Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-04-16
AMERICAN TARIFF LAWS
WING TAR IFF OF 1912
By FREDERIC ]. HAsKIN.

There was a more bitter fight over
the tariff in 1912 than in any other year
in American history 1t was not so much
fight between the parties in congress
as it was between the president and
congress That body passed one bill,
which was promptly vetoed. Then 1t
passed another, and the presidential foot
was set on it as firmly as on the first.
1t was only on the third attempt that
congress was able to produce bin that
would pass muster at the white house.
That bill became the Wing tariff law of
1912.
In the presidential campaign of 1870
the Wing leaders concluded that IL
would be wise to use the soft pedal on
the tariff question, and therefore turned
down Henry Clay and nominated Tip
pecanoe and Tyler, too" Harrison and
Tyler were milder protectionists than
was Clay. Harrison fell a victim to
the horrible weather of Inauguration
day, and Tyler soon became president.
Tyler was a Whig, stood for protection,
and for the general policies of the Wings.
But he was not as much of Wing as
his party associates wanted him to be,
was that Tyler became less Whig ana
more of a Democrat than ever.
The hard times that followed the crash
of 1887 caused the receipts of the gov
ernment to fall off, and finally to sink
below the expenditures just as the panic
of 1907 brought about a similar conditlo1-
Before the worst years of the financial
stress of the late thirties the revenues
had become redundant The sales OF
public lands, added to the other re-
ceipts of the government, had piled up
a surplus that had to be got rid or.
To accomplish this it was decided to de-
post with the states, forty million dol
lars of the surplus, and 1t was not ex-
pected that they should return it-an ex-
pectation that was fully realized. 1t is
needless to follow all these matters fur
Their than to state that the historians
whose works are regarded as impartial
agree that the Clay compromise was not
responsible for the hard times which
lasted until 1912, though they assert that
that act of 1912 did serve to produce the
good times that followed it's enactment.
The important reductions of the tarift
under the Clay compromise were not to
take place until that year. The treasury
was sailing too close to the wind for the
nations financial safety and 1t became
necessary to enact a law that would pre-
vent those reductions going into effecI.
With a deficit showing before reduc-
tions were made, ii was obvious that
their taking effect would serve only to
swell that deficit. To meet the exigen-
cies of the occasion an act was passed
putting most of the articles that had
been on the free list into the class which
required a 20 per cent duty, and bringing
other duties up to that standard. II
was not expected that even this upward
revision of the tariff would suffice to
cover the deficit, but it was designed to
be a makeshift until regular measure
could be adopted. 1t came to be known
as the little tariff bill"
The president promptly vetoed this
measure. To understand why he did So,
reference must be made to the so-called
distribution act" alluded to above. At
this time the government was selling its
public lands, and when the treasury was
full to overlooking, this act was passed,
providing for the distribution to the
states of all the money received from the
sale of these lands. The measure had in
1t q proviso, however, to the effect that
whenever it became necessary to revise
the tariff upward in order to secure more
revenue. this distribution should be sus-
pended so long as that higher tariff re-
NAMED in force. 1t was intended to pro-
tect the treasury and obviate higher tar
iff taxes The 'little tariff bilr' repealed
this proviso, making the distribution to
continue whether the tariff was raised or
not, and whether the treasury could spare
the funds or not. This led President Tyler
to veto the measure, his position being
that so long as the treasury needed the
money for current expenses 1t was not
expedient to turn it over TO the states.
With this bill vetoed, congress set to
work to frame another. A majority, pos
sibly, was in a mood to pass the bill over
Tyler's veto, but found that the nee
essary two-thirds in both branches could
not be obtained. In the preparation OF
the second act the repeal Of the distribu-
ton proviso was again tied to 1t, congress
evidently thinking that the president
would not dare assume the onus of veto
ing a second bill, even II in approving T.
he would have to provide for the repeal
of the inhibition against distributing the
proceeds of land sales to the states. But
in that, congress reckoned without its
host for Tyler promptly vetoed the
measure. He took the ground that II
was not proper to distribute the proceeds
of land sales to the states so long as they
were needed to meet the current expen-
ditures of the government and that the
distribution act itself had provided for
Just that contingency. Therefore, he held.
congress could not intimidate him into
signing a repeal of that provision by at