The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1913. A GREAT TARIFF BATTLE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1844, 2 September 1913, Page 6

The Dominion. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1913. A GREAT TARIFF BATTLE.

The United States Tariff Bill has reached another definite stage in its long journey to the Statute Book. A cablegram which we publish in another column of this issue states that it has now been read a second time in the Senate. The second reading debate started on July 21, and the expectation of a prolonged discussion has been fully verified. The action of the Republicans in keeping the debate going for Such a length of time is, however, not fully explained' by their hostility to tho Bill itself, for they fully recognise that they have no hope of preventing its ultimate passage. They have been playing a political game, not unknown in New Zealand, in which one measure is debated at inordinate length ■ with the| object of blocking the progress of another. In the present instance the Republicans in the Senate have been taking every advantage of all'those Parliamentary rules and regulations which make for delay, in the hope of preventing the passage of a Currency Bill this session, and a great deal of the debating has simply been obstruction in disguise. The following extract from the Gongretsional Record, giving the opening of • the speech delivered by Senator Works, of California, affords *an indication of the dreary level to which the discussion had then fallen: 1

Mr. President, I want to say in the beginning that, considering the state of th» weather, to say nothing of the uninteresting character of what I am about to say, I shall not complain of any Senator who seeks a more comfortable place than this Chamber, I am sorry, under the circumstances, to burden tho Senate with a speech. '

After having wasted some two hours in futile talk to empty benches, Mit. Works further remarked:

Mr. President, I have consumed considerable time, and 1 must confess I am somewhat weary. Tho Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Weeks), I understand, is desirous of submitting some . remarks, upon tlio subject, and, if it be agreeable to tho Senate, I should bo very glad to suspeud at this point and to bo allowed to take up the discussion again to-morrow. I expect to-morrow to discuss-tho tarill on sugar, English walnuts, olives, and olive oil, all of which aro important industries in my State.

Although the Democrats have only a majority of six in the Senate, their position is really much stronger than the numerical strength of tho . two parties would indicate, for_ the Republican Opposition is divided and disorganised. Like the New Zealand anti-Reform party, they arc without a leader, and they arc quite unable to put forward a programme that would arouse any popular.enthusiasm., This disunion and lack of leadership are sorely hampering tho Republicans, making it very difficult for them to take a definite line of action. If, as The Times points out, "the Democrats failed politically over the tariff, the Republicans would have to take the field, and take it | almost at once, against the RooskVGLT Progressives, whose fiscal plank is the same as theirs, and whose genera-1 programme is far better baited. They are consequently not altogether averse from a recuperative period of Opposition." The attack of the Opposition as regards the Tariff Bill was principally against the sugar, wool, and agricultural schedules, but the proposals to place sugar and raw wool on the free list havo j been carried. No vital changes have so far been made in the proposals regarding agricultural produce, but the Senate has adopted a recommendation of the Finance Committee to the effect that the President should ba given power to impose retaliatory duties upon certain specified articles, including a number of farm products, with the object of bringing effective pressure to hear on those countries which do not give the exports of the United States fair treatment. This provision will place a very useful weapon in the hands of . the Government when negotiating commercial treaties with other nations. It should be remembered that' the United _ States Government does not aim at a fundamental departure from the policy of protection, their intention being to construct a tariff which will fit in with the interests of the people and the country, and reduce the cost of living for the mass of the population by removing the existing protection from certain industries in which monopolies have been established. This has been pointed out by. the London Times in

order to remove the widespread misapprehension that a change wasbeing made from a policy of protection to that of free trade. Still, the duties have certainly been reduced very materially. This is shown by the statement that the Bill as amended by the Finance Committee of the Senate makes an average reduction from the rates of the Payne-AiiDRICH law of 27.64 per cent., and. also shows an average reduction of 4.22 per cent, in the rates provided in the present- Bill as it passed the House. Since then it has been amended in various directions, hut the New York Outlook, in summing up the position at the beginning of ■ August, stated that "generally speaking, there seems to bo nothing cither in the Bill as passed by.the House, or in the Bill as it is now before the Senate which so controverts the main purpose of the Administration as to make the Bill unacceptable to the President, unless it shall still receive very radical changes."