The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1912-03-28
The
TARIFF REPORT.
DEMOCRATS ARE NOT SATISFIED
WITH THE WORK OF THE
BOARD.

DEMOCRATS ARE NOT SATISFIED
WITH THE WORK OF THE
BOARD.
WASHINGTON, March 2S.-De-
nounclng the theories and methods Of
the .tariff board as erroneous and un-
tenable," the Democrats Of the House
Ways and Means Committee today
fled with the. House yolumlnous re-
port on the reintroduced Underwood
wool bill, vetoed by the President last
summer.
The committee declares that the,
wool report gives absolutely no reF
sons for any change in thesbill passed
last. year,
After reviewing the Presidents Veto.
the committee quoted the report on
the original bill that ut would be
ttiling with the people to, give further
Consideration to Republican copnsels
OF more delay"
1.-THE committee has made careful
analysis OF the report of the Tarift
Board in order to interpret the find!
lngs and to discover in what particu-
lars the committees bill Of the last
session was defective" the report
states. This analysis has failed to
reveal anything that requires a single
change in the rates fixed in the com.
mittee's BILL
LAS shown in the analysis, the data
of the report of the Tariff Board have
been found 10 be diffuse and unsyste-
matte and to present insignificant find
ings.
1.-THE theory OF applying tariff duties
according 10 the difference IN the cost
OF production in this and in foreign
countries, upon which the board has
projected and prepared Its report, is
entirely erroneous and untenable.
Those persons who are willing to
overlook the lack of theoretical sound
ness and OF statistical accuracy, will
find the data Of the report too frag.
mentary anu incomplete TO admit of
conclusions with reference to rates Of
tariff duty. The report leaves the ques,
tlon of the tariff duties on wool as
much unsolyed as before the Tariff
Board was formed.
IN preparing this bill no Intentional
provision was made for protection, the
endeavor being TO reduce and adjust
duties with view to producing the
largest amount of revenue consistent
with the proper consideration Of the
consumer. II is believed that the rates
Of this bill approach very closely, at
least, to the best revenue'producing
points, and these rates should, If en-
acted into law, permit such quantities
of imports as will effectiveEregu!ate
domestic prices. Such Competition
would be an important service to the
people as it would encourage Increased
consumption and production by making
more nearly normal the conditions of
supply and demand. The report OF
1.-THE Tariff Board, so far as 1t admits Of
conclusions, shows that the rates
which meet the consumers needs also
sufficiently satisfy those Of the pro-
Queer.
Probably the most striking feature
of the report Of the Tarifl Board is
that il contains little with reference TO
the tariff. 1t is primarily an analysis
of the money expenses involved in the
I.production and manufacture of wool.
After voluminous discussion OF the
Tariff Boards findings, regarding con
ditions in the production Of raw wool
the committee, to justify. the rate Of
go per cent placed on the raw pro
duct by the bill, declares that NJ
protection whatever is necessary.
Discussing the Republican doctrine
that the tariff should represent the
difference in the cost Of production at
home and abroad. the report says:
The view, that the proper basis
for tariff duties is found by comparing
money costs of production, rests upon
the opinion that money costs represent
the relative degrees Of sacrifice in
volvcd in turning out commodities OF
given kind in various countries. For
instance, If it be ASSUMED that il a
given unit Of certain commodity can
be produced in England at one dollar
or the equivalent of that sum, while in
the United, States the money expenses
of production are SIPS, it Is necessary
to have tariff duty equal 10 the DIFF
ference in these mOna" expenses OF
production, or certainly 10 the differ
ences in money expenses minus the al
lowance for variations in freight rates
in order 10 place the producers in the
two countries upon an equal market
! footing, II this is not done, II will be
possible for ttle producer in the coun
try where money expenses are lowest
to drive out Of business the producer
in the country where money expenses
are highest. This assumption is based
upon an erroneous view OF internation
al trade, aud finds no warrant what
ever in economic reasoning.
Even II It be granted, however, that
an ascertainment Of differences in
money cost of pr9ducttOn-wh whether
rnlghest, average, or lowest-would
furnish guide to the proper amount
CT, tariff duty needed for protection
could he ascertained in such way as
~ rondar, tho methOd available. Tx,