The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1912-06-11
Manufacturers Awaiting Pro-
posed Revision
ALL DO NOT OPPOSE 1T
N.uy troc JnfairnesS Of Leaving
Tarin- High ON Products Entering
Into Manufacture OF Cotton if
I1fin on Cotton l. Reduced.

" .tiA t''tt', 'iAi' - >'bNoh hl
f. rars Of the South are keenly in
~e-.-d In the reintroduction Of the
cotton tIriff schedule in Congress.
lewis w. Parker, president of the
,usarican Cotton Manufacturers AS
ltlon. is reported to be one manu-
.-trrr who believes in revising the
.a.,,n schedule along with other tariff
anIllas.
as i ruIe. however, manufacturers
OPPOSE the proposed revision. not al
~lts because they are opposed to
tariff revision generally, but chiefly
a.. tuse the tariff on cotton goods is
already low. as compared with tariffs
ou other nroducts. Many argue that
T. IS unfair to still further reduce
cotton tariffs. while at the same time
I.t.lHE tariffs high on products en-
triug into the manufacture of cot-/
&; NJ. Miller, Jr.. Of this city, has
studied til" subject carefully II has
prepared several bulletins on the sub
J"et for the Manufacturers Associa-
ton. Nhen asked for an interview
On the subject. he refused to make
f..' >Liltilltlll, uttldti liiS lldl IFS ~
siHou now is as it was set forth in
his report to the American Cotton
Manufacturers Association, which is
essentially as follows:
Reasonable Revision.
favor Il reasonable revision Of
tn" cotton schedule. based upon the
hs'r"s at which impOrtationS are
actually being made and can be
made, rs shown by comparative man
fl,tl,Tar re- SplIjnr nrjrpC ut homo and
abroad, as shall be consistent with
tn raising of revenue and the con-
$rrvAtion of our home market
= significant section Of Bulletin No.
3 issued by the association. reads:
We are opposed to any revision
thAt viii increase the percentage Of
ImUortationS to total United States
cotton manufactures that now exist.
We believe that any way it may
BE- considered. the present impOrta-
Cons are sufficient to protect the con-
Sunrr BY regulating prices, for there
Is no monopoly or restraint of trade.
bat on the contrary. the keenest COM
oetlion among cotton manufacturers
pi the United States.
W. do not believe that ANYTHING
more regulatiye of prices can be Sc
cured. however such impOrtatiOns
may De increased, for American man
udcturers are already down to cost,
and without radical cutting of wages,
which is not believed could or should
De directed. the cheap result of legis-
Eating moro foreign goods into this
country would be only to transfer that
Work to foreigners. for The importers
do not usually undersell a local mar
Set except enough to bring in theil
goods,
we believe that the cotton SEIZED
w" bears its share Of the customs
revenue for the support of the NOV-
erninent and that there is no call fol
increasing the amount collected un
dr. it,"
Manufacturers View.
Mr.. u. a. T%Ompkins. one Of thu
~peS{-knoWn manufacturers Of thu
south, had this to say relative to tn
~ntroductio Of the cotton tariff
revision bill:
Assuming hat It costs approx
nlttrly one billion dollars per year t
ray the cost of running the govern
uient. about One-third Of this sun
mdS 10 be raised by means of "a tariff
Aheretore, We must have $500, 900, 90
thu upwards a year by means Of
'dT1. II this tariff be laid for reve
'NS purposes only, still a perfect,
pFoper discrimination might make i
give y very considerable protection t
american manufacturers. agricultur
wages, WITHOUT Infringing 1T
main purpose of raising Thi
Ueihe the case, we might we'll la,
us tarllf IN a manner. not only t
'ae revenue, but at the same tim
+ benefit the most people.
Ne tariff on cotton goods aztec
,'' interests Of every cotton produce
~ N" nited States. All the mill
ne South put together cost abou
"-'p.ooo,o to $500 900. Tn
tpldt nlNuf1 Of nrp1 proIuctc ic wort
about $50, 900. 900. Thirty per cen
arm IN the way Of protection woul
cniount to about $50, 900. 900. 9
lnn other hand, if the mills were nc
'a"'ithtlN protected to exist, and tn