The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-07-16
SMooT FIGHTS THE BUREAU.

OF tnP clalm lnat tne tafi1i revision
should he downward. to see the Scna-
tors now so anxious TO prove that the
revision they have made was in fact
downward But If the Senate or the
Republican party was under no obliga-
iionS TO make n downward revision of
the tariff, rs has been so contemptuous
lv stated, why should the Senate be so
anxious TO show that the revision was
downward. or at least that il was not
upward?
Another significant circumstance is
that the Bureau Of Statistics of the De
partmcnt Of Commerce and Labor has
gotten out an expert statement, figured
by expert statisticians, which shows
that the revision was, in fact ma
torially upward. The significance Of
this is quite as much in the fact that
the executive department named has
cxcrted itself on this side OF the case,
as that its finding was the reverse of
what some Of the Senators arc now
claiming The fact that this executive
department Of the Government brings
out n statement Of this kind is held
Indicative Of the President s state of
mind on this question, and points clear
~ 10 the conclusion that his mind has
not changed from the campaign ex-
pressions he made last year-that the
Republican party was pledged to a re-
vision of the tariff. downward. Other
wise il would not be expected that IN
executive department would come into
this contention at this time
Senator La Toilette presented the
analysis made by the Bureau Of
Statistics Of the increases and de-
creascs Of the tariff bill in its present
shape as based upon the importations
of 1907. The duties on imports valued
at $3.50, JOG ,035, are increased 6.465 per
cent. Duties on imports valued at
| IS149,716.619, are increased 2152 per
cent. Decreases made affect imports
TO the value Of 500. 800, ,6l9, and amount
| 10 3S4 per cent. The average increase
Of the entire bill is 5.65 per cent, ac-
cording to the expert analysis of the
Bureau of Statistics, as presented by
Senator La Toilette
The perpetual butterin' Of the
Senate, our own unlovely Smoot. under
takes to refute this expert statement
method of computation, it seems. that
is different But as Smoot is not an
expert stauistician, his figures are Of 2
negligible quality. In place of taking
the figures Of 1907, or Of any one year
complete. he iumbles the figures Of
lS9S and 1900 to 1908 on average ad
valorems; sort Of computation which
it is evident any sort of result may be
arrived at that is desired, by an un-
scrupulous and poorly-informed com
puter.
Smoot claims that articles transferred
from the dutiable list to the free list
by the Senate are not taken into con-
sideration by "the Senate critics in
figuring ad valorem averages of the
pending bill. Whether Smoot wishes TO
imply that the Bureau of Statistics is
among the "Senate critics or not Is
not worth consideration. 1t is an un-
worthy fling. no matter how intended;
and when Smoot thinks that the expert
statlsticians OF the Bureau of Stats
tics have left out anything IN their
computations, il is simply the railing of
an ignoramous against expert work pre-
pared by persons who know their busl-
ness and who do not leave out anything.
1t is evident in a glance at the figures
above quoted that the Bureau Of sta
tistics certainly did include all trans
fers from the dutiable TO the free list,
for in spite of the very great difference
noted on the values as stated, the gen
eral result is a per centage far lower
than one would expect from the figures
as presented. Clearly, this low per
centage could not have been arrived at
in any other way than by including the
free list as well AS the dutiable list.
The Bureau of Statistics proceeded
thoroughly in the computations made
| by its experts, taking the different
classes of imports and including every
thing for the year, classifying every
thing under IFS proper head as none but
experts could do. Smoot jumps around,
| a
III some other year, and so arrives at
results that are altogether unworthy of
consideration.
When Smoot undertakes 10 assail the
work of such experts as are in the
Bureau Of Statistics, il is good deal
rs if noisy hoodlum in the street
should undertake 10 question the state
ment Of a professor of Greek on the
question of the infection Of Greek
verb. In such case the hoodlum would
not be in it al all. and no more is Smoot
in il on the question of expert sta
istics, compared with the wcll-equipped
statisticians in the Bureau Of Statistics.
Smoot has made a ridiculous spectacle
of himself all through in his undertak-
ing 10 present facts and figures to the
Senate in the discussion of this tariff
bill; and now nc caps the climax by
undertaking TO assail the expert sta.
. 80. Al