The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1909-06-02
WEDNESDAY EVENING. JUNE ?. 1909.
RETALIATORY VERSUS RECIP-
ROCAL TARIFFS.

The plan of the Finance Committee
is frankly to make retaliatory tariff.
1t provides that the new law, whose
rates viii not be materially different
from the rates now in effect, shall have
% per cent added to them IN order to
make the tariff apply to all countries;
but that as to any given country, this
p per cent may be RENTED when it
shall convince the President that it is
giving to this country terms reciprocal
and equivalent" to the concessions
granted in the minimum tariff of the
United States"
That is to say. the general tariff Of
the United States" is going to be the
list OF rates which the Senate IS now
fixing, plus % per cent ad valorem.
Every country, beginning March 10
next. viii be subject to those rates I'M
less the President by proclamation an
nounces that he has been informed
that particular countries have made
concessions to products of the United
States, while are equivalent in value to
this country, to the advantage which
the minimum American rate gives to
the foreign country.
At the very least, tlis is a dangerous
provision in its language, and it repre-
sents a dangerous policy. The sub
stance of the whole position of the tar
if revisers who have control, Is this:
70
but we haven't promised to revise them
downward. We viii merely revise
them; and so far as we can now see.
we observe no reason for making any
changes of Importance from the Dingley
rates.
Second. We viii then add 25 per
cent to these revised rates, and make
that the general tariff of the country.
Third. We viii lop of this 25 per
cent again for the benefit of countries
which do as much for US.
How many countries can do it,
Other countries are tied up in treaties
and commercial arrangements. The
most favored nation clause is in most
modern commercial treaties. Conces-
sioDs which other countries give to the
United States they are IN the main
bound to give to other countries. The
whole scheme Is a dangerous and doubt
full one, which OF analysis suggests a
purpose to make this revision revis-
ion upward TO the extent of about 25
per cent
Senator Shively raised sharply the
question Of whether the Constitution
permits such a Judgment of legislative
authority in the President as would be
represented by the power to issue proc
lamation taking of this extra 25 per
cent when he was satisfied with the
treatment other countries were giving
as. The constitutional question he and
the rest of the lawyers viii have to de-
bate at their leisure. For our own
part, we are able to find an even more
serious menace IN the terms by which
this authority IS granted to the Presi-
dent.
It seems to be very plainly intended
that this IS per cent looping of shall
not be permitted, except in the case of
other countries doing as much for us. f"
It is mighty uncertain whether they
can, and IN the case of some OF them
It is even more uncertain whether they
would be willing to do so. Germany
has a tariff chip on her shoulder at all
times, and the sentiment in favor of
retaliation against the United States
Is reported stronger now than ever be
fore.
The commercial world has been irhed
for a long time with the unfairness of
tariff relations with the United States
but has been led to hope that when re
vision came in the United States it
would be downward and substantial
It is not TO be either, TO any appreci-
able extent, from present indications
There viii be resentment against this
In fact the plain purpose of the tariff
makers is to readjust the schedules SO
as to hit most effectively the articles
which foreigners are now able TO sell
to us. Take eottons. The discussion
of that schedule has brought out clear
" that what the Finance Committee
wants is to increase the duties against
those classes of goods which can still
be imported. Il Is proposed TO move