New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-02-09
KANSAS AND THE TARIFF.

The Topeka Capital Il Republican
newspaper, joins The Philadelphia Rec
ord" and THE Baltimore Sun in be-
Hitting the Importance of the marked
increase in the percentage of non-dutl-
able importations under the Payne tariff
law. Being displeased with certain
features Of the law, it hesitates to give
the law credit for any praiseworthy
accomplishment whatever. Instead OF
being gratified that the proportion of
duty free commodities imported has
been enlarged. lifting unnecessary bur
dens on foreign trade, our Kansas
brother complains that the nondutlable
total only seems larger because the dutl-
able total has been artihcially decreased
by hosting rates TO the prohlbltory
notch. We showed on Monday, answer
ing similar argument made by The
Baltimore SUM-" that importationS Of
both classes were steadily increasing,
the gain i'll non-dutiable importations
being little greater than the gain in
the dutiable class. In the seven months
from July l, 1909, TO January 81, 1910
-one month and five days under the
DingIey law and five months and twenty
six days under the Payne law-there
was a gain in customs collections On
dutiable articles of So. 100000 over the
total for the same seven months in 1905
90 This gain proves that the Payne
law did not check dutiable importations.
Our imports from EurOpe-nearly all III
the dutiable class-were larger in value
by S21S.000.G00 in the calendar year
1909 than they were in the calendar year
1908. 1t is utterly fallacious. therefore,
to attribute the relative increase in duty
free imports to a sudden closing Of the
American market to dutiable articles by
means of a prohibitive tariff.
The Capital" attributes a part Of the
gain in the percentage of free imports
10 the addition of hides TO the free
list, and says that taking the duty of
hides does not particularly recommend
the tariff out this way" Yet the re
moval Of the duty on hides was one If
the most decided steps taken last sum
mer toward a rationalized tariff system.
Like the free admission of Philippine
sugar, it was d readjustment wholly
creditable to the trainers Of the new
law. We believe that Kansas was in
terested in getting iron ore, coal and
lumber also on the free list. If they
had gone there would our Topeka con
temporary now argue that the increase
in duty free imp0rtations thus caused
was of no consequence and had no bear
ing ION the question whether the tariff
was revised up or revised DOWN?
We cannot agree that because we
criticised some details of the Payne bill
as it went through the two houses, and
particularly some of the increases made
IT, the Senate. that we ought not to do
full justice to the commendable features
OF the law as finally enacted. We think
that the Payne law is Il decided i'm
prOyement upon the Dingley law. We
should have been glad to see more down
ward revision accomplished than was
accomplished, owing TO the obstructive
attitude of The Senate. But in creating
a board of tariff experts. providing
maximum and minimum schedules. ell
larging the free list, doing justice TO the
Philippines and in many other sub
stantial respects the new law undOubt-
eddy represents progress. IN so far as
If represents progress and holds out
promise for the future, why not give it
its due: