The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-04-09
THE TARIFF REVISION BILL.

|
session, is by no means the sort OF
J measure that the country had reason
.. 80 expect from the declarations made
by President Wilson. There is evi'
IDENTIFY misioindcr between the public
idea OF what is damaging to the bust
ness and prosperity Of the country and
the President s idea on the same point.
1t is a clear case that he has followed
Democratic theories moro than actual
conditions; or, as President Harrison
used TO say, maxims rather than mar
kets control the Democratic ideas on
the tariff.
The placing of raw wool upon the
free list, as proposed in this bill,
would be Gripping blow TO the wool
industry OF all this region, and the rails
ing of wool in the United States would
bavo TO be placed on a different basis
altogether from what it is at present. if
il could be continued at all. However
given tho provision for raw wool, tho
cuts on wooden manufactures arc the
logical sequence; for there would be
no sense whatever in keeping high
tariff upon wooden manufactures when
there is no tariff upon raw wool. The
theory upon which these changes have
been made undoubtedly is that free
wool and the reduced tariff rates on
manufactures Of wool will cause ma
terial reductions in the prices of woolcn
| goods, by at least as much as the tariff
| is reduced. We believe this to he
complete fallacy We have no idea
that there would he any material re-
ductions in the prices Of clothing, Of
blankets. or of the manufactures of
wool in most general demand. on the
passage of this bill We believe that
the difference between what might be
called the import price. which The man.
ufacturers Of the United States will
be obliged to meet, and the price to
the ultimate consumer will be taken
up by agreement among the importers
and manufacturers in part. by the
wholesalers in part, and the remainder
by the retail dealers; and that the
one who buys clothing for himself or
WOODEN goods for his family, will not
get that clothing or those goods for
much if any less than he now has to
pay.
The immediate reduction in the tariff
on sugar is not so great as ono would
have expected in view Of the severe
cuts generally carried through the bill;
but tho drastic provision that in three
years after the enactment of this
measure, raw sugar shall be admitted
free Of duty is where the revision will
hurt, and American cane and beet sugar
producers be crippled; always provided
that the combines and interests in
volved cannot keep up the price to
about the samo rate as now, and the
manufacturers and middlcmen divide
among themselves the profit that would
accrue from the reduction of duty.
We believe that here, precisely as in
the case Of wool, there would be no
benefit to the ultimate consumer,
The cut on lead Is very severe, tax.
ing off two-thirds Of the duty both on
lead in ores and lead in pigs. Zinc,
as zinc, is not specifically mentioned |
in our reports, but we judge from the |
general tenor Of the bill that probably |
the same sort Of cut is made upon zinc
as upon lead. AS to these two metals |
there is and can be no such combine |
as in other cases that will keep up |
prices. On the contrary, the reduction !
will fall specifically and directly upon |
the producers OF lead and zinc. 1t is |
likely that the market will respond al |
most Immediately to the reduction pro-
posed, although probably not complete |
ly TO the figure carried in the bill. |
But the reduction made in that bill |
is destructive, amounting, as stated, |
TO about two.thirds of the present rates. |
leaving but onc.third of the present |
duty as measure of protection, and |
this very clearly is not sufficient.
1t has been intimated in the dis |
patches, and is probably true, that the |
bill is framed on more radical lines
as to these leading articles than the |
Democrats expect finally to get in the |
bill as it is TO be enacted; for it is a !
clear case that good many Demo. |
cratic Senators will not stand for the |
reductions proposed. The Democratic !
Senators from Montana. from Colorado |
and from Nevada will not be likely |
TO stand for free raw wool. The Demo |
cratic Senators from Colorado, Mis- |
souri,, and Montana viii not be likely !
TO stand for a destructive cut in lead |
and zinc, The Democratic Senators |
from Louisiana and Texas will hardly |
stand for the cut in sugar And so !
among these Democratic Senators who !
will not stand for one or another Of |
these cuts on these leading articles. it |
should be easy TO form combination
that viii fairly protect all of them;
and that com hination would he abso- |