read
justed with benefit both 10 the American pro-
ducer and the American consumer.
Politically It would be unwise to attempt
revision either at the next session Of Congress
or Mt the short session following. Tariff max
ing should be dissociated as completely as pos
sible from partisanship and partisan strategy.
To undertake to frame a new law on the eve OF
a Presidential election would foment political
intrigue Misrepresentation and chickering's. 1t
would force a drawing Of lines which should
national welfare tariff law, too, ought to
have n fair trial before the country passes
judgment on lts efficacy. The fate which over
took the Mckinley law and the Wllson-Gorman
law Is a sufficient warning against entangling
economic legislation with sectional and factiona
passions. The Dlngley law lived and has been
accepted by the country as the most satisfactory
tariff of our time, not only because It had a
fair chance to take hold and show It's worth
but because It was passed at time when old
political alliances were weakened and political
interest centred not 50 much In the tariff as
in the coinage question. An administration md
a Congress coming into ofice in the spring OF
1909 could readily cooperate In rearrangng the
tariff schedules without any serious awakening
OF political passions any material disturb
/ ance Of business or industry. The next Repub-
lican national platform ought 70 contain an as
surance that the work of revision will be ex-
pedltiOusly and prudently done