Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1909-09-18

one way Of stating what WIS done is
TO say what the facts show-that under
the Dinrley law there were 2O2i items
This Included dutahle Items only. The
Payne law lesvcs l.l5o Of these items
unchanged There are decreases IN 6'i
of the items and increases in 22o OF
the items Now. Of course that does
not give p full picture, but il does show
the proportion of decreases "a have been
three times those of the increases.
REASONS FOR CHANGES
Attempts have hson made Ia show
what the real effect of these changes
has been by comparing the imports
under the various schedules and as
Stunning that the changes and their im-
portnnce were DO proportion 20 the inn
portaiionF Nothing could be- more UNI
Just in "a protective tariff which also
contains revenue provisions. Some ot
the tarin is made for the purpose OF
Increasing the revenue by increasing
mporiations which shall pay duty.
other items IN the tariff are made TO
reduce competitions that D. by reduc-
ing importations and therefore the
question Of the Importance Of a change
IN rate cannot in the slightest degree
be- determined by the amount Of Inn
ports that take place.
ln order 60 determine the Importance
OF the changes u is much fairer 60
take the articles on which the ratets OF
duty have been reduced and those on
which the rates have been increased
and then determine from statistics
how large a part the articles upon
which duties have been reduced play
In the consumption 81 the country, and
how large part those upon which the
duties have been increased play Such
table has been prepared by Mr.
Payne than whom there IS no one who
understands better what the tariff Is.
and who has given more attention 20
the details Of the schedules
TARIFF ON HIDES
The tariff on hides was taken on be
cause il was thought that IL was not
necessary 10 the man who raised cattle
ana that the profits Of the cattle bust
ness were sufficient without imposing
q duty and that the duty imposed was
likely TO throw the control Of the sale
of hides into the hands Of the meat
packers in Chicago.
In order 10 balance the reduction on
hides. however there was "a great re-
ductiOn in shOes-from % to 10 per
cent on sole leather, from 20 to per
cent on harness, from 40 70 Is per
cent There also was a reduction in
the duty on coal OF 30 l-3 per cent All
countervailing duties were removed
from oil. uaphtha, gasoline and its re-
fined products.
Lumber was reduced from 81 to si25.
II is said that there might have been
more, but there were many business
interests in the south. in Maine along
the border and especially in the far
northwest which insisted that II would
give great advantage 10 Canadian lum-
Der " the reduction was made more
than Is cents Mr. Pinchot. the chief
forester. thought that il would tend to
make better lumber IN this country il
duty were retained on II. The lum-
Der Interests thought 81 was none too
much. but the reduction was made and
the compromise effected.
Personally. | was In favor OF free
lumber because I did not think that II
the tariff was taken Off there would be
much suffering among the lumber in
terests In the controversy the house
and the senate took a middle course
and who can say they were not justi-
fed?
WOOL RATES TOO HIGH
With respect TO the wool schedule I
agree that u Is too high and that il
ought TO have been reduced and that II
probably represents considerable more
than the difference between the cost
| of production abroad and the cost Of
production here. The difficulty about
the wool schedule Is that there were
two contending factions early in the
history OF Republican tariffs-wool
growers and the wooden manufacturers.
and that finally many wears ago they
settled on a basis by which wool in the
grease should have III cents pound
and by which allowance should be
made IN the shrinkage in the differen-
| tial upon wool manufacturers The
percentage Of duty was very heavy
quite beyond the difference Of Fhe
cost of production. which was not then
regarded as a necessary or proper llmi-
tation on productive duties
When II came TO the question Of re
ducing the duty on WOOL Mr.. Payne
and Mr. Aldrich found that in the Re
publican party, the interests Of the
woOlgrowers Of the far west and the
interests of the wooden manufacturers
In the east and IN other states We're
sufficiently strong 70 defeat any at
tempt to change the wooden tariff and
| that had IL been attempted u would
have beaten The bin reported from
either committee. ] am sorry this is
SO. aud | could wish that il had been
otherwise II IL the one Important de-
feet IN the present Payne tariff bill
and the performance OF the promise
of the platform 10 reduce rates 10 a
| difference In the cost ~ production
with reasonable profit to the manu-
price OF wooden cloth or clothes / very
much doubt.
CRITICS or THE BILL
The sever critics Of the bin pass this
reduction la the metal schedule win q
sneer and say that the cut did not hurt
the iron Interests. Well, OF course, Il
did not hurt them IL WIS not expect
ga 10 hurt them. Il was expected only
20 reduce excessive rates so that bust
ness should be conducted at a profit
and the very character OF the criti-
cisms Is an indication Of the general
injustice of the attitude OF those who
make H. assuming that IL was the
promise Of the Republican party a.
hurt the Industries by tarin reductions,
whereas IL expressly indicated as Jar
as POSSIBLE in the platform that an
Industries were 10 bee protected against
Injury by foreign competition
The high cost of living, OF which 80
per cent Is consumed Ia food. % pee
cent in clothing aud % per cent IN rent
and fuel has not been produced by
the tariff because the tarin has re-