The New York herald., 1921-12-30
CRUDE OIL TARIFF
DEVELOPS DEBATE
Mid-Continent Producers Sug-
gest President Levy Diff
ferential.

WASHINGTON, Dec 29.-Varying duties
Senate Finance Committee to-day by
spokesmen for mid-continent producers,
and all duties were opposed by Amer-
can producers operating in Mexico AMI
representatives of various classes Of oil
consumers in this country.
Renewing the fight for tariff levy.
which was lost in the House by an over
whelming vote, Senator Harreld (Okla.).
Republican said he was satisfied with
the original rates proposed by the Ways
and Means Committee 35 cents a barrel
on crude and 25 cents barrel on fuel.
Senator Curtis (Kansas). a Republican
member of the Finance Committee has
introduced an amendment to the tariff
bill proposing these duties.
A duty of 81 a barrel was urged by
Harry H. Smith of Tulsa, secretary OF
the Mid-continent Oil and Gas Associa-
tion, who said this would equalize the
difference in the costs of production in
Mexico and in the mid-continent fields.
w. II. Gray of Tulsa, representing the
National Association of Independent Oil
Producers. urged that the President be
empowered to assess a duty equivalent
TO the combined import and export levies
imposed by Mexico. Colombia and Ven
ezuela. from which the chief American
imports come.
Opponents of duty on oil said tariff
protection was not necessary and would
serve only to increase the price to all
consumers They laid particular stress
upon what they said would be the
effect on the farmers. the merchant ma
rine. the navy the consumers OF manu-
factUred gas, railroads and industries
using oil for fuel and upon the users
of automobiles, trucks and tractors.
1t also was argued by the opponents
that higher priced oil would increase
the cost of and retard road building and
building operations over the country. and
that since the Government aided in con-
structing the roads 1t would have to pay
part of the duty. This also was true.
they said. with respect to oil used by
the navy.
Railroads Oppose Tariff.
Opposing a ,ariff on oil. counsel for
railroads in the West said in a brief
read by Alfred p Thorn of Washington
that duty on Mexican oil would force
those roads to return to the use of coal.
thus largely increasing operating costs
at time when it was highly desirable
TO reduce those costs. The brief set
forth that there was not enough mid
continent oil available to the roads to
supply their needs and that they were
largely dependent on Mexican oil.
Speaking for the phosphate rock miners
OF Florida, users of 100000 barrels OF
oil annually, Stephen B. Fleming of New
York city told the committee that duty
on Mexican oil would increase the cost
Of producing phosphate rock and that
this would be reflected in increased
prices of fertilizers to the farmers.
Mr.. Fleming said his company was
getting Mexican oil delivered at $1.50
barrel, as compared with So a barrel,
which he asserted would be the cost of
laying down American oil in Florida.
He added that American refiners would
not even take the trouble" to quote him
a price in competition with the Mexican
oil.
The committee was told by James l..
Ackerson of Philadelphia, representing
the American Steamship Owners Asso-
citation, that the proposed duty on oil
would increase the operating costs of
American merchant ships by an average
of $50 a day. this adding a further
handicap on them in the effort to COM
pete with foreign vessels.
NJ. j. Murphy of New York city. vice.
president of the Island OIL and Trans
port Corporation. an American producer
of Mexican oil. charged that domestic
producers were asking all the people OF
the United States ito pay more for their
oil products in order that the producers
may get more money for their raw ma
terials."
Increase Cost of Gas.