The Clarksburg telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1874-1926, 1909-03-18
Review Given 81
Tariff le0r rings

lsprint paper last year for the infor-
nation upon which to base It's con-
tensions regarding the paper and
Iipulp schedule. !
The proposition to have the values
OF articles upon which an ad yalor-
!! lem duty is imposed determined by
1.-The Wholesale prices In. this country
as well as the cost at the place Of
production was first discussed at the
hearing given the pottery interests.
This method or collecting the duties
would permit the appraisers to- cali
upon witnesses In this country for
information, which, under the pres
,ent method Of collecting I'D valorem
duties is not possible. The plan was
advanced as means for preventing
under valuation, of which there, has
been omDlaint wherever ad yalorem
duties have been imposed. Several
cases of undervalriation were pre-
scented to the committee by the pot
fiery manufacturers, who favored an
increase in the duties on the better
grades of china The importers adj
vanced arguments for Il reduction ~
25 per cent. in the duties on POT
terry. III
Want Free Hides.
As at all Former tariff hearings
there was a fight between the shoe
and leather manufacturers Of New
England and the cattle raisers of the
West. The leather manufacturers
were loath to admit that their indus
try could stand a reduction in duties
on shoes and other leather articles,
hut urged that the raw material
should be placed on the free list. An
amusing incidnt occurred when one
of the shoe man admitted that with
free hides the shoe manufacturers
Would be able to compete with for
eign manufacturers without tariff
protection. This caused the leather
manufacturers to assemble their
forces and present arguments, to
show that the duty on the manufac-
Itured article should not be reduced.
Elisha w. Cobb. manufactures
of heavy leather, of Boston, Mass,
told the committee that the. tariff on
hides, accrued only to the benefit Of
the packers and not to the farmer
and cattle raiser. He. declared that
the large packerssof Chicago ara en-
gagged in the tanning business and
look forward to the time when they
will have complete monopoly in the
hide Business and in the sole and
Irpper-leather business.
The Wool Schedule.
The wool schedule was the occa-
sion for mora contention than any
other and during Its consideration
there was much criticism of the
methods by which tariff bills are
framed. While William Whitman.
OF Boston, representing the Natianal
Wolf Manufacturers was on the
stand. Representative Clark, of Mis-
souri,, placed in the record a pamph,
let which purported to inform the
Ways and Means committee how
tariff laws are framed" The name
of the author was given as Frank p.
Bennett, OF Boston.
The place you get IN your work
is not in the House Of Representa-
tives or in the Ways and Means
ommittee, but is in the Senate, Isn't
Iit?" was one o fthe characteristic
questions asked ny Champ Clark, Of
Mr.. Whitman.
The wool growers of Ohio and OF
the western states declared empha t.
ically to the committee that further
protection must9ibe given the indus
try. or the wool growing business
would be entirely wiped out. the
WOODEN manufacturers also asked
that the present duties at least ne
retained on their product. There
were several supplementary hearings
I.on the wool schedule. ali of which
Indicated that the various branches
of the industry differ as to the prop
er classification and differentials TO
be established in the ta-ff. The
carpet manufacturers declared that
the classification in the present tariff
Is unjust to their industry and simi-
lar claims We're made by other man
ufacturers. There was much, testi-
mony which shed considerable light