American Wool Tariff Is Bitterly Denounced By British Newspapers

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26471, 27 May 1947, Page 5

American Wool Tariff Is Bitterly Denounced By British Newspapers

Special Correspondent Rec. 7.30 p.m. LONDON, May 26. The decision of the American House of Representatives to pass the Wool Bill, including the clauses providing for a 50 per cent, increase in tariffs on imported wool, has increased London reservations about the successful outcome to the Geneva trade talks. The reported comment of a State Department official: “If this Bill is passed by the Senate, we can kiss Geneva good-bye,” is echoed here, while the Republican remark: “ Back to the good old days of high tariffs,” is received with a mixture of bewilderment and cynicism. Three possibilities remain which may result in the clauses in the Bill affecting wool being deleted. First, the Senate may agree to throw them out; secondly, President Truman may veto them; thirdly, some way out may be found as a result of the discussions between the United Kingdom—Dominion Wool Disposals Limited and the American Commodity Credit Corporation, which holds large stocks of wool and is vitally interested in the tariff.

Even with these clauses deleted from the Bill, the last will not be heard of the subject since America already has refused to agree to the Australian request that the existing duty of 34 cents per pound should be halved.

' Comment in Britain on the possibilities of a successful conclusion to the Geneva talks h&s not been hopeful, while criticisms of the American Wool Bill have been sharp. “Other nations will not fail to observe the Irony whereby at this moment American wool interests try to raise the protection they enjoy to even higher levels,” says the Daily Herald. “The future of this Bill will test the good faith of the American approach to the problem. It is certain that other and poorer nations can accept the obligations of the proposed new charter only if the United States does the same both in letter and spirit.” “Depressing News"

it adds, is supposed to want a reduction of world trade barriers, but it ought to realise at least the elementary truth that countries which export must also import.” One-Way Trade Declaring that the “present disgraceful tariff ” prevents wool from getting into America and dollars from getting out, it says an increase in tariff must be abandoned and drastically cut down, “and there must be no strings, such as the suggestion that fees or quotas may he imposed later to protect American wool interests from more efficient producers elsewhere.”® Another angle is seen by the New Statesman and Nation. It recalls that countries were urged by Americans themselves to make no tariff increases while the Geneva discussions were pending. The paper adds: But in this, as in other instances, the Americans appear to regard themselves as exempt from any obligation to swallow their own medicine.” The New Statesman adds: “These little troubles are all to the good; for the less liberal Americans show themselves to be in practice, the less obligation is there for Britain or the Dominions to give up the preferences which the Americans denounce in the name of ‘no discrimination.’"

The Economist frankly declares that the news from Geneva is depressing. Referring to the wool dispute, it adds: “ Until this episode is safely out of the way and indeed, until the United States find themselves able to do something better than insist on the maintenance of the present excessive tariff on wool imports, it would be well to view the proceedings at Geneva as a performance of somewhat academic interest.” ✓

The Spectator, saying there is no point in mincing words, refers to the “ scandalous ” proposed duty and “ complete badness ” of the present American actions. The United States,