The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1912-08-30
IN ROBERT KENNETH MAGkEA-
(FOrmerly consulting expert CT the
tariff board.)


of the ninety-f1ve all cotton samples
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, Endorsed by the
leading jobbers of the United States
as being representative Of all classes
Of fabric in use In this country, each
sample being chosen because IT was
typical of the most used material Of
it, particular weave or class. Ninety
five all cotton and five silk and cotton
samples comprise the 100 that appear
in the tariff boards cotton report.
Forty-seven Of the ninety-1ve in the
all cotton class pay $3.50 per cent.
higher duties under the Payne-Aldrich
than they did under the Dingley tariff.
Payne-AldrIch HJokers."
OF these forty-seven classes OF ma
terial on which the tariff was increas-
gu u1RS hE0 LA0 111ASy TCnfC0 no@S
in three or four New England mills
commonly grouped as the "Lippitt-
MoColl interests" This is the clique
Of New England manufacturer-politi-
clans who were permitted by Senator
Nelson w. Aldrich to write the cotton
schedule to suit themselves.
On the nine Lippitt-McColl fabrics
the Payne-Aldrich law lacked up the
average duty from 1857 to 60.33 per
cent. In other words, the promised
revision downward" on these goods
was really a revision upward amount
ing to 64.97 per cent. Of the Dingley
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 an
average duty Of $3.50 per cent Under
the Payne-Aldrich law they pay 44.58
per cent-a revision upward equal to
26.0T per cent OF the former rate al
compared with 64.97 per cent. increase
on the manufactures Of the favored
few.
On just three among the 100 sam
pies was there a decrease in duty.
These were the silk and cotton fabrics
(silk mtllsl that pay more than 100
per cent duty. On these three samples
the reduction averaged 5.66 per cent
on the former duty-a reduction from
1870 per cent. under the Dingley law
to 110.44 per cent. under the Payne
AIdrich law. On one of the silk and
cotton samples there was an increase
amounting to 2198 per cent. The fifth
of the silk and cotton samples was left
unchanged.
On the forty-f1ve of the ninety-fve
all cotton samples there was no
change In duty.
On the three remaining samples
completing the total Of 1000 no COM
partson Is made because Of apparent
lack Of authentic foreign prices
Mr.. Taft Was Mistaken
And still President Taft said r. haD
speech at Boston, April 20 last:
1T (the Payne-Aldrich bill) was
vastly better bill than the DlngleG
bill. If had refused TO sign the
Payne bill 1t would have maintained
the Dingley bill with higher rates than
the Payne bill"
When Mr.. Taft made this statement
he must have known that Ii was unr
true A. for the wool schedule, he
knew that the rates were not higher
in the Dingley law than in the Payne
Aldrich law, for right after signing the
latter bill did he not denounce its wool
rates as ""indefensible? And, as for
the cotton rates of the Payne bill, he
knew they were just as "1ndefensible"
a. the wool rates, for AT the time he
made this statement in Boston he had
the tariff boards report On cotton be-
fore him.
Il is true that the cotton report of
the tariff board did not make this in
formation available at a glance to Mr..
Taft or to congress or to the public.
The tariff board carefully avoided CIV
Ing this information In getatable'
understandable form
Suppressed the Answer.
"Was the tariff raised or lowered 2"
has been an insistant question ever
since the Payne-Aldrich law was en-