The Omaha morning bee. [volume] (Omaha [Neb.]) 1922-1927, 1922-08-10
Shoes Put
on Tariff
Free List
Senate Concurs in House Ac.
ton. Taken Over Year Ago
in Removing Duty on
Hides and Leather.
Pa..,,, %.S, IS Disappear

!. ch thus con-
y the house
There was
III hidcs-and the
70 against the conf
OF , cents pound on
:, picked and 3 cents oil
:. hides.
y Most OF the marked lines which
have developed in the senate during
the tariff fight disappeared OH this
vote, but about the only surprise
was that a majority OF the rcpubli-
cans voted against making hides duti-
able. Not only was there a spill,
among the majority leadership on the
question, but also In the finance
committee majority and even in the
republican agricultural tariff bloc,
which. through its chairman. Sem
ator Gooding OF Idaho, had asked
for 2 cents on green hides and 3 on
dried hides.
Only two members OF the finance
committee majority-Curtis and
Smoot-supportcd the duties while
four members-Caldcr, Dillingham;,
Frslinghuysen and Sutherland
voted against them. Chairman Nc
Cumber and. Senator Watson OF In
diana, the other members present,
were paired and unable to vote. Five
members of the tariff bloc broke
away on the ballot-Spencer, Willis,
New, keyes and Townsend.
Smoot Proposal Adopted.
With hides sent back to the free
list, Senator Smoot, Utah, for the
committee, moved that the senate dis
agree to the amendment proposing a
rate of IL cents a pair and S per cent
ad valorem on boots and shoes and
varying rates on band, rough and
sole leather, betting and harness
leather and various other kinds OF
this product. The motion prevailed
without roll call and as substitute
the senate approved the house provi-
sion proposing duty of 20 per cent
ad valorem on chamois skins, piano.
forte, pianoforte action, player piano
action leather, enamed upholstery
leather and glove leather. finished in
the white or in the crust.
Without roll calls the senate then
cut from 4 to ) per cent the proposed
duty on bags, baskets, belts. satchels,
card cases, pocketbooks, jewel boxes,
portfolios and othet boxes and cases
wholly or in chief value OF leather.
On such articles permanently fitted
and furnished with travelling, bottle,
drinking, dining or luncheon, sewing,
manicure or sir.~r sets, the duty
was made as per cent ad valorem in
place of the 90 per cent originally
proposed.
Fight Against Duties.
In the six hours debates which
preceded the vote Senator Lodge of
Massachusetts,. the republican leader,
snd Senator Walsh OF the same state,
a democratic member of the finance
committee. were found fighting side
by side against the duties.
Senator Lenroot, republican, Wis
consin, and Pomerene, democrat,
Ohio, also extended arguments
against removing hides from the free
list, while Senator's Bursum, repub-
lican, New Mexico; Jones, demo-
crat. New Mexico; McCumber, re-
publican, North Dakota, in charge
of the bill: Stanfield, republican,
Oregon, and Gooding supported the
committees recommendation.
Senator Lenroot charged that 5 per
cent ad valorem protective duty pro-
posed by boots and shoes was a
bait to get votes for the tariff on
hides"
There was a sharp disagreement
between proponents and opponents
as to how much the proposed hide
duties would increase the price OF
shoes and as to whether the cattle
raisers q the Chicago meat packers
would get the benefit from the tariff.
Opponents placed the increase on
shoes at from 20 cents pair to q
cents, while advocates said the in
creased cost would range from 3H
cents to f cents pair.