The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1909-05-25

Declares Minimum Duties
Named Are Not Prevail
ing Rates.

Senator Shively OF Indiana, in his
maiden speech in the Senate. made a
remarkable attack on the maximum
and minimum provisions of the tariff
bill today. Senator Shively's remarks
attracted much attention. de charged
in substance that while the minimum
rates fixed in the bill are presumably
the general and prevailing rates this
in fact is not the case and that in real
ity the general and prevailing rates
tina. will obtain If this bin is enacie ed
viii &c the maximum rates.
Answering the question what Is TO be
the 1ea! tariff of the United States,
SeratGr Shively said:
1T ls too plain for controversy that
the duties prescribed in section ! plus
% per cent ad valorem and ) cents
per pound on coffee and 10 cents per
pound On tea are, from and after the
31st day OF March. 1905, to constitute the
general tariff of the United States
Presumption Favors Rates.
Every presumption would be in favor
O; these rates as the duties to be levied
and collected and none other, according
TO Senator Shively.
Senator Shively contendeG that 1t
WOulQ De plNSlcakIN Impossible IOF the
President of the United States, in the
limits OF a single term. to ascertain
accurately what constituted undue dis
elimination. 1t requires, said he,
such mastery OF facts IN wide and
complicated detail as TO render the
task, even with all available assist
ance. impossible of Ineligible perform
ance within the time of Presidential
term"
The Indiana Senator dwelt at length
on the magnitude of the task set before
the President and the impossibility of
him performing it. He said:
Exceeds Present Rates.
sThe tariff of the United States az
defined in section would raise the duty
prescribed IN section ! on lumber to
over S per thousand. 1t would make
the duty on steel rails and all other
dutiable products of iron or steel much
higher than IN the present law
In brief, the proposed act would
make the general tariff Of the United
States higher in every schedule and on
every dutiable article than In any tar
in law in the Country's history IT
would postpone and transfer the contest
for the retention OF prizes in the lottery
OF taxation from the halls OF Congress
10 the executive department. The bene-
fciaries OF the proposed act would fight
10 the death the remission of the add
tiOnal p per cent ad valorem duty in
franchises in the taxing power of the
Government There the issue would lie
between the concessions granted by the
minimum tariff of the United States
and the reciprocal equivalents granted
by foreign governments. The interested
and organized avarice of the country
would be enlisted on the side of the
maximum rates The scattered millions
Of American consumers would be voice
less in a tribunal committed 10 the
doctrine OF wealth by statute and pros
perity by taxation.
This conclusion is REINFORCED moi
/ only by the well-nish numberless OBJ
/ structions raised by the language Of tho
provise in section 10 putting in force
| the minimum rates. but as well by the
uniform experience or the country under
I laws professedly designed TO the same
/ end. The additional 20 per cent ad
| valorem on certain articles in the Ding
I ley act was proclaimed as trading stocr
I on which 10 secure concessions and
annex trade. For some reason the trade
I treaties negotiated in pursuance Of these
/ clauses in the Dingley act were con-
signed by the Senate TO the limbo OF
/ forgotten dreams, and the domestic
| benefcisries Of the exceptional rates
are to this hour left in full enjoyment
or whatever usufruct flows from them.