The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-06-21
TARIFF ON HIDES
THE PABAGRAPH SEES LIGHT IN
 SENATE.
The Finance Commlttee's Amendment Levfes q Tari6 of 1B Per Cent
 Ad vaIorem on Hides of
 Cattle, Raw or Cured.

Cattle, Raw or Cured. Washington, June 2e--The Finance Committees amendment to the hide paragraph of the tariff bill, saw the | light in the Senate Saturday for the first time, being presented by Chair man Aldrfch.
 It levies a tariff of Is per cent ad | valorem on hides of cattle, raw or | cured, whether dried, salted or pickled. with provision drawback equal to the duty when exported in the form or leather. The amendment was in the language, of the ningley law and the effect Is to take hides from the Tree list. where the House left them. Easing his objection to a duty on hides upon the claim that it would tend to per petuate the beef trust, Senator Clapp declared that his constituents were pa triotic enough to give up any advaht- age they might reap in the possible higher price of hides in order to help destroy a trust.
 How about the leather trust7" in- quired Senator Warren. Continuing, he said before the beef trust came into being hides were so cheap that farmers could market them. Now, he added, hides bring a higher price and | shoes are not higher in price.
 If we can get two trusts by the ears and knock their heads together, l think that is the better way suggest ed Mir. Warren, who could see no ad- vantage in placing hides on the free list to injure one trust while the other would thrive by the action. MT. Lodge reviewed the history Of the duty on hides and advanced argu- ment in favor of admitting hides free of duty. He said he would vote Tor free boots and shoes if the Senate would agree to place paper on the free list with the pulp logs from which 1t Is made, and to put lumber on the free list with sawed logs. Otherwise, ne said, he would not vote to put the products of leather on the free list with hides.
 MT. TiIlman did not understand why MT. Lodge favored a protective duty on the wool off the sheep, but did not favor protection for the hide off the steer He said the latter needed the protection most, because 1t could only be protected once, while the wool on the sheep could be protected each year. Mir. Lodge was freQuentlly inter- rupted.
 If you will give us the duty you have placed on leather goods, in ten wears we will raise all the hides used in the United States said Senator Mo Cumber referring to the large import tation of hides. MT. Warren said the duty on hides were from to cent&> from the cost of making pair Of shoes and would not be paid by the consumer.
 MT. Lodge was chided as an advocate of free trade.
 T feel sorry for the Senator from Massachusetts,'' remarked Senator Scott, in pitying tones, because he is making a free trade speech when we all know he is such a good protectionist."
 Again when in colloquy with MT. Dixon, the Montana Senator suggested that his Massachusetts colleague was .joining the insurgents" which only called forth applause from the subject of the thrust.
 Replying to an insinuation from Sem ator Warrent that the Central Leather Company instigated the "outcry against the beef trust" the Massachusetts Sen- ator said sharply that his course was not instigated by the Central Leather. Company.
 "That Is a commission, he said. that has been dealing in the food products of the people. I need no instigation from anybody to oppose them, and when I see a great industry pass help lesslv into their hands, I should like to do anything in my power to stop it."
 His concern in this subject he said, was to subserve the interests of the independent tanners, and he firmly believed that the farmer would receive no benefit to duty.
 Referring to a charge that the duty on hides had been placed in the Ding ley law while the bill was in conference, Senator Warren, in fervent language, denounced that statement as wholly false. He was sustained by Senator Aldrich, who recalled that it had been voted into the bill by the sub commit tee that had framed the paragraph and agreed to by both Senate and House.
 Defending the hide duty; MT. Warren said:
 q don't have to go to Massachusetts or to Pennsylvania or to the Leether Trust to learn whether the farmers want the duty. The farmers are not here asking for free hides."
 MT. Warren yielded the floor with the statement that ne would renew his discussion Monday.
 Senator Aldrich then suggested an amendment placing duty or 10 cents a pound and 40 cents ad valoren on nippers and pliers. except blacksmith tonEs, surgical and dental instruments, which, he stated, was less than the present law. It was agreed to.
 Another amendment placing a duty of 35 per cent ad valorem on bands and strips of steel, which, he explained, was less than the current law, also was adopted.