Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1916-07-06
EXPOSING TARIFF MISTAKES


DIR. +. +. Pratt. chief of the Burea
of Foreign and Domestic Commerce
has unwittingly exposed one of tn
fatal defeats in the Underwood tarii
law. Ii can never be used as "A bar
gaining tariff, the Importance o
which DIR. Pratt acknowledged i'm hi
recent address before the Boston con
vention of wholesalers, when he said
"One of the fundamental ideas
in the tariff board as proposed in
the present Congress is to gather
such information and to furnish
such data for the concluding of
treaties between this and other
countries that we will receive
tariff concessions in other coun-
tries in return for similar con
cessions that we ourselves may
be willing to make. This part of
the new Tariff Commissions
duties will make it possible for
the United States TO bargain ac-
lively for foreign trade and to
say to this or that country in
Latin America; If you will give
US a concession on canned goods
or on breakfast foods or on auto
mobiles, we, on the other hand,
will admit some of your products
at rate lower than the usual
standard rate"
In our trade relations with Latin
America the Democratic tariff law is
especially defective, for the products
of these countries are nearly all on
the free list, and there is, therefore
no opportunity for bargaining. There
can be no greater concession than
that. Mr.. Underwood, Mr.. Simmons,
and other Democrats who had-a hand
in the Democratic tariff abomination.
took particular pains to inform the
public that the rates carried in the
bill were revenue rates only; that
there was not a line of protection i'm
the bill. Now, if a rate is laid for
revenue only, on a particular article.
how can we bargain with country
by making the rate still lower or
abolishing it altogether? This would
mean nothing more nor less than rob-
bing the National treasury of needed
revenue
This is on the theory that tariff
for-revenue-only measure exists. That
such is not the case with the Under
wood tariff law, has been amply prov
ed. 1t has been a sorry failure as
revenue producer. The rates on duti-
able articles were put so low that the
huge increase in the volume of i'm
ports failed to provide sufficient Gus
toms revenues, and resort was had
to a war tax on everything from
telephone call 10 a stock certificate.
This was followed by the repeal of
the free sugar clause which was
scheduled 10 take effect May first. The
close of this fiscal year finds the Uni
ted States with record of 100000
600 worth of imports in excess of any
other year in our history, but the Gus
toms revenues are over 100000, 900
less than during the last fiscal year
under the Republican protective tariff
The Underwood law has been a tariff
-less-than-revenue.
The average rate of duty on all i'm
ports into this country for the fiscal
year 1916 was under 10 per cent. That
leaves practically no margin what
ever for bargaining for concessions in
foreign markets.
A protective tariff law would pre-
sent an altogether different situation.
The reciprocity agreement with Cuba
was reached while the Dingley law
was in force. 1t permitted certain
articles of merchandise produced in
the United States to enter Cuba at |
rates from twenty to forty per cent
less than the prescribed Cuban rate. |
and in return Cuba got a twenty per
cent preferential rate in the United
States on her sugar. But reciprocity
agreements, at best, are fraught with
danger. The simplest solution of the
matter is to accord ample protection
At home and let our manufacturers 20
after the foreign markets on the basis
IF full mill capacity and low unit cost.
L is as difficult to agree upon a uni
'ersally acceptable reciprocity treaty
rs 1T is to agree upon a universally
tariff law Protection we
must have, speedily; reciprocity trea-
les can be dealt with as occasions
Iemand.