The Richfield recorder. (Richfield, Idaho) 1909-1931, 1916-06-30
TARIFF
MISTAKES
Underwood Tariff Law is
Exposed

LII. ~. u. IIdJtJ CHlel VI Jue ID u
reau of Foreign and Domestic Com
merce, has unwittingly exposed one
of the fatal defects in the Underwood
tariff law. 1t can never be used as a
bargaining tariff, the Importance of
which DR.. Pratt acknowledged in his
recent address before the Boston con-
vention of wholesalers, when he said
lone of the fundamental ideas in
| the tariff board as proposed in the
present congress is to gather such in
formation and to furnish such data
| for the concluding of treaties between
| this and other countries that we will
receive tariff concessions in other
countries 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 actively for foreign trade and
to say to this or that country in Latin
America: If you will give us con-
cession on canned goods or on break
fast foods or on automobiles, we, on
the other hand, will admit some of
your products at a 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 those 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 line of protection in
the bill Now, if a rate is laid for
revenue only, on particular article,
how can we bargain with a 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 a tariff
or-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 a
revenue producer. The rates on
dutiable articles were put so low thai
the huge increase in the volume OF
imports failed to provide sufficient
customs revenues, and resort was had
to war tax on everything from a
telephone call to a stock certificate
This was followed by the repeal of
the free sugar clause which was
scheduled to take effect May first.
The close of this fiscal year finds the
United States with a record of $780,
100000 worth of imports in excess OF
any other year in our history, but the
customs revenues are over 500, ,O0O,-
900 less than during the last fiscal
year under the republican protective
tariff. The Underwood law has been
a ess-than-revenue.
The average rate of duty on all
imports into this country for the fis-
cal year 1916 was under 10 per cent.
That leaves practically no margin
whatever for bargaining for conces-
L.
A protective tariff law would pre-
sent an altogether different situation.
The reciprocity agreement with Cuba
was reached while the DINGHY law was
in force. 1t permitted certain articles
of merchandise produced i'll the Unit
ed States to enter Cuba at rates from
twenty to forty per cent less than
the prescribed Cuban rate, and in re-
turn Cuba got 20 per cent prefer
entail 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 go after the
foreign markets on the basis of full
mill capacity and low unit cost 1t is
as difficult to agree upon a universal
ly acceptable tariff law. Protection
we must have, speedily; reciprocity
treaties can be dealt with as occasions
demand.