Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1911-09-23

have specific duties. It affects many
millions of imports. Nevertheless, the
bill went through, and 1t went back to
the house and was submitted to two
days examination by the ways and
means committee OF that body.
4. Held Bill impossible.
Then 1t passed the house under
rule that permitted no amendments
whatever, l had the bill examined BY
experts, especially with respect to the
chemical schedule, and even in the
very short time had, found the
creates confusion produced by the
amendment. Upon number of the
articles the reduction was greatly
more than the proposed Is per cent,
reaching in some cases Is and 100 per
cent, and on other articles, instead OF
being decrease, there was an In
crease all the way from to 100 per
cent. The bill was supposed to be 9
concession to the North Carolina cot
ton interests, and to be intended to
cheaper the bleaching, dyeing, ana
colCring materials needed In that
business. The very comical effect OF
the bill as amended was that instead
of reducing the duty on bleaching
powder, 25 per cent, 1t increased IT 40
per cent But even more serious DE-
feet in the bill was in those changes
affecting the alcoholic compounds con-
tanned in four or five items, in respect
to which in the Payne bill and in all
previous tariff bills, in order to pre-
vent the use of these items TO import
alcohol at small duty, compensatory
duties had been imposed of about ~
cents pound or $500 a gallon. I'm
der the provisions of the new bill,
these alcoholic compounds and arti-
cles containing alcohol would come IN
at duty, making the tax on the
alcohol from eight to ten cents a gal
lon, while the internal revenue tax on
alcohol in this country is $1.10 per
proof gallon, and the duty imposed on
it az an import is $3.50 a gallon. The
opportunities for the introduction OF
cheap alcohol and the danger Of eva
sion, or the breaking down of the inter
nal revenue law by such a change In
the chemical schedule, need hardly
elaborate. The bill was impossible and
of course vetoed 1t. There was IN
the passage of the bill, in the amend
ments, and in the general treatment
an Indication that the support Of the
bill was based rather on desire to
make political record in favor OF
lower duties than upon serious pro-
posal to change the law. At least this
is the only explanation that can be
offered of the careless, inartificial,
and altogether unsatisfactory charac-
ter of the three bills.
Opposes Blacksmith Tool Tariff.
/ have gone into this matter at con-
siderable detail in order that my posi-
ton with, respect to these bills and the
general treatment Of the tariff may be
understood | am in favor of the re-
duction Of the tariff wherever it can
be done and still giving living meas
ure of protection to these industries
of the country that need it. But in
sist that we have reached now a point
in the. history of tariff making when
everyone ought to realize that the
tariff should not be changed and bust
ness disturbed, except upon informa-
ton which shall enable us to pass bills
that will disturb it least. Our whole
business system rests upon the pro-
tective tariff basis. The real hope Of
men who are in favor Of lowering
duties is to pursue the policy of secur-
ing accurate information to keep the
tariff rates down as low as possible
consistent with the life of the bust
ness protected. The natural operation
of the tariff under those conditions and
and American ingenuity is to continue
to reduce the cost of production, and