The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1913-04-26
HOUSE A;SCHOOL;
MOORE TTSPUP|L
Pennsylvania Member An
.wers Question from "A
Tariff Primer. )"
CLERK READS QUESTIONS
Customs Legislation Reviewed from the
Time Of George Washinston's
Administration.
CLERK READS QUESTIONS

The House was turned into school
room yesterday in the course of the
tariff debate when Representative j.
Hampton Moore. of Pennsylvania, pro-
tectionist, pulled off a one-act original
skit, entitled "A Tariff Primer" II. Mar
tin Williams, reading clerk of the House,
was the only other member of the caste.
His part was unimportant. He played
the schoolmaster, while Moore essayed
the role of star pupil, teacher asking
only such questions as Moore had pre-
pared, along with the answers.
In introducing his piece. Mr.. Moore
complimented President Wilson for his
method of calling attention to tariff
questions so pointedly by IAN address
from the throne" ut is because / be-
lieve there is urgent need for publicity
and careful study of the tariff question
that / have written my address in the
form of Tariff Primer which 1 send
to the desk of the clerk, whose assist
ance I shall ask in propounding the
questions therein noted"
Questions Are Propounded.
The Primer" started off:
@. When was the first tariff act
passed?
A The first act passed was a tariff
act. 1t was approved by President
George Washington July 4, 1889.
After running through the history and
theory of tariff laws up to the Dingley
law, Mr.. Moore was asked by Teacher
Haltigan:
Q.-Can you give some data pertain
ing to this progress under the Dingley
bill?
Ayes, the Tariff Handbook just is
sued by the Democratic Ways and Means
Committee, although not thoroughly re-
liable, quotes the number of establish
ments engaged in manufactures as being
214.95i in 1894 at the beginning of the
Wilson law. and 66,s05 in 1909, under the
Dingley law. The Dingley law was sue
cessful as a promoter of industry within
the United States, and as revenue
raiser IL is true that while the mill
worker obtained higher pay ii cost him
more for the supplies he purchased from
the farm, but it is also true that during
the period Of the Dingley law the hours
of labor were greatly reduced, the COM
forts of living were everywhere Increased
and the people without regard to section
or employment enjoyed conveniences,
comforts, pleasures, and even the lux
uries of life TO a greater degree than
ever before in the nations history. New
ertheless, because of certain inequalities
in few of the provisioss of the Dingley
law and because its free list was not
extended there was an tncessant agita-
ton against II.
Q-How long was the Dingley law in
force?
A-Until the Payne bill went into ef-
feet. August 5. 1909.
Democrats Were Out.
Q.-What was the reason for this
change?
Acne reason was that the Democrats
who We're out of power were continually
misrepresentng the tariff question, con-
tending that it created trusts and large
enterprises and that Americans acquired
wealth under it too rapidly. Another
reason was that the growth of popu-
lation in the United States. due to the
inspiration of our success, having given
us the greatest home market in the
world. had invited the attention and con-
Germ Of other great nations which covet-
ed our purchasing power and sought to
break the firm hold our protective laws
gave us upon our own trade. With es-
ia Adjustments that cost less, and with
labor that was skilled but poorly paid,
they knew they could compete for the
American dollar in the American market,
IL their cheap goods could be gotten over
our tariff wall Another reason for the
change was that our own people had
FORGOTTEN our former distresses; in fact.
we were FESTIVE under too much prosper
ity.
Q.-Did the Payne bill revise the tariff
downward?
Alt did revise the tariff downward
and while attempting to maintain me
protective principle it equalized certain
duties that had been Objectionable and
i've rayv-
enue measure. y
Off the people enjoyed such wonder
full progress why did they complain?
A.-They listened to ambitious polite
ians, agitators without conscience.
Journalist organs with axes to grind.
magazines seeking pap, essayists who
found it more profitable to write fiction
than to work, theoretical college profess
sors nonproducers generally. and few
sincere reformers usually misinformed
and frequently misled.
Free List Criticized.
Mr. Moore had something to say about
the unwisdom of extended free lists. Dis
cussing the Payne bill in this connec-
ton, he said:
Another article on the free list was
art works When the Payne commit
tee, yielding to newspaper clamor, put
art works upon the free list in 1909, the
idea was to encourage art, and to win
over a few old masters for American
art galleries. In 1909 art works came
in free to the value of $549,661. In 1910
they jumped in value to s19,114, 1918. In
1911 the value of these art works coming
in free had reached 81 ,054, 921, and in 1912
they climbed to the enormous value of
ss5, liz, 1890. IS. This was a direct displace-
ment of s75.OOO,O00 of good American
money in four years, not for food or
necessities, but for art works upon
which to feast the eyes and inspire the
applause of the conneisseur. The peo-
pie or somebody claiming to represent
them demanded free art, and they got
It by blowing in SIS, 900 Of American
money for the enrichment of foreign
artists and picture Dealers
Mr. Maara smoke for time He