River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1911-12-28
PRESIDENT SAYS
RATES TOO HIGH
Chief Executive Urges Downward
Revision of Schedule K.
MESSAGE SENT TO CONGRESS
Document Upholds Protective PrincI-
pie But at the Same Time Most
Ardently Supports Recommen-
dations of Tariff Board.

hington.-President Taft trans
mitted to congress the report of the
tariff board on schedule K. Accom-
panying the report, the chief execu-
tive sent to the national legislature
the following message:
To the Senate and House of Representa-
tives:
In my annual message to congress, De-
cember, 1909 / stated that under section
of the act of August 8, 1909, / had APP
pointed a tariff board of three members
to cooperate with the state department
in the administration of the maximum
and minimum clause of that act, to make
a glossary or encyclopedia of the exist
ing tariff so as to render its terms intel
hgible 10 the ordinary reader, and then
to investigate industrial conditions and
costs of production at home and abroad.
with view to determining to what ex-
tent existing tariff rates actually eXem-
plify the protective principle, viz: That
duties should be made adequate, and only
adequate, to equalize the difference in cost
of production at home and abroad.
I further stated that believed these in
vestigations would be of great value as
basis for accurate legislation, and that
should from time to time recommend to
ules in accordance with the findings of
the board
In the last session of the Sixty-f1rst con-
gress bill creating a permanent tariff
board Of five members, of whom not
more than three should be of the same
political party, passed each house, but
failed of enactment because of slight diff
ferences on which agreement was not
reached before adjournment An appro-
priation act provided that the permanent
tariff board, If created by statute. should
report to congress on schedule K in De-
cember. 1911
Presidential Appointments.
Therefore, to carry out so far as lay
within my power the purposes of this
bill for a permanent tariff board, 1 APP
pointed in March. 1911. a board of five.
adding two members of such party affili-
alton as would have fulfilled the statu-
tory requirements. and directed them to
make q report to me on schedule K OF
the tariff act in December of this year.
In my message of August IT, 1911, ac-
companying the veto Of the wool bill. l
said that, in my judgment, schedule
should be revised and the rates reduced.
My veto was based on the ground that,
since the tariff board would make, In
December, q detailed report on wool and
wool manufactures, with special refer
ence to the relation of the existing rates
of duties to relative costs here and
abroad, public policy and a fair regard
to the interests Of the producers and the
manufacturers on the one hand and OF
the consumers on the other demanded
that legislation should not be hastily en-
acted in the absence of such information;
that I was not myself possessed at that
time of adequate knowledge of the facts
to determine whether or not the proposed
IT, xryffh Y1ln
support a fair and reasonable protective
policy; that such legislation might prove
only temporary and infiict upon great
industry the evils of continued uncer-
tainty.
Advocates Reduction of Rates.
now herewith submit a report of the
tariff board on schedule K. The board is
unanimous in it's findings. On the basis
Of these findings 1 now recommend that
the congress proceed to consideration
of this schedule with view to it's revi-
sion and a general reduction of Its rates.
The report shows that the present
method of assessing the duty on raw
wool-this is. by the specific rate on the
grease pound, i. e., acknowledgements to
exclude woods of high shrinkage in
securing, but fine quality. from the
American market and thereby lessons the
range of woods available to the domestic
manufacturer; that the duty on unsecured
wool of 80 cents per pound Is prohibitory
and operates to exclude the Importation
of clean, low-priced foreign woods of in
ferior grades, which are nevertheless val
liable material for manufacturing. and
which cannot be imported in the grease
because Of their heavy shrinkage. Such
woods If imported, might be used to dis
place the cheap substitutes now in use.
To make the preceding paragraph a lit
tie palmer, take the instance of a hun
dred pounds of first-class wool imported
under the present duty, which is IL cents
a pound That would make the duty on
the hundred pounds $11. The merchan-
disc part of the wool thus imported is
the weight of the wool of this hundred
pounds after securing. If the wool
shrinl<s 80 per cent, as some wool does
then the duty in such a case would
amount to $11 on 20 pounds of secured
WOOL This. of course, would be prohibit
tory. II the wool shrinks only so per
cent, it would be 81 on so pounds of
WOOL and this is near to the average of
the great bulk of woods that are imported
from Australia, which is the principal
source of our imported wool.
These determinations could be over
come by assessing a duty in ad valorem
terms. but this method is open to the OBJ
lection. first. that it increases admnistra-
tive difficulties and tends to decrease
revenue through differentiation: and,
second that as prices advance, the ad
valorem rate increases the duty per pound
at the time when the consumer most
needs relief and the producer can best
stand competitions: while II prices de-
cline the duty is decreased at the time
when the consumer is least burdened by
the price and the producer most needs
protection.
Method That Meets Difficulty.
Another method of meeting the diff
Guilty of taxing the grease pound is to as
cess a specific duty on grease wool in
terms Of its secured content. This obvi-
ates the chief evil of the present system.
namely, the discrimination due to differ
ent shrinkages, and thereby tends great
ly to equalize the duty. The board re-
ports that this method is feasible in prac-
tice and could be administered without
great expense.
The report shows in detail the difficult
ties involved In attempting to state in
categorical terms TIE cost of wool pro-
duction and the 81 eat differences in cost
as between different regions and different
types of WOOL 1t is found however. that.
taking all varieties in account, the aver
age cost of production for the whole
American clip is higher than the cost in
The CHIEF competing country by an
amount somewhat less than the present
duty.
The report shows that the duties on
noiIs, wool wastes. and shoddy. which are
s~~~~~~~-~~~-~-~~~~~~~~~ ~-~~~-~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~-