UNITED STATES TARIFF.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20339, 21 August 1929, Page 10

UNITED STATES TARIFF.

The Ilawley Tariff, accepted by many other countries as a challenge from the United States, is gradually being shaped. It has been subjected to prolonged consideration since it was introduced into the House of Representatives on May 7. Its emergence from the Finance Committee of the Senate, which has been working at it for well over a month, marks another stage in its progress toward finality. About U6O alterations arc reported to have been made to the rates of duty approved by the House, but of these only a few, necessarily, have been cabled. Of their number, one of the most interesting is that affecting wool. The House of Representatives approved an increase in duty from .'3l cents a pound to 84, but the Senate Committee demands a return to the original figure. For the rest, there is no quarrel between the two Chambers respecting the rates it is proposed to place on such primary products as butter, cheese, hides, wheat, beef and live sheep. These items were sharply criticised inside the United States when the newschedules were originally published. It was argued that they would offend neighbouring countries and good customers like Canada, Cuba, Mexico and the South American republics. No account was taken of two countries, which, though far distant, are still good customers of the United States—Australia and New Zealand. Yet it is evident that whatever prospects there might have been of finding an enlarged market for the products of this country in the United States, they arc likely to be adversely affected by the increases in the tariff. Since both sections of Congress seem to be of one mind concerning the duties on the products of the soil, the rates quoted can be taken as confirmed. There was little prospect of any reduction in the considered proposals of the House of Representatives affecting them. Agricultural interests arc strongly represented in Congress. Those who come from the farming areas tend to take a fairly independent line, and both parties court their favour. Since the farm- • ing States, especially those of Republican colour, complained that the duties on primary produce as originally proposed were not high enough, the prospect of any reduction was small. The report from the Senate Committee on the bill may lie said definitely to have killed that prospect.