New-York tribune., 1909-05-14
rgy WAIT Foe COyFERENCEr

The interesting news comes from Washington
that in remodelIing the Payne tariff bill so as
10 make il, so far as rates are concerned, Il
practical reprint of the Dingey law, the Senate
Finance Committee was merely marching up hill
with the full intention of later marching down
again. Our dispatches from the capital say that
the Senate managers are only executing felnt
in differing from the House on the most impor-
tart reductions made in the Payne bill. In con-
ference they intend to concur in those reduc-
tions There are mysteries in the craft of states
manship as in every other craft, and perhaps
this uphill-downhill programme should be re
garded as an exhibition of political strategy be
yond the comprehension of the uninstructed lay
mind. To that mind. however. it would appear
to be a saving of time labor and trouble TO agree
to the House provisions while the bill is still in
the Senate thus Obviating the necessity of ma
npuvring forward and backward and helpfully
minimizing the duties and responsibilities Of the
conference committee.
1t is said that the Senate managers are obliged
10 GO through the form of raising the duties
lowered by the House bill in order 10 obtain
votes enough TO pass any bill at all But this
Is an assumption unsupported by evidence. On
the few significant votes taken in the Senate on
the question of restoring the Houses lower rates
the Finance Committee and It's friends have
won 10y small margins. The weight of party
discipline and authority was all on their side.
But If they had followed what are reported to
be their real intentions and advocated the adop-
ton of the lower House duties they would have
carried the day by more than a three-fOurths
majority There can be no question about the
Finance Committees ability TO make in the
Senate every concession to the House which it
plans to make in conference. CircumlOcution
will only delay result which could be better
obtained by direct action.
We do not agree with The New York Times"
in holding that q conference committee is limit
ed absolutely in its jurisdiction to the specific
items on which the two houses may disagree.
1t is a generally accepted parliamentary con-
vention that only items in dispute are subject
TO action in conference But that convention
cannot bind Congress if the two houses choose
to set it aside. The Times went much too far
when it said yesterday:
Mr. Taft has not been in Congress and he Is
TO be pardoned for unfamarity with some Of
the processes of legislation; but he must know
that in lew conference committee can legally
reduce the rates In a tariff bill in dispute be
tween the House and the Senate below the
lowest rates fixed by one or the other Of these
two bodies
There is no law Of any kind which could he
invoked TO restrain the two houses from ap-
proving conference report containing rates
which represented neither the lower rate voted
by one house nor the higher rate voted by the
other house, nor yet a compromise between the
two rates. Congress has enacted into law tariff
conference reports which levied higher rates
than were originally approved by either house.
1t may easily happen that the settlement of a
rate in dispute involves changes in rates on re-
lated articles in the same schedule or in other
schedules certain latitude must be permitted
I'm dealing in conference with a complicated sub
ieCt like the tariff.
Yet it would be better policy. in our opinion
if a substantial agreement between the TWO
houses exists. TO have that agreement made eff
fective before the bill goes into conference. Such
r action would clear the way of many obstacles
and make the task of the conference far lighter.
The fewer the points Of disagreement left the
fewer the temptations to trading in behalf of
special interests. The public will welcome a
substantial return to the provisions of the House
bill Why not demonstrate the admitted purpose
to return at the earliest practicable moment: