Men's Sewed Straw Hats Report of the United Stated Tariff Commission to the President of the United States (1926) — Themes and Context

The Language of Disagreement

The report's most striking feature is the inclusion of a dissenting opinion within the main text. Commissioner Costigan's statement, labeled "in part concurring and in part dissenting," directly challenges the majority's refusal to recommend both higher and lower duties simultaneously. He argues that the data "points not only to an increased duty on lower-priced hats but also to a decreased duty on higher-priced hats." This internal debate is not hidden in an appendix but presented as part of the formal submission, creating a polyvocal effect. The majority's conclusions, by contrast, are stated with collective authority: "The commission further agrees that foreign hats sold in the United States on a basis of quality rather than price are the higher-priced hats." The juxtaposition of unified and dissenting voices reveals the political and interpretive nature of tariff-setting.

Numbers as Narrative

The report's argument hinges on precise cost comparisons, but the numbers themselves become a point of contention. The majority identifies $9.50 per dozen as the "fair breaking point" between lower-grade and higher-grade hats, a threshold derived from foreign valuation. Yet Costigan questions the representativeness of the samples and the omission of importers' selling expenses. The text is dense with figures: rates of 88 percent, 105 percent, 50 percent, and 69 percent are all proposed depending on whether transportation costs are included. This numerical specificity gives the report an air of objectivity, but the competing calculations show how data can be interpreted to support different tariff policies. The reader is left to weigh the evidence themselves, as the commission offers no single definitive answer.

Pace and Procedural Framing

The report moves from the letter of transmittal to a table of contents, then to sections on domestic production, imports, and costs. This structure mirrors the step-by-step logic of an investigation. However, the pace shifts abruptly when Costigan's dissent begins, introducing a more argumentative rhythm. His statement uses headings like "Both higher and lower duties indicated" and "Some omissions from and doubtful features," which break the monotony of the majority's expository style. The final appendix, President Coolidge's proclamation, returns to formal, declarative language. This alternation between procedural reporting and contested interpretation gives the document an unexpected dynamism, as if the reader is witnessing a debate unfold in real time.

Readers should pay close attention to the footnotes and tables, particularly Table 9, which summarizes the competing cost calculations. The dissenting statement is not a mere addendum but a counterargument that exposes the assumptions behind the majority's recommendations. For those interested in the politics of trade policy, this report offers a rare glimpse into the mechanics of tariff-setting under the flexible provisions of the 1922 act.