New-York tribune., 1909-07-30
president AND HOUSE.

Repuhlicans anxious 70 see the promises or
their last national platform redeemed have been
gratifed by the frmpesS with which the great
majority of the Republican membership III the
House of Representatives has stood by President
Taft in his apparently successful effort 10
secure for the country a substantial downward
revision of the Dingley schedules. The House
ma jority, as a whole has responded TO popular
sentiment. There have been members who voted
for the Payne bill unwillingly. and who, after
going on record in favor of free coal. free OIL
free iron ore and free hides. hastened over 10
the Senate and implored the Senate Finance
Committee 10 put back duties those raw ma
teriaIs A delegation of House statesmen re
Gently called on Mr.. Taft and asked him TO lend
a hand in nullifying programme for which they
had all voted Getting no encouragement from
him. they went off with iutimationS that if the
Senate didn't succeed in reversing them in confer
ence on the raw materials issue they would vote
when the conference report should he presented
To reverse themselves. however inconsistent and
painful the process Happily these Pickwickians
are in small minority in the House. They
needed only 10 state their case to make its un-
reaSOna benesS apparent.
The House. as whole has followed out
consistent and rational policy. 1t has aimed at
Il moderate reduction OF duties all along the
line. but il undoubtedly made a tactical mis-
take when ii advanced the rates on hosiery and
gloves. 1t was evident that the Senate would
try minimize reductions and to hold rates
nearly possible TO the figures in the Dingley
law. The Senate is less progressive body than
the House and far less influenced by popular
opinion. 1t was certain 10 play an obstruction
list role In making two exceptions therefore.
to the general policy OF moderate downward
revision the House put it in the power of the
Senate TO use those two advances in duties for
trading purposes The upper chamber seized
that obvious opportunity and after voting re-
ductions gladly yielded to the House advances
OF hosiery and gloves in the hope of forcing an
acceptance of its own higher rates on other arti-
cles
1t is somewhat astonishing 70 find that GER
tain influences in the House have been more in
tent on maintaining the experimental higher
duties on gloves and hosiery than vindicating
the accepted tariff policy of the House. They
preferred justifying the exceptions to enforcing
the rule. Our Washington dispatches and the
Washington dispatches of many other news
papers give a surprising explanation of the
tenacity of the House conferrees in contending
for higher duties gloves. It is said that
Representative Littauer received a promise
from Speaker Cannon that an experiment with
the higher glove rates should be made. Even
supposing that a good case might be made for
an increase of duties IL the glove schedule. II
is clear that this not the most opportune
time for such venture
We cannot understand, moreover. why prom
ise said 10 have been made 10 Mr.. Littauer
by Speaker Cannon should have been cited as as
bar 10 a settlement their merits of the
questions before the conference It is surely
curious idea that II is one Of the Speakers
functions TO promise certain tariff legislation To
an individual. 1t is more peculiar to hold
that promise of that sort must be treated as
. public obligation. Tariff making to please in
dividuals has gone entirely out Of favor.