Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-11-13
A Reply to the Honorable Reed Smoot

most STUpUUCICULy
May trespass on your patience while present
examples in support of contention that the
tariff measures of both the House and of the Senate do
not give agriculture its promised equality and its home
market
The duty on hides as set down by both the House
and the Senate is 1919 ad valorem. The compensatory
duty boots and shoes is down at 2Oqo ad vaore
On the average these two duties would SOC addi-
tona for hide and $1OO additional for pair of shoes
Surely you do maintain that the imposition of these
duties has any tendency put agriculture basis of
equality with other industries. The farmer is clearly
loser by this transaction and what adds his irritation
is the fact that this actual injury is given to him in
the guise of benefit You tell him you will give him
for his hides and then around and take twice
that sum away from him for his shoes.
You will observe that have confined my discussion
to the simple items of hides and shoes. I say nothing
about the duty harnesses saddles gloves etc. all Of
which made of leather and all of which the farmer
compelled to buy.
respectfully submit that the above gives no indca
ton of the intention of the Republican party to keep its
pledge to give equality to agriculture.
Them there is the matter of sago sage -four tapiOca
and -four used in the manufacture of starches
In 1928, IT'S million pounds were imported For starch
purposes this is the equivalent of Is million bushels of
potatoes Agriculture asked for duty of SC per pound
the equivalent of the duty other starches This
refused by both the Senate and the House. 1t seems to
me that this is in direct violation to the Republican
partys pledge to give the home market to the farmer
ito the full extent of his ability to supply it." Here's
'home market" for Is million bushels of potatoes for
%Lo cl,oJ and
gress refused.
Both the House and the Senate have refused to give
to the farmer sufficient duty casen Half the casen
used in this country imported from Argentina and here
again is "home market" that is denied to the farmer,
in spite of the party's pledge to give it to him.
Both the House and the Senate have refused to place
a duty on hempseed OIL palm nut OIL palmnut kernel
OIL tung OIL sunfower seed OIL sesame OIL all of which
are used in the manufacture of paints and varnshe or
soaps These oils into this country in large volumes
from countries other than the Philippines and take the
place of inseed OIL and other domestic oils that could
be produced by the American farmer
purposely omit any discussion of the vegetable
fats produced in the Philippines, although vast and
profitable "home market" which should belong to the
American farmer, is thus denied to him.
The tariff linseed oil is not completely effective
1t will permit the Importation of oil which, of course
subtraction from the American "home market"
for fax
The senate finance committee reduced the house
duty ar from CSC per bushe to soc per bmsel IN spite
of the fact that fully so per cent of the fac used in this
country is imported from Argentina. The American
farmers thus denied so per cent of the "hoe arket
for fac in spite of the Republican partys promise to
give it to him ito the t, entent Of his ability to
supply It,"
The duty wool which was increased from 31c to
34c per pound by the House reduced to 31c by the
Senate Finance Committee. Everyone is aware of the
fact that the cost of the wool in clothing trivial mat
ter to the There exceed four pounds
of wool in suit that costs $125 YET an increase of Sc