New-York tribune., 1909-04-04
TIE NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. TARIFF.

Tho Trfhune's Washington dispatches report
that certain notifications are to be made III
the maximum minimum provisions OF inc
Pavne tariff bill. These changes VIII denLe
mora clearly the conditions under which the
MAXIMUM schedule is to be applied and VIII
lessen the probability Of its being applied dt
sTI unless American exports are being polntedl9
Disseminated against by some foreign country.
rrbav will nut upon the executive department
of the government the responsibility OF declu-
ing whether or not material discrimination
AGAINST American trade exists and will allow
annie time for negotiations for the purpose or
removing causes of dispute with foreign ma
tions The minimum schedule Of the tariff Dill
is to go into effect at once and TO remain IN
effect for either nine or twelve months, ana
foreign countries will thus be able to arrange
their future trade relations with the United
States and determine whether or not they care
10 continue dealing with this country on the
most favored nation basis.
This is an arrangement which The Tribune
has most heartily favored. We said on March
26 last, in discussing the working of the double
rate:
we are disposed to think that some latitude
should be given TO the executive department III
determining whether not a foreign country
is discriminating against American imports. A
theoretical discrimination may exist YET IL may
he so rettv as TO be negligible. Time might Well
be allowed for removing such d1scT1mlnatlonS DV
negotiation. and the discrimination should be
shown to be material before retaliation was un-
dertaken by the United States. As thus modlfed
the Payne scheme would. we think. work to
remove all Determinations against American
trade and to keep only the minimum rates IN
force against dutiable foreign products.
A defect in the Payne bill as reported from
the Ways and Means Committee, was that it
did not explicitly vest in the President power
TO decide whether or not the United States was
receiving substantially the same treatment as
it was giving another country. Some nation on
the other side of the world might be admitting
at q special rate some product Of a neighboring
nation which the United States did not export,
or exported in very limited quantity. 1t
might not be worth while TO engage in a tariff
war on account Of such an inconseQuental dis
elimination Moreover, the Payne bill did not
give time enough in which to rearrange our
commercial relations with countries having
double rate tariffs and complicated treaty ar
rangements. The amended scheme ought TO
minimize possible disagreements with such
countries
The maximum minimum scheme has been the
target for much unreasoning criticism. 1t has
been persistently misunderstood. Here is THE
New York Times" for instance, saying:
We turn toward other nations a denying coun-
tenance in respect substantially TO all their
products If they through treaties or trade
agreements receive the goods of their colonies,
of other countries. at rates lower than,
in view Of our policy Of exclusion, they At
to accord 10 US. call 1t discrimination" for
sooth and the makers Of the Payne bill contrtve
a complex and diabolical device by which retail
iation for discrimination" becomes the struct-
uraI and governing principle Of the measure.
We do not turn 10 other nations denying
"countenance in respect substantially TO all
their products" On the contrary, we invite
them TO enter their products here at our mini
mum rates, asking from them only a CORE
spending concession. Special agreements be
tween colonies or dependencies and the mother
country or between the colonies and dependen-
cies Of any nation are not TO be held TO
constitute discrimination against the United
States. We shall he able to deal at once on the
minimum basis with Great Britain and all the
parts Of the British Empire, with the countries
Of Central and South America, with China and
Japan and many other nations. About two
thirds of our exports go to countries from
which we can obtain most favored nation treat
ment without any difficulty. It is absurd to
say, therefore, that the maximum-minimum
scheme is "a complex and diabolicaI device by
which retaliation for discrimination becomes
''the structural and governing principle of the
measure" The maximum rates Of the Payne
bill are not likely to be applied at any time to
more than a tenth of our importations; for for
eign countries with double scales of duty will
strain point to enter market freely when
TO obtain that advantage they have only to
treat the United States as literally as the
United States treats them. Retaliation is only
an incident Of our double rate policy It will
be resorted to only in rare emergencies, when
a substantial grievance exists and must be
taken note Of