The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1910-08-12

ID E<N
in excess Of 5000 cases litigated by the
board of general appraisers ana Ine
courts, due to the fact that parasi"p'
40 imposed 80 per cent ad valorein
manufactures OF bone, chip, grass. horn
rubber. straw, etc, while manufactures
of wood under paragraph 4oS; paPe5,
under paragraph 407; hard rubber ana
leather under paragraph 4o0, dol's ui
der paragraph 4lS, and hats, bonnetS
and hoods, untrimmed, for women anu
children composed of chip, straw, grass
| or palm leaf, In paragraph 4oe' were az,
yalorem and these litigated eases IN.
yolved the almost hopeless tasks OF
determining which Of the materials was
the component Of chief value.
Conflict of Provisions.
" Chips, straw aud grass, when
manufactured into articles, unless spc-
cially named in the tariff act are always
a combination with wood paper or leath-
er, hence it invariably followed that
the government contended that the ma
terials which were subject TO duty
! of 80 per cent were the components OF
chief value. while the importers MAN
| tanned that chip, grass or straw wnlch
were subject to duty of 30 per cent
was Of more value than the other ma
terial
/" 1t was especially difficult to de-
| termine whether the wood contained IN
innumerable articles was in the form
OF chip OF wool. Baskets, toilets and
J hundreds OF different descriptions OF
goods were consequently claimed by
| the importers to be lutiable at 30 per
contended that the material was not
chip but wood--for wood splits very
fne-eni was therefore dutiable at 80
| per cent.
| q Fancy articles composed of paper
cardboard ornamented or less elaborate
" with braids composed of grass or
straw, or of so-callcd chip, also resulted
in much friction and litigation, the i'm
portors contending that such articles
weic dutiablc at 80 per cent as manu-
factnres of straw, grass or chip, re-
spectively, while the government con.
tended that they were dutiable at 80
per cent as manufactures of paper.
Hard rubber was provided for in
paragraph 40 at 30 per cent, while
India rubber was named in paragraph
449 at 80 per cent, Then where hard
rubber ended and India rubber began
was another prolific source Of contro-
versy. India rubber dolls were pro-
vided for in paragraph 41S at 80 per
cent. while India rubber figures and
other toys were excluded from that
paragraph and made dutiabe at 80 per
cent under paragraph 449.
| The determination as to whether
certain figures were dolls or not caused
great disturbance in the trade and the
question, IN many eases had to be de.
termlned by the courts-a requirement
that left importers in doubt whether
they would have to pay 30 or 35 per
cent duty on an endless variety of In.
dia rubber toys.
Harmonizing Regulations.
To avoid expensive litigation. de.
lay and uncertainty in classification,
leading importers urged that the duty
on manufacturers of India rubber be
made 80 per cent, the same as TOYS.
lnasmuch as paragraphs 2OS. 407. 400
and 400 all imposed a duty Of 35 per
cent on substances of kindred nature
OF those which had TO be Combined
| with those enumerated in paraqranh
449 to avoid future litigation and to
accord with the wishes of the importers
and the officers Of the government, sole.
y 1or purposes of administration.
judged that the rate of duty should be
made 80 per cent to accord with that
speclhed In other paragraphs of the
act. Had the numerous other nara.
graphs OF the act provided a lower
rate of duty than paragranb a6a
should have recommended that the yate
De changed to conform thereto.
after listening to the reasons
gave for the proposed change tba
hnanee committee unanimously aro an
proved the recommendation. and a.
conference committee, before wbor,
mace the same statement, did the samo
ooth mouse and senate agreeing that i
wouid ne the part. of wisdom to avoid
SHe continuance of the difficulties and
disputes that had arisen between the
government and the importers. dine 't ~
lne sight difference in the rates of W
tIuty petween paragraph 444. 463 and
Ine other paragraphs mentioned T%a
WISDOM OF this change has been frl,,.
demonstrated by the fact that aitbnunft
IneIe were many thousands of casau sn
Iitlgated under the act of 1897 for tSs
reasons set forth, under the nra one
act Ihere has not been a sinole un' ""na
very truly yours "kic case
'0iened) THOMAS SHARRETys
, Committees Conclusion
The committee found that - :.
aesired uniformity was securcd hv Inc
| iang al The rates 80 per cent insiaaa 1ahs
90 per cent, this would have ;rWaI OF
Ioss OF Fevenue-based unon thn i:eu
portations of 1906-of mora +hn lni-
miiion dollars. Therefore fhev Adi a.
eided to recommend the nn;fo" r"ey oe.
30 per cent. ""iiolm rate of
hoI;a IL was not believed, nor do
oeiieve, that this rate was in No ana now