FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211  
212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   >>   >|  
lace (in a monetary regime) unless the monetary price is lower in the exporting than it is in the importing country. This virtually means that the product cannot be profitably exported unless the monetary costs of production ("together with a fair profit") of the article exported are for each party less than those of the other party in the other country.[9] The so-called "true principle" would lead thus to absolute prohibition of every article to which it was applied. Sec. 12. #The Payne-Aldrich tariff, 1909-1913#. In the campaign of 1908 the Republicans admitted that the protective tariff needed to be revised, but they declared that it should be revised by its friends. It was doubtless the general understanding that "revision" in this promise meant revision downward, tho this was left somewhat unclear in a campaign wherein the tariff played a somewhat minor part. The tariff act of 1909 (the Payne-Aldrich act) was the attempt of the successful party to redeem its promise in this regard. Many changes of rates were made, both downwards and upwards. It was estimated that rates were reduced in 584 instances, affecting 20 per cent of imports. These changes included placing hides upon the free list (before taxed 15 per cent), and cutting down the rate on leather, shoes, coal, lumber, iron ore, pig iron, and steel-rails. But on the other hand rates were increased in 300 instances (including many items in the cotton schedule). The general belief that little reduction was effected, on the whole, was confirmed by the experience under the act. As compared with the last two years (1908-1909) of the Dingley tariff the first two years of the Payne-Aldrich tariff showed a decline of 1.5 per cent, and on free and dutiable a decline of less than 3 per cent. These reductions in the statistical results are no greater than occurred within like periods while the Dingley act continued in operation without change.[10] No other tariff since "the act of abominations" in 1828 has called forth such widespread criticism as this one, and the tariff became a leading issue in the campaign of 1912. After 1910, the House being Democratic, many bills to reduce duties were presented, and some were passed by both houses, but all were vetoed by President Taft mainly on the ground that it would be best to await the report of the tariff board which had been authorized and appointed for the purpose of ascertaining the cost of production referred to in the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211  
212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
tariff
 

Aldrich

 

campaign

 

monetary

 

instances

 

decline

 
Dingley
 
revision
 

general

 
promise

revised

 

article

 
exported
 

country

 

called

 

production

 

showed

 

appointed

 
authorized
 
results

report

 

statistical

 
dutiable
 
reductions
 

purpose

 

Democratic

 

belief

 
reduction
 

schedule

 

cotton


including

 

referred

 

effected

 

compared

 
ascertaining
 

confirmed

 
experience
 

duties

 
ground
 

widespread


criticism

 

presented

 

vetoed

 
passed
 

houses

 

leading

 

reduce

 

continued

 

periods

 
greater