[Footnote 13: For example, the maximum alteration
in any year might be limited to 3.65 per cent of the
value of the goods and in any case not to exceed one
tenth of the old duty, this change to be applied day
by day. Thus, if, on a valuation of $1000, the
duty collected under the old rate has been $400, and
under the new law is to be $290.50, three years would
be required for the full change to become effective,
the reduction each day being $.10 per $1000 valuation.
The administration of such a rule would be simple,
and it has been favored by men of practical commercial
experience.]
AMERICAN TARIFF HISTORY
Sec. 1. Prevalence of protective
tariffs. Sec. 2. Specific and ad valorem
rates. Sec. 3. Some technical features
of the tariff. Sec. 4. The tariff, 1789-1815.
Sec.5. The tariff, 1816-1845. Sec.6.
The tariff, 1846-1860. Sec.7. The tariff,
1861-1871. Sec. 8. The tariff, 1872-1889.
Sec. 9. The tariff, 1890-1896. Sec. 10.
The Dingley tariff, 1897-1909. Sec. 11. Sentiment
favoring lower rates. Sec. 12. The Payne-Aldrich
tariff, 1909-1913. Sec. 13. The Underwood
tariff, 1913. Sec. 14. Some lessons from
our tariff history. Note on Tariff legislation
and business depressions.
Sec. 1. #Prevalence of protective tariffs.# For a
century and a half most serious students of economics
have favored a larger measure of freedom, if not absolute
freedom, in foreign trade. But the actual practice
of most nations has never been in accord with the principles
laid down by the philosophers. Great Britain alone
among the larger countries has, since 1846, steadily
pursued a low tariff policy for revenue only, and
her example has been most nearly followed by Holland
and Denmark. Germany, which had always had restrictive
duties, adopted still more protective measures under
Bismarck in 1879. France, Italy, and most of
the other nations of Europe have strong protective
tariffs. The United States has followed a restrictive
policy since near the beginning of the last century.
The explanation of this contradiction between precept
and practice is not entirely simple. Great interests
are affected by foreign trade and certain of these
interests are able to influence opinion and to dominate
legislation. Free trade is not the most desirable
thing for every one. The general policy of free
trade between nations, as advocated by most English
economists since Adam Smith, has usually been rejected
by the people and the legislators of other countries.
In its details American policy in tariff legislation
under the Constitution has been varied and vacillating.
The changes have been determined in most cases by
motives of temporary partisan advantage or by the
political activity of the immediate beneficiaries rather
than by clear knowledge and consistent purpose of
the electorate as a whole. Thus its lessons for
the student are largely of a negative nature, but
they well repay serious study.
