Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1909-07-21
WEDNESDAY JULY 81, 1909.
The Tariff Bill.

I'LL be upon the statute books within
flew days, or weeks, and this new
hw, which will probably afterwards
become known as the tariff of 1909,
viii be full redemption of all repub-
ncan pledges not only made in the
platform, but also by candidates dur
ing the campaign Of last year.
Even if the so-called Aldrich bill,
rs amended by the Senate were to be
adopted without any changes, the new
law would show substantial reduc-
tions over the present tariff, but the
bin Is it wilt finally become q law will
undoubtedly be compromise be-
tween the House bill and the Senate
bill, and will show very substantial
reduction over the Dingley law, not
only in the number OF decreases in rate,
but also in the average rate per cent.
Of duties collected.
At the Same time, it must be under
stood that the object Of tariff law is
drst to raise revenue, and that it is
intended to obtain, il possible, an in
crease of revenue through the new
law. This will be gained BY increase
Of duties upon luxuries and perhaps
through increase Of importations be-
-cause OF lower duties upon other
articles.
The claim has been made by certain
leaders in Congress, a. we'll as by many
republican papers, that there has
been no tariff revision downward.
Such statement is untrue, because
even were the Senate amendments
adopted the bill would still show a
material reduction over the present
law. Decreases have been made in
v somewhat over 400 articles, while in
creases have been made in only about
100 articles, and these latter largely
Injuries.
A reduction has been made upon
nearly every article of the iron and
steel schedule, and many Of the SEN
ate amendments were made between
the House reductions and the present
Dingiey rates-for instance, the House
cut the Sc duty on lumber to 81, while
the Senate put it to u so; the House
sat the 90 duty on paper to 80, while
the Senate put it to "a, and 80 on
through large part Of the schedules.
Even upon hosiery and other arti-
cles upon which the duty was in
creased by the House, the Senate re-
stored the present Dingley rates.
But because Of the fact that the Sem
ate increased the rates over the
House duties there has been a cry
that the revision has been upward,
and already higher prices are talked
OF because of this increase. Such
higher prices are not only not justif-
able, but an absolute imposition upon
the public, just as they were in 1890
after the Mckinley law was passed.
For instance, we are told that boots
and shoes are going to be higher in
price, and yet there has been no IL
crease OF duty on hides, even if the
Senate rate is adopted. We are told
that there is to be an immense in
crease in the price of clothing, and
yet there has been no increase in the
duty on woolens and cotton goods,
only change from ad valorem to
speciic rates. We are told that there
is to be an increase in building mate
rial, and yet there is an absolute de-
crease of duty on lumber and struc-
tura1 steel.
The public should fully understand
this point at once and not be imposed
upon by dealers who may raise their
prices, laying it all to an increase of
tariff duties. There has been an in
crease on champagne and diamonds
and other such Injuries, but these
should not affect the general con-
sumer.
The republican party has redeemed
its pledges for revision of the tariff
as its platform SAID it would, and i;
has revised it downward as many OF
the leaders promised during the cam
+ paign. II was not intended by any
one that the tariff should be revised
downward to such an extent as to
lose it's protective features. We are
more than ever nation OF protec-
tionists, and the debate during the
last few months has shown that there
are not only northern republican pro-
tectionists, but southern democratic
pro.ectionists as well.
The tariff question should be closed
in the near future for years to come,
i Gn5 ~ should sntsr upon : reign Of