Democratic Sentinel, Volume 21, Number 11, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 19 March 1897 — EXPLAINS HIS BILL. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

EXPLAINS HIS BILL.

CHAIRMAN DINGLEY ON HIS NEW TARIFF MEASURE. Expects It to Yield $112,000,000 More Revenue—Reciprocity Is Prominent —Fire in St. Loui* Causes a Loss of Nearly $1,000,000. Dingley Tariff Bill. Chairman Dingley, of the Ways and Means Committee, in response to a reQuest that he furnish a synopsis of the new tariff bill presented by him makes the following statement : “The bill has two purposes—namely; to raise additional revenue and to encourage the industries of the United States. On the basis of the imjiortations for the last fiscal year the bill would increase the revenues about $112,000,000, divided among the several schedules roughly as follows: A, chemicals, $3,500,000; B, crockery and glassware, $4,000,000; C, metals, $4,000,000; D, wood, $1,750,000: E, sugar, $21,750,000; F, tobacco, $7,000,000; G, agricultural products. $(1,300,000; 11. liquors, $1,800,000; I, cottons, $1,700,000; J, jute, linen and hemp. $7,800,000: K, wool, $17,500,000; manufactures of wool, $27,000,000: L, silks. $1,500,000; M. pulp and paper, $58,000; N, sundries, $6,200,000. “This estimate is on the supposition that the imports of each class of goods would be the same the next fiscal year as in the fiscal year ended last June. The committee assumes that the excessive importation of wool would be largely reduced by the proposed bill, although the fact that our domestic production of wool has diminished 8,900,000 pounds since 1893 will necessitate the importation of much more wool now than in the latter year. Assuming that the importations of wool will fall off at least one-third from (hose of 1896 on account of anticipatory imports

to avoid duties, we place the increased revenue from this source at $11,000,000. Anticipating also that the imports of woolens will fall off nearly 50 per cent, from the enormous imports of 1896, we estimate the increased revenue from this source under the proposed rates nt about $14,000,000. From sugar we estimate $20,000,000 additional revenue. Anticipating a considerable falling off of imports of Havana tobacco because of the revolution in Cuba, we reduce the estimates of additional revenue to be derived from the tobacco schedule to $4,000,000. The remaining schedules would afford a revenue of about $39,500,000 on the basis of the imports of 1896, but as there would probably be diminished imports at some points, although the gradual restoration of business activity would offset this by increasing the consumption of imported luxuries, we reduce the estimates on these to $31,000,000. These would aggregate an additional revenue of $80,000,000 the first year. A further reduction of $5,000,000 or $10,000,000 for contingencies would leave $70,000,000 to $75,000,000 as the probable increased revenue from this bill the first year, which would undoubtedly rise to $100,000,000 the second year. “These estimates are below, rather than above, the probable result, unless a considerable delay in the enactment of the bill should greatly enlarge the opportunity for imports of articles on which duties are to be raised—particularly wool and woolens—for speculative purposes. Undoubtedly any delay beyond May 1 in placing the bill on the statute book would result in a large loss of revenue. “This increase of revenue is secured by transferring wool, lumber, crude opium, argols, paintings and statuary, straw ornaments, straw mattresses, burlaps and various other articles from the free list of the present law to the dutiable list; by increasing the duty on woolens to compensate the manufacturer for the duty placed on wool; by raising the duty on sugar about three-fourths of a eent a pound in order to encourage the production of sugar in this country, which, it is believed, can be done, and thus give our farmers a new crop, which we now import mainly from abroad; by increasing the duty on agricultural products affected by Canadian competition, and on the cotton goods, some advanced manufactures of iron and steel, manufactures of jute, flax and hemp, in order to encourage these and other industries here, and especially by increasing duties on such luxuries as liquors, tobacco, silks and laces. “As a rule the rates of duties proposed are between the rates of the tariff of 1890 and the tariff of 1894, such reduction of rates from the former law and preservation of the protective principle being made feasible by changed conditions. “The iron and steel schedule is changed very little from the schedule of the tariff of 1894. the change being entirely in the more advanced articles. The same is true of the cotton schedule. “In the agricultural, wood and glass and earthenware schedules alone are the duties of the act of 1890 fully restored as a rule, and in a few cases increased, with the view of amply protecting and encouraging our farming interests by every possible point. While the duty on clothing wool is larger in proportion to the foreign value than on manufactured articles, yet it is thought desirable for the public interest and for our agriculture that we should produce this prime necessity for ourselves. The duty on carpet wools, as well as upon many other articles, is imposed mainly for revenue. The irritation caused by the use of a few wools, heretofore classed as carpet wools, for

clothing purposes, has been remedied by transferring such wools tn the c+nthingwool classes, but the duty on clothing wool has been restored to the rata of theart of 1890. “In framing thia new tariff the aim has been to make the duties specific or at least partly specific, so far as possible, to protect the revenue and also to protect our own interests. The reciprocity provisions of the act of 1890 have not only been fully restored, but this policy has been extended by adding to sugar, tea, coffee and hides, as articles on which to make reciprocal agreements, such articles as champagne, brandy, wines, artificial and natural mineral waters, argols and silk laces. In adding these articles the reciprocity provision is strengthened greatly by providing for a redaction of duties to countries giving us similar concessions.”

CHAIRMAN DINGLEY, FATHER OF THE NEW TARIFF BILL.