THE AMERICAN WOOL TARIFF BILL.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVI, Issue 195, 17 August 1912, Page 4

THE AMERICAN WOOL TARIFF BILL.

The plethora of detail with which the American agents of the Press Association usually submerge ua when a champion prize-fight is being reported may well be contrasted with the

miserable inadequacy of the information vouchsafed when a measure seriously concerning one of the great primary industries of Australia and New Zealand is before Congress. Exactly what is £!ie nature of the new Wool Tariff Bill, introduced by Mr La Follette, carried by the House of Representatives, vetoed by President Taft, and then carried a second time by the House, we do not know; but any legislation affecting the entry of foreigngrown Wool l i.ftto the ,' United States must necessarily bo of the greatest importance and interest to New Zealanders and Australians. Consequently, the omission of the press agents to keep^ us informed as to the original provisions of .'the measure and the nature of the Bill as passed by the House is verr'..retprettable. Mr Taft himself is siipH"''an uncompromising friend of the 'nigh tariff party that we may reasonably, assume the Bill to j contain provisions for thelowering of the American import duties on wool. A reduction in these duties has long heen a plank in the platform of -|lw Democrats, who ~contend that the present high price of warm woolleij clothing in the United States is especially to tho interests of. tlw working and middle j classes. ; TTvo . Bill will now, we ex- ' pectj fro forward to the Senate—that;

,is if the Speaker's decision in fayor v of the measure h^ine passed "over the I Presidential veto" cannot be upset. Tlie rpc«T>t''on ,of the Treasure in the Senate is tloubfcful. On most qncs-

tions, it is understood, the President is more in touch with the Senate than with the. House of Representatives, although on the Army Bill he is still at loggerheads with the former body; but it is a very difficult matter, to gauge the true inwardness of American politics. To assume, therefore, that the Bill is now safe would be unwise. All we can do is to await fur- | ther developments, regretting mean- j while that those responsible for the compilation and cabling of American news to Australasia have not risen to the occasion and kept us better informed. We would even go so far as to say that it is the duty of the Government of New Zealand to lose no time in obtaining full and reliable intelligence concerning the measure. Is not there not in existence a Department of Industries and Commerce? And if so, why should it not promptly communicate with Washington, and let the wool-growers of this country know exactly what is the nature of the Wool Tariff Bill, and keep the press authoritatively informed as to the future progress of the measure?