The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1912-03-27


nit such quantities of imports as will
effectively regulate domestic prices.
Such competition would be an import
ant 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 the tariff
board, so far as it admits of conclu-
sions, shows that the rates which
meet the consumers needs also SUI
ficiently satisfy those Of the produc-
err
After reviewing the democratic at
tempt Of last year to secure revision
of the wool schedule and the presi-
dents veto, the committee quoted the
report on the original wooy to the
effect that ut would be trifing with
the people to give further considera-
ton to republican %counsels Of o
delay in this matter"
notwithstanding this conviction"
the report continues, "the democratic
majority of the house of representa-
tives, impatient to respond to the de-
mands of the people for the speedy re-
vision Of a schedule Of i~ndefensible
rates, was forced to delay further ef-
forts to respond to the protests Of the
American people"
Presidents Message Quoted.
The message of the president submit
ting the report of the tariff board and
his recommendations that the boards
findings be used as a basis for a re-
duction of the rates, is then quoted,
and the committee comments:
1.-THE committe has made a careful
analysis Of the report of the tariff
board in order to interpret the findings
and to discover in what particulars
the committees bill of the last session
was defective, or failed to adjust the
duties in an equitable and proper man
ner. This analysis has failed to re-
veal anything that requires a single
change in the rates fixed in the COM
mittee's bill, and the committee is
constrained to present again the re-
suits Of its Investigations of last am
mer, as embodied in the bill presented
to the house at that time.
GAS shown in the analysis, the data
of the report of the tariff board have
been found to be diffuse and unsys-
tematic, to present Insignificant find-
ings and, rs stated to afford the COM
mittee no valid reason for any change
in its recommendations Of last session
with regard to the rates of schedule
X"
Comparative Costs.
The report of the committee further
states that the tariff boards report
largely consisted of a study of what
is called Comparative cost Of produce
ton OF woods and manufactures of
woods in various countries, and Of this
1t says:
1.-THE view, that the proper basis for
tariff duties is found by comparing
money costs of production, rests upon
the opinion that money costs repre-
sent the relative degrees Of sacrifice
involved in turning out commodities
of a given kind in various countries.
Fol instance, if it be assumed that if a
given unit Of a commodity can be pro-
duced in England at 81, or the equiva-
lent of that sum-, while in the United
States the money expenses Of produc-
tion at SLIPS, it is necessary to have a
tariff duty equal to the difference in
these money expenses of production, or
certainly to the difference in money
expenses minus the allowance for
variations in freight rates, in order 10
place the producers in the two coun-
tries upon an equal market footing. IL
this is not done, it will be possible for
the producer in the country where the
money expenses are the low est to drive
out Of business the producer in the
country where MONEY expenses are
highest. This assumption is based
upon an erroneous view of information
al trade, and finds no warrant whatev-
er economic reasoning"
Great Range in Costs.
The democratic report discusses this
matter at great length, and points out
that j every country there is a great
range Of difference in cost.
Besides these considerations" the
report says, sit should be noted that
in every country there is a great range
of difference in cost OF production.
Scarcely any commodity can be said to
have a uniform cost OF production.
There is more difference, as a rule, be-
tween different factories in the same
country, than there is between the best
and poorest factories in n country
and those OF corresponding grades In
another. This has been amply illus
trated by the work of the tariff board
itself. In its report on pulp and paper,
the board found little difference in
one cost of production between the
United States and Canada in the best
mills, but it did find very great diff