The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1909-04-03
AMERICAN TARIFF LAWS
KX--1hs Tin Plate Industry


cailIalll 81 =
The theory Of Protection finds IT.,
BEST argument in the American tin
plate industry. From an industry
whose output was q negligible quantity
In 1891 TO an annual output valued at
eeS.000. 900 In 1904. and wage roll OF
$io.oeo.o00 year: such II the story of
American tin-plate AZ the same time,
the price Of tin-piate 10 cheaper than
II was prior to 1891. when the bulk of
our supply came from England.
Prior to the passage Of the McKin-
ley bill II was the theory OF Protection
that the infant industry should be fos-
tered. when the tin-plate schedule
was framed 1t was not to foster an In
dustry. but virtually to bring one into
being. Before that time there had
been a duty OF one cent per pound on
tin-plate. It was not enough to en-
courage the investment OF capital In
the manufacture OF this commodity. 1t
simply served as q revenue raising
schedule. Then came the Mckinley
law with rs duty of 90 cents a pound
on tin-plate. American capital at once
saw that with such wall erected
against the English tin plate maker
there was every chance OF success, and
tinsplate establishments sprang up
like mushrooms In the night. Prices
were not increased beyond what the
foreign rates had been. but still the
manufacturers grew wealthy at those
rates.
Many thought that the growth was
TOO rapid TO be lasting and solid, but
test was soon to come which dis
proved that conclusion. The wilson
Gorman law provided a reduction to
liz ner hntInd---fiaf rnfl1u
higher than provided before 1890. II
me INDUSTRY had not taken firm root
THIS reduction might have sufficed to
cause 1t to wfther. But in spite of the
great reduction the tfn-plate business
continued TO thrive, and actually In
creased about three fold during the
three years the WILSON, German law
was In force.
When the Dingley law was passed II
was agreed that the tin-plate manufac-
turer no ionser needed the 30 cent rate
which had obtained under the McKin-
ley law. They advanced the rate only
three mills per pound above those of
the Wiison-Gorman law. making 1t lis
cents, or seven mills less a pound than
under the Mckinley law. The Demo-
Gratis opposed even this increase. Ie-
claring that the industry got all the
help 1t then needed out OF the rate pro-
vided In the Wilson German law.
1t was afterward developed in
striking way that the Democrats were
even more right in this contention.
When the Industrial Commission held
Its hearings several years after the
Dingley law became operative, Presi-
dent Read OF the tin-plate trust. de-
clared that the tariff could be lowered
half a cent per pound, that Is, to one
cent, without exposing the American
product to destructive foreign compe-
tition. From this IL will be seen that
the start given the industry by the Nc
Kinley law was sufficient to carry II
through the hard times that shortly
followed, and to enable 1t to thrive on
the same duty of one cent per pound
that had obtained before the Mckinley
law brought 1t into being. And at the
same time the cost of tin-pIate had
FALLEN from one to three cents a pound
All Of this was accomplished, II is to
be remembered, in less than ten years.
When the Industrial Commission was
investigating the tin-plate trust It call
ed washington. Pennsylvania manu-
facturer to testify. He stated that
after the passage OF the Mckinley law
the manufacturers were able to make
as much as 100 per cent year on their
investment. and that even with the
lower rates of the Wilson German and
Dingiey laws they were able to clear
a heavy percentage. He had sold his
plant to the trust az what he regarded
as a 30 per cent increase over its cost.