Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1922-05-03
LEATHER TARIFF
AN ADDED COST
. OF $1OO,OO0,O0O
Farmers Would See Raise Reflected
in Shoes.
(By Arthur Evans)

between SlOU,VOO,OUU and SloU,'
600, "a year would be added tt
Americas boot and shoe bill by the
tax on hides put into the tariff bill
which was reported into Unitet
States lsenate on Tuesday by the
senate finance committee. So says
the shoe trade, which is preparing TO,
a battle for free hides, free leather
and free shoes.
Manufacturers estimate that the
proposed duty on hides would slap
so cents to rs cents more on the
cost of pair of brogans, while the
public is yelling for cheaper foot
wear. Cattle raisers are asking for
the duty on hides, deeming it q
good thing for the cattle industry.
The farmers, on the other hand, seem
to be taking a different slant, and
the American Farm Bureau filed a
brief with the senate finance COM
mittee urging that hides, leather, and
leather products should remain on the
free list.
Farmer Might Be Hit
The farmer, the brief pointed out,
would come out at the wrong end of
the horn. Even if a duty on hides
should give him an increased return
from his cattle, which is open to
question, it would be more than Off
set by the boost in the cos: of boots
and shoes, harness and other leather
products.
Critics of the bill as it stands point
out that hides have been on the free
list as a traditional policy, with the
exception of one period from 1897 to
1909. Prominent protectionist of the
past, Mckinley, Dingley, Blaine and
Payne all went on record against a
tariff on hides and refused it a place
in bills they sponsored.
Chief benefit of a hide tariff would
go to the packers the critics say.
The United States does not raise
cattle enough to supply its hide de-
manh. The annual hide consumption
is around 1,55O,O0O,O0O pounds and
the American production is about
850,000,000, meaning that about As
per cent has to be imported. Ii
imports kept up as they have during
the last ten years, duty on cattle
hides, it is estimated by the farm
bureau federation, would yield a Gus
toms revenue of about S16,000,000.
As against this between S100,000,000
and S150,000,000, by another estimate
would be added to the cost of the
200,0O0,000 pairs of shoes used in
America each year.
Launch Fight on Congress
A campaign has been launched by
the National Shoe Retailers associa-
ton and the National association of
Shoe Manufacturers to get consum-
ers to write senator and representa-
tives to vote for free hides. In a
circular issued last night the Ma
tional Shoe Retailers association
says:
"Do you want shoes to advance in
price? If the duty is put on hides it
will benefit no one but the large
killers. They already control large
portion of the heavy leather business
of the United States and a duty on
hides would eventually give them abb
solute control, and when they get
that prices will begin to rise by leaps
and bounds.
Cattle are bought for their meat,
not their hides. 1t is absurd to be-
lieve that the killer would pay the
farmer rs cent or 81 more for a
hide ON account Of the duty. The
farmer would not get a penny. 1t
would just be extra profit for the
killer. Even if the farmer did get
a small advance in price, he would
pay it back ten times in the in
creased cost of shoes for himself and
family.
Big Shoe Market Needed
"The only thing that will give the
farmer more for his hides is great
er demand for shoes, leather, etc
Just as soon as shoes lower in price
more shoes will be sold, our exports
will be increased, more hides will be
used, and the farmer will get more
for his hides. The public, the re-
taller, and the manufacturer are al
striving to reduce the price of shoes