The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1909-04-01

performance--an attempt to revise the
tariff that had been enacted by their
votes. They put, sugar on the free list
in one bill they passed, and did the
same with many other items. William
NJ. Springer. as Democratic Chairman
Of Ways and Means, had resorted to
the same sort of tactics the session
following the enactment Of the McKin-
ley law, and with great eject. Now
the Democrats were using this same
method. II they had sought to bring
reproach upon o bill of their own
making, they could not have Dnrsued .
course more conducive to that end. Ex-
Speaker Reed called them the pop
gun" tarin bills. They passed the
House but landed In q Senate pigeon
hole. Of course.
The next Congress was Republican.
and the situation was almost the re-
verse of that when Morrison offered
his "horizontap' bill. Speaker Reed
had selected Nelson Dingley a. Chair
man OF Ways and Means--another very
unusual performance. since 1t has new
er been customary to have the Speaker
and the Ways and Means Chairman
from the same State. Dingley brought
In another 'horizontar bill. only IT
provided for horizontal increases in
stead Of reductions 1t imposed duty
on wool 60 per cent as great as that
OF the Mckinley law. and q duty Of Is
per cent more than the rates of the
Wilson German tariff on most manu-
features. The similarity to the Morri-
son "horizontar bill goes further. Nor
rison provided that no duty imposed
hereunder shall be less than those Of
the Morrill, tariff." Dlngley provided
that no duty hereunder shall be high
err than those Of the Mckinley law"
The bin passed the House by vote
of 22s to SO. When the measure went
to the Senate. which was now nominal
ly Republican, but strongly for free
coinage. 1t had the misfortun to get its
wires crossed with those of the white
metal The Senate Committee on FL
nance amended the tariff bill by sub
shutting q bill for the free coinage Of
silver and instructed the venerable
Morrill, to report 1t. There the mat
ter ended, except for the few times 1t
was taken up by the Senate to allow
q free silver senaor to air his views
on his favoirte topic.
The Republicans wanted to make the
tariH the paramount issue In 1895. On
that issue William Mckinley was the
logical candidate, and with "Bill Nc
Kinley and the Mckinley Bill as the
rallying cry, he easily outdistanced
Speaker Reed In the race for the nom
ination. 1t is said that IL the Republic
cans had thought the free coinage of
silver would be the issue, Reed might
have been the successful candidate,
since Mr.. Mckinley had not been as
orthodox as Reed on the money ques-
ton. The wish Of Mr.. Bryan was that
the tariff question should play second
fiddle In the Tight and he made 1t 20.
After the campaign was won ana Nc
Kinley inaugurated, the question arose
as to which should be considered first,
tariff revision or financial legislation.
The doubt was, finally resolved In favor |
of the tariff, which was to be consid-
cred at q special session of Congress.
It met twelve years to the day before
the present extra session.
When the Dingley bill was intro
dueed II was pointed out by the Demo- I
Gratis that there was no occasion for
any change of the tariff. They offered
figures showing that the Wilson -Gor- |
man law was at that very moment
producing q surplus and indicating
that 1t would continue to do so. But
program and they proceeded to carry 1t |
out. In introducing the bill Mr.. Ding |
ley stated that the duties levied were |
q compromise between those OF the !
pending law and those of the Mckinley |
law. The Democrats controverted this |
point and declared that the rate swould |
averagee higher than thvse OF the Nc |
Kinley law. AS q matter of fact the |
actual operation of the law proved the |
Democrats to be more nearly right In |
that contention than the Republicans. |
The average rate on free and dutiable |
goods during the first four years of the |
Dingley tariff was approximately 2s
per cent. During the forty-seven |
months under the Mckinley tariff the |
average was approximately % per cent |
Taking dutiable goods alone the aver
age under the two laws was substan-
TALLY the same-approximately 40 per
cent.
Mr.. Dingley was also mistaken as |
to the amount the new tariff law |
would add to the customs receipts. He |
stated that based on the importations
of the fiscal year ending June 80, 1897,
It would be s112.00o.o0o more than what |
It, was under the Wilson German law;
but In order to be conservative he
would place the added revenue from
the first years operation of the bill at |
SIS. 100000. What actually did happen
was that the importers. seeing the |
prospect of very high tariff, flooded |
the American ports with their goods
before the Dingley law went into ef-
feet, and it's first years operation |
brought in receipts amounting to s27,- |
000. 900 less than those OF the last year |
under the Wilson German law. There
after the receipts began to increase.
but even then it took four years for |
them to get $75,o00.o0o a head of the |
last year under the Wilson German |
tariff. All this shows how even the |
most competent of the tariff experts |
may go wrong in his calculations.
Not all of the error, however. was |
due to miscalculation, but some of 1t !
was the result of a failure of plans |
Seeing how great an advantage the |
importers were taking of the days of |
low stariff grace, the House proposed to |
make the law retroactive, and thereby |
catch all the imports which came in |
after April l. But the Senate doubt |
ed the constitutionality of such a pro- |
vision and struck 1t from the bin. |
Much has been heard about the consti- |
tutionality of Protection. In 1882 the |
Democrats bantered the Protectionists |
to state in the preamble of the tariff |
of that year that 1t was for the en-
couragement of manufacturers,I de- !
clarfng til 4 they wanted TO determine |
the constitutional question once for all. |
The Protectionists refused. perhaps for |
fear Of the verdict that might be hand |
ed down by a Democratic Supreme |
Court. In 1897 these words were used, |
but las yet no low tariff man has been |
bold enough to trust a decision of the |
matter to a Supreme Court while q |
majority of its members are Republi- |
cans. 1t is perhaps the most iInpor-
tant question IN the history of the |
country upon which there has not
been rendered a judicial opinion.
Mr.. Taft has the distinction OF hav-
ing written the shortest message on a
IL 80 -, Ill =.