Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1922-10-14
BY ]. HASK1N,

comes in, Under its operation, GER
tain cities. parts Of cities or even
larA4r sections could take all the i'd
vantage. OF the British free trade poi
icy for the purpose of obtaining duty
free ctfnfnodities to ,fabricate and re-
export while, keeping the rest o tthe
country protected against an inflow
Of free goods.
Recently the chamber Of commerce
OF the United; States made a careful
study Of the whole question. A sum-
mary OF the arguments for and
against free ports may b stated al
follows: G =.
Arguments for and Against Free +.
Ports.
Free ports would cut customs red
ports for transshipment and forward
ing whether or not they were to: be
manufactured. This would bring
freightst to American ships.
Ne wmarkets for fdreign goods
would be established and American
manufacturers would gain the advan-
tage OF c~onsignments from all I've
the world,
BY concentrating business in free
ports, vastly Increased. harbor and
terminal facilities could be provided
economically.
Free ports would simplify the. sys-
tenn Of bonded WAREHOUSES;. :
Free ports would save large sums
bonds under the present law. Nov.
country, merely for re-export, they
must put up a heaYy bond to insure
payment Of the duty, provided they
remain.
Free ports would simtaify ali GUS
toms procedure which now IL intricate
because of the bond and drawback
provisions.
Arguments opposed are:
The United States Is too isolated
geographically to bs q favorabls seat
for free ports and they would not be
so successful in attracting business
az their proponents Assert. gssg1
Such a policy is a dangerous step
in the direction of free trade which,
in the opinion Of many, would ruin
American industry.
The present system OF bonded
warehouses and drawback ID adequate
to fill the need Of free, ports. 1ThSy,
would promote trade from which the
United States would derive no rev
featuring beyond its present advance.
ment. J
i, Confusion would arise from MIXED
ship cargoss, parts OF which would
be destined to free ports and parts
to ports OF entry. This, and the
whole system, would promote SNUG
Cling.
Finally. 1t 10 claimed; the whole
scheme 10 unconstitutional because
friction would arise among the ports
and difficulties would be encouraged
in their SELECTION. "A choice, would BIZ
practically impossible IN view Of the
preference shall be given by any reg
tilRtion OF commerce or revenue 10 thh
ports Of one state Over those Of ans
other"
n spite Of these strong objections
the free port Idea has many ardent
supporters. Former Secretary OF
lcOtlmerce Redfjeld was .much$in Ia
vor Of their establishment and lead
ling officials Of the United Sthtei tar
!iH commission and the bureau o. for.
eisn and domestic commeEsee have In
trade and commercial organizations
thaye advocated the, plan.
The tariff ~ . subject which seems
rather technical 3tolthe IAyinan but III
realitg IT. has "a bearing On everyday
hfe.I The whole question comes, down
to- whether Q nation has . dense or
q sparse population, In a dense pop
Iulation. labor IL cheap and manufac.
tnfe enonorlicl. Thsrefore such; d
country can tfdetseil the new $couri-
TRY. IA 9 new country people are
lat premium, labor is high and man-
ufacturss are scarce.
Adam Smith, the eminent British
ecofomist, illustrates the principle by
Iexplatnlng that IN England xsf6an IL