The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1909-04-03

I . hundfedweight on the tin for their
export trade pay only fifteen cents a
thousand pounds while the small con-
sumer, not having an export business
large enough to warrant direct impor-
tation. cannot take advantage Of such
a privilege.
| Much complaint has been heard about
the quality of American tin-plate. and
also Of the roofing material known as
terne-piate. At the recent hearings be-
fore the Ways and Means Committee
| there were many representatives. Of the
| roofing interests who declared that the
American product was of Inferior
quality. and that the duty served to
keep out the better grades of roofing
tin. thus bringing tin into bad repute
as a roofing material. The makers of
roofing tin Indignantly repudiate this
view. They declare that never before
In the history Of the country has a
dollar bought as much In quantity and
quality as II does today, and that mo-
where in the world can given grade
OF roofing tin be purchased for less
money than 1t can be here In America.
The Gamers have also found some
ground for complaint. They declare
that there has not been enough uni
formity of coating. Tin-plate is made
by first rolling out very thin sheets Of
q picking vat filled with acids SO as
to take all the oxidation and grease
off of them. They are at once dipped
into another vat filled with a mixture
OF pure tin and lead, with little tall
low added. Where the plates come out
of this they are the tin of commerce
or tin-plates, more properly speaking
The Gamers do not complain that there
is not enough coating on the steel
oA, A.s< l,& H.
formity. The tin-plate manufacturers
have set out to remedy that trouble.
and the calming trade expects TO see
the end of unsightly cans.
When the trainers of the Mckinley
law Incorporated the tin-plate duty in
that measure they freely confessed that
1t was an experiment. and in order to
make sure that no harm could come
from 1t in the way of increased bur-
dens. the Senate provided that II the
production did not increase as was ex-
pected the duty should automatically
cease. No one was sure that the ex-
pertinent would succeed. There had
been failures before. The war duty on
"tjn-plates, terne-piates, and tagger's-
tin" had been 20 per cent. There had
been varying rates since then. The
tariff of 1878 had placed the duty on
'iron coated with tin" at Ia cents
pound. but Secretary Fessenden OF the
Treasury Department. decided that this
did not mean iron plates coated with
tin. so by departmental ruling the duty
was placed at Is per cent. under the
head Of unenumerated articles.
1t was at the instance OF Senator
Spooner that the experiment" clause
was inserted In the bill, and ample pre-
cautiohs were taken to prevent the
British manufacturers from rushing
into the American market with big i'm
portations and thus defeat the purpose
of the clause. 1t was also provided
that tinware made of black sheets and
afterward coated with tin should be
accounted as tin-plate in the estimate
of domestic production which was
necessary to make the duty a permap-
ent one. The Democrats demurreI at
this. but the Republicans answered
that this was simply coating the iron
after being made up instead of before.
The tin-plate duty narrowly escaped
defeat in the House when II came up
for q separate vote. and IL won out by
only one majority. The canning In
dustry was firmly set against It. and
the tinware manufacturers were as
much opposed TO II as the shoe manu-
facturer Is to duty on hides. Perhaps
the one thing which aid more than any
other to carry the duty through the
House was the alarm that the British
tin -plate manufacturers manifested.
They saw in that duty the death knell
of their trade with America. and un-
hesftatingly declared so. That pleased
many an American congressman, and
he voted for the duty. II the British.
manufacturer had seemed indifferent
he might yet be sending seventenths
OF his tin to America instead OF
America being his principal competitor
One of William NJ. Springers pop
gun tariff bills" in 1891 provided for
the reduction of the duty on tin-plate
and terne-plate to one cent pound
Tt passed the House 20T to 81. One of
the most remarkable changes of front
ever executed by any class OF people
was that of the Gamers and tinware
manufactures in 1894. Having protest.
ed with great yigor against the Me-
Kinley law duty. they were now send
ing a petition to Congress for its re-
tention. Mr.. Aldrich presented petit
tion said to have been signed by the
consumers of nine-tenths OF all the tim
plate used in this country, asking that
the schedule be left as It was in the
Mckinley law. and declaring that they
were able to buy tin-plate cheaper than
before that law went into effect
Copyright, 1909. by Frederic ]. Has
kim
Tomorrow--American Tariff Laws.
XXL-PrOtection PropaGanda.