Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 24, 1911)
T"iifejaEc" !(1r', TV' "" ""?'v !,T,t1' '"jt" rv?'s,iTi- - NOVEMBER 24, 1911 7 Practical Tariff Talks I George T. Murray of Berthold, N. D., sends to The Commoner copieB of letters passing between himself and Senator McCumber, in which the topic for discussion includ&l sevoral phases of the tariff question. Mr. Murray writes in substance: "I have been trying for six months to harmonize his position with reference to the duty on the wool in a suit of clothes with the tariff law, but can not. Will you try?" Sena tor McCumber's statement was that the "duty on the wool in the cloth in the ordinary suit of clothes, costing, say, $45, would be from 63 cents to $1.25." The duty on tho wool in a suit of clothes is dependent, naturally, upon the amount or quantity of wool in it, The value of the wool in a suit depends upon the quality used. Wool, before it can be utilized in cloth-making must be scoured or cleaned, what remains Is pure wool. The duty on scoured wool is 33 cents a pound, and in order, there fore, to find out the original duty on the wool in a suit of clothing one must multiply tho -amount of scoured wool by 33 cents. This amount of wool varies according to tho weight of the cloth and. the extent of the adulteration by using cotton yarn with woolen yarn. In the latter case, however, the duty is Just the same as if the yarn were all wool, another tariff trick. But, as will be seen later, this duty, as finally paid by the consumer has grown much greater. Where Mr. Murray became mixed was in com puting the duty upon the cloth. There is ample excuse for this confusion. The wool tariff is a mass of complexities, and designedly so. The same tariff is levied upon wool regardless of how much it shrinks, and at each step in the process of manufacture duty is piled upon duty, all for the advantage of the manufacturer; until only an expert can compute what the result is. Cloth is not made from wool, but from woolen yarn. The finest woolen goods are the worsteds. There are four processes in the making of this ;TiHd,..pf.goods. . First, the unwashed wool is scoured or cleaned. Then it is combed, the result of which process is known as tops. These tops are then spun or twisted into yarn, and tho yarn woven into cloth. Wool is divided into several classes, each bearing a different rate- of duty. The tops vary in value as the wool varies in quality. There are two divisions, one for tops valued at not more than 20 cents a pound and pne for tops valued in excess of that figure. Reduced to easily understood figures the cheaper tops carry a duty of 24 cents a pound and 30 per cent ad valorem, and the dearer ones 36 2-3 cents a pound plus 30 per cent ad valorem. Yarn,, which is the next step in the manufac turing process, is divided for the purpose of duty levying, into two classes, that valued at thirty cents a pound and that valued above thirty cents a pound. On the theory that it takes two and a half pounds of unscoured wool to make one pound of the cheaper yarn tho duty is two and a half times the 11 cent a pound duty on unscoured wool, or 28 cents. It is figured that on theJ more valuable yarn it re quires three and a half pounds of unscoured wool to make jone pound of yarn, and the rate -is,- therefore, 38 cents a pound. These are what are knpwn as compensatory duties, that Is to compensate the manufacturer for the added price put on the wool by the tariff, and in addi tion there Is the protective duty, which on the cheaper yarn is 3U per cent of its value and on the dearer 40 per cent. But suits are not made from yarn, but from cloth, and here a higher rate of duty is Imposed. SThere .are three rates upon cloth. . The first applies to cloth not exceeding forty cents a pound in. value, the second on cloth valued at between -forty and seventy cents a pound, and -the-third to'cloth above seventy cent3. -Reduced to- actual flgurs and avoiding the technical definition, -thf cheaper grade carries a fluty of g&. cents a pound and 50. per cent ad valorem; rthe: next cheapest 44 cents a pound and 50 per cenfc a& talbrem, and the third, 44 cents a pound andH5B percent ad valorem.' Ajl of these compensatbr duties are heavily overloaded in theinterest of" the manufacturer, and the net T8iiit,i8ra- piling up of the duty above all wasdnv Ail of 'which simply means this, that 'i every step' in the manufacture of the cloth and at every handling from cloth to the finished article a profit Is added on every duty paid or The Commoner. levied, so that in tho end when tho suit roachos tho wearer tho original duty of 33 cents a pound has grown to largo proportions. Tho original duty is supposed to satisfy tho wool growor; tho remainder is absorbed by tho manufacturer. C. Q. D. A WALL STREET VIEW From tho New York Sun: As a domagoguo Mr. Bryan grows worse with ago. President Taft would no doubt give his cordial assent, if assent were necessary, to tho publication by Mr. Bryan of any "written and verbal recom mendations" of Mr. Justico Whlto for chief justice of tho supreme court and of Govornor Hughes of New York for associate Justice which aro within Mr. Bryan's knowledge; but as to Mr. Taft's making a clean breast of all or any recom mendations which ho may have recoived, tho president of tho United States will of courso not comply with Mr. Bryan's impudent demand, and nobody knows it bettor than Mr. Bryan. Mr. Taft's reasons for preferring Mr. Justico White to Mr. Justice Harlan for chief justice, which Mr. Bryan affects to regard as truckling subservience to tho trusts, woro published at tho time of tho appointment Mr. Justice Harlan at seventy-seven was, in the president's opinion, too old to undertake tho greater responsibilities and do tho work that naturally falls to the chief justice of tho supreme court. Mr. Taft was deeply interested in reforms in civil procedure in the federal courts and believed that no mem ber of the supreme court was bettor qualifiod by knowledge and experience to draft tho changes needed than Mr. Justice White, who, although only twelve years tho junior of Mr. Jus'tlco Harlan, was a man of great vigor of mind and body. The president had said on tho subject of tho reform of procedure: "Speaking generally, the improvement of the administration of justice, civilly and criminally, in the matter of its prompt dispatch and the cheapening of its use for tho poor man is the most important question before tho American people." As to tho Hughes appointment, Mr. Taft made it in spite of tho fact that the governor of New York had urged the legislature to reject the federal income tax amendment, which was ono of tho Taft policies. Governor Hughes argued that "the power to tax incomes should not bo granted in such terms as to subject to federal taxation the incomes derived from bonds Issued by the state Itself or those issued by municipal governments organized under tho state's authority." He held that "to place the borrow ing capacity of the state and of its governmental agencies at the mercy of tho federal taxing power would be an impairment of tho essential rights of the state." Mr. Bryan blacklisted the Hughes appoint ment when it was made. "He is understood," said the personal organ, "to bo a close per sonal friend of Rockefeller." Mr. Bryan fol lowed the remarkable bit of "evidence" of un worthlness with such rubbish as this: 'It will be remembored also that he was tho first prominent man to oppose the Income tax, and his opposition came after Mr. Rockefeller had announced hostility to the income tax amendment." Mr. Bryan also denounced the appointee be cause "he vetoed the bill for the reduction of railroad rates after a New York legislature, and a republican legislature at that, had passed tho reduction bill." Mr. Bryan, being simply a loose mouthed and unscrupulous demagogue, refused to recognize the independence and courage of an act for which the governor of New York was praised by fair minded men irrespective of party. It Is painful to see him ranting about the 'supreme court like a sand lots orator. - TWO OASES Df POINT A reader of . The Commoner sends in tho following: "President Taft has asked that a' single trust or .combination in restraint pf trade between the, states be named that would not come, within the Sherman anti-trust act as construed ia'the opinions of Chief Justice White in the Stand ard Oil and Tobacco cases, and that ought to be held to come within that act, I.mame two and refer the president, as my authority- for so doing, to the opinions of the chief, justice (n, tp capee mentioned and to his opinion, when an associato Justice, m the Trans-Missouri case CI 6 IT. S. 290), and to his dissent intho Joln't-Tra'filc'case (171 U. S. 505). 573-574. . .. "In the Trans-Missouri case the supreme court by a majority vote of one decided that the railroad traffic association Involved therein was a violation of tho Shorman net Juntlco White dissented in a lengthy opinion based upon tho rulo of roason, and on which ho mado an argumont In ovory substantial rospect tho aamo as aro his arguments in tho Standard Oil and Tobacco cases, mado in support of his dicta in those cases that the Shorman act should bo con otruod so as to apply only to unroasonnblo or unduo restraints of trado botwecn tho statoa. Now if Justico White's argumont was sound against tho conclusion of tho court condemn ing tho combination or association of railroads involved in the Trans-Missouri case, if his argu mont was sound in holding that such combina tion or association was reasonable, and thero foro not within tho Sherman act, why does not tho same argument mado by Chief Justico Whlto in tho lator cases have tho same offoct; and why does not tho lator nrgument, concurred In by seven justices, have tho offoct of romoving such a combination or agreement as that Involved in tho Trans-Missouri cnBo from tho Sherman act? "If this bo true, and how can thoro be any doubt of It, tho samo thing is truo of tho combinatloa or agreomont involvod In tho Joint-Traffic case, because there Justico Whlto dissented on the samo grounds as thoso expressed by him in the Trans-Missouri caso, without repenting them. "It will not do for the president to answer this suggestion by roforrlng to tho decisions (as distinguished from tho opinions of the court) in tho Standard Oil and Tobacco cases, tho solo controversy is as to tho construction of tho Shorman act given by Chief Justice Whito, not to support tho decisions or conclusions of tho court In those cases, but to control tho decision of future cases." WORKING OUT OUR OWN SALVATION Mr. Bryan is exactly right whon he says that rollef from opprcsslvo taxation must bo had not by bargaining with other countries, as In the case of Canadian reciprocity, but by our own determined effort to promoto equality and Justice at home. In our proposed agreement with Canada we remitted certain taxes upon oursolves on condi tion that the inhabitants of the dominion should abolish certain taxes upon thcmselvos. That was all that it amounted to. Tho stupid refusal of tho Canadians to do away with any of their own taxes constitutes no reason why wo, feeling that wo aro overtaxed, should abandon our efforts to remove a burden that has becomo Intolerable. Reciprocal arrangements aro objectionable chiefly because they greatly oxtend the power of government over business and depend not upon right but upon negotiation. Under tho pro tective system we build up favored interests at homo and then, by reciprocal trades, bargain ings and cozenings, wo make foreign commerce an affair that is to bo carried on profitably only as government shall permit A treaty of reci procity may be as crooked as Schedule K of the Payne-Aldrich tariff. Nobody In this country Is bettor qualified to preach the doctrine of independence, courage and fairness in taxation than Mr. Bryan, and wo hope ho will do more of it. St. Louis Republic. THE FATHER'S EXAMPLE ,From the Pendor (Neb.) Republic: "There is a story told of a father who took his Jlttle boy -one morning Into tho city whoro he transacted his business. When noon came ho took his boy to a restaurant where he often had lunch. The iwaitor on receiving tho order, knowing that It was the father's custom to havo a bottle of wine, askud the boy what he would take to drink. The boy replied, "I'll take what father stakes." The father, realizing the seriousness of the situation, quietly beckoned the waiter and countermanded the order." - A warning: "You are a fine little fellow,' said a man to the son of a friend as he patted .the. bpy on the head. After chatting with hint awhile he asked, In parting, "Well, I suppose you' are -going to grow up to be a man like ,jrear father" J'That's what ma's afraid 'of," (innocently replied the boy. " - - , i i . K ' "EXECUTION '(arcWb'atever else you maysay about Mn.Taft, "wh&i Wflnds a law on the Vtatute books he fries to execute it Inst as if rongrcse meant what 'jSw.iHftrji W can't W. don't wish $'&. 'ecue"lt he has a supreme court to 1'execute" it with nea'tnesi and dispatch. Wayne (Neb') Democrat i J 5 I 91 1 1 ' L- &&&'