Page images
PDF
EPUB

CONSTERNATION EXPRESSED IN NORWAY RELATIVE TO
PROPOSED FISH DUTIES

The proposed increased duties on mackerel and herring, both pickled and salted, caused much consternation in Norwegian business circles. To the end that these articles of consumption should be placed on the free list according to present tariff law, the Norwegian Minister, H. Bryn, addressed a note to Secretary of State Hughes on August 24, 1921.

SHEFFIELD IS ALARMED OVER PENDING TARIFF LEGISLATION

The manufacturers of Sheffield, England, had been very much alarmed at the passage of the Emergency Tariff, and viewed the pending Fordney-McCumber Bill with equal concern. They were of the opinion that this tariff legislation would close the American markets to Sheffield goods. In view of this fact, representatives left Sheffield for Washington in the summer of 1921 to present their case The British government at the same time also requested the Federation of British Industries to investigate the tariff situation as to how it affected British Industries, and to lay its data before the Board of Trade so that representations might be made to the proper authorities.44

ENGLISH MANUFACTURER PLEADS FOR SHEFFIELD WORKERS

In the opinion of Arthur Balfour, managing director of a company of his name in Sheffield, England, there would be disastrous results if these tariff rates should pass Congress as proposed at that time. He appeared before the United States Senate Committee on Finance to plead for the workers of Sheffield, and represented that even though wages had increased since the war, the working people did not live on the same standard as they do in America.45

NEWFOUNDLAND PRIME MINISTER VISITS WASHINGTON
REGARDING FORDNEY-MCCUMBER TARIFF

Canada viewed with the greatest concern the prospect of the Fordney-McCumber tariff measure being enacted into law, on

44 See The London Times, August 15, 1921.

45 Hearings before the United States Senate Committee on Finance, Schedule 3, Metals and Manufacturers of High Speed Steel, pp. 1752-58.

account of the effect it would have on the Newfoundland fishing trade. Owing to this fact, Sir Richard Squires, the Prime Minister of Newfoundland, in the fall of 1921, visited Washington, and argued informally before the members of the Finance Committee of the Senate that a reduction in Newfoundland's fishing exports would follow the passage of this bill. The pending bill imposed duties on herring and cod oil, and, he testified, its operation would completely destroy a new herring industry which had been built up since the war.

As a direct result of this alarm for its national trade, a reciprocity agreement with the United States had been advocated in Newfoundland, as a solution of the problem; and although that country has shared the advantage of Canada's reciprocity agreements in the past, it lately has been legislating individually.46

CANADA CONSIDERS THAT RECIPROCITY ON ARTIFICIAL LIMBS IS LACKING IN TARIFF

At this time the Consul General at Ottawa, Canada, forwarded a letter of Mr. C. H. Scamwell, Assistant Deputy Minister of the Department of Soldiers Civil Re-Establishment. In this communication was shown a lack of reciprocity regarding the customs treatment of artificial limbs when sent to former Canadian soldiers now resident in the United States.

FURRIERS' ASSOCIATION OF FRANCE PLEADS FOR REDUCTION OF DUTIES ON RABBITS' SKINS

As the representative of the Furriers' Association of France, Harold L. Allen appeared before the United States Committee on Finance and pleaded for a reduction of proposed duties on rabbit furs. In his brief he based this request upon the fact that preferential treatment should be reciprocal with France and Belgium, since France accorded such to the United States and Belgium imposed very low duties on furs from the United States. In addition, he felt that since a most important French and Belgian industry was threatened by the proposed tariff, the only remedy 46 See London Times, October 7, 1921.

remaining to their governments was to impose an export embargo or tax on the source of raw materials for the United States.47

FRANCE DIRECTS AMBASSADOR to Represent the NUT-GROWERS' INTERESTS TO PROPER AUTHORITIES IN THE UNITED STATES

In great alarm over the provisions of the Fordney-McCumber Bill, the nut growers of the Department of Corrize petitioned Premier Briand of France to intercede for them with the United States. Their business was threatened with destruction by the excessive duties about to be established on the importation of nuts. The French Government immediately directed the French Embassy at Washington to take up the matter and present the French point of view before the proper authorities.48

FRENCH MERCHANTS WISH PROHIBITION ON WINES LIFted

In view of the fact that French wine merchants would be placed at a great disadvantage if the tariff bill, with its clauses relative to spirituous wines, should pass the Senate in its present form, M. Jules Jusserand, the French Ambassador, on November 10, 1921, drew the attention of the Department of State to the consequences which would follow if this further prohibition of wines should go into effect.

REPRESENTATIONS BY FRANCE AGAINST THE AMERICAN

VALUATION PLAN

The Emergency Tariff Act and Fordney-McCumber Bill were the subject of representations made to Secretary of State Hughes, on December 20, 1921, by the Ambassador of the French Republic M. Jules Jusserand, in behalf of the French producers. The principal objections raised in France over the tariff bill seemed to 47 See Hearings before Senate Committee on Finance, Sundries, pp. 4139-4141: The ministry of finance on March 28, 1921, issued a decree, possible under the French law, giving the United States preferential treatment, paragraph 2 of which reads:

"With regard to the United States of North America, the importations of which are subjected to the general tariff for a certain number of articles and which would have suffered under the new measure, it has been understood that the benefits of the actual general tariff will be conserved to them by the application of the provisions of the law of July 29, 1919.”

48 See New York Times, August 23, 1921 (2:1).

center around the increase of duties and the contemplated computation by the American valuation plan. He added that the silk manufacturers' protest against the inspection of books by the appraising officers of the United States, since the manufacturers fear that secrets of their trade might thus be uncovered. Since wages had risen enormously in France since 1914, all increase of duties in proposed tariff would be burdensome to the silk industries. The cotton goods manufacturers also protested against any increase in duties since the cost of production in France had perceptibly risen. The proposed duties on textiles, hosiery, carpets, gloves, cutlery, walnuts, shelled and unshelled, mushrooms, chemical products, talcum, beeswax, and hair, were also subjects of protest by the French producers of such articles.

JAPAN SHOWS CONCERN OVER THE PROPOSED DUTY ON FISH

The Japanese importers of crab meat, in the fall of 1921, presented memoranda to the Japanese Embassy to be forwarded to the United States Government. This representation showed a concern on their part as to the effect on their business of the proposed duty on such kinds of fish as were embodied in the Fordney-McCumber Bill.

FISH DUTIES THOUGHT TO CRIPPLE IRISH TRADE

The object of the mission to America of Mr. J. L. Fawsitt, Irish Trade Commissioner, was to promote amicable trade relations between Ireland and America. In connection with this, he appeared before the United States Senate Committee on Finance and pleaded for a reduction in the duties on fish. The proposed rates of the Fordney-McCumber Bill on fish products would seriously cripple the Irish trade, in his opinion, and the demand of the United States consumer of fish could not be met by our native producers.49

BELGIUM CONSIDERS RATES ON UNEXPOSED FILMS

The Belgian Embassy on October 18, 1921, addressed a note to Secretary of State Hughes relative to the proposed import rate on unexposed films in the Fordney-McCumber Bill.

49 See Hearings before United States Senate Committee on Finance; Agricultural Products and Provisions, p. 2989.

REQUEST FROM ITALY FOR LOWER RATES ON ITS PRODUCTS

A tariff commission was dispatched to Washington, D. C., by the American Chamber of Commerce of Italy, to indicate the stand of Italy on the proposed increase of duties in the pending tariff on oranges, lemons, olive oil, cheese, and other agricultural products. Lengthy conferences had been held with Senator Salmoiaghi, the President of the Italian Chamber of Commerce, regarding the attitude of the commission.50

CATTLE INTERESTS IN MEXICO ARE DISTURBED OVER
PROPOSED RATES ON BEEF

The interests of the Association of American Cattle Growers of Mexico was represented by J. A. Harper of El Paso, Texas, while the Cananea Cattle Company of Mexico was represented by Charles E. Wiswall of Cananea, Sonora, Mexico, before the United States Senate Committee on Finance. Both speakers advocated that the tariff bill be changed so that young cattle under two years of age should come into the United States duty free, for the proposed excessive rates would result in "eat no meat and eat something else" in the United States.51

CUBA AGAIN FEARS SUGAR DUTIES OF PROPOSED BILL

On November 28, 1921, the First National Congress of the Chambers of Commerce and other Cuban corporations representing thirty-five associations, was held at Havana, Cuba, as an outcome of many small meetings gathered through the island. This convention assembled for the purpose of expressing a protest against tariff legislation in the United States, as it would seriously affect the sugar industry of Cuba.

The newspapers at this time carried accounts of the telegrams forwarded to Congress and the President of the United States requesting that they prevent the passage of the Fordney-McCumber Tariff Bill so far as it contained the sugar schedule.

As a direct result of these highly protective tariffs, the Department of State has been approached by the Cuban Government 50 See New York Times, May 30, 1921 (17: 5).

51 See Hearings before U. S. Committee on Finance, Agricultural Products and Provisions, pp. 2593-2606.

« PreviousContinue »