Ripley County democrat. (Doniphan, Mo.) 1905-1920, 1912-09-20
'jOKERS" HID
REVISION Up
Actual Raising Of Duties Effected
q Payne Bill
COTTON and WOOL SCHEDULES
Both lndefensible. and President Taft
Knew lt-Suppression Of Facts by
the Tariff Board--statistics Employ
cd to Mislsad the Public.
BY ROBERT KENNETH MAC LEA.

cd to MIslead the Public.
BY ROBERT KENNETH MAC LEA.
Formerly consulting expert OF the tariff
board.I
New York, On not a single
one Of the nlnety-five all cotton sam
Piles Of fabric taken as the basis of the
tariff boards investigations Of the cot
ton schedule was there an actual re-
duction Of the tariff by the Payne
Aldrich law,
The samples were selected with great
care by the combined judgment of the
boards experts. indorsed by the lead
ing jobbers of the United States as
being representative Of all classes Of
fabric in use In this country, each
sample being chosen because 1t was
typical of the most used material of
its particular weave or class Ninety
Eve all cotton and FIVE silk and cotton
samples comprise the 100 that appear
IN the tariff boards cotton report
Forty-seyen Of the nlnety-fve In the
all cotton class pay $500 per cent high
er duties uuder the Payne-Aldrich
than they did under the Dingley tariff.
Payne -Aldrioh "Joksrs."
OF these forty-seven classes Of ma
teriai on which the tariff was In
creased nine are the fancy weaves
made In three or four New England
mills commonly grouped as the Lip
pitt.McCo1 interests" This Is the
clique Of New England manufacturer.
politicians who were permitted by Sen
ator Nelson W. Aldrich to write the
cotton schedule to suit themselves
OF the nine Lippitt-McColI fabrics
the Payne-Aldrich law lacked up the
average duty from 1851 to 60.33 per
cent. In other words, the promised
revision downward" on these goods
was really revision upwardamounting
to 64.07 per cent Of the Dngley rates.
The remaining thirty eight classes OF
all cotton fabrics on which the duty
was increased were not generally the
product of the favored New England
ring. Under the Dingley law these
thirty eight fabrics were assessed au
average duty of 1886 per cent Under
the Payne-Aldrich law they pay 44.5S
per cent-a revision upward equal t.
28.07 per cent Of the former rate as
compared with 64o7 per cent increase
on manufactures OF the favored few.
On just three among the 100 samples
was there decrease In duty. Thes'
were the silk and cotton fabrics tsill
mills) that pay more than 100 per cen
duty. On these three samples the re
duction averaged 6.66 per cent on th'
former duty-a reduction from 118,E
per cent under the Dingiey law u
110.44 per cent under the Payne Al
drich law. On one OF the silk and cot
ton samples there was an increas'
amounting to 21.9S per cent. The fftl
or the silk and cotton samples was lef
unchanged.
On the forty-nve of the ninety-fiv
all cotton samples there was no chang
In duty.
On the three remaining sample
completing the total of 100 no CON
parison Is made because Of appafen
lack Of authentic foreign prices.
And still President Taft said In hi
speech at Boston, April 25 last:
att tthe Payne Aldrich bin was
vastly better OH than the Dtngle
] bill. II I had refused to sign the Payn
bill 1t would have maintained the DIM
ley bill with higher rates than ii
Payne bill"
} When Mr.. Taft made this statemeI
he must have known that 1t was III
, true. AS for the wool schedule. t
, knew that the rates were not high'
, In the Dingiey law than in the Payn
,, Aldrich law, for right after signing Il
l latter bill did he not denounce its wo
rates as ''indefens.ole And, as Il
!. the cotton rates Of the Payne bill,
knew they were Just Is '1ndefensibl'
8 as the wool rates, for at the time
, made this statement in Boston he hs
the tariff boards report on cotton b
: fore him
II Is true that the cotton report I
I. the tariff board did not make this /
D formation available at a glance to M
D Taft or 10 congress or to the publ
: The tariff board carefully avoided 81
! ing this Information in a getatable, u
. derstandable form.
b supprssssd the Answer.
/. was the tariff raised or lowered
has been an insistent question ey
since the Payne Aidrich law was 9
, acted three years ago. The tar
5 board avoided answering u
. In making my oficial report 20 4
3 board ! submitted a table that d
ansver this ousetsrr L. resnect TO ca