(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Tariff hearings before the Committee on ways and means of the House of representatives, Sixtieth Congress, 1908-1909"

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
LOS ANGELES 




TAEIFF HEAKINGS 

BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 
OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTIETH CONGRESS 
1908-1909 



VOL. VIII 

APPENDIX 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1909 



COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
SERENO E. PAYNE, Chairman. 



JOHN DALZELL. 
SAMUEL W. McCALL. 
EBENEZER J. HILL. 
HENRY S. BOUTELL. 
JAMES C. NEEDHAM. 
WILLIAM A. CALDERHEAD. 
JOSEPH W. FORDNEY. 
JOSEPH H. GAINES. 
ROBERT W. BONYNGE. 

WILLIAM 
U 



NICHOLAS LONGWORTH. 
EDGAR D. CRUMPACKER. 
CHAMP CLARK. 
WILLIAM BOURKE COCKRAN. 
OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD. 
D. L. D. GRANGER. 
JAMES M. GRIGGS. 
EDWARD W. POU. 
CHOICE B. RANDELL. 
K. PAYNE, Clerk. 






\ c (o c ( 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



Volume I: Page. 

MEMBERS OF COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 60ra AND 618T 

CONGRESSES n 

PREFACE '. in 

REMARKS BY THE CHAIRMAN v 

SCHEDULE A Chemicals, Oils, and Paints 1- 579 

SCHEDULE B Earths, Earthenware, and Glassware 581-1044 

Volume II : 

SCHEDULE B (continued) Earths, Earthenware, and Glassware 1045-1310 
SCHEDULE C Metals, and Manufactures of 1311-2170 

Volume III : 

SCHEDULE C (continued) Metals, and Manufactures of 2171-2834 

SCHEDULE D Wood, and Manufactures of 2835-3248 

SCHEDULE E Sugar, Molasses, and Manufactures of 3249-3513 

Volume IV : 

SCHEDULE F Tobacco, and Manufactures of 3515-3604 

SCHEDULE G Agricultural Products and Provisions 3605-4333 

SCHEDULE H Spirits, Wines, and Other Beverages 4335-4452 

SCHEDULE I Cotton, and Manufactures of 4453-4636 

Volume V : 

SCHEDULE J Flax, Heinp, and Jute, and Manufactures of 4637-4976 

SCHEDULE K Wool, and Manufactures of 4977-5767 

Volume VI : 

SCHEDULE L Silks, and Silk Goods 5769-5876 

SCHEDULE M Pulp, Papers, and Books 5877-6389 

SCHEDULE N Sundries 6391-6790 

Volume VII: 

SCHEDULE N (continued) Sundries 6791-7339 

FREE LIST AND MISCELLANEOUS 7341-7739 

Volume VIII: t 

APPENDIX 7741-8425 

Volume IX: 

GENERAL INDEX. 



7O73O 



APPENDIX 



7741 
61318 AP 09 1 



APPENDIX. 



SCHEDULE A-CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

ACETIC ACID ANHYDRIDE. 

[Paragraph 1.] 

THE WARNER CHEMICAL COMPANY, WEST CHESTER, PA., STATES 
THAT ACETIC ANHYDRIDE HAS BEEN AND CAN BE COMMER- 
CIALLY MADE IN THIS COUNTRY. 

WEST CHESTER, PA., January 2, 1909. 
Hon. S. R. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee of Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

MY DEAR SIR: My attention has just been called to the testimony 
of O. T. Zinkeisen, chemical importer, New York City, before your 
committee in reference to duty on acetic anhydride, which under the 
present tariff carried a duty of 25 per cent ad valorem, but by Tariff 
Decision 26400 duty was assessed at 2 cents per pound. 

Mr. Zinkeisen states* that "not a pound of acetic anhydride has 
ever been made in this country which was sold in the open market." 
In reply to this, I would state, as manager -of the Chesco Chemical 
Company and its successor, The Warner Chemical Company, I have 
made and sold in the open market many tons of this chemical, and by 
the manufacture and sale assisted in the development of several of the 
industries to which reference is made. 

Mr. Zinkeisen further states that it is highly improbable that this 
chemical will be successfully made in the United States for the 
reason that a special chemical must be used, which is not, and prob- 
ably will not, be made here for a long time to come. 

In reply to this I would state that all of the chemicals used by us 
for the manufacture of acetic anhydride were made by ourselves or 
others from domestic material, and it was not then and is not now 
necessary to import any chemicals to produce this article. 

After the duty was lowered we found we could not manufacture 
the goods in competition with the German manufacturers, so we shut 
down that part of our plant, and imported through Mr. Zinkiesen, 
from Germany, sufficient acetic anhydride to fill our orders. 

Certain parties are now ready to resume the manufacture of these 
goods if the duty is restored to the old rate, and I respectfully ask 
your committee to restore the rate of 25 per cent ad valorem. 
Respectfully, yours, 

Tt FRANK WOODSIDE, 

The WARNER CHEMICAL Co. 

7743 



7744 tiCHEDULJfi A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

EXHIBIT B. 

141 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, June S9, 1905. 

DEAR SIR: We beg to advise you that we ran now offer the following goods in 
quantities to suit the purchaser, from 1 pound to 10,000 pounds: Phosphorus, stick, 
selected; phosphorus trichloride, phosphorus pentachloride, phosphorus oxychloride, 
acetyl chloride, acetic anhydride, acetic ether, butyric ether, amyl acetate, amyl 
butyrate. 

We would be pleased to receive your inquiries for any of these goods and will take 
pleasure in forwarding samples and quotations. Special prices on larger contracts. 
Respectfully, yours, 

THE WARNER CHEMICAL Co., 
T. FRANK WOODSIDE, Secretary. 



BORACIC ACID, BORAX, AND BORATES. 

[Paragraphs 1 and 11.] 

THE STERLING BORAX COMPANY, OF CALIFORNIA, SUGGESTS 
A FIFTY PER CENT REDUCTION IN THE DUTIES ON BORAX, 
BORACIC ACID, AND BORATES. 

CHICAGO, ILL., March 1, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Referring to the tariff on borax, boracic acid, and 
borates, I would advise that the Sterling Borax Company, of Cali- 
fornia, of which I am vice-president, considers that the duties on the 
above articles could be. scaled down to 50 per cent of the figures in 
the present tariff, and that if so amended the duties would give 
sufficient protection for the American industry. Our company owns 
extensive mines in California as well as controlling factories in 
Chicago and New Brighton, Pa., and we are absolutely independent 
of any other borax company. We need a certain amount of pro- 
tection against the foreign article, both from a mining as well as a 
manufacturing standpoint. We must bring our ores by rail across 
the continent, as against the South American ores, which are more 
easily mined and are close to the seaboard. The bulk of the European 
borax is manufactured from this South American ore. Furthermore, 
we need a measure of protection for our factories in Illinois and 
Pennsylvania as against the English and continental manufacturers 
of borax. This proposed 50 per cent reduction would, then give us 
the following rates of duty: 

Cnts 

Borax and boracic acid per pound.. 2$ 

Borax containing more than 36 per cent anhydrous boracic acid do 2 

Borax containing less than 36 per cent anhydrous boracic acid do 1$ 

This letter will come to you through the kindness of Congressman 
Bout oil, of your committee. 
Yours, respectfully, 

STEPHEN T. MATHER, 
Vice-President Sterling Borax Company. 



LACTIC ACID HELBUBN CHEMICAL, CO. 7745 

LACTIC ACID. 

[Paragraph 1.] 

THE HELBURN CHEMICAL COMPANY, NEW YORK, FILES ADDI- 
TIONAL BRIEF FAVORING DUTY-FREE LACTIC ACID. 

356 PEARL STREET, 
New York, January 21, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SLR: Referring to our letters of November 11 and 12, 1908, 
we beg to say that we have made further investigations in reference 
to this product, and herewith take the liberty to furnish you with 
more data and facts, which no doubt will be of interest to your hon- 
orable body and probably induce you to place lactic acid on the free 
list or reduce the duty on same. 

Referring to the bound reports of the Oil, Paint, and Drug Reporter, 
whose offices are located at No. 100 William street, New York City, 
we find that there has been exported lactic acid from the port of 
Boston to Liverpool and other foreign ports by the domestic manu- 
facturers of this product, from January 5, 1905, to December 18, 1908, 
1,398 barrels of lactic acid 50 per cent, at the average weight of 600 
pounds net per barrel, approximating 838,800 pounds of lactic acid 
50 per cent. 

The imports of lactic acid, beginning January 1, 1905, to October 
23, 1908, were 232 barrels, average weight 500 pounds, approximating 
116,000 pounds. 

The exports of lactic acid, as stated above, namely, 838,800 pounds, 
do not include the exports from New York City to Liverpool, etc., 
which, if added to the above-mentioned figure, would make the total 
quantity of lactic acid exported from this country to foreign ports 
in Europe at least 1,000,000 pounds during the above-mentioned 
period. You will therefore observe that the amount of lactic acid 
exported from this country is at least eight times that which is im- 
ported from Europe to this country. 

It proves that the domestic manufacturers of lactic acid do not 
need any protection, as they compete with the foreign manufacturer 
in the foreign territory, and further proves that the claim which the 
representative of the domestic manufacturers makes, namely, that 
they are unable to compete with the higher grades or rather stronger 
grades of lactic acid, is not borne out by facts, when such quantities 
of the domestic lactic acid are sent abroad. In addition to the Euro- 
pean exports of lactic acid by the domestic manufacturers an addi- 
tional quantity is sent by rail to Canada, where they also compete 
with the foreign manufacturer of this article. 

We beg to add the following statement : An officer of our company, 
who was formerly connected in the capacity of selling agent for the 
domestic manufacturers, states that the cost of manufacturing lactic 
acid, 22 per cent, is 1^ cents per pound, which claim he bases upon 
his knowledge that at the time of his connection with one of these 
manufacturers of lactic acid they made a 28 per cent strength, the 
cost of which was calculated at 2 cents per pound. Since then they 
have reduced the strength to 22 per cent and have formed a combina- 



7746 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

(ion with other manufacturers of this product. They control the 
domestic product and no consumer of lactic acid can purchase any 
except direct from this combination of lactic acid interests. 

The output or sales of this combination is nearly 4,000,000 pounds 
of lactic acid per annum, which increased output, in connection with 
the lower strength, namely, 22 per cent, which they now manufac- 
ture, reduces cost to 1$ cents per pound. 

Can there be any question as to whether the duty on lactic acid 
should be increased or decreased? Surely the course seems to point 
one way, namely, the latter, and in proof of our claims we urgently 
call your attention to the small imports against large exports. The 
domestic manufacturers do certainly compete with the German 
manufacturer, as the domestic manufacturer competes with the 
German manufacturer in foreign territory, as, for instance, England, 
where the domestic manufacturers advertise their product through 
their selling agent at Bradford, England, at which point the domes- 
tic product is sold and distributed over English territory; further- 
more, the lactic acid shipped from this country to England is 50 per 
cent strength, the same which the Germans ship into England, winch 
proves that the American manufacturers can make and concentrate 
a liigher strength lactic acid when they feel inclined to do so. This 
proves that the domestic manufacturer does make a high strength 
of lactic acid, and contradicts the claim or assertion of their repre- 
sentative, that they make a lower grade, and that the foreign-made 
higher grade should be put on a higher rate of duty. 

In conclusion we claim that the domestic manufacturers offer 
and sell their product in Europe and Canada at a lower figure than 
they are selling their product to the consumers in the United States, 
and do compete very favorably with lactic acid manufacturers on 
their own or foreign territory. 

Will the domestic manufacturer explain to your honorable body, 
by opening their books, and show their large exports of lactic acid 
from Boston to Liverpool, or to their advertised agent in Bradford, 
England? We hardly think so. 

Trusting you will give this matter your kind attention, we are, 
Most respectfully, yours, 

HELBURN CHEMICAL COMPANY, 
VICTOR H. BERMAN, Secretary. 



S. SAXE, NEW YORK CITY, PRESENTS FIGURES TO SHOW THAT 
LACTIC ACID NEEDS NO INCREASE OF DUTY. 

107 MANHATTAN AVENUE, 

New York, February 27, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 
DEAR SIR: Alan A. Claflin, president of the Avery Chemical Com- 
pany, of Boston, Mass., manufacturers of lactic acid; also president 
of the Lactic Process Company, of New York City, known as the "Lac- 
tic Acid Trust," comprising the three manufacturers of lactic acid in 
the United States, appeared before your committee on behalf of him- 



LACTIC ACID S. SAXE. 7747 

self and his associates on November 11, 1908, asking for a higher 
duty on lactic acid, which now has a high protective duty of 3 cents 
per pound. 

Mr. Claflin is credited with saying in public recently, "That prob- 
ably 90 per cent of the unwise legislative acts were caused by special 
interests presenting misleading facts to lawmakers." 

This is a most extraordinary statement coming from Mr. Claflin, 
in view of the very deliberate number of misstatements made by him 
to your committee, as published on November 11, 1908. 

Having been a stockholder and actively associated with the Avery 
Chemical Company from 1894 to 1903, developing the greatest present 
use of lactic acid, and again from 1904 to 1907 as stockholder, di- 
rector, and secretary of the American Acid and Alkali Company, of 
Bradford, Pa., also manufacturers of lactic acid, therefore thoroughly 
conversant with the subject, from its manufacturing and selling 
standpoints, gives me the opportunity of laying before your commit- 
tee the truthful conditions or this industry. 

Mr. Claflin in his evidence before your committee made very many 
misleading statements, particularly his fear of foreign competition, 
due to cost of raw material and labor here and abroad. 

Dwelling briefly upon the manufacture of lactic acid, will say that 
this product is made from any vegetable material which will ferment, 
such as corn, wheat, rye, or glucose, but corn has been found to be 
the cheapest, which is raised cheaply in our country. Damaged corn, 
for which there is a limited market, has been used for years by the 
Avery Chemical Company, for damaged grains make equally as good 
lactic acid and produce a cheaper article than good quality of grains. 

Mr. Claflin underrated the consumption just 100 per cent. As to 
the question of labor, it practically amounts to nothing, as the whole 
process is a fermenting one, and a half dozen wage-earners can pro- 
duce the total amount Mr. Claflin gave you as the annual production. 

The point which I desire more particularly to bring to your notice 
is the attempt on the part of Mr. Claflin to mislead your committee 
into believing that the American manufacturers of lactic acid require 
a higher protective duty than now in force under the Dingley bill, 
which is 3 cents per pound. 

The actual cost of producing lactic acid of commerce to-day in the 
United States is 1 J cents per pound, consequently under the Dingley 
Act it has a protection or 200 per cent, it is being sold at from 3 
to 4 cents per pound, as per inclosed quotations taken from one of the 
leading tanning papers, and can not be bought outside of the lactic 
acid trust, which is composed of the Avery Chemical Company, of 
Boston, Mass.; the Harrison Brothers & Co., of Philadelphia, Pa.; 
and the American Acid and Alkali Company, of Bradford, Pa. 

Mr. Claflin deliberately stated to your committee that he fears 
for himself and associates the German lactic acid, and I herewith 
inclose you statement of imports and exports of lactic acid from 
1902 to 1908, inclusive (calendar years), calling your particular 
attention to the very notable fact that the exports (which shows the 
year, dates, name of steamer, and port of destination) are all ship- 
ments solely from Boston by the Avery Chemical Company, of which 
Mr. Claflin is president. 

You will note that his company exported about four times as 
much as the total imports into the United States; and the figures given 



7748 



St IIKDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 



are outside of exports to other countries from the port of New York, 
some having gone* to Australia, South America, India, Italy, and a 
goodly percentage to Canada. 

The bulk of the exports went to England, consigned to Ernest Hick- 
son, of Bradford, England, who is the accredited agent of the Avery 
Chemical Company, as per inclosed advertisement, taken from one of 
the English papers. 

Mr. Claflin's company has been able to compete very successfully in 
England against the German manufacturers since 1895. If you will 
carefully read the summary giving the list of imports and exports, you 
will readily see how much greater the exports were than the imports. 

If the Avery Chemical Company has been able to compete in Eng- 
land since 1895 against the German manufacturers of lactic acid, your 
committee can readily judge whether the present duty of 3 cents per 
pound is not more protective than is necessary, and, in fact, question 
why it should not be cut down one-half or the article put on the free 
list. 

I can disprove many of his other statements, and am prepared to 
verify by data such items as cost of production, labor required, con- 
sumption, etc., if your committee so desires. 

It is to be regretted when manufacturers are more than necessarily 
protected that they should not be satisfied without deliberately mis- 
leading our lawmakers into advancing their selfishness. 

It is also to be regretted, particularly as in this instance, that your 
honorable committee, who are working hard to frame a fair and just 
tariff bill, should have been so imposed upon, making the task more 
difficult and arduous. 

However, the data here submitted, showing the excess of exports 
over the imports, is sufficient to guide your committee as to the cred- 
itability of Mr. Claflin's statements, and whether this article is enti- 
tled to any protection at all. 

At your service, 

Very respectfully, yours, S. SAXB. 



EXHIBIT A. Imports of lactic add into the United States from 1909 to 1908, inclusive. 



Date. 


Steamer. 


From 


Barrels. 


1902. 
January 3 


Statendam 


Rotterdam 


10 


March 21 


do 


do . 


5 


April 11 


Rotterdam 


do 


8 


May2 


Potsdam 


.do.. 


5 


Do 


Ryndam 


do. 


5 


June 13 


...do... 


do. 


5 


August 22 


do 


do 


10 


August 29 


Rotterdam. 


.do 


10 


October 3 


Noordftm , 


do 


25 


October 31 


Rynrlfvm 


do 


25 










Imported, 1902 






108 


1903. 
January 9 


Atnstftrdam 


Rotterdam 


20 


March 27 


St&tendam 


do 


18 


Do 


P atrician 




10 


My22 


Pntsrifmi 


Rotterdam 


20 


August 14 


Statendam 


do 


4 










Imported, 1903 






72 











LACTIC ACID S. SAXE. 



7749 



EXHIBIT A. Imports of lactic acid into the United States from 1902 to 1908, inclusive 

Continued. 



Date. 


Steamer. 


From 


Barrels. 


1904. 
January 8 


Rotterdam 


Rotterdam 


10 


February 26 


Statendam 


do.... 


20 


March 11 


Amsterdam ; 


do 


10 


April 1 .. 


Kroonland 


Antwerp 


10 


April 29 


Noordam 


Rotterdam... 


10 


May 20 


Rotterdam 


do 


10 


September 23 


Noordam 


...do... 


10 


December 2 


Ryndam 


. ..do 


10 


December 30 


Saestdyk 


do 


20 










Imported, 1904 






110 










1905. 
January 27 


Amsterdam 


Rotterdam. . . 


10 


March 3 


Ryndam 


. .do. 


10 


Marcb.31 


Statendftm 


do 


15 


May 26 


Potsdam 


do 


16 


September 22 


Noordam .... .... 


do . 


10 










Imported, 1905 






61 










1906. 
January 12 


Noordam 


Rotterdam 


10 


August 10 


Finland. 


Antwerp 


5 


November 2 


do 


.. .do 


10 










Imported, 1906 






25 










1907. 
January 11 


Vaterland 


Antwerp 


10 


February 21 


Finland. 


do 


10 


A ugus t 2 


Sloterdyk 


Rotterdam 


10 


October 36 


NRW Am^te'dani 


do 


10 


December 20 


Ryndam 


do 


10 










Imported, 1 907 ...................... 






50 










1908. 

January 10 . 


Amsteldyk 




10 


March 13 
April 3 


Noordam 

Ryndam.... 


do 

do 


10 
10 


May8 


Pennsylvania 




1 


June 5 


PrpxiHent TJnnnln 


do 


14 


June 12 


Ryndam ... 




10 


July 24 


Jelunga 


.do 


2 


September 18 


Patricia 


Hamburg 


20 


October23 


Augusta Victoria 


do " 


25 










Imported, 1908... 






102 



Exports of lactic acid from the United States to Europe, 1902 to 1908, from port of Boston. 



Date. 


Steamer. 


To 


Barrels. 


1902. 
January 3 


Sachem 


Liverpool 


5 


January 17 


Sagamore 


do 


17 


January 31 


Kansas 


...do... 


20 


February 7 


Sachem 


.. do... 


17 


February 28 


Norman 


...do... 


15 


March 14 


Kansas 


...do... 


10 


May 2 


Sagamore 


do 


12 


May 16 


Cambrian TOnp 


Antwerp 


10 


May 30 


r.nmmnnwftftltb 


Liverpool 


23 


June 6 


Ra-ron Ifing 


Rotterdam 


20 


July25 


Saxonia 


Liverpool 


20 


August 1 


Buenos Ayres 


Glasgow 


5 


September 12 


Sachem 


Liverpool . ......... 


16 


October 10 


Michigan 


...do... 


10 


December 5 


Victorian 


.... do : 


15 










Exported, 1902 






215 











7750 



SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 



Exports of lactic acid from the United States to Europe, 1909 to 1908, from port of Boston 

Continued. 



Date. 


Steamer. 


- 


Barrels. 


1908. 
January 9 


Cambrian King 


Antwerp 


21 


March 20 .... 


Roman 


Liverpool 


10 


March 27 


English King 


Antwerp 


5 


M iv i 


Storm King 


do 


20 


Do 


Rfybm ^ ........ 


Liverpool 


15 


May 15 


Pinemore 


Antwerp 


20 


May 29 


Chicago 


do 


25 


Do 


Mayflower 


Liverpool 


12 


June 5 . . 


Georgian 


Manchester 


12 


June 26 


Pinemore 


Antwerp 


5 


July 17 


Corean 


Glasgow 


5 


August 29 


Ultonia 


Liverpool 


8 


September 4 


Sachem 


do... 


2 


September 18 


Mayflower 


...do... 


15 


October 9. . 


Sachem 


do 


24 










Exported, 1903 






199 


1904. 


Sylvania . ... 


Liverpool . 


6 


February 12 


Cretic 


do 


10 


February 19 


Republic 


Genoa 


15 


March27 . 


Cestrian 


Liverpool 


10 


April 1 . . 


Sagamore 


do 


10 


Do 


Kingstonian 


Antwerp 


15 


April 29 


Sachem 


Liverpool 


20 


May6 ... . 


Pommfiranian 


Glasgow 


5 


June 10... 


Sylvania 


Liverpool 


10 


Do 


Sachem 


do 


10 


Do 


Cretic 


do 


10 


June 17 


Oakmore 


Antwerp 


40 


JulyS 


Sylvania 


Liverpool 


10 


August 5 


Cretic 


...do 


20 


September 2 


Sachem 


do... 


30 


October 21 


Saxonia.. 


do 


5 


October 28 


Oakmore 


Antwerp 


20 


November 11 


Sylvania.. 


Liverpool 


23 


December 30 


Cymric 


do 


15 










Exported, 1904 






284 


1905. 
January 6 


Oakmore 


Antwerp 


21 


February 17 


Sagamore 


Liverpool 


10 


March 10 


Oxonia ... 


Antwerp 


15 


March 17 


Sachem 




10 


Do 


Romanic . . 




8 


March24 


Sagamore 




17 


Aprll7 


Michigan 


do 


1C 


Do 


Oanopic. . 


Genoa 


20 


Do 


K'nj"*tn'f\Tl 




10 


May 12 


Michigan 


Liverpool 


12 


May 19 


Cymric 


do 


18 


Junn 2 


Sagapinm ... 


do 


18 


Do 


Saxonia 


do 


| 


July 14 


Sagamore ... 


do 


12 


July 21 


Michigan 


do . 


30 


August 11 


Sachem 


do 


5 


Do 


Canadian 


do 


20 


November 17 


Cymric . . 


do 


20 


December 14 


Ivernia 


do 


10 


December 8 


Sachem . . 


do 


27 


December 22 


Manitou 




39 










Exported, 1905 






338 


1906. 
January 12 


Sachem 




22 


February 16 


Ottoman 


do 


20 


March2 


Cymric 


do 


20 


March 23 
JtmeS 


Wlnnefredian 
Sagamore 


do 
do 


15 
15 


June 15 


Michigan 


do 


5 


June 29 


Cymric 


do 


23 


August 10 


Sachem . 


do 


28 


September? 


Arabic 


do 


12 


September21 


Republic 


do 


10 


November9 


Marquette. . 


Antwerp 


20 


December 14 


Arabic 


Liverpool 


40 










Exported. 1006. .. 






9=tfl 



LACTIC ACID S. SAXE. 



7751 



Exports of lactic acid from the United States to Europe, 1902 to 1908, from port of Boston 

Continued. 



Date. 


Steamer. 


TO- 


Barrels. 


1907. 
January 11 


Michigan 


Liverpool 


37 


February 15 


Dftvnniftn 


do.. 


40 


March2 


Sachem .... 


do 


34 


March 15 


Marquette 


Antwerp 


17 


April 12 


Cymric.. 


Liverpool 


29 


April 19 


Bohemian 


... .do 


20 


May 3 


Michigan. 


...do... 


15 


July 19 


Anglican 


do... 


20 


August 2 


Sagamore 


...do... 


41 


September 6 


Republic.. 


....do... 


60 


September 20 


Cymric . 


do . 


43 


October 18 


Sachem 


do 


77 










Exported, 1907 






433 


1908. 
January 17 


Michigan... 


Liverpool 


32 


January 31 


Sachem 


do 


30 


February 20 


Michigan 


do... 


28 


March 20 


Sagamore 


do 


2 


May 22 


Marquette 


Antwerp 


20 


July2 


Cymric . . 


Liverpool 


15 


July 10 


Michigan 


do 


5 


July 24 . 


Ivernia 


do 


15 


August 14 


Republic 


... .do. 


29 


August 28 


Michigan 


do... 


20 


September 18 


Sachem 


do. . 


20 


September 25 


Menominee 


Antwerp 


20 


October 9 


Republic.. 


Glasgow 


34 










Exported, 1908 






270 











RECAPITULATION. 



Year. 


Imports. 


Exports.' 


1902 . 


Barrels. 
108 


Barrels, 
215 


1903 


72 


199 


1904 , 


110 


284 


1905 


61 


338 


1906 


25 


250 


1907 


50 


433 


1908 


102 


270 










528 


1,989 



Only from Boston. 

The figures submitted were taken from the manifests published weekly by the Oil, 
Paint and Drug Reporter, the recognized standard chemical trade paper, and only 
those from the port of Boston. 

Other exports to Australia, India, and South America, etc., are not given in this 
report, having gone through the port of New York. 

Canadian exports not given, but total more than American imports from Europe. 

Boston in addition exported a very large number of 100-pound kegs, but figures are 
omitted from this report. 

Practically four times the amount exported to Europe alone than is imported, 
exclusive of exports to Canada and other countriea. 



7752 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

OXALIC ACID. 

[Paragraph 464.] 

THE AMERICAN ALKALI AND ACID CO., BRADFORD, PA., SUB- 
MITS STATEMENT OF COST OF MAKING OXALIC ACID. 

BRADFORD, PA., February 17, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: In the year 1903 a new American industry was 
started with the erection of a large factory for the manufacture <f 
oxalic acid by the American Alkali and Acid Company, in the city 
of Bradford, McKean County, Pa., and after all these years spent 
in experiments which many times met with disappointment, we 
have at last brought our factory to a successful operation; our fac- 
tory now having a capacity of 10,000 pounds per day of the finest 
quality of oxalic acid produced hi the world. 

We append hereto a statement of the cost of labor, etc., in the 
manufacture of oxalic acid, as compared with the cost of producing 
the same goods in foreign countries, calling your attention to the fact 
that we have no import duty on these goods, while the several for- 
eign countries manufacturing the goods have duties which prohibit 
us exporting oxalic acid and entering into competition with them. 

In view of the facts herewith set forth, and of the further argu- 
ments which can be brought to your attention, we trust you will 
find sufficient grounds for recommending to Congress the granting 
of our request for a duty on oxalic acid and its by-products duly set 
forth in our statement appended hereto. 

The American Alkali and Acid Company, of Bradford, Pa., incorpo- 
rated under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, was organized for 
the purpose of manufacturing oxalic acid, and 13 large buildings, 
covering nearly 6 acres of land, were built and equipped to this end, 
at a cost of $300,000. 

Up to the time the plant of the American Alkali and Acid Company 
was put in operation oxalic acid and its by-products had never been 
manufactured in the United States in a commercial way, all of the 
oxalic acid and its by-products consumed in this country having been 
imported from Germany, England, Norway, Belgium, and Austria. 

The following countries have imposed the following import duties 
on oxalic acid and its derivatives, bioxalate of potash, oxalate of pot- 
ash, and oxalate of ammonia: 

Germany (tariff No. 5): 

Oxalic acid, salts of oxalic acid, 8 marks per 100 kiloa. 
Russia (tariff No. 112): 

Chemical and pharmaceutical products 

Not especially mentioned, 2.40 rubles per pood. 
Conventional duty, 1.50 rubles per pooa. 
Spain (tariff No. 139): 

Chemical products not especially mentioned 

Imports from the United States, 0.12 peseta per kilo. 
Imports from favored nations, 0.10 peseta per kilo. 
France (tariff No. 238): 
Oxalic acid 

Imports from the United States, 15 francs per 100 kilos, net weight. 
Imports from favored nations, 12.50 francs per 100 kiloa, net weight. 



OXALIC ACID THE AMERICAN ALKALI AND ACID CO. 7753 



Austria-Hungary (tariff No. 324): 

Oxalic acid and oxalate of potash, 4 florins per 100 kilos. 
Italy (tariff No. 31r): 

Acids not especially mentioned, 10 lire per quintal. 
England: Free; no duty. 
Belgium: Free; no duty. 

NOTE. 1 mark equals 23.8 cents, 1 rouble equals 51.5 cents, 1 peseta equals 19.3 
cents, 1 franc equals 19.3 cents, 1 florin equals 48.225 cents, 1 lire equals 19.3 cents, 
1 kilogram equals 2 pounds, 1 poud equals 36^j pounds, 1 quintal equals 100 kilo- 
grams. 

These duties reduced to American money give the following: 

Cents per pound. 

Germany : Duty 0. 867 

Russia: 

Chemicals not especially mentioned 

Duty 3.424 

Conventional duty 2. 112 

Spain: 

Imports from the United States 1. 052 

Imports from most favored nations duty 877 

France: 

Imports from the United States 1. 316 

Imports from most favored nations 1. 096 

Austria: Duty 877 

Italy: Acids not especially mentioned 877 

Below is a list of the acids imported into the United States and their 
respective duties, etc., for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1904: 



Name. 


Duty. 


Quantity. 


Remarks. 


Acetic S. P 


Cts.per 
pound. 
2 
7 
3 
5 
7 
10 
Free. 
Free. 
Free. 


Pounds. 
52,914 
5,188 
82,900 
721,532 
5,546 
8,000 
6,726,159 
853,636 
2,639,481 


Produced here; protected. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Not protected here; imported. 
Not produced here; protected. 
Do. 


Tartaric 


Chromic and lactic 


Boracic 


Citric <. 


Gallic 


Oxalic 


Arsenious 


Carbolic 





All others not especially provided for, 25 per cent duty. 

It will be noticed from the above that the article oxalic acid is 
imported hi larger quantities than any other acid; also that this arti- 
cle is now produced hi this country and that it is admitted free of 
duty. The amount of oxalic acid imported free of duty in the fiscal 
year ending June, 1908, was 8,500,000 pounds. 

The most important difficulty in manufacturing oxalic acid hi the 
United States is the lack of labor skilled in this line and the extreme 
difference hi wages paid hi this country and those of Europe where 
oxalic acid is manufactured. Below is a comparison between the 
wages paid in the United States and in Germany for the same class of 
labor on the same work, based on figures made by a former superin- 
tendent of the Koepp Oxalic Acid Works, in Oestrich, Germany, 
which is the largest plant of its kind in the world, its annual output 
being 4,500,000 pounds, being about one-half of the American imports 
for the past year, as per statistics from the Department of Commerce 
and Labor. 



7754 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

Wage scale. 





Germans. 


Americans. 


Difference 
in favor of 
Germans. 


Pay per hour .. 


St. 06* 


SO. 17} 


SO. 11 


Pav DOT dav. . . 


.77 


2.10 


1.33 


Pay per week... 


4.62 


12. SO 


7.98 











Comparative pay rolls between German and American factories of the same capacity. 





Germans. 


Americans. 


Difference 
in favor of 
Germans. 


Total pay roll per day .... . 


S154.00 


S420.00 


S266.00 


Total pay roll per week . 


924.00 


2, 520. 00 


1,596.00 




48, 100. 00 


131,040.00 


82,940.00 











This difference in wages of $82,940 in favor of the German manu- 
facturers based on a yearly production of 4,500,000 pounds, gives: 

Cents. 

Difference in cost of labor per pound of oxalic acid 1. 84 

Interest on excess capital necessary for labor 16 

Extra cost per pound of oxalic acid for common labor in the United States 2. 00 

The cost of labor of chemists, superintendents, engineers, firemen, 
and factory foremen is as much greater in proportion in this country 
as that of common labor; therefore to the excess cost of common 
labor of 2 cents should be added one-quarter of 1 cent per pound, 
making a duty of 2J cents per pound on oxalic acid and its by- 
products, bioxalate of potash (salts of sorrel), oxalate of potash, and 
oxalate of ammonia. 

This duty of 1\ cents per pound on oxalic acid, bioxalate of potash, 
oxalate of potash, and oxalate of ammonia is necessary solely for 
protecting the difference in cost between American and foreign labor, 
the cost of materials used in the manufacture of the above-named 
articles not entering into the calculations. 

The oxalic-acid manufacturers of Europe have formed a syndicate 
or trust, agreeing among themselves to hold the price up hi their 
respective countries. This agreement does not effect the price of acid 
sold for export to countries not covered by the agreement, and this 
fact explains why oxalic acid was being sold by brokers in the United 
States at 6 cents per pound, while in the foreign countries affected 
by the agreement the same acid was being sold at 80 marks per 100 
kilos or at the rate of 8^ cents per pound. 

We most respectfully request the careful consideration of your 
committee on statement above. We trust we have made clear the 
necessity for a protective tariff on oxalic acid, owing to the strong 
syndicate formed by the manufacturers of these goods in Europe, and 
to their tactics as now practiced, which are and always have been 
very discouraging to new industries in this country. We, being the 
sole manufacturers of oxalic acid in America, and having brought 
the manufacture of the goods to a successful commercial basis, we 
feel that we are justified in asking for a protective tariff. 



OXALIC ACID PERFUMERY. 7755 

We respectfully ask that you recommend to the Congress of the 
United States that a tariff of 3 cents per pound be placed on oxalic 
acid and its by-products. 
Respectfully submitted. 

AMERICAN ALKALI AND ACID COMPANY, 
By LEWIS EMERY, Jr., President. 



PERFUMERY. 

[Paragraph 2.] 

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COM- 
MERCE OF NEW YORK CITY ON BEHALF OF THE FRENCH 
PERFUMERY IMPORTERS. 

32 BROADWAY, 

New York City, February 27, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : We beg to respectfully submit to your honorable body 
the following considerations: 

Articles of perfumery, upon their entry into the* United States, are 
divided into two classes by the customs act: First, products non- 
alcoholic, subject to a duty of 50 per cent ad valorem; second, alco- 
holic products, subject to two duties, (a) 60 cents per pound; (6) 45 
per cent ad valorem. 

Yet these heavy duties are, in practice, subject to a further duty 
that the Unites States customs levy on what they call the home price. 
The greater part of French firms manufacturing perfumery and 
selling their products in France and in foreign countries have to men- 
tion two prices in their catalogues because of the tax on alcohol in 
France; one of these prices, called price for foreign countries, gives 
the value of the product; the other intended for France, or home 
price, gives the selling price in France, the same comprising the value 
of the product together with the duty on alcohol in France. For 
instance : 

Roger & Gallet, 1151, 1 dozen Eau de toilette Violette de Parme: 
Price for foreign countries, 20 francs; price in France, 23 francs. 
French tax on alcohol contained in this article, 3 francs ; value of this 
article, 20 francs; price in France, 23 francs. 

This difference in price represented by the amount of tax is purely 
nominal, for when we sell to a client in France we sell to him under 
the internal-revenue tax regime. We, being the shippers, remain 
jointly responsible for the taxes, if the consignee does not pay them, 
or if he fails to comply with the formalities wnich fall to his charge on 
receipt of the goods. Not one penny of these taxes comes to us, nor 
do said taxes necessitate the circulation of any special funds on our 
part. We have shown on our price lists the price for France, which 
indicates to our clients the taxes that the State claims from them, and 
that they must pay before taking delivery of the goods. Therefore, 
these taxes can not constitute for the manufacturer a higher selling 
price or a greater profit. In other words, we have only one price. 

In spite of this evidence the American customs have always con- 
sidered the price for France as being the home market value and have 
calculated tne 45 per cent ad valorem on this price. 



7756 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

So far, the most justified protests have not succeeded in overcoming 
this arbitrary and final decision of the American customs. We have 
never been able to understand why our explanations have not been 
accepted, and we are thus placed in a most peculiar situation, since all 
our consular invoices made out in conformity with our selling prices 
are considered by the United States customs as undervalued because 
the home price arbitrarily adopted by them is superior to the price 
paid by the client. 

As a matter of fact, the amount of the tax added to the value of an 
article does not increase the market value of said article. When an 
American whisky merchant sells a bottle of whisky in his own country 
he sells it at a price "A," which comprises the value of the whisky to- 
gether with the internal-revenue tax on the whisky, but the total value 
of the product is not equal to the price "A." Witness the fact that 
when the same merchant sells the same bottle of whisky to the export 
trade, in France, for instance, he sells it at a price "A" less the internal- 
revenue tax, or at a price "B," which constitutes the home market 
value of the article. The difference represents a tax, just as in our 
tariff the apparent difference between the two prices also represents 
a tax. 

The American customs levy a tax on a local duty imposed by a 
foreign country, whilst in political economy the value or a product 
is not constituted by the tax or taxes imposed thereon. The United 
States is the only country which obliges us to put the home price on 
our invoices. 

In regard to the duties themselves we can not but remark how very 
high they are. 

Concerning the nonalcoholic products, we have figures to go by, 
and these are so eloquent in themselves that they need no comment. 
Yet it is not so for the alcoholic products, for the latter are subject to 
two duties: First, 45 per cent ad valorem; second, 60 cents per pound 
liquid contents. 

The latter tax of 60 cents per pound is, in our opinion, an exagger- 
ated overcharge, which you will readily admit, we imagine, if you 
consider the position in which the importers find themselves as com- 
pared with the American manufacturers regarding the duties on the 
alcoholic products. 

An alcoholic product imported pays 45 per cent of its value plus 
60 cents per pound, or 6.85 francs per liter, whatever may be the 
degree of alcohol of the article. 

Naturally, the American manufacturers pay nothing on the value 
of the article, but they pay a different duty on the alcohol, and we 
think this matter calls for careful consideration. 

In America the internal-revenue tax is eaual to $1 per proof spirits 

allon, or 3.02 francs per liter of pure alcohol at 100*. The tax 
iminishes in proportion to the degree of alcohol employed. 
Consequently there is a considerable disproportion (almost three- 
fold) between the duties on the alcohol whether employed by Amer- 
ican manufacturers or contained in foreign manufactures. To estab- 
lish a serious basis of discussion we ask to pay the tax on alcohol on 
its entry into the United States at the same rate as the American 
manufacturers, i. e., according to the degree of alcohol used, com- 
mencing with a maximum of 3.02 francs per liter of pure alcohol 
(100), or $1.10 per gallon proof spirit, according to the definition of 
the internal-revenue tax. We must not forget that the tax of 60 



PERFUMERY HENRY E. GOURD. 7757 

cents per pound is imposed in addition to another duty of 45 per cent 
ad valorem. For alcoholic products such as the following we pay 
taxes which amount to more than 100 per cent of the value of the 
article. 

First exhibit: Roger & Gallet; 1151; 1 dozen Eau de toilette Vio- 
lette de Parme, France, 23 "francs; foreign countries, 20 francs. Net 
value, all discounts deducted, 15.83 francs. 
Duties: Francs. 

First, 45 per cent on 23 francs, less the discounts, or 45 per cent on 18.20 
francs 8. 19 

Second, 60 cents per pound on 2.965 pounds 9. 20 

Total amount of duties 17.39 

The article being worth 15.83 francs, the percentage of duties 
amounts to 109.85 per cent. 

Second exhibit: Roger & Gallet; 1269; 1 dozen Eau de quinine, 
France, 26.40 francs; foreign countries, 21 francs. Net value, all dis- 
counts deducted, 16.62 francs. 

Duties: Francs. 

First, 45 per cent ad valorem on 26.40 francs, less the discounts, or 45 per 

cent on 20.90 francs 9. 40 

Second, 60 cents per pound on 5.80 pounds 18. 02 

Total amount of duties 27. 42 

The article being worth 16.62 francs, the percentage of duties 
amounts to 165 per cent. 

We have chosen the articles that enjoy the largest sale. It is true 
that on the very high-priced articles which always contain a small 
volume of alcohol, the tax does not weigh so heavily, but then the 
additional duty of 45 per cent is very heavy on the high-priced articles 
for which there is only a very limited number of purchasers. 

First of all, we solicit from your honorable body that our price for 
the export trade, i. e., the real value of the goods be taken as the basis 
for the duty ad valorem, the way this duty is applied at present being 
absolutely unfair. 

Then we would call the attention of your committee to the excess- 
ive duties imposed on the articles mentioned in this report. We 
request that tne alcoholic products on which the duty ad valorem has 
been paid bear the same duty on the alcohol as the article made hi the 
United States, i. e., that tney be taxed according to the degree of 
alcohol on a basis of $1.10 per gallon proof spirit. 

We beg to remind your committee of tne extremely moderate 
duties imposed on foreign perfumery when imported into France, 
whilst, as they actually stand, we can affirm that the duties collected 
in the United States on the toilet lotions, eau de quinine, hair lotions, 
cologne waters, and tooth washes are prohibitive. We think we have 
proved it clearly enough. 

We trust that you will give ample consideration to the foregoing 
remarks, and that you will realize that they have been dictated to us 
only by the desire of seeing the exchange of merchandise between 
both countries placed on a fairer basis than heretofore, which will 
promote keener competition for the benefit of the consumer and cor- 
dial business relations between the United States and France. 
Very respectfully, 

THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, 
HENRY E. GOURD, President. 

61318 AP 09 2 



7758 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

ARSENIATE OF LEAD. 

[Paragraph 3.] 

HEMINGWAY & CO., NEW YORK, ASK FOR REDUCTION OF DUTY 
ON ARSENIATE OF LEAD USED AS AN INSECTICIDE. 

133 FRONT STREET, 
New York City, February 4, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

WatMngton, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: On October 31, 1908, Mr. L. A. Coolidge, Assistant 
Secretary of the Treasury Department, Division of Customs, Wash- 
ington, D. C., wrote to me advising that arseniate of lead as wet pulp 
and arseniate of lead as dry powder is assessed with duty as chemical 
compounds under paragraph 3 of the tariff act at the rate of 25 per 
cent ad valorem. 

I venture to call your attention to the fact that absolutely the only 
use of arseniate of lead in either pulp or dry powdered form is as an 
insecticide, and that other insecticides, namely Paris green and 
London purple are specially provided for in the tariff at 15 per cent 
ad valorem. 

I respectfully suggest that, insomuch as agriculturists, horticultur- 
ists, and particularly cotton planters, would greatly benefit by a 
lower rate of duty on wet pulp or dry powdered arseniate of lead, 
and as the existing tariff on this commodity is for revenue purposes 
only, that it be assessed with duty at the rate of 15 per cent ad 
valorem. 

Respectfully, FRANK HEMINGWAY. 

HON. ROBERT I. TAYLOR, SENATOR, FILES LETTER OF H. A. 
MORGAN, KNOXVILLE, TENN., ASKING REDUCTION OF DUTY 
ON ARSENIATE OF LEAD. 

SENATE CHAMBER, 

Washington, D. C.. February 21, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. 

GENTLEMEN: Letter of Dr; H. A. Morgan, Knoxville,. Term., 
respectfully referred to committee. Doctor Morgan is a scientific man 
and his opinion should carry weight. 

ROBERT L. TAYLOR. 



KNOXVILLE, TENN., February 17, 1909. 
Senator ROBERT L. TAYLOR, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I beg to call your attention to the effort that has been made during the 
past few years to develop a powdered form of arseniate of lead. This insecticide will 
have a much wider use than Paris green or London purple and will be especially 
valuable in the control of fruit, truck, tobacco, and cotton insects in Tennessee. 

In the proposed revision of the tariff I understand that Paris green and London 
purple are scheduled for about 12$ per cent ad valorem, while arseniate of lead remains 
25 per cent. If a reduction can be made in the case of arseniate of lead, it will place 
upon the markets of our State a cheap and most effective insecticide. Anything you 
can do toward having the tariff on araeniate of lead reduced will, I am sure, be greatly 
appreciated by the farmers of Tennessee. 

With kindest regards, very truly', yours, 

H. A. MORGAN, 
Director University of Tennessee, 
College of Agriculture and Experiment Station. 



ARSEXTATE OF LEAD C. E. JACKSON. 7759 

C. E. JACKSON, MIDDLETOWN, CONN., WISHES ARSENIATE OF 
LEAD PLACED ON SAME BASIS AS OTHER INSECTICIDES. 

MIDDLETOWN, CONN., Febrnar>i 25, 1909. 
Hon. E. J. HILL, M. C., 

^Yashington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Your kind assistance in reference to the establishment 
of an experiment station in Mississippi to deal with the boll weevil 
has been so much appreciated by some of our southern friends that 
they have asked us to call your attention to another matter which 
has been called to their attention by Mr. Wilmon Newell, secretary 
of the State Pest Commission of Louisiana, that is, in regard to the 
proposed changes in the tariff in regard to Paris green, London purple, 
ancl powdered lead arseniate, the duty on all of which now stands at 
25 per cent ad valorem, and it is proposed to reduce the duty on Paris 
green and London purple to about 12 per cent or 15 per cent ad 
valorem, leaving the duty on the powdered lead arseniate as it now 
stands, at 25 per cent. 

During the past two years powdered arseniate of lead has been used 
with excellent success on cotton, and it is stated that it is quite cer- 
tain that this insecticide will replace Paris green for use in fighting 
cotton insects, particularly the cotton-leaf worm and cotton boll- 
worm. It is barely possible also that it will prove more or less 
effective against the boll weevil, for experiments in this direction are 
now being conducted with promise of some success. 

The powdered arseniate of lead is preferable to Paris green for use 
on cotton, for the reason that it is cneaper, and also that it contains 
no soluble arsenious oxide which Paris green contains in amounts 
varying from 2 to 5 per cent. The high content of soluble arsenic in 
the Paris green causes it to injure and stunt cotton to which it is 
applied. 

In view of these facts it will undoubtedly be a marked advantage 
to the southern cotton planters if Congress would reduce the tariff 
on powdered arseniate or lead to the same basis as that of Paris green 
and London purple. 

Much of the arseniate of lead is manufactured abroad, and Ameri- 
can manufacturers are certain to keep up the price so long as this 
high duty on the imported articles remains in effect, and the farmer 
will have to foot the bill. 

I might add that this same preparation is being used very effect- 
ively in spraying shade trees, and has proved most effective in pro- 
tecting them from the attacks of bisects, and in view of the very 
apparent effectiveness of this article over all others it would seem 
very advisable that it should be placed in the hands of consumers at 
as low a rate as is possible, and certainly on an equal basis with other 
insecticides, so that the increased effectiveness of powdered arseniate 
of lead may not be offset by the higher cost. . 

We ask your kind attention and action in this matter with the 
committee, as we are much interested with our southern friends and 
correspondents. 

Yours, very truly, C. E. JACKSON, Vice-President. 



7760 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

BARIUM SALTS. 

[Paragraph 3.] 

JOHN T. WILLIAMS & SON, NEW YORK, RECOMMEND SPECIAL 
CLASSIFICATION FOR VARIOUS SALTS OF BARIUM. 

114116-118 LIBERTY STREET, NEW YORK, 

Saturday, January 9, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman of Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Not being advised when your committee will hear 
arguments as to the increase and decrease of duties on barium salts, 
we take this opportunity of presenting the matter to you. There 
have been several attempts in this country to manufacture barium 
salts, but up to the present time the business has not been found 
profitable, owing to the fact that the cost of labor, which is a large 
item of expense, has been too great to successfully compete with these 
products manufactured abroad. This applies to binoxide of barium, 
chloride of barium, carbonate of barium, blanc fixe (sulphate of 
barium), nitrate of barium. 

The duty on these salts of barium is 25 per cent ad valorem, except 
on blanc fixe (the sulphate of barium), which is one-half cent per 
pound. The carbonate of barium is imported under the name of 
"witherite" (a native mineral) and comes in free, although there 
is now a suit between the Government and the importers as to whether 
the artificial precipitated carbonate of barium should not pay duty 
as a chemical salt at the rate of 25 per cent ad valorem, but this suit 
has not yet been decided. 

We would respectfully ask your committee to increase the duty on 
the following salts: Chloride of barium, carbonate of barium, nitrate 
of barium, blanc fixe or artificial sulphate of barium, satin white or 
artificial sulphate of lime, to 1 cent per pound, as this would enable 
the manufacturers of chemicals in this country to produce these 
articles here in competition with the foreign goods. Over 70 per 
cent of the entire cost of these articles would be in the labor, including 
the mining of the ore, the hauling of same, and the working of the 
ore up into these various chemicals. 

Binoxide of barium, another salt of barium, has never been made 
in this country, and Is used for the purpose of producing peroxide 
of hydrogen. The dut3 r on this salt is 25 per cent ad valorem; the 
product is only made in Germany and England, and we can not make 
it here in competition with the conditions existing in those countries. 
We would respectfully ask that the duty on this material be increased 
to 40 per cent ad valorem, which would allow of its manufacture here. 

We have not gone into the question of the amount of these materials 
which are imported, as your committee have this data before them, 
but the value, as you will see by the importations, exceeds the sum 
of $500,000, and the manufacture in this country would be of advan- 
tage, owing to the amount paid out for labar and also to the manu- 
facturing chemists, as it would lead to the production of other mate- 
rial in connection with the salts of barium. 

Respectfully submitted. 

JOHN T. WILLIAMS & SON, 
Per JOHN T. WILLIAMS. 



ESSENTIAL, OILS AND OLIVE OIL HENRY E. GOURD. 7761 

ESSENTIAL OILS AND OLIVE OIL. 

[Paragraphs 3 and 40.] 

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COM- 
MERCE, NEW YORK CITY, ON BEHALF OF THE IMPORTERS 
OF FRENCH OLIVE OIL AND ESSENTIAL OILS. 

32 BROADWAY, 

New York City, February 27, 1909, 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, Z>. 0. 

GENTLEMEN: The importers of French olive oils beg to submit 
respectfully to your honorable committee the following remarks, and 
trust that it will give them the proper attention: 

We understand that the domestic producers of olive oils have 
requested your committee to increase the duty on imported olive oils, 
and, in fact, to double it. They claim that if their request was com- 
plied with California could supply the entire demands of the United 
States, and in their report of November 11 they state that the home 
production amounts to 350,000 gallons, or about, and they acknowledge 
that the importation of foreign oils reaches 3,450,000 gallons, or about. 
Consequently it appears to us very difficult to reconcile their asser- 
tion with the facts, as there would only be two ways of arguing their 
side of the case as presented by them. Either many people in the 
United States would have to dispense with the use of olive oil and, 
as you know, this product is commonly consumed all through the 
country for table and medicinal purposes, and it is a well-known fact 
that many invalids, amongst whom are consumptives, are prescribed 
olive oil by the doctors, as it is quite beneficial in many cases or the 
production of California olives would have to increase ten times at 
once to meet the demand, and everybody knows that the growth of 
the olive tree is exceedingly slow and tnat it takes many years to 
produce olives fit to be employed in the manufacture of oil. 

Consequently it would be impossible for the public to procure good 
olive oil, except at such high prices that very few might afford to pay. 
The result would be, therefore, that under the denomination of olive 
oil the public would be literally poisoned by all kinds of concoctions 
in which the fruit of the olive tree would play but a very small part, 
and we believe that it has been the purpose of the Government, as 
shown by the creation of the Bureau of Chemistry, to assure pure 
food to the consumer, and in the case of olive oil high duties would 
have exactly the contrary effect. 

On the other hand, as we understand that it is the purpose of the 
Treasury Department to try to increase its revenue from the collection 
of duties instead of being obliged to resort to direct or indirect taxa- 
tion, it seems to us that, by reducing the duties on olive oil consider- 
able revenue might be obtained without doing any harm to the home 
industry, which can only gradually develop and will always find a 
ready market for its products. 

Therefore we would suggest that in consideration of the above 
remarks your honorable body should take into consideration the 
advisability* of reducing the present duty on olive oils, which amount 
to 60 francs per 100 kilograms for oil in wood, and 74 francs per 100 
kilograms on the value of the oil besides the duty collected on the 



7762 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

bottles, tins, labels, corks, etc., a duty that has no equivalent in the 
French tariff on any class of goods. 

We would call also the attention of your committee to some essential 
oils manufactured in France, which are actually taxed at 25 per cent 
ad valorem, and which are not manufactured and can not be produced 
in the United States, but which are employed here in large quantities 
for the soap and perfumery industries, and ought to be considered 
practically as raw materials. They are: Extracts of rosewood, pro- 
duced in French Guiana; extracts of geranium, shipped from Tunis 
and Algeria, or from the Island of Reunion, or from Grasse and 
Cannes; extracts of myrtle, from the south of France, Corsica, 
Algiers, and Tunis; extracts of orange flower water and jasmine, from 
Cannes or Grasse. 

We ask that all these raw materials, employed extensively by the 
home industries, and which do not constitute a competition to any 
American manufacturers, should be placed on the free list. 

Trusting that you will give the above considerations the kind 
attention which they deserve, in our opinion, W T C remain, gentlemen, 
Respectfully, yours, 

THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, 
HENRY E. GOURD. President. 



SULPHATE OF AMMONIA. 

[Paragraph 5.] 

THE SEMET-SOIVAY COMPANY, SYRACUSE, N. Y., WISHES PRES- 
ENT DUTY ON SULPHATE OF AMMONIA MAINTAINED. 

SYRACUSE, N. Y., January 12, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We respectfully petition that the specific tariff on sul- 
phate of ammonia be retained at the present figure, on the ground 
that it is practically a revenue tariff paid by the foreign manufacturer. 

COMPARISON CHILEAN NITRATE OF SODA AND SULPHATE OF AMMONIA. 

For the purpose of the farmer and the fertilizer manufacturer, 
Chilean nitrate of soda (on the free list) and sulphate of ammonia 
are interchangeable, and on the basis of their ammonia or nitrogen 
content the prices are practically equal. During the calendar year 
1907 the imports of nitrate of soda were 364,610 tons; of sulphate of 
ammonia, 35,220 tons. For the fiscal year ending June, 1908, the 
imports of nitrate of soda were 330,090 tons ; of sulphate of ammonia, 
38,273 tons. For nine months of the calendar year 1908 the imports 
of nitrate of soda were 220,382 tons; of sulphate of ammonia, 22, 207, 
tons. 

PRICE OF SULPHATE OF AMMONIA BASED ON CHILEAN NITRATE OF SODA. 

Especial attention is called to the fact that, so far as we are able to 
obtain the information, Chilean nitrate of soda has always been on 
the free list; that it is always possible, if at any time the price of 
sulphate of ammonia appears too high to the fertilizer manufacturer, 



SULPHATl. OF AMMONIA SEMET-SOLVAY CO. 7763 

to turn to Chilean nitrate of soda, which is on the free list. There was 
a time when practically no sulphate of ammonia was made in this 
country, and at that time nitrate of soda was generally used hi ferti- 
lizers. As the manufacture of sulphate of ammonia grew, it was only 
with the greatest difficulty that fertilizer manufacturers could be per- 
suaded to substitute it instead of Chilean nitrate of soda. The ratio 
of nitrogen or ammonia content between sulphate of ammonia and 
Chilean nitrate of soda is 25 to 19. The price of sulphate of ammonia 
(25 per cent ammonia) in New York ports at the present time is 2.80 
to 2.90 cents per pound, and the price of 95 per cent nitrate of soda 
2.20 cents. Reducing the ammonia content in sulphate of ammonia 
to a price comparative with the price of Chilean nitrate we find the 
following comparison : 

Sulphate reduced to nitrate basis, 2.13 to 2.20 cents; nitrate, 2.20 
cents. 

Does not this prove that the price is made by Chilean nitrate of soda, 
and at the same time show that the foreign manufacturer of sulphate 
of ammonia, who is dumping his excess production in this country, 
pays the tariff and would be the person benefited if the tariff on 
sulphate of ammonia were removed? 

A point to be borne in mind is that the United States is the outlet 
for the surplus of sulphate of ammonia produced in Europe. If the 
tariff were removed it does not appear that the surplus of Europe 
would be increased, and therefore tne stimulus of the production hi 
the United States would be removed, forcing any shortage of nitrogen 
to be made up by the importation of Chilean nitrate of so da, which is 
on the free list. 

REVENUE TO THE UNITED STATES. 

The revenue to the United States from the tariff on sulphate of 
ammonia for the fiscal year ending June, 1908, was $229,638. 

TARIFF ON SULPHATE OF AMMONIA DOES NOT AFFECT THE PRICE. 

We submit a table showing the price of sulphate of ammonia com- 
mencing at a period long before there were any retort or so-called 
by-product ovens in the United States, and also showing the tariff on 
sulphate of ammonia during that period. The comparisons of the 
lines will show that the movement of prices of sulphate of ammonia 
does not correspond with the fluctuations of the tariff, proving, there- 
fore, that it has been purely a revenue tariff. 

OPERATORS OF RETORT COKE OVENS OR SO-CALLED BY-PRODUCT OVENS. 

It has been stated before your committee that the persons inter- 
ested in producing sulphate of ammonia are the steel men the men 
who manufacture coke. A study of the retort coke-oven plants of 
this country shows that there are 24 such plants. Of these, only 8 
are operated by steel or iron companies, so that their profits can be 
applied to the production of steel or iron. The remaining 16 depend 
on the returns from the so-called by-products for covering the cost 
of operation and for their profits, and do not participate in the profits 
from steel or i-ron. In addition, a certain amount of sulphate of 
ammonia is made by gas works and some manufacturers not hi any 
way allied with the "steel or iron industry. 



7764 SCHEDULE A CHEMTCATS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

As a general proposition the coke from a retort coke oven is sold at 
a price equal to the cost of the coal required to make it plus the 
freight on the coal. There is almost no profit in the coke itself, manu- 
factured in this way, and therefore no margin to pay for labor. There- 
fore labor and capital must look for then* returns from the value 
receh ed for the so-called by-products. No retort coke oven plant is 
built without a full consideration of the value to be received from all 
the products produced from it, and therefore the word "by-product" 
does not represent an extra profit to be added to the legitimate profit. 

HISTORICAL. 

The first retort coke ovens built in the United States were con- 
structed in the year 1892, but the tariff acts of 1883 and 1890 carried 
a duty on sulphate of ammonia, and it can fairly be said that the 
retort coke oven industry started to grow under the protection of the 
tariff on sulphate of ammonia. 

This growth has been slow, owing to the large amount of capital 
required in the plant investment as compared with the small amount 
required in the investment in the wasteful form of coke oven called 
the "beehive." The reason for this slow growth is that the business 
has only been moderately remunerative and capital could be employed 
in other directions whicn were more remunerative. 

NITROGEN FROM THE ATMOSPHERE EXTRACTED BY WASTE-WATER 

POWER. 

At the present time the great future source of nitrogen to restore 
the decreasing productiveness of our farming lands is from the air 
produced by the use of our water powers, which are now being wasted 
in remote places. The attention of scientists all over the world is 
bejng given to developing this method, but in order to make it suc- 
cessful capital must be induced to develop these water powers and 
exploit this method of manufacture. This would make sulphate of 
ammonia available at points remote from the seaboard and coal- 
mining districts, but where waste-water power is available. The work 
of scientists may be given to this process, but it can only be effective 
by making the industry attractive to capital, and any efforts which 
may result, directly or indirectly, in reducing the present prices of sul- 
phate of ammonia would work against the development of this highly 
desirable method of manufacture. 

WORK OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. 

The waste of sulphate of ammonia and tar going on from the dis- 
tillation of coal in oeehive ovens has been contemplated with great 
uneasiness by the Bureau of Mineral Resources attached to the 
Department of the Interior. At the present time but 12 per cent of 
the coal coked is prepared in retort ovens, as against 88 per cent in the 
wasteful beehive oven. The Department of the Interior has for many 
years endeavored to stimulate the building of retort coke ovens, in 
order to conserve the enormous values now being wasted in the manu- 
facture of coke. The returns from retort coke ovens are moderate, 



SULPHATE OF AMMONIA. 7765 

and at the present time the rate of increase in the building of these 
ovens has been seriously checked. If, as stated by the interests in 
favor of the removal of the duty on sulphate of ammonia, the price 
will decrease to an amount of the duty, it can be seen from the above 
arguments that the building of retort coke ovens will be still further 
checked, if not entirely stopped, and the efforts of the Department of 
the Interior will not therefore have borne the fruit the department 
desired in conserving the fertilizing values in the coal. It has been 
shown by Professor Monroe, of the Department of the Interior, that if 
the coke which was produced hi 1907 had all been made in retort coke 
ovens, which saved the ammonia, the supply of ammonia would have 
been increased by the equivalent of 455,000 tons of sulphate of 
ammonia. Compare this with the importations of nitrate of soda in 
the calendar year 1907, amounting to 364,610 tons. 

Does not this show that the proper method of increasing the enor- 
mous supplies of nitrogen and ammonia that the United States needs 
is by stimulating the construction of retort coke ovens rather than 
by removing a duty on sulphate of ammonia, which will simply benefit 
the foreign manufacturer and only slightly, if any, increase the 
imports? This method of reasoning seems to be clear, as the duty- 
free Chilean nitrate of soda always acts as a check on any abnormal 
increase of the price of sulphate of ammonia. 
Yours, very truly, 

SEMET-SOLVAY COMPANY, 
E. L. PIERCE, Vice-President. 



THE NEW ENGLAND GAS AND COKE CO., BOSTON, OPPOSES 
EEMOVAL OF DUTY FROM SULPHATE OF AMMONIA 

SHAWMUT BANK BUILDING, 

Boston, Mass., January 16, 1909. 
The Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: On behalf of the parties engaged in the construction 
and operation of by-product COKC ovens in this country, we wish 
to protest against the suggestion advanced by the Bowker Fertil- 
izer, the American Agricultural Chemical Company, Mr. J. C. Kala- 
nianaole, M. C., and others before your committee, that the present 
tariff on sulphate of ammonia be removed. 

The existing retort coke-oven plants are at present the only pro- 
ducers of sulphate of ammonia, and the plants to be built in the 
future are the only probable sources of important increase hi its 
production, therefore both industries are alike menaced by the 
removal of the present moderate protection. 

For the sake of convenience we will present our arguments for 
the retention of this duty in brief form, under separate heads. 

PRESENT TARIFF IS NOT INCONSISTENT, AS CLAIMED. 

Sulphate of ammonia is the only fertilizer that we produce in this 
country in competition with the imported article; Chilean nitrate, 
potash, kainit, and guano are not found in this country, while super- 



7766 



SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 



phosphates, dried blood, tankage, and cotton-seed meal are not im- 
ported. Sulphate of ammonia, being both produced and imported, 
stands on a different basis than any 01 these, and should be protected. 
It has also to meet the severe competition of duty-free Chilean nitrate 
of soda. 

The importation of sulphate in mixed fertilizers, claimed as incon- 
sistent and in favor of foreign manufacturers, is admitted by Mr. 
Bowker to be commercially impossible. 

FREE NITROGEN. 

"Free nitrogen for the farmer" is only a catch phrase. Whether 
sulpbate of ammonia be imported free or with duty is a commercial 
proposition, and should be decided as such. It can be shown that 
making this particular form of nitrogen free will check the develop- 
ment of our national resources of nitrogen, and work injury to our 
agriculture as a whole. 

PRESENT RATE OF PROTECTION IS MODERATE. 

The existing tariff is between 11 and 12 per cent, far below the 45 
per cent rate prevailing on manufactured articles in general. 



SULPHATE OF AMMONIA IS ALREADY CHEAPER. 

Average market price, New York, 1908. 





Per ton of 
2,000 
pounds. 


Nitrogen 
content. 


Cost Of 
1 pound of 
nitrogen. 


Sulphate of ammonia 


$59.90 


Per cent. 
20.59 


Centf. 
14.57 


CmlfiRn nitraf "f S"d 


45.60 


15.65 


14.60 











Away from the seacoast sulphate is comparatively still cheaper, 
as it is made at inland points, so local freights only need to be added. 
Chilean nitrate must always pay freight from a seaport. 

The agricultural experiment stations of Maine, Massachusetts, New 
Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, Connecticut, and New York have 
for three years past recognized sulphate of ammonia as a cheaper 
form of nitrogen than Chilean nitrate or any other equivalent nitro- 
genous fertilizer, and have so published it in their tables of trade 
valuations. These values are supposed to show the retail price. 

Cents per pound. 

Nitrogen in ammonia* salts 17$ 

Nitrogen in nitrates 18$ 

Organic nitrogen in dry and ground fish, meat and blood, and in mixed ferti- 
lizers 20$ 

Organic nitrogen in fine bone and tankage 20$ 

These figures show conclusively that the introduction of sulphate 
of ammonia does not depend upon a lowering of the price. As manu- 
factured here it is already the cheapest form of chemical nitrogen 
available to the farmer. 



SULPHATE OF AMMONIA NEW ENGLAND GAS & COKE CO. 7767 

On the 32,668 tons imported in 1907 the duty collected was 
$196,000, and on the 34,224 tons imported in 1908 the duty was 
$205,000. 

SULPHATE PRACTICALLY ALL USED BY FERTILIZER MANUFACTURERS. 

Between 85 and 90 per cent of the sulphate of ammonia made in 
and imported into this country is used in agriculture, and of this 
practically all is used by the fertilizer manufacturers. Buying the 
ingredients separately and mixing them at home is universally 
recommended by the agricultural stations, but the farmer is slow to 
adopt this method, in spite of the paving. It is done extensively 
abroad, where much more sulphate is used. 

DIRECTORS OF AGRICULTURAL STATIONS REQUESTED TO WRITE ON 
BEHALF OF FREE SULPHATE. 

The expressions of opinion by the station directors to the Ways 
and Means Committee nave not been spontaneous, but at the sug- 
gestion of Mr. Bowker. This is also apparent from the similarity of 
argument and statement to that effect. Dr. W. H. Jordan, who writes 
favoring free sulphate, calls attention to the fact, however, that 
there is danger that placing sulphate on the free list will advantage 
the fertilizer manufacturer more than it will the farmer. Others 
advocate free sulphate provided other industries are not injured. 
These gentlemen are all acting from the' best of motives and con- 
ceive they are promoting the Best interests of the farmer, but have 
not had opportunity to become acquainted with the industrial side 
of the question. Were they to hear the other side they might modify 
their opinions. 

REMOVAL OF THE DUTY WOULD BENEFIT THE FERTILIZER MANUFAC- 
TURER, NOT THE FARMER. 

The amount of ammoniacal nitrogen actually used in fertilizers is 
negligible. For 247 brands registered for sale in Connecticut it is 
under 1 per cent. For 15 brands of Bowker Fertilizer Company's 
make it averages 0.84 per cent. (See Table 1.) This corresponds to 
4 per cent of sulphate of ammonia, or 80 pounds per net ton of mixed 
fertilizer. Cost of sulphate at present prices $2.28, duty 24 cents. 
Average retail selling price of the 15 Bowker fertilizers, $37.18 per 
ton. Average value, $23.44 (see Exhibit A), according to agricultural 
station valuations, in which retail prices of fertilizing ingredients are 
used. Discrepancy, $13.74, to which must be added the saving to 
the manufacturers by buying in quantity, e. g., sulphate at $57 instead 
of $72.50 per ton, etc. This difference covers only cost of handling and 
mixing, all other charges being included in valuation figure. Where 
the margin of profit is already so great, there is no chance that a saving of 
24 cents would reach the farmer. The saving due to removing the duty 
will all go to the fertilizer manufacturer. (See Connecticut Agri- 
cultural Experiment Station Report 1908 for analyses and valuations.) 

The American Agricultural Chemical Company, who ask for 
removal of duty on sulphate, and who import possibly one-half or 
two-thirds of the sulphate to this country, will save a corresponding 
proportion of the $205,000 duty collected the past year, a sum worth 
arguing for. 



7768 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

If asked for his opinion, he would doubtless say that he did not use 
sulphate of ammonia as such, and that the amount in the mixed fer- 
tilizers he used was too small for the removal of the difty to affect the 
cost to him; which is an exact statement of the case. 

EFFECT OF TARIFF REDUCTION ON RETORT COKE-OVEN INDUSTRY. 

The coal-gas works of the country do not make sulphate, the retort 
coke ovens, working on a larger scale, alone being aole to stand the 
higher labor cost for sulphate manufacture. The market for ammo- 
nia in other forms than sulphate is supplied. Hence additonal ovens 
must make sulphate. Exnibit B shows imports, production, con- 
sumption, and average market quotations of sulphate (and sulphate 
equivalent) since 1903. Note steady drop in price for past four years. 
Actual selling prices are usually below market quotations. 

Coincident with the fall in ammonia prices the number of retort 
ovens under construction has suffered a striking decrease, as shown in 
Exhibit C. 

This slackening in progress is all due to fall in price of by-products, 
as coke has fulfilled all expectations. The depletion of the coal fields 
that yield standard coke in the beehive ovens has forced blast-furnace 
operators to erect retort ovens; but this has been done unwillingly, and 
action has been postponed as long as possible. This reluctance is 
partly because the investment in a retort oven plant is about three 
and one-half times heavier than for beehives for the same daily coke 
output. 

A number of retort coke-oven plants supply coke for the foundry, 
domestic and general fuel trade, and make illuminating gas as well. 
The latter is an essentially American development and promises to be 
the best source of cheap artificial gas. Domestic coke is also the only 
practical substitute for anthracite coal, and because of its smokeless- 
ness its use is strongly advocated in the cities of the Middle West, 
where anthracite is too expensive. Progress hi all these directions 
will be hampered by the removal of the duty on sulphate of ammonia 
and the consequent halt in retort-oven construction. 

TO STOP RETORT-OVEN CONSTRUCTION WILL INJURE AMERICAN AGRI- 
CULTURE. 

Each acre of a 4-foot vein of average coking coal \\ ill yield enough 
sulphate to fertilize an acre of land above it for four hundred and 
eighty years. This fertility should serve as a return to the farmer 
for the agricultural desolation in coal-mining regions. Instead, it 
is resolved into its elements and comes back mingled v ith the smoke 
of chimneys and beehive ovens, blasting vegetation rather than nour- 
ishing it. In 1907, 66,000,000 tons of coal were carbonized in coke 
ovens and gas retorts, \\hich would have yielded 660,000 tons of 
ammonium sulphate if treated in recovery plants. Instead of recov- 
ering this we imported 322,195 tons of nitrate of soda duty free, 
besides 32,668 tons of sulphate of ammonia. Only 17.5 per cent of 
the coal carbonized was treated in recovery plants, and the actual 
ammonia obtained, all reckoned as sulphate, amounted to 97,310 
net tons. Of this the retort coke oven supplied 62,700 tons, or 65 
per cent, increasing from 56 per cent in 1905. 



SULPHATE OF AMMONIA NEW ENGLAND GAS & COKE CO. 7769 

Regarding loss of valuable by-products and economical importance 
of retort coke ovens, see Bulletin No. 65, Department of Commerce 
and Labor, page 18, by Prof. Chas. E. Munroe, and Geological Sur- 
vey Bulletin, "Manufacture of coke in 1907," pages 23-30, by Dr. 
E. W. Parker. For statistics of ammonium sulphate see accompa- 
nying article, "The production of ammonium sulphate," by C. G. 
Atwater. 

After fifteen years, retort coke ovens produce only 14 per cent of 
the metallurgical coke made. (See Exhibit D.) If tariff on sul- 
phate of ammonia is removed, prematurely, there is no hope for 
better progress. 

THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DOES NOT AID PROPAGANDA FOR 
USE OF SULPHATE OF AMMONIA AMONG FARMERS. 

In Germany, where 263,000 tons of sulphate were used in 1907, 
the Government promotes its use by experiments and instruction. 
No such campaign has been undertaken here, so the farmer is largely 
ignorant of its advantages. Introduction work has been left to the 
initiative and cost of the producers Quantity and margin of profit 
have never sufficed for such a campaign of education. If induce- 
ments to manufacturers are decreased, sulphate of ammonia cer- 
tainly will not be made in increasing quantities nor will it be placed 
before the farmer as a competitor witfi other forms of nitrogen. 

RELATION OF THE SURPLUS PRODUCTION IN ENGLAND TO OUR MARKET. 

England is the largest manufacturer of sulphate of ammonia for 
export and sells to all the other nations whose coal resources are 
not great enough to produce their own supply. Realizing that the 
United States was destined in time to be the greatest producer of 
ammonium sulphate because of its wealth in coal, England has not 
exploited this country as a market as it has other countries, but has 
dumped its surplus production here from time to time at a concession 
in prices in order to maintain rates elsew^here. Owing to the demands 
of other countries, which once developed will remain permanent cus- 
tomers, no large proportion of England's output will be diverted to 
this country in any event. 

In case the tariff is removed the present imports may be doubled 
or trebled; but what proportion does a probable 100,000 tons of sul- 
phate ammonia bear to the present annual imports of 322,000 tons 
of Chilean nitrate, or to the 900,000 tons of blood and tankage esti- 
mated as the annual product of the packing-house industries, or to 
the 6,000,000 tons or cotton seed annually produced, over half of 
which goes back to the soil in one form or another as a nitrogenous 
fertilizer? What proportion would the possible saving in duty on 
even the above amount of imported sulphate of ammonia be com- 
pared with the $58,000,000 representing the value of the fertilizers 
annually produced and consumed in this country? 

The only logical way to really develop the stores of nitrogen that 
are available For the use of the American farmer in our bituminous 
coal is to continue the tariff protection now placed on it until such 
time as the increase of the retort coke oven industry shall have placed 
the production of sulphate of ammonia on a firm and profitable basis. 
Yours, truly, 

THE NEW ENGLAND GAS AND COKE COMPANY, 
J. L. RICHARDS, President. 



7770 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

EXHIBIT A. 

Table showing amount of ammoniacal nitrogen (at sulphate of ammonia) contained in 15 
brands of Bowker fertilv.ers, also dealer's price and United States agricultural station 
valuation of same. 

Nitrogen. 







Agricul- 


Percent- 
age dif- 














Total 






. 


ference 




As am- 
monia 
by anal- 
ysis. 


Total 
guar- 
anteed. 


ivi:ir:in- 
teed 
phos- 
phoric 


Total 
guaran- 
teed pot- 
ash. 


Selling 
price 
per ton. 


penment 
station 
valuation 
per ton. 


between 
cost and 
valua- 
tion. 








acid. 










Bowker's Market Garden Fertilizer. 


1.00 


2.5 


7.0 


10.0 


$37.00 


$24.83 


52.0 


Bowker's Fisherman's Brand Fish 
















and Potash 


1.00 


2.5 


5.0 


4.0 


28.00 


18.41 


56.2 


Bowker's Hill and Drill Phosphate. 


1.80 


2.5 


10.0 


2.0 


35.00 


20.67 


69.3 


Bowker's Sure Crop Phosphate 
Gloucester Fish and Potash 


.10 
.08 


.8 
.8 


10.0 
9.0 


2.0 
1.0 


30.00 
25.00 


15.64 
13.63 


88.6 
96.3 


Stockbridge Tobacco Manure. . . . 


2.30 


5.8 


6.0 


10.0 


47.00 


36.81 


27.7 


Stockbridge Top Dressing 


1.47 


4.9 


6.0 


6.0 


39.25 


30.72 


27.8 


Stockbridge Potato and Vegetable.. 
Stockbridge Corn and Grain 


.90 
.26 


3.3 
3.3 


7.0 
11.0 


10.-0 
7.0 


40.00 
39.25 


29.34 
28.89 


34.6 
35.9 


Bowker's Tiarly Potato Manure 


1.46 


3.3 


8.0 


7.0 


38.75 


26.44 


46.6 


Bowker's Tobacco Starter 


.99 


2.5 


10.0 


3.0 


34.00 


22.57 


50.6 


Bowker's Potato and Vegetable Fer- 
















tilizer 


.61 


2 5 


9.0 


4.0 


35.00 


22.13 


58.2 


Bowker's Potato and Vegetable 
















Phosphate.. . 


.14 


10.0 


10.0 


2.0 


32.50 


18.81 


72.8 


Bowker's Lawn and Garden Dress- 
















Ing 


.84 


3.0 


8.0 


5.0 


45.00 


25.19 


78.6 


Bowker's Corn Phosphate 


.12 


1.7 


9.0 


2.0 


32.00 


17.55 


82.3 


Average . . 














.84 


2.74 






37.18 


23.44 













EXHIBIT B. 

United States production and imports of ammonium sulphate and average market price. 

[In tons of 2,000 pounds.] 



Year. 


1903. 


1904. 


1905. 


1906. 


1907. 


1908. 


Imports 


16,777 


16,667 


15,288 


9,182 


32,669 


34,224 


Production 


41,873 


54,664 


65,296 


75,000 


i-i :;m 


















Total consumption. 


58 650 


71,331 


VJI \s4 


.M lv> 


i:;i '''< 




Average market price , 


$62.10 


$61.71 


,,'.;,> 


*(._'. :;:; 


.*i.l ,<.; 


$59.90 

















The price is given for the calendar year, while the imports are for the fiscal year 
ending June 30. 



EXHIBIT C. 
Record of retort coke ovens built, 1893-1907. 



Year. 


Ovens 
built. 


Ovens 
building. 


Year. 


Ovens 
built. 


Ovens 
building. 


1893... 


12 




1901 


1 165 


1 533 


1894 


12 


60 


1902 


1 663 


1 346 


1895 


72 


60 


1903 


1 956 


1 335 


1896 


160 


120 


1904 


2,910 


832 


1897 


280 


240 


1905 


3,159 


417 


1898 


520 


500 


1906 


3,603 


112 


1899 


1,020 


65 


1907 


:i yj-> 


330 


1900 


1 085 


1 096 





















SULPHATE OF AMMONIA NEW ENGLAND GAS & COKE CO. 7771 



EXHIBIT D. 

Coke production of the United States showing progress of the retort coke ovens. 
[Tons 2,000 pounds.] 



Year. 


Retort 
coke ovens. 


Total. 


Per cent 
of total. 


1893 


12,850 


9,477,580 


0.13 


1894 


16,500 


9,203,632 


.18 


1895 


18,521 


13,333,714 


.14 


1896 


83,038 


11,788,773 


.7 


1897 . 


261,912 


13,288,984 


2.0 


1898 


294,445 


16,047,209 


1.8 


1899 


906,534 


19,668,569 


4.6 


1900 . . . 


1,075,727 


20,533,348 


5 25 


1901 


1,179,900 


21,795,883 


5.4 


1902 


1,403,488 


25,401,730 


5.5 


1903 


1 Si2 SIM 


25,274,281 


7 4 


1904 


2, 60S, 229 


23,661,106 


11.1 


1905 


3,462,348 


32,231,129 


10.7 


1906 


4,558,127 


36,401,217 


12.5 


1907 


5,607,899 


40,779,564 


13.7 











EXHIBIT E. 
Memorandum. Sulphate of ammonia, 1908. 

[Figures for imports taken from bulletins issued by Department of Commerce and Labor. Domestic 
manufacture estimated by reliable authority.] 





Quantity. 


Value. 


Imports 


Pounds. 
76, 475, 104 


$1,982,830 


Domestic manufacture 


60,000,000 


1,800,000 








Total . 


136, 475, 104 


3,782,830 









Imports 56 per cent of total; tariff, 0.3 cent per pound. 

We ask to have the present tariff retained. From the above it will be seen that the 
rate is a tariff for revenue only, and does not prohibit importations. See accompany- 
ing letter from James L. Richards, president, New England Gas and Coke Company, 
for further information. 



THE NEW ENGLAND GAS AND COKE COMPANY, BOSTON, MASS., 
THINKS THAT THE PRESENT DUTY ON SULPHATE OF AMMONIA 
SHOULD BE RETAINED. 

SHAWMUT BANK BUILDING, 

Boston, Mass., February 11, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We give below the figures for imports, production, and 
consumption of ammonium sulphate for the year 1905, as given in 
Census Bulletin No. 65, and for the year 1907, as given in the United 
States Geological Survey report on gas, coke, tar, and ammonia and 
the Bureau of Statistics report on the commerce and. navigation 
of the United States. 

These figures show that the imports of sulphate of ammonia for 
the year 1905 amounted practically to 50 per cent of the gross con- 
sumption, and that in 1907, the next year for which statistics are 



7772 



SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 



available, this had increased to 54 per cent. These figures are far 
above the average for Schedule A or for any of the other schedules, 
or for the free list itself. On these figures we base the following 
statements: 

(1) The present tariff rate produces as near as may be the maxi- 
mum income to be expected from this article. If there be any 
change in the rate it should be increased rather than lowered. 

(2) As the foreign producer now controls over 50 per cent of the 
market, any decrease in the tariff will give him complete control. 

(3) Any equitable adjustment of this rate in the relation to the 
other rates in Schedule A or in relation to the other schedules must 
tend to reduce the amount of ammonium-sulphate importations 
rather than increase them. The producers of sulphate of ammonia 
in this country now face more than their share of foreign competition. 

For these reasons we ask you to retain the present tariff on sulphate 
of ammonia. 

Yours, respectfully, , 

THE NEW ENGLAND GAS AND COKE COMPANY, 
J. L. RICHARDS, President. 



EXHIBIT A. SULPHATE OP AMMONIA. 







1905. 




Per- 










centage 










of im- 










ports to 




Imports. 


Productions. 


Gross 
consumption. 


gross 
con- 
sump- 










tion. 


Sulphate of ammonia (under A): 
1905 


a $807, 480 


6*818,290 


$1,625,770 


49.7 


1907 


1,770, 222 


d 1,525, 472 


3,295,694 


54.0 













o United States Census Bulletin No. 65., p 20. 

6 United States Census Bulletin No. 65, p. 18. 

c Commerce and Navigation of the United States, 1907, Imports entered for consumption, p. 976. 

& United States Geological Survey Report on Gas, Coke, Tar, and Ammonia, p. 29. 



BATJGH & SONS' COMPANY, OF PHILADELPHIA, PA., ASKS THAT 
SULPHATE OF AMMONIA BE KEPT ON DUTIABLE LIST. 

DELAWARE RIVER CHEMICAL WORKS, 

Philadelphia, February 24, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee of Ways and. Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR : Several large fertilizer concerns have petitioned your 
committee to remove tne present tariff on sulphate of ammonia, 
thereby placing the article on the free list. We (as manufacturers 
of sulphate of ammonia, also as very large manufacturers of ferti- 
lizers) wish to protest against the removal of the present tariff on sul- 
phate of ammonia, for we are convinced that while removal of the 
duty would probably effect a lowering of the price of ammonium 
sulphate for the time being: the ultimate outcome would be grave 



SULPHATE OF AMMONIA BAUGH & SONS* CO. 7773 

injury to the fertilizer interests and to those of the country at large. 
It would be in the highest degree unwise to check the progress we have 
made toward saving our native supply of nitrogen for the sake of a 
small and temporary reduction in the price of ammonium sulphate. 

The average price of sulphate of ammonia at Hull, England, for 
the year 1907 was $56.56, tne present import duty is $6 per ton, and 
the cost in freight, etc., for laying down in New York would be $7 
per ton. This would bring the total cost of a ton of English sulphate 
in New York to $69.56, but during the year 1907 the average price 
of English sulphate in New York was only $61.93. In other words it is 
a clear case of the foreigner paying the duty. In order to find an out- 
let for his surplus production, the Englishman unloads it on our mar- 
ket at a concession in price amounting to over $7. 

This country already imports more ammonium sulphate than it 
produces. Under the conditions that are outlined in the preceding 
paragraph, if the duty is removed the price of foreign sulphate will 
probably fall, but where so large a concession in price has been made 
the foreigner will unquestionably absorb the larger portion of the 
saving made by removing the duty. Doubtless more sulphate of 
ammonia will come in at the more profitable figure and the foreign 
producers of sulphate of ammonia will be encouraged to extend 
their operations. On the other hand the American producer of 
sulphate of ammonia will receive less return than hitherto, the 
installation of such plants will be regarded as a doubtful proposition, 
and the progress that we have made during the last fifteen years in 
the production of ammonium sulphate at home will go for naught. 
There could be no clearer case or the surrender of the control of a 
promising American industry into the hands of the foreign manufac- 
turer than this. 

The by-product coke-oven industry in the United States is still in 
its infancy. But 14 per cent of our coke production comes from by- 
product coke ovens, whereas in England or in Germany the proportion 
is three to four times as large. Yet the United States produces nearly 
as much coke as England and Germany together, and her recovery 
of sulphate of ammonia from this coke could be correspondingly 
great. 

The coal treated in coke ovens, gas works, etc., in 1907 amounted 
to 66,000,000 tons, from which 660,000 tons of ammonium could have 
been recovered, but the actual total recovery reckoning all forms of 
ammonia as well as sulphate, fell below 100,000 tons. Where the 
discrepancy between possible production and actual production is 
so great it is surely a wise policy to .continue the moderate degree 
of protection now received by the manufacturers of ammonium sul- 
phate, rather than to discourage them by removing the duty. 

The supply of nitrogen to an agricultural nation is of too great 
importance to be jeopardized by the selfish wish of a few manufac- 
turers to obtain cheaper raw material for the moment. 

Under our system of protective tariff our manufacturers have 
grown strong. Under the various tariff schedules the imports range 
below 7 per cent of the total consumption except for three schedules 
under which the imports are principally raw materials. 

The imports of sulphate of ammonia for the year 1907 were 54 per 
cent of the gross consumption; in other words, sulphate of ammonia 
is facing far more its share of foreign competition, particularly when it 

61318 AP 09 3 



7774 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

is considered that it also encounters the competition of Chilean nitrate 
of soda which comes in duty free. 

The interests of the fertilizer manufacturers of this country are 
founded on an adequate supply of raw materials. It is the unequaled 
phosphate beds of Tennessee, Florida, and South Carolina that have 
ouilt up the superphosphate industry. It is the supply of cotton 
seed that has made our cotton seed oil and meal industries possible. 
Conversely it is the lack of crude potash salts that makes it necessary 
for us to rely upon the German producers of potash. Is it not in 
accordance with the most elementary principles of political economy 
that we encourage the development of our native supply of nitrogen 
and cease to rely so extensively for this essential element of fertility 
on the thrift and enterprise of foreign nations? 
Very truly, yours, 

BAUGH & SONS' COMPANY, 
E. BUTLER, Jr., Treasurer. 



CAMPHOR. 

[Paragraph 12. J 

CHAELES A. WEST, OF BOSTON, MASS., THINKS THAT THE DIS- 
TINCTION BETWEEN SYNTHETIC AND NATURAL CAMPHORS 
SHOULD BE CLEAR. 

BOSTON, February 20, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIRS: We beg to supplement our letter of December 1, 1908, 
to emphasize the importance of distinguishing radically and rationally 
between natural camphor and artificial or svnthetic camphor in the 
proposed tariff schedules. Nothing else will avoid further litigation 
under the rulings and findings of fact in the case of United States v. 
Schering & Glatz, and consequent uncertainty and expense to the 
custom-house, the Department of Justice, and camphor refiners or 
importers. 

In the Schering case technical or artificial German camphor ready 
for use in the pyroxylin, celluloid, and smokeless powder industries 
has been held to be "crude" when it is not in fact crude from either 
the makers, the refiners, or the destined users' practical standpoint. 
It was established and was not seriously disputed in that case that 
this miscalled crude synthetic camphor was sufficiently pure or 
"refined" to require no refining in this country before going into use, 
and that the whole weight of it without appreciable loss was available. 
Its very name "technical camphor," distinguishing from medicinal 
camphor, tells the story that it is not crude in ordinary commercial 
sense, and that it is refined in the sense that it is sufficiently refined 
for its technical use without further treatment. 

The uncertainty and the almost inevitable litigation that must 
follow confusing crude natural with this technical camphor, in view 
of the Schering & Glatz decision, can manifestly be avoided by plain 
wording of the schedules and recognizing the fact that the impurities 
in crude natural camphor are totally different in kind from anything 
in artificial or synthetic camphor. They have a different effect in 
the degree of lowering the melting points and the boiling point. By 
this lowering different grades of natural crude camphor can be ration- 



CAMPHOR CHARLES A. WEST. 7775 

ally compared and distinguished. The application of this mode of 
distinction to an artificial camphor, with its entirely different impuri- 
ties (which are of a beneficial or certainly not a harmful nature in the 
intended use for which the camphor is manufactured), must inevitably 
lead to false conclusions and to trouble and expensive litigation. 

If the free list reads as proposed, "camphor, crude natural," that 
will be unambiguous and perfectly clear. If the dutiable list shall 
read "camphor, refined natural, 6 cents per pound," that will be 
unambiguous and perfectly clear. If the terms "crude" or "refined" 
are applied to the artificial or synthetic camphor, trouble will inevi- 
tably arise, since these terms do not have the same meaning nor relate 
to things of the same nature or to similar impurities. Here the 
impurities are such that they do not have to be refined out, and the 
terms "crude" and "refined" overlap hi meaning, if, indeed, they are 
properly usable at all in connection with the artificial process of 
making camphor or with the synthetic camphor when made. 

A second heading on the dutiable list should, therefore, deal with 
this different subject-matter, and in view of the litigation the words 
"crude" and "refined" should be avoided, as the decision shows that 
crude now legally means something very different from what the 
law of 1897 intended it to mean and very different from anything 
that a chemist, a refiner, or a practical user would understand it 
to mean. We respectfully suggest and urge, therefore, that a sepa- 
rate heading be put in the dutiable list, reading: " Camphor, artificial 
or synthetic, 6 cents per pound." 

The present Notes on Tariff Revision, pages 22 and 681, expresses 
the opinion that "crude synthetic camphor would be relegated to 
the division of chemical compounds not enumerated in the present 

garagraph 3." But this could not be the effect in the face of united 
tates v. Schering & Glatz until after litigation to determine whether 
the present improved "technical" camphor made artificially, i. e., 
synthetic camphor ready for use in the pyroxylin arts, is similar, 
under section 7, to "refined camphor, natural or synthetic," or, as 
the court formally held, to "crude." Such camphor has never been 
in a crude condition in any sense like the natural tree camphor 
and under section 7 of the act of 1897, if reenacted, it could well be 
contended that this "technical" camphor is an "imported article 
not enumerated in this act, which is similar either in material, 
quality, texture, or the use to which it may be applied" to the "crude 
natural" by the importer and to the "refined natural or synthetic" 
by the custom-house and general appraisers. 

As, therefore, synthetic camphor exists in at least two forms, both 
of which are imported ready for their intended respective uses without 
needing any refining in this country, it follows that both must con- 
sistently be on the dutiable list and not upon the free list if the 
refining industry in this country is to survive and the policy concern- 
ing natural camphor is to be maintained in respect to artificial, and 
if further expensive litigation interpreting the new acts is to be avoided. 
As your committee is doubtless aware that the medicinal use of 
camphor is very limited as compared with its technical uses, it will 
be apparent that it is quite unimportant whether the technical 
synthetic camphor can or can not be regarded from a medical point 
of view as impure, unrefined, or crude, if it be free from all those 
impurities which render natural camphor too crude for use in the arts. 
Here again is shown the fallacy and the ambiguity of employing the 



7776 SCH KIM 1 .1. A -rHK.MH-AI.fi, OILS, AND PATNTS. 

terms "crude" and "refined" for the very distinct synthetic or tech- 
nical camphor. 

Viewed again from the broad policy of reasonably and moderately 
fostering the American refining industry, the admission of this 
"technical" or so-called "crude synthetic camphor" free must tend to 
destroy the industry of refining natural camphor for its large com- 
mercial uses and must directly give to the German patent monopoly 
undue advantages, in addition to their legal patent advantage. 

By the letter of Schering & Glatz printed in the tariff hearings at 
page 6838 we judge that this patent monopoly desires the committee 
to overlook the fair parity which actually exists between their article 
and the natural refined camphor, both of which are completely ready 
for technical use. It must be manifest, however, to your committee 
that the German technical synthetic camphor (although held to be 
"crude" by the court) competes, not with the crude natural as it 

foes to a refiner, but with the refined after the same has been refined 
v the American refining industries or after paying duty if refined 
abroad and imported. 

The free admission of such sufficiently refined synthetic camphor 
under the guise of being crude and under the decision of the United 
States court must be a menace to, if it does not actually destroy, the 
industry of refining natural camphor in the United States for tech- 
nical purposes. 

We respectfully annex hereto a colored diagram intended to graph- 
ically show by comparison the relation of the technical synthetic 
camphor to refined natural camphor on the one hand, and the crude 
natural camphor on the other. 

We shall be glad at the request of your committee to submit more 
in detail quotations from the testimony in Schering & Glatz case, 
sifted and tested by cross-examination of the witnesses, which well 
show the correctness of this diagram, and we are ready to afford you 
any assistance that we can, because we are convinced that a thorough 
knowledge of the facts is all that is necessary to lead your committee 
to follow our suggestions and continue to moderately and reasonably 
protect the American refiner. 
Yours, very truly, 

AMERICAN CAMPHOR REFINING COMPANY, 
CHAS. A. WEST, President. 



CELLULOID. 

[Paragraphs 17 and 459.] 

PIPE WORKS ' BROOKLYN, N. Y., WISHES THE 
CONTINUED CLASSIFICATION OF CELLULOID PIPE BITS UIJDER 
THE HEAD OF SMOKERS' ARTICLES. 

18 AND 20 SACKETT STREET, 
Brooklyn, N. Y., February 20. 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We wish to submit for your consideration our views 
eference to the duty on compounds of pyroxlin, known under 
roistered trade names as "celluloid," "fiberlofd," "pVralin *c 



CELLULOID HAMILTON PIPE WORKS. 7777 

We are personally interested in celluloid mouthpieces for smoking 
pipes, the duty on which at the present time is 60 per cent ad va- 
lorem as "smokers' articles," which classification was secured by us 
after considerable agitation, and we respectfully submit samples of 
the kind of goods which we are using for your information and 
inspection. 

From September, 1904, to December, 1906, we imported of this class 
of goods $20,249, on which we paid duty of $15,498.30, or at the 
rate of 76^ per cent ad valorem, as the collector of port insisted 
upon having these articles entered as "manufactured celluloid," on 
which the duty at that time was 65 cents per pound, 25 per cent 
ad valorem: but, as stated, after considerable agitation we were 
enabled to have these goods properly entered as "smokers' articles," 
which in our judgment is the only correct classification. 

We wish further to call your attention to the monopoly which exists 
on these articles. So far as we know or have any means of finding 
out, there are but two manufacturers of these pipe bits in the United 
States, namely, the Celluloid Company, of Newark, N. J., and the 
Arlington Manufacturing Company, of Arlington, N. J., the former 
by all odds the larger and more important manufacturers of these 
pipe bits. 

We called personally several times on the said "Celluloid Com- 
pany," and offered to them our business, and we were informed that 
they were under contract to sell only certain manufacturers of smoking 
pipes at a fair price and the price to all others is practically pro- 
hibitive. 

We submit a copy of our letter written to these manufacturers on 
date of October 20, 1903, and also their reply, showing the monopoly 
which exists on these pipe bits in this country. We could not buy 
these bits from the Celluloid Company; and as the bits manufactured 
by the Arlington Manufacturing Company were unsatisfactory to us 
and our trade, we were therefore practically forced to secure our 
material from abroad; but up to that time the duty on these pipe bits 
was 60 per cent ad valorem, and as soon as we began to import in 
quantities in 1904 the classification was changed and we were com- 
pelled to pay at the rate of 65 cents per pound and 25 per cent ad 
valorem, which is practically prohibitive. 

We note in the letter submitted to you by the manufacturers of 
celluloid in America that had they been approached a few months 
prior to November, 1908, they would have consented to a reduction 
in the duty on their material, and they asked you to raise the duty, 
solely on what might happen with the Japanese manufacturers who 
are not yet ready to manufacture any goods whatever, and their only 
point of argument is, as far as we can see, based on a supposition. 
They also ask you to change the classification of these "pipe bits or 
mouthpieces," which we think is unjust, for the reason that owing 
to the contracts existing between the Celluloid Company and certain 
manufacturers we are practically unable to secure their goods at all. 
We would suggest that in order to substantiate this statement regard- 
ing the monopoly which now exists on pipe bits or mouthpieces, that 
the Celluloid Company be compelled to submit to you the contracts 
which have in the past years existed between them and the smoking 
pipe manufacturers, whom they supplied. 



HI Ml I A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

Tlu- industry is practically in the hands of the Celluloid Company, 
of Newark, N. J.; Arlington Manufacturing Company of Arlington, 
N J and the Fiberloid Company, of Indian Orchard, Mass. 

We think that according to their own statement they can well 
afford a reduction in duty and to leave these bits which can only be 
used for '* smokers' articles" remain under the classification of 
"smokers' articles," as they can not be used for any other purpose. 

\\,. rcspoi-tfulh submit the above foi your consideration, and 
remain, 

Yours, very truly, 

HAMILTON PIPE WORKS. 

EXHIBIT A. 

OCTOBER 20, 1903. 

The CELLULOID COMPANY, 

JVw York City, N. Y. 

GENTLEMEN: Having informed us on several occasions that you arrange your busi- 
BMB on the pipe-bit question for a year in advance, and thinking, perhaps, this is the 
time of the year when you are looking into this business, we would thank you to let 
us know whether some arrangements could be made by which we could handle your 
line for the coming year, of course considering that we would be able to compete with 
manufacturers already having this privilege. 

We are now handling an average of about 10,000 per year on a similar article, and, if 
let in at the right price, we could undoubtedly dispose of quite an additional amount 
during the year. 

Hoping to be favored with your reply, we remain, 

Yours, very truly, HAMILTON PIPE WORKS. 

30, 32, 34, 36 WASHINGTON PLACE, 

New York, October 21, 1903. 
HAMILTON PIPE WORKS, 

18 Sackett Street, Brooklyn. N. Y. 

GENTLEMEN: We have yours of the 20th instant, and in reply would say that it is 
a little early for us to take up the matter of pipe-bit business for next year, but at 
the same time we do not think that there is any probability of our being able to supply 
you on any better terms than those already quoted. 

Yours, very trulj. THE CELLULOID COMPANY, 

WM. SMITH. 



SCHRADER & EHLERS, OF NEW YORK CITY. SUGGEST A CLAS- 
SIFICATION AND RATES FOR CELLULOID AND MANUFAC- 
TURED ARTICLES OF CELLULOID. 

335 BROADWAY, 
New York, February 24, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 
DEAR SIR: In connection with 

Schedule A, paragraph 17: Collodion and all compounds of pyroxylin, whether 
known as celluloid or by any other name, fifty cents per pound; rolled or in sheets, 
unpolished, and not made up into articles, sixty centa per pound; if in finished or 
partly finished articles, and articles of which collodion or any compound of pyroxylin 
w the component material of chief value, sixty-five cents per pound and twenty-five 
per centum ad valorem 

We beg permission to submit the following for the consideration of 
your committee: Collodion and all compounds of pyroxylin, 50 cents 
per pound. This is imported only in quite negligible quantities. 



CELLULOID SCHBADER & EHLERS. 7779 

The Department of Commerce and Labor, in the official statistics 
published for the year ending June 30, 1907, shdws importations of 
1,132 pounds; value, $2,195. (See page 981 in the latest publication 
of 1908.) 

Celluloid in sheet form: The price of this material in Europe is 
from less than 40 cents to 60 cents per pound ; higher prices are asked 
only for a few special grades. The kinds that are most largely used 
cost less than 40 cents and up to 50 cents per pound foreign value. 
The rate of duty on celluloid in sheet form is 60 cents per pound, 
and when polished, 65 cents and 25 per cent ad valorem. It will be 
readily seen that this duty excludes all foreign competition. Nothing 
practically is imported, as a matter of fact. The official statistics 
of the Department of Commerce and Labor for the year ending June 
30, 1907, show imports of 271 pounds; value $205~ (See page 981 
in the latest publication of 1908J 

Celluloid in sheet form is raw material for a number of other indus- 
tries, such as the manufacture of collars and cuffs, the manufacture of 
dressing combs, side combs, ladies' back combs, and a number of 
other industries. We respectfully submit the question whether it 
is right to let the duty on celluloid sheet remain prohibitive as it now 
is, at the expense of the industries depending upon celluloid sheet as 
their raw material? 

On the other hand, if it seems just to the committee that the cellu- 
loid industry should be protected, we claim that the rate of 60 cents 
per pound, being more than 100 per cent in the average, or 65 cents 
per pound and 25 per cent for polished sheet, being 150 to 175 per 
cent in the average, is excessive. 

The proportion of the cost of labor in the price of celluloid sheet is 
small, probably not more than one-quarter or the total. The price of 
camphor, the principal ingredient required in the manufacture of 
celluloid, is the same here and abroad. 

The cost of labor in America is said to be 50 per cent more than in 
Europe. Even if it were 100 per cent higher, the excess cost of pro- 
duction would only be 5 to 7^ cents per pound. 

It would seem from this that a rate of duty of 5 to 10 cents per 
pound would quite sufficiently protect American labor. 

The present tariff places celluloid sheet, when polished, into the 
category of manufactures of celluloid at 65 cents plus 25 per cent. 
The polishing of celluloid sheet is a very simple mechanical operation, 
and, as a matter of fact, European manufacturers make no charge for 
it, except for a very high polish in the expensive kinds, for which a 
charge of up to 11 cents per pound is made. 

There seems to exist no good reason why polished celluloid sheet 
should be classed differently from unpolished sheet, especially when 
most of the industries using celluloid sheet as their raw material buy 
only polished sheet. 

The same rate of duty as that for unpolished sheet would be suffi- 
cient protection. 

We have found it impossible to import any celluloid sheet, rod, or 
tubing, polished or unpolished, into the United States. We know, 
on the other hand, that American manufacturers are exporting cellu- 
loid sheet in competition with European manufacturers. 

The present rate on celluloid, when made up in finished or partly 
finished articles, is 65 cents per pound and 25 per cent ad valorem. 



7780 miTI.K A CHK.MI. U-S. OILS, AND PAINTS. 

(Vlluloid goods of widely different classes are imported. The value 
,,f -u<-h iim.nrtations is not immaterial, but in our estimation is not 
very large in comparison to the business done by the domestic manu- 

facturers. 

The imports of collodion and manufactures thereof are given m the 
oflicial handbook of statistics of the Department of Commerce and 
Labor published in 1908 (p. 208) as follows: 

..................................... 178,144 

............... 240, 501 

................. 166,479 

............. 272,426 

iiiiiiii~:iiiiii!iii"": .......................... 371,736 



The exports of celluloid and manufactures thereof are given in the 
same publication (pp. 523-524) : 
1903 ................. 249,488 

1904*.! ill! ............................................... 246,601 

1905 ........................................ 294,979 

. ................................................... 340,825 

1907 ..................................................................... 444,518 

It will be seen that only in one of five years were the imports larger 
than the exports, and it would seem that the celluloid industry stands 
in no need of being fostered as an infant industry by excessive rates 
of duty. 

A particular class of celluloid goods partly finished, to which we 
desire to call the attention of your committee, is celluloid mouth- 
pieces for tobacco pipes. This article forms a raw material for the 
very important brier-pipe industry in this country. It has been 
held that as a part of a smoker's article it is dutiable at the rate of 
smokers' articles, which is very high, namely, 60 per cent ad valorem. 
We see that three celluloid manufacturers have submitted a brief 
requesting a change in the schedule which would bring celluloid 
mouthpieces, although raw material for the pipe manufacturers, 
under the classification of celluloid in finished or partly finished 
articles, and for an advance in the rate for such celluloid articles. The 
change in classification alone means an advance in the cost to the 




this industry if the classification were changed, and the rate increased 
at the same time, as suggested by the celluloid manufacturers. 

Mouthpieces made of amber are admitted at the rate of 25 per cent, 
but amber shaped for mouthpieces is free as raw amber. 

Wood blocks for the pipe bowl are admitted free of duty. 

Admitting that the celluloid industry has a claim for protection, 
we contend that the present rate of 60 per cent is excessive. We 
are informed that the proportion of the cost of labor in the price of 
mouthpieces, including factory expenses, in the average, is not more 
than one-third of the selling price. 

Granting again that American labor is 50 per cent and even 100 
per cent higher than European labor, it is apparent that the present 
rate of 60 per cent is excessive, and that a rate of 25 per cent would 
amply protect the domestic celluloid industry. 

In view of the facts as stated, we would respectfully ask that the 
petition of the celluloid manufacturers be denied and that the com- 



CELLULOID. 7781 

mittee take into consideration the establishment of the following 
rates as an ample protection of the celluloid industry and as fair to 
the industries depending on celluloid as their raw material: 

Schedule A, paragraph 17. 

Collodion and all compounds of pyroxylin cents per pound. . 5 

Collodion and all compounds of pyroxylin manufactured or rolled in sheets, rod, 
or tubing, unpolished or polished (which would be equal to from 15 to 25 per 

cent ad valorem) cents per pound. . 10 

Celluloid in finished or partly finished articles per cent ad valorem. . 25 

Celluloid mouthpieces, as raw material for tobacco pipes do 25 

SCHRADER & EHLERS, 

Importers. 



EUGENE DIETZGEN, NEW YORK, THINKS DUTY ON POLISHED 
SHEETS OF CELLULOID SHOULD NOT BE INCREASED. 

214-220 EAST TWENTY-THIRD STREET, 

New Yvrlc, February 25, 1909. 

GENTLEMEN : We are manufacturers of large quantities of celluloid 
goods, such as T squares, triangles, curves, and other goods of similar 
nature, which are largely used by schools, universities, and other 
educational institutions, and also by individual draftsmen, engineers, 
as well as by the various government engineering offices, etc. 

The raw material from which we manufacture these articles is pol- 
ished celluloid in sheet form which we obtain exclusively from Ameri- 
can manufacturers. We have never imported this material, as the 
import duty prohibited our doing so, and to our knowledge no other 
manufacturer in our line is obtaining any of this material from 
abroad. This will also be seen by referring to the statistics of the 
Department of Commerce and Labor, according to which during the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1907, only 271 pounds, at a total value of 
$205, have been imported. 

This commodity is protected at present at the rate of 25 per cent 
ad valorem and 65 cents per pound on the foreign market price; and 
as the same ranges from 80 to 90 cents per pound, this means a pro- 
tectional duty of from 125 to 150 per cent. It is our opinion that 
such a high duty is unnecessary, as at even a duty as low as 65 cents 
per pound any foreign competition would be absolutely excluded, 
and the American celluloid industry would be sufficiently protected. 
We consider that the American manufacturers of celluloid in polished 
sheets should be well satisfied with the protection they enjoy at pres- 
ent in view of the fact that they have absolute control of the manu- 
facturers and regulation of price of celluloid in polished sheets in this 
country, and have absolutely excluded all foreign competition hi this 
material. We therefore can not see any reason for any increase in 
duty on this material such as has been asked by the domestic manu- 
facturers of sheet celluloid. An increase in duty on celluloid in pol- 
ished sheets would only work a hardship on the manufacturers of 
finished celluloid goods hi our line, and would increase the price of 
these articles to the public and the users at large, especially to edu- 
cational institutions, there being no cause for any such increase 
whatsoever. 



7782 SCHEDULE A r 1 1 1, inCAl -S. OILS, AND PAINTS. 

In view of this we respectfully suggest to deny the increase in duty 
of celluloid such as has been petitioned for by the domestic celluloid 
manufacturers. 

Should any further information be required such as to the propor- 
tions of cost of labor and material in the manufacture of articles in 
our line as mentioned above, we will be glad to give same upon request. 
Very respectfully, yours, 

EUGENE DIETZGEN Co., 

W. BlERBHAUER, 

Assistant Secretary. 
TANNING MATERIALS. 

[Paragraph 20.] 

H S ORTH, BOSTON, THINKS TEN PER CENT DUTY SUFFI- 
CIENT FOR DYEING AND TANNING BARKS AND BERRIES. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 27, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: I regret having to take up your time further with 
this letter, but I discover that I made a serious error in my first 
brief. 

I suggested there that in the revised tariff bill you have paragraph 
20, Schedule A, read the same as suggested by Mr. Skiddy. I have 
only just now discovered that Mr. Skiddy's suggestion is for one- 
fourth cent per pound in addition to 10 per cent ad valorem. 

It seems to me that 10 per cent ad valorem is sufficient protection 
without the one-fourth cent per pound. In some instances even 
this 10 per cent is unnecessarily burdensome and even prohibitive, 
but, as a rule, I should tliink that the tariff provided for in paragraph 
20 is a logical and reasonable one. Raw tanning materials have 
free entry, and if they are improved by grinding, etc., it takes away 
that much from our American labor, and should pay a duty. 

I ask, therefore, that my suggestion regarding paragraph 20, 
Schedule A, be changed to the suggestion that the articles in this 
paragraph pay a duty of 10 per cent ad valorem. 
Yours, respectfully, 

M. S. ORTH. 



TANNING EXTRACTS. 

[Paragraph 22.1 

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FILED BY VARIOUS AMERICAN MANU- 
FACTURERS OF TANNING EXTRACTS. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 22, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: In the concluding paragraph of the petition filed by 
the manufacturers of tanning extracts on December 4, 1908, it was 
promised that such petition would be followed within a few days by a 
detailed verification of the statements of fact made therein.' Such 
verification follows: 



TANNING EXTRACTS BREVARD TANNIN CO. ET AL. 7783 

PARAGRAPH 1. 

In paragraph 1 of our preliminary brief we state the item of labor 
constitutes 75 per cent or the total cost of production. In proof of 
this statement we submit the following: 

Our raw material, i. e., chestnut wood, is the greatest item of cost, and is at this time 
Costing an average of $4.50 per cord at the various mills. This value is made up as 
follows: 





Cost. 


Per cent. 


Price of stumpage per cord 


$0.25 


5.56 


Average freight per cord 


1.00 


22.22 


Labor, including felling, splitting, handling, and hauling 


3.25 


72.23 








Total 


4.50 


100.00 









If all the plants now established were to ran full capacity, they 
would consume about 500,000 cords per year, the total value of 
which is $2,250,000; the amount directly expended for labor would 
be over $1,625,000. 

As to the manufacture of the finished product from this raw 
material, the cost for labor is 49 per cent of the total cost, of manu- 
facturing the extract, exclusive or raw material, or $1,625 per cord, 
which amounts to $812,500 more, making a total of $2,437,500 per 
annum expended for labor on a product which has cost to produce 
in all $4,687,500. That is to 'say, the direct labor cost is over 62 per 
cent of the entire cost of production, or 3 cents per unit of tannin. 
Hence, for each ton of quebracho or mangrove extract imported into 
the United States, containing 1 ,452 units, the loss to American labor 
is $43.56, or on the importations of quebracho during the year ending 
June 30, 1908, a gross loss of $1,655,690. The contingent or indirect 
labor involved in freight, coal, oils, etc., will make the percentage of 
cost, exclusive of wood, due to labor, exceed 75 per cent. 

PARAGRAPH 2. 

Mr. Skiddy, in his brief presented November 10, shows that in Ar- 
gentine common labor costs but $18 per month against ours costing 
$38, while the proportionately small number of skilled men employed 
cost from 30 to 40 per cent less than ours. In the East Indies the 
labor cost is still less. The less cost of labor is involved not only in 
the manufacturing cost, but in the various items connected with raw 
material, supplies, etc. Putting together the various items making up 
the total cost it is found that the Argentine manufacturer can pro- 
duce solid quebracho extract containing 65 per cent tannin for about 
one-third the labor cost involved in producing an equivalent chestnut 
extract under United States conditions. 

While the quebracho extract is brought into the United States in 
solid form containing 65 per cent tannin, it is necessary, in order to 
compare in parallel the costs of production of quebracho and chestnut 
extracts, that the quebracho shall be considered on the basis of 25 per 
cent tannin, the standard for domestic chestnut. One ton of que- 
bracho wood will make 1,450 pounds of extract containing 25 per cent 
tannin, whereas 1 ton of chestnut wood will make only 325 pounds of 
extract containing 26 per cent tannin. With these yields it is possi- 



7784 



SCMKI'II.K A CIIK.MI( AI.S, OILS, AND PAINTS. 



Me to tubulate the items of production cost per 100 pounds of ex- 
tract containing 25 per cent tannin, the quebracho under Argentine 
conditions and the chestnut under United States conditions, thus: 

Comparative coit chettnut and quebracho extract*, both on 25 per cent tannin bant. 
[Cost per hundred pounds.] 





Quebracho 
manufac- 
tured in 
Argentina. 


Chestnut 
manufac- 
tured in 
United 
States. 


Wood- 


Cents. 
48.0 


Centt. 
69.26 


l^lior 


7.8 


25.00 


Incidentals (Interest, depreciation selling, taxes, etc.) 


6.43 


25.74 








Total 


62.23 


120.00 









It is shown that the cost of production under parallel conditions is 
1 :1 cents per pound for the domestic chestnut and 0.62 cent per pound 
(25 per cent tannin) for the quebracho, or a difference against the 
chestnut of 0.58 cent per pound on the American standard of 25 per 
cent tannin. Inasmuch as the imported quebracho extract actually 
contains 65 per cent tannin, the difference against chestnut put upon 
that basis is (25:65:0.58:x) 1.5 cents per pound of solid quebracho 
extract. 

The duty requested is 1 cent per pound plus 10 per cent ad valorem, 
which upon solid quebracho extract worth 2 cents in bond will be 
1 25 cents per pound, which is 0.25 cent per pound less than the shown 
difference in production cost between Argentine solid quebracho 
extract and domestic chestnut extract, whereas the present duty of 
one-half cent per pound on solid quebracho extract is only one-third 
of the shown difference in such production costs. 

PARAGRAPHS 3 AND 4. 

Five years ago quebracho extract containing 65 per cent tannin was 
selling at from 4 to 5 cents per pound and chestnut oak extract con- 
taining 25 per cent tannin at 1.75 to 2 cents. Under these conditions 
the extracts were almost on a parity, the tannin unit values being 
almost the same, i. e., 7 cents per unit. Profits were good, and as a 
natural result the production of both kinds of extract increased rap- 
No sooner, however, had the apparent ultimate consumption 
be<?n reached than prices began to drop, and in 1905 chestnut extract 
was sold as low as 1.14 cents per pound, which is less than cost, and 
quebracho at 3 cents, duty paid. 

This competition received further impetus about two years ago. 

wlu-n the German and French Governments, to protect their domestic 

extract industries, put in force a greatlv increased tariff. In the case 

many the duty was made prohibitive, being 1$ cents per pound 

quid and 3 cents per pound upon solid quebracho extracts. This 

in the United States being made the dumping ground for the 

i quebracho. Since then Argentine solid quebracho has sold 

cents or less, duty paid, at which price any chance of 

competition by chestnut-oak extract has disappeared. 



TANNING EXTRACTS BBEVARD TANNIN CO. ET AL. 7785 

Illustrating this point clearly, the tannin unit value at which que- 
bracho extract is sold is 4.6 cents, or 3 cents per pound extract con- 
taining 65 per cent tannin, whereas in a previous paragraph we have 
stated the cost of making chestnut-oak extract to be 4.8 cents per 
tannin unit, or 1.2 cents per pound of extract containing 25 per cent 
tannin. 

During a period from 1898 to 1904 the domestic manufacture 
increased two to three times in volume. From 1905 to the present 
time the capacity for output has remained stationary, while the actual 
output has decreased; this in the face of a large increase in the 
consumption of extract. 

Filed with the committee is a diagrammatic survey of the business 
of producing chestnut extract in the United States during the period 
of six years, or from 1902 to 1907, inclusive. On this diagram is 
shown the cost of wood in dollars and cents per cord from the year 
1903 to the year 1907, by which it is seen that the price has risen from 
$2.50 per cord in 1903 to $4.50 per cord in 1907, or an increase of 80 
per cent. At the same time common labor, which is employed 
almost exclusively by this industry, increased in cost from $1 per day 
in 1903 to $1.50 per day in 1907, or an increase of 50 per cent. It is 
fair to say that if a similar line were drawn covering the other mate- 
rials entering into the manufacture of chestnut extract, such as coal, 
oils, machinery repairs, etc., this line would show an increase common 
to such increase as found in other industries. From 1898 to 1902 the 
output of chestnut extract showed a small increase of volume, but in 
1903 several additional plants were put into commission, and by the 
end of 1904 the output had been doubled. From 1904, however, the 
production of chestnut extract has been substantially stationary. 
From 1903 to 1907 the net gain in volume of chestnut extract pro- 
duced in the United States has been 100 per cent; whereas during 
the same period the importations of quebracho extract have risen 
from 6,000 tons to nearly 40,000 tons, or an increase of 570 per cent, 
such increase in quebracho importation showing an almost steadily 
rising line from 1903 to 1907. Coincident with the increase in con- 
sumption of chestnut and quebracho extracts there occurred a steady 
continuous drop in the selling price of chestnut extract. While there 
was sufficient demand to absorb the output of both extracts, it was 
a demand forced by the strong competition between the two mate- 
rials in which the selling price of the domestic chestnut extract was 
sacrificed, the decrease in such selling price from 1903 to 1906 being 
in excess of 35 per cent. 

Under the stimulus of a reduced duty upon foreign-made tanning 
extracts there is no reason why the importations of such material 
shall not continue to rise in volume until the domestic chestnut 
extract, through the limitation of market and lowering of selling 
price below cost, shall be eliminated as a source of supply for the 
domestic tanning industry. 

PARAGRAPH 5. 

On the other hand, putting the duty at an amount sufficient to 
cover the difference in cost of production between quebracho extract 
and chestnut extract will enable the chestnut-extract industry to 
maintain a uniform rate of increased production, as may be required 
by the increased output of domestic leather. Existing plants are 



77M'> SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

readily capable of producing 50 to 75 per cent more material than they 
did in 1907. 

Abundant timber areas to support the maximum producing capac- 
ity of existing plants are at this time either entirely within the control 
of manufacturers or directly tributary to the points of production. 

It may be stated briefly but accurately that the producing poten- 
tial of th'e domestic chestnut-extract industry is sufficient to supply the 
needs of the domestic tanning industry for a great many years ahead. 
The sole limitation upon the growth of the domestic chestnut-extract 
business is the vast area of chestnut-bearing lands within the zone of 
the southern Appalachian Mountains from Pennsylvania to Georgia. 

It is not contemplated by the manufacturers of chestnut extract 
that the tanning industry of the United States shall be confined to 
chestnut extract as its tanning material, as the trend of the science of 
tanning is unmistakably toward a combination of different tanning 
materials in the process of manufacture. The domestic tanning 
industry will require quebracho extract in the future, but it is the con- 
tention of the domestic chestnut-extract manufacturer that the busi- 
ness of producing chestnut extract must, in order to meet properly 
and fully the future need for its product, have sufficient protection 
to offset the difference in cost of production between conditions in the 
Argentine Republic and in the United States. 

PARAGRAPHS 6 TO 9. 

Relative to the enhancement in value of chestnut-timber lands, it 
is a fact that previous to the utilization of this wood for extract pur- 
poses it had virtually no value, and when land timbered with chest- 
nut was sold such timber was not considered. 

In the southern Appalachian Range, which is the source of the tim- 
ber furnishing the domestic extract manufacturer his raw material, 
chestnut stumpage could be purchased eight or ten years ago for less 
than $1 per acre, whereas equivalent lands at this time are selling 
for not less than $5 per acre, this advance being due almost entirely 
to the increased demand from manufacturers of chestnut extract. 
In view of the emphasis given in recent years to the necessity for 
conservation we most particularly desire to direct attention 
to the fact that the popular idea of forest destruction does not apply 
to this industry Lnlike the lumberman, who takes only what can 
9 manufactured into lumber, the extract manufacturer takes the 
whole tree above the ground, and instead of leaving the greater part 
of the wood in the forest as debris he cleans it all up, down to the 
limbs, leaving the ground open for the growth of young 
timber and minimizing the danger from forest fires. Ninety per cent 
f the wood is fit for no other purpose than the production of extract, 
a fact that large quantities of it are obtained after the lum- 
an has taken all he can use, and what would otherwise he 
ned up eventually m the annual forest fires or lost by decay is 
diverted to a useful industrial purpose 

wood, unlike any other native tannin-bearing woods or 

^^S5^Hi^?^ r^ 

the domestic leather industry. As previously stated, 



TANNING EXTRACTS BBEVABD TANNIN CO. ET AL. 7787 

a number of the domestic manufacturers have acquired forest reserves 
which will provide them with raw material over a long period. 

The fact that chestnut timber grows upon waste steep and barren 
lands, whichmaynot bediverted profitably to agricultural orotheruses, 
is, in connection with the known rapidity of reproduction of the species, 
a final practical argument for fostering the use of this forest product. 

In the following letter Dr. C. A. Schenck presents his views upon 
the forestry questions involved in this subject. It is proper to say 
that Doctor Schenck is the only forester in the United states who 
has had, during the past few years, intimate personal and profes- 
sional touch with the exact facts involved in the use of chestnut 
timber for the manufacture of tanning extracts and the relation of 
that business to forest operations and forest conservation. 

FOREST DEPARTMENT, BILTMORE ESTATE, 

Biltmore, N. C., December 15, 1908. 
CHAMPION FIBER COMPANY, 

Asheville, N. C. 

GENTLEMEN: In response to the queries contained in your letter of December 15, 
I beg to make the following statements: 

1. In western North Carolina, on the property in my personal charge, comprising 
180,000 acres, second growth of chestnut will be fit for removal within thirty years 
from the first cutting, on an average. 

The forest department of the Biltmore estate, in my charge, is footing on a thirty- 
years' rotation in chestnut, which means to say that we intend to cut over in 1938 
the same lands which we have been cutting in 1908. 

2. Under conditions of careful and systematic cutting, with sylvicultural care, 
the average acre of land in western North Carolina produces close to 1 cord of chest- 
nut per acre per annum. 

3. Chestnut is growing from elevations exceeding 5,000 feet down to elevations of 
2,000 feet. It is occupying soil unfit for agricultural purposes. It does not grow in 
the bottom lands along the river, whereon alone agricultural pursuits are found to be 
remunerative. 

Chestnut is growing, and chestnut will and should be growing, on nonagricultural 
lands, occupying notably the northern or cool aspects of the Appalachian Mountains 
at altitudes running between 2^900 and 5,500 feet. 

Chestnut is found usually on sloping land, which converted into farms is sure to 
erode viciously within ten years from the clearing. Such land, as a consequence, 
should be kept under forests and should never be turned over to the plow. 

4. Assuming that the domestic demand for chestnut extract expands to an annual 
consumption of 3,000,000 barrels, an area of chestnut-producing lands of 3,000,000 acres, 
approximately, would be required to fill the American demand for tanning material 
by American chestnut extract. 

5. From the forester's standpoint nothing can be better than the maintenance of a 
high price of wood goods. 

No one will raise cotton unless it pays to raise cotton, and no one will raise chestnut 
in second growth unless the prospects of a remunerative outcome of the investment 
are good. 

Forestry as a business must obey the same economic law which agriculture obeys 
as an economic enterprise. Goods are raised in the forest which it pays to raise. 

Forestry in the southern Appalachian region will receive a very severe blow if for- 
eign tanning materials are allowed to compete without bounds and limits with the 
tanning material grown on our native soil. 

Unless the Congress of the United States finds ways and means to protect the finan- 
cial results of forestry there will not be any forestry in the country of Stars and Stripes 
and dollars and cents. 

Hoping that I have answered your queries, I am, 
Very respectfully, yours, 

(Signed) C. A. SCHENCK. 

PARAGRAPH 10. 

Green packer hides, as furnished by the meat packers of the United 
States, yield in the average 30 per cent of actual dry hide substance, 



7788 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS. AND I'AINTS. 

whirli is convertible into leather, and in the manufacture of sole 
Icatlu-r uliidi requires more tannin than any other, it has been well 
established that 1 pound of tannin will tan and fill 1 pound of hide 
substance, making witfc the ash, oil, fat, and moisture 2* pounds of 
merchantable leather. At present market prices the chestnut tannin 
in a pound of leather costs the tanner 2.08 cents and the quebracho 
tannin in a pound of leather 1.84 cents. Now, assuming the domestic 
manufacturer to be able to avail himself of the full amount of the 
requested tariff, it means the increased cost of the leather would not 
much exceed one-half cent per pound, thus: 

Present market. 

Cents per 

pound 
of tannin. 

Domestic extract, 25 per cent tannin, at 1.30 cents per pound 5. 2 

Quebracho extract, 65 per cent tannin, at 3 cents per pound 4.6 

Highest possible under proposed tariff. 

Cents per 

pound 
of tannin. 

Domestic extract, 25 per cent tannin, at 1.65 cents per pound 6. 6 

Quebracho extract, 65 per cent tannin, at 4.25 cents per pound 6. 55 

Tannin at highest possible cost to tanner per pound of leather under proposed tariff. 

Cents. 

At present cost 2.62 

Increase. .. 2. 08 



Difference 54 

When it is considered- that the value of the hide in a pound of 
leather is about eight times the value of the tanning material, it will 
be granted that the actual slight increase in the cost of tanning ma- 
terial would be a negligible factor, especially as all tanners would be 
on the same basis. So far as the consumer is concerned, we can only 
say that even if a pair of average soles did take a pound of leather 
the increased cost due to the tariff would not much exceed one-half 
cent on a pair of shoes. 

PARAGRAPH 11. 

This paragraph of our brief of December 4 we desire to repeat: 

11. That neither capital nor the application of modern science has enabled us to 
overcome the conditions imposed bv foreign competition; that unless the principle 
of protection is applied to this industry those engaged in it will be forced out of 
business. 

In our foregoing verification of paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 we have 
clearly shown the past and present conditions surrounding the indus- 
try of manufacturing domestic chestnut extract, and from a study of 
such conditions we do not derive any encouragement for the future, 
unless the requested duty upon imported tanning extracts is made 
effective. Without the intervention of the requested duty we see 
no possibility of continuing our business, even on its present rate of 
output, without considering whatever call may come hi the future 
rom the domestic tanning industry for an increased production. At 
3 tlm fi u he business is without profit, and should it so continue 
there will be a gradual abandonment of existing plants, a number of 



TANNING EXTRACTS. 7789 

which are of very substantial construction and represent investment 

which it will be impossible to divert to other uses. 
Committee representing 

Brevard Tannin Company, Pisgah Forest, N. C. ; J. M. 
He-aid & Co, Lynchburg, Va; Juniata Extract Com- 
pany, Mount Union, Pa.; Smethport Extract Com- 
pany, Damascus, Va. : Southern Extract Company, 
Knoxville, Tenn.; Tanners and Dyers Extract Com- 
pany, Charleston, W. Va. ; Tellico Extract Company, 
Tellico Plains, Tenn. ; The Champion Fibre Company, 
Canton, N. C. ; Cherokee Tanning Extract Company. 
Andrews, N. C. ; Excelsior Extract Company, Harri- 
sonburg, Va. ; Basic Extract Company, Basic City, Va. 



M. S. ORTH, BOSTON, MASS., THINKS THAT MAKERS OF TANNING 
EXTRACT NEED NO INCREASE OF DUTY. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., 

February 25, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: I have read with much interest Messrs. Kerr and 
Stine's brief and statements, published in the tariff hearings of Friday, 
December 18, 1908, and offer the following comment for your con- 
sideration: 

The greatest mistake that Mr. Kerr makes is in thinking that chest- 
nut extract and quebracho extract directly compete with each other. 
This is not the case. They are, and must be used in conjunction with 
each other, and also with the barks and other tanning extracts. The 
best proof of this is, I think, that Canada, where quebracho extract is 
free of duty and therefore one-half cent per pound less than in the 
United States, is one of our best markets for chestnut extract, buying 
it in 100 and 200 tank-car contracts. In addition to this higher cost, 
the Canadian tanners pay a somewhat higher freight rate on the chest- 
nut extract than the American tanners. Another positive pro.of of 
Mr. Kerr's error is that during the past two months quebracho extract 
has advanced in price eight-tenths cent to one cent per pound, or 
about 30 per cent, whereas chestnut extract has actually declined in 
price during the same time. In other words, you have the unique 
situation of quebracho extract having actually advanced more than 
the additional duty Mr. Kerr and Air. Skiddy have asked, and yet 
chestnut extract has declined in price. 

Mr. Kerr all through his statement referred to the price of que- 
bracho extract as 3 cents per pound, duty paid, for 65 per cent tannin. 
As a matter of fact, very little, if any, was sold to the tanners at this 
price, but at 3 T V to 3J cents per pound a large quantity was sold. 
The price to-day is 4 to 4- cents per pound, and we have sold many 
hundreds of tons at these prices. Furthermore, it will be noted that 
the quebracho extract prices are between 4 and 5 cents per pound, 
which were the prices five years ago, according to Mr. Kerr, at which 
time chestnut extract, according to his statement, was selling at If 
to 2 cents per pound. To-day chestnut extract is selling for 1^ to 
01 318 AP 09 4 



7790 lll-riK A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

li cents per pound in tank cars and about U cents per pound in 

The truth of the matter is that five years ago the chestnut extract 
manufacturers w.ere making an exorbitant profit, surely 50 per cent 
if not quite 100 per cent, and quite naturally other factories were 
built and other manufacturers entered the field, with a consequent 
overproduction of chestnut extract. Mr. Kerr states that in 1904 
there was a very large increase in the number of extract plants. 
There were, as I remember, nearly a dozen new plants built about 
that time, doubling the production of chestnut extract; and there 
is to-day an overproduction of chestnut extract. There is not enough 
leather manufactured to use the amount of chestnut extract the 
present factories can produce, because, as stated above, chestnut 
extract is not a substitute for quebracho or mangrove cutch or other 
tanning extracts, but must be used in conjunction with them. 

However, it is my opinion that the manufacture of chestnut 
extract is still a good business. I can not understand Mr. Kerr's 
statements to the effect that his company has lost money since 1904. 
The Lynchburg plant is a large one, and on account of its size is 
supposed to have economic advantages over smaller ones. I can 
only say that our company, located in Virginia, not many miles from 
Lynchburg, has made money during every month since 1904 (except 
one or two months when closed for repairs), until its surplus is now 
124} per cent. In addition it has paid 50 per cent in dividends. Its 
earnings the past year, in spite of the panic and depression, were 30$ 
per cent from February 1, 1908, to February 1, 1909. 

I am thoroughly convinced that the only protection the American 
chestnut manufacturer needs is against Mediterranean and Saxonian 
chestnut extract, and on account of our shipping the bulk of our 
extract in tank cars there is really no fear of this European competi- 
tion. 

I think also that Mr. Kerr's figures regarding cost of wood and labor 
are misleading. They might be correct if the extract factories all 
owned and operated their own timber tracts, but I venture to say 
that fully nine-tenths of the wood used to make the chestnut extract 
is furnished by the farmer, who uses his own teams and his own labor. 

Furthermore, I am of the opinion that chestnut wood does not 
average $4.50 per cord cost. On our February 1 statement we 
have the wood all piled in the yard valued at S3. 50 per cord. 

The chestnut-extract business is a good business and will continue 
to be so, in my opinion. At any rate, we are looking for another 
good site for a small factory. There has not been a single failure 
in the business during the past twelve years to my knowledge, and 
also to my knowledge much money has been made by some of the 
companies. 

It would seem very unjust and a great mistake to put a high duty 
on quebracho extract and other extracts with the erroneous idea of 
benefiting the chestnut extract business and causing instead an 
increased cost of $1,600,000 for shoes used by the American people, 
as shown bv Mr. Clark, based on Mr. Kerr's own figures. 

I have also read with much interest Mr. W. W. Skiddy's letter of 
December 4 to the Ways and Means Committee. He says that 
the Argentine Republic manufacturers are selling their quebracho 
extract at 2} cents per pound and "making money." In this I am 



TANNING EXTRACTS M. S. ORTH. 7791 

sure he is incorrect. Some extract was sold for 2 cents per pound in 
bond, equal to 3 cents duty paid, but I have never heard of anyone 
before saying that they thought there was anything but a loss to 
the manufacturers at this price. 

He also says that if his request for a higher duty is granted it 
would make the price of quebracho extract 4J cents per pound, duty 
paid, which presumably would be satisfactory to him. As already 
stated in this letter, the price of quebracho extract is to-day 4 to 4| 
cents per pound. This is for the untreated extract. I understand that 
the treated extract commands a price about one-half cent per pound 
higher. Therefore, it would seem that Mr. Skiddy has already re- 
ceived what he has asked for, and the indications are that quebracho 
extract will advance in price even more. 

I think that Mr. Skiddy's statement, the same as Mr. Kerr's and 
Mr. Stine's, that without an additional duty they can not continue 
in business is entirely without foundation. Prices of extracts dur- 
ing the panic and depression were low, as were the prices of most all 
commodities, but with improved conditions they should gradually 
increase. 

MANGROVE CUTCH. 

I have a special word to say with reference to mangrove cutch. 
This extract is made in the island of Borneo from the bark and small 
limbs of the mangrove and tengah trees. The bark is different from 
our hemlock and oak barks, in that it breaks off of the trees in verv 
small pieces, about as large as the hand, requiring much labor to col- 
lect. Furthermore, the bark has to be kiln-dried, in order to prevent 
oxidation and produce an extract suitable for tanning purposes. 
It is utterly impossible to overcome the expenses and the damage to 
the bark sufficiently to admit of shipping the bark itself from Borneo 
to America, and in converting the bark into an extract in Borneo it 
is practically a raw material put into condition to ship. 

There is no mangrove cutch made in the United States, and none 
can be made profitably from the Florida bark. Some mangrove bark 
is imported from Africa of an inferior quality, but in some parts of 
Africa the peeling of the bark from the mangrove tree is being pro- 
hibited, and the price of mangrove bark has advanced considerably. 

This mangrove cutch made in Borneo directly takes the place of our 
native hemlock and oak. bark, and is therefore, as I have already 
pointed out to you, of the utmost value to the United States as a 
means of preserving our bark supply and preventing the destruction 
of our forests. Mangrove cutch requires that an additional quantity 
of quebracho extract or chestnut extract be used with it, and is there- 
fore a boon to Mr. Skiddy and the chestnut-extract manufacturers, 
though they do not seem to be practical enough to realize it. 

The situation in the mangrove cutch business is just this: In 1901 
the Board of General Appraisers of New York decided in two cases 
that mangrove cutch is entitled to entry into the United States free 
of duty under clause 542 of the Dingley tariff bill. Based on these 
decisions two English companies erected expensive extract plants in 
Borneo for the manufacture of cutch for the tanning trade, and a third 
company, which had been making cutch for net dyeing, increased its 
capacity and improved its product for the tanning trade. In 1906 the 
Treasury Department ruled that the material was dutiable at seven- 



TT'.I'J SCMI.ITI.K A CHEMK M.S. OILS, AND PATNTS. 

eighths cent per pound. This was absolutely prohibitive and one of 
L wo large companies dismantled its plant and wrote off about 
i'OO 000 loss. We contested the Treasury Department's ruling and 
lit fall the Board of General Appraisers decided unanimously that 
mangrove cutch is properly a cutch and entitled to entry free of duty. 
In spite of these tliree decisions, based on two of which the large 
investment were made, and in spite of the fact that Congress was to 
revise the tariff when the question could be definitely settled, the 
Treasury Department appealed from the board's decision. The result 
is that the largest mangrove cutch company remaining has ceased 
operations for the time being, and if the new bill carries a duty on 
mangrove cutch this company will dismantle, as did the other one. 

Aside from its being unjust to these English concerns who invested 
their money in good faith, relying on the uncontested appraisers 
decisions to impose a duty, it is, as I have tried to show you, of the 
greatest importance that every encouragement be given mangrove 
cutch, as it directly takes the place of hemlock and oak barks, and if 
10 000 tons per year were used it would mean, directly and indirectly, 
the substitution of 160,000 to 400,000 cords of bark, causing,- as it 
would, the consumption of 10,000 to 40,000 tons of quebracho and 
chestnut extracts. 

Mangrove cutch should certainly come in free of duty. In my 
opinion it would be a wise expenditure, were it necessary, for the 
Government to pay a bounty on all mangrove cutch imported into 
the United States on account of the beneficial reasons given above. 

VALONIA EXTRACT. 

There is onl} T one factory making this extract. It is located in 
Smyrna, and makes the extract from the valonia burr. There is 
no valonia extract made in the United States, and, in fact, there is 
but little of the valonia itself imported into the United States, 
although it is a valuable tanning material and quantities are used in 
Europe. I think this valonia extract should be allowed free entry 
into the United States on account of its advantages to the tanners 
and noncompetition with home industries. 

MYROBOLAN EXTRACT. 

There is one factory in India, near Calcutta, making this extract 
in the solid form containing 50 to 55 per cent tannic acid. There is 
a little myrobolan extract made in the United States in the liquid 
form out of the myrobolan nuts which are imported from Calcutta 
and Bombay. In case any tanning extract is to pay a duty, I pre- 
sume that myrobolan extract should pay the minimum duty, in order 
to protect in a moderate way the domestic manufacturer. 

In this connection I might say that my firm is the largest importer 
of this solid myrobolan extract and that we do not manufacture a 
pound of myrobolan extract in the United States, but the manufac- 
ture of myrobolan extract in the United States would seem a reason- 
able and logical business proposition, much more so than the manu- 
facture of quebracho extract. My reasons are that the myrobolan 
nut contains 30 to 40 per cent of tannic acid and requires only about 
a pound and a half to produce 1 pound of the myrobolan extract. 



TANNING EXTRACTS M. S. ORTH. 7793 

Furthermore, the freight on the nuts from India to America is less 
than it is on the extract. It is therefore easy to protect the American 
manufacturer without unduly burdening American leather manu- 
facturers. 

There are two noticeable tendencies in the extract business and the 
tanning business as related to extracts, namely, the continual grad- 
ual increase in the cost of raw materials and tanning extracts, and, 
secondly, the necessity of using several different kinds of tanning 
materials, especially extracts, instead of only bark, in order to pro-* 
duce the best leather. It is therefore my opinion that it is wisest 
to keep this country open to the free importation of raw materials and 
tanning extracts, in order to lengthen the life of our native tanning 
materials and keep down the cost of American-made leather, in 
addition to the important reason already given, namely, the preven- 
tion of the destruction of our forests. 

The domestic chestnut extract manufacturer needs no protection, 
and as regards the one or two quebracho extract manufacturers, the 
protection which Mr. Skiddy asks (for I do not see anywhere that the 
New York Tanning Extract Company has asked for a duty, and since 
they have a large factory in South America, which was a logical move 
on their part, they may not desire a duty) seems to be all out of 
reason, since he wishes to bring a bulky log from the center of South 
America to New York, paying four times the freight on it that an 
extract made in South America from the log would cost, and in addi- 
tion to this great excess of freight, something like a claimed 100 per 
cent difference in labor cost. Besides which, as already shown, the 
advance in the price of the South American quebracho extract during 
the past two months has been as much as the additional duty asked 
by Mr. Skiddy. ' 

Mr. Skiddy may claim that this increase in price has been caused 
by a combination of the extract manufacturers of South America 
and that they have also advanced the price of tho quebracho log, and 
that therefore he needs still the protection of the duty asked. If he 
claims this, he admits that his business is an illogical one, and it would 
seem apparent to anyone that no matter what the duty on the ex- 
tract might be he would be at the mercy of the South American, who 
controls not only the extract but the log. On the other hand, if he 
does not claim that the South American controls the log as well as the 
extract, then, as shown, he has already received the advantage he has 
asked for inasmuch as the South American extract has advanced as 
much as the additional duty he asked. 

In support of my assertion that tanning extracts are universally ad- 
vancing in price, I give below copies of a letter sent out to the Ameri- 
can chestnut manufacturers by one of their number, and of the arti- 
cles which appeared in the Hide and Leather issue of January 30, 
1909, and the Leather Trade Review of London, issue of January 13, 
1909. 



EXHIBIT A. 

FEBRUARY 1, 1909. 

GENTLEMEN: We herewith submit for your consideration two articles recently pub- 
lished in the leading English and American leather-trade journals, which indicate the 
trend of the foreign extract business is toward higher values universally. 

This situation, taken in connection with current events, warrants us in suggesting 
that as there is a strong probability of better prices for domestic extract in the near 



77<M SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS. AM' 1'AINTS. 

amenta before closing contracts for goods 



future it 

to _. _ > tH _ w ^ u 

deliveries excepting at prices which guarantee a satis- 



y margin. 
Youre, very truly, 



EXHIBIT B. 
* [From Hide and Leather, January 30, 1909.] 

Quebracho extract is growing firmer, and prices tend toward a high level. A promi- 
nent dealer states that thfc extract has been sold too cheaply for many months, due to 
^vere competition in the primary market. The fight in producing centers is now 
over, and prices are seeking a more profitable level. 



EXHIBIT C. 

[From Shoe and leather Reporter, Boston, January 21, 1909.] 

There seems to be a great deal of anxiety in Europe at the present time in connec- 
tion with the future of the tanning-extract business. As we have pointed out, the 
French and German Governments are contemplating measures which will have the 
effect of putting a stop to the wholesale destruction oftimber which has been going on 
by timber merchants, paper makeib, pulp-board makers, and, last but not least, the 
makers of tanners' extracts. Whole tracts of forest land have been cleared in the 
south of France, and in some cases the climate of the country has been adversely 
affected by this denudation of forests. The danger of invasion seems also to have 
been much increased by stripping the mountain sides of timber; in fact, there is every 
reason to believe that in the near future the supply of timber for extract making will 
be much curtailed. 

In France we learn active steps are now being taken by the makers of chestnut 
extract to protect their interests, in view of possible developments. A meeting has 
been held lately in Paris of all the principal men engaged in the industry, at which 
unanimity on most questions relating to the industry prevailed. A liberal programme 
of activity was put forward, and a strong endeavor will be made to improve as far as 
possible the conditions of the extract business. 

This programme runs as follows: 

(1; To assist and cooperate with the public authorities and by other means to help 
in the reafforestation of France with oak and chestnut trees. 

(2) To assist the development of the French industry of tanning and dyeing extracts 
manufacturers by an inquiry to economic conditions which, in keeping with their own 
interests, are the most favorable to consumption in France and abroad. 

(3) To intervene in the general interests of the French extract industry with the 
Government, chambers of commerce, railways, administrations, etc. 

(4) To arbitrate in all the disputes voluntarily brought before the syndicate or 
dismissed by the tribunals. 

The above is a precise of the objects of the syndicate, and is signed by the president, 
Edouard Roy, and A'exis Roy, secretary. 

It looks, therefore, that there is a very strong movement in the extract business, 
which will end in a considerable advance in prices. Much of the business done this 
last few years in tanning extracts has been of a decidedly unprofitable nature; so much 
no that several of the smaller French and Corsican makers have been forced out of 
the business. The position should be borne in mind by the American users of imported 
extract, and their policy should be shaped accordingly. The movement toward 
combination is also noticeable in South America, where steps are being taken toward 
a unification of the quebracho interests. Several meetings have, we believe, been 
held, and importers ao not seem lately to have been able to get even regular quota- 
tions for future deliveries of quebracho wood or extract. 

Again, it must be remembered that a deal of money has also been lost in connection 
with the tropical mangrove extract industry, and we believe some of the London 
concerns would like to shut down on the business at once if they could get out without 
running the risk of mtore severe losses than has hitherto been the case. 

1'erhaps, after all, this question of tanning extracts may have more interest for 
European tanners than for our own. All the same, it is necessary to remember that 



TANNING EXTRACTS M. S. ORTH. 7795 

we are year by year importing more foreign chestnut and pakwood extracts, quebracho, 
etc.. while another important point to domestic tanners lies in the fact that it is admit- 
ted British and German tanners have only made headway against imported American 
leather by the free use of concentrated extracts, such as we have been discussing. If 
the supply is rendered dearer, or seriously curtailed, it is difficult to see what the 
effect will be on the European tanning industry, but in any event we in America 
can afford for many years yet to await events without any great amount of anxiety. 



EXHIBIT D. 
[From the Leather Trades Review. London. January 13, 1909.] 

A most important meeting of manufacturers and others interested in the continental 
extract business was held in Paris on the 24th ultimo. The proposed government 
restrictions on the amount of available timber to be utilized, and the threatened 
legislation on the subject, are making the future full of anxiety, and a united effort 
is to be made toward the betterment and protection of the extract industry. We 
shall probably deal with this important matter at greater length in a subsequent 
issue, but meanwhile a perusal of the objects of the proposed combination, of which 
E. Edouard Roy is the president, will show tanners how necessary it is to cover their 
requirements ahead as far as may seem reasonable. The objects of the syndicate are 
stated to be: 

(1) To assist and cooperate with the public authorities and to use all other means 
in the reafforestation of France with chestnut and oak trees. 

(2) To assist in the development of the French extract industry by research into 
economic conditions, which, in keeping with its own interests, are the most favorable 
to the consumption of extracts in France and abroad. 

(3) To take action in the general interests of the French extract business in its 
relations with the Government, chambers of commerce, railways, administrations, etc. 

(4) To arbitrate on disputes brought before the syndicate or dismissed by the laws 
of courts. 

The feeling seems general on the Continent that, owing to the unfavorable conditions 
under which the extract business has been carried on for some time, that prices are 
likely to be substantially advanced under the new syndicate's regime. It is also use- 
ful to bear in mind the fact that there is also a movement on foot toward a combination 
of the exporters of quebracho wood and extract in South America, so that there unfor- 
tunately seems every .prospect of an era of higher prices in the extract business, a 
fact of which tanners should take careful note. 

Respectfully submitted. 

M. S. ORTH 

(Of Harden, Orih & Hastings, 
Boston, New York, and Chicago). 



M. S. ORTH, BOSTON, MASS., SUBMITS LETTER OF J. GORDON 
PARKER, BERMONDSEY, ENGLAND, RELATIVE TO THE PROPER 
DEFINITION OF CTTTCH. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 25, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: I refer you to my letter of December 30, 1908, in 
which. I stated that I had written to Dr. J. Gordon Parker asking 
him to substantiate his statement regarding the meaning of the 
word "cutch," and I have the pleasure of giving you herewith his 
reply, recently received, regarding this: 

LONDON LEATHER INDUSTRIES LABORATORY, 

HEROLD'S INSTITUTE, DRUMMOND ROAD, 

Bermondaey. February ?, 1909. 
Messrs. MARDEN, ORTH & HASTINGS. 

DEAR SIRS: Your favor of the 12th ultimo, with copy of your letter sent to the Waya 
and Means Committee at Washington, came duly to hand. In reply to the same. I have 
made careful inquiries at the British Museum and of some Indian authorities as to the 



77% - IIKDULE A CIIK.MICAI.S. <m.s. AND PAINTS. 

exact meaninu t the word "cutch." I can not get any printed or documentory evi- 

dOfM (hat would definitely prove your statement, but I find that the word "cutch " 

<-a from the Bengali word "cutcha," or "cutha." This material was a paste made 

'' down certain trees, or the pith of certain trees, in Bengal and Burma, and this 

paste WM spread on betel-nut leaves. A certain amount of lime is added, and the 

whole leaf turn- n-d. The natives chew this. In other words, this was a paste which 

they used to put upon betel-nut leaves. 

I can not lind that the word " cutch " in Hindustani means paste, and I have evi- 
dently been misled in this, although that statement is made in more than one dic- 
tionary and in certain books of tanning. It evidently comes from one of the other 
Indian languages, viz, Bengalese, or the language spoken in some parts of Burma and 
.1. where cutch was originally made. 

A t Singapore the word " cutch " means paste, and it is a common custom to have orders 
from native firms given for extract or other material worded, "We prefer to buy the 
extract in cutch form than in liquid form," meaning that they prefer an extract of a 
pantv nature rather than of a liquid nature. 

I have at the present time studying with me three graduates from Indian univer- 
sit i-3 who are natives, and I asked each one separately the meaning of the word " cutch," 
and they all understand it an meaning a pasty extract made from the pith, the bark, 
or the wood of certain trees, and that it is a generic name for any pasty extract made 
by boiling the leaves, bark, wood, or pith of different plants and trees. 

Cutch catechu definitely means a cutch made from acacia catechu. Uncharia 
cutch means a cutch made from the uncaria gambier, or, as we know it more in tanning 
terms, gambier cutch or gambier. Then there is the cutch made from the arabica, 
cutch made from tengah or tengah cutch. There is also a cutch made from the 
turwahr; and we have mangroce cutch, which is made from the pure mangrove tree, 
and that differs materially as to whether it be made in Borneo, in India, or in West 
Africa. 

It must be clear to the authorities at Washington that the word "cutch," if not 
followed by a specific indication, such as cutch catechu or cutch arabica, must mean 
the whole series of different cutcbw which have been made for years from different 
trees. 

I was very much surprised in reading the report of the recent trial to find that 
some of the American chemists could not find catechin in the cutch they examined, 
enpecially as both Professor Proctor and myself were able to find it in pretty large 
quantities. 

Yours, faithfully, J. GORDON PARKEK. 



GLUE AND GELATIN. 

[Paragraph 23.] 

JAMES POLLITZ, NEW YORK CITY, RECOMMENDS A DUTY OF 
TEN PER CENT ON ALL GLUES AND GELATINS. 

232 FULTON STREET, 
New York, January 18, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: As an importer of gelatin, and having been unable 
to appear before your committee in person, I beg to submit the fol- 
lowing for your consideration: 

With reference to Schedule A, paragraph 23, of the present tariff 
act, it is of course apparent that the tariff imposed upon any article 
which goes into direct consumption, or may be used as a raw material 
in producing another article, is indirectly paid by the consumer. 

After reading the account of some of the hearings had before you 
and briefs submitted, it appears to me that many of the manufac- 
turers in this country of products of which a high-grade gelatin 
is used as a raw material are urging an increase in duty on the manu- 
factured and finished article. To me it seems clear that they are 



GLUE AND GELATIN. 7797 

not giving due consideration to the fact that they are handicapped 
by the high duty on the raw material. 

For instance, gelatin which they are using is of a high grade, and 
on the basis of cost in Europe of 35 cents a pound minimum the duty 
is 20 per cent ad valorem and 15 cents a pound, or 22 cents on foreign 
cost of 35 cents, which is about 63 per cent, which is the amount 
the American manufacturer has to pay for his raw material more 
than his competitor in Europe. 

On gelatin for eating purposes the tariff of 20 per cent and 15 cents 
a pound becomes almost prohibitive, with the result that the best 
and purest gelatin, which is used largely in Europe for such purpose, 
is excluded from this country and the inferior grades used in their 
stead. I respectfully submit that no such protection is necessary, 
as there is scarcely any gelatin made in this country which is sold 
as high as 35 cents a pound, and the grades made in this country are 
produced cheaper here than in Europe. 

A uniform tariff of 10 per cent ad valorem on all glue and gelatin 
would fully cover any difference in cost of labor. 

In my opinion the revenue under such a tariff would soon be greater 
than under the present act, as it would give a stimulus to our indus- 
tries and soon place our manufacturers in a position to compete with 
foreign manufacturers on finished articles. 

Very respectfully, yours, JAMES POLLITZ. 



STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COM- 
MERCE OF NEW YORK CITY ON BEHALF OF THE IMPORTERS 
OF FRENCH GLUES. 

32 BROADWAY, 
New York City, February 27, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : We beg to submit to your honorable body the follow- 
ing remarks : 

We believe that the duty now collected on glues worth 10 cents or 
less per pound, which amounts to 40 per cent on the qualities usually 
employed, and the duty of 25 per cent ad valorem on glues ranging 
from 10 cents to 35 cents per pound, and the duty of 15 cents per 
pound plus 20 per cent ad valorem on glues worth 35 cents and above 
are excessive. 

For the first class, or the glues worth 10 cents or less per pound, the 
raw material counts for less than the workmanship, and said work- 
manship has increased very materially in France since the Dingley 
tariff has been enacted, having passed from 3.50 to 5 francs a day in 
that industry, and if Congress is to take into consideration the cost of 
producing in foreign countries, it seems that this duty of 40 per cent 
should be reduced to 25 per cent. 

For the second category of goods it seems that the duty ought to be 
reduced from 25 to 12^ per cent, since the Treasury admits now glue 
stock free of duty, and therefore glue costs to-day considerably less 
than it used to, and an actual duty of 12 ^ per cent on the imported 
article would be equivalent to-day to 25 per cent at the time the 
Dingley Act was enacted. 



7798 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

These remarks apply also to the more expensive class of glue, or 
fine gelatines, in the confection of which women are principally em- 
ployed and their salary has nearly doubled during the last ten years. 
The argument above invoked would therefore apply to this case, and 
we would ask that glues above 35 cents should oe submitted only to 
a specific duty of 15 cents per pound, which would give ample protec- 
tion to the domestic manufacturers. 

Trusting that you will give this matter your kind attention, we 
remain, gentlemen, 

Very respectfully, 

THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, 
HENRY E. GOURD, President. 

LICORICE EXTRACT. 

[Paragraph 29.] 

JOHN W. YERKES, WASHINGTON, D. C., FILES SUPPLEMENTAL 
STATEMENT RELATIVE TO IMPORTATIONS OF LICORICE. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., March 9, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives. 

DEAR SIR: Representing the Independent Tobacco Manufacturers' 
Association of the United States, I had the honor to appear before 
your committee last November and presented the request of the asso- 
ciation that the duty on licorice extract or paste be removed and same 
be allowed to enter this country absolutely free of custom dues. 

At that time the question was asked as to the amount that was 
imported. I was unable to answer the question, but said that I 
would give the committee that information. 

I find from a report made by the Bureau of Manufactures that in 
1906, 583,342 pounds of licorice extracts were imported, of a total 
value of $95,451. During the same year there was imported free of 
duty 102,000,000 pounds of licorice root. In 1907, 692,739 pounds of 
licorice extracts were imported, of the value of $77,984, and 66,000,000 
pounds of the root imported. 

You will recall that in 1902 or 1903 the American Tobacco Company, 
or its allied companies, secured virtually an absolute monopoly of the 
licorice business, and the independent tobacco manufacturers were 
compelled to purchase from them. 

In the testimony given by James B. Duke, president of the Ameri- 
can Tobacco Company, at the trial in New York under indictments 
found against MacAndrews & Forbes Company and J. S. Young 
Company, for violation of federal law because these concerns, owned 
by the tobacco trust, were restraining interstate trade and commerce 
in licorice paste, and had formed a monopoly, he admitted that the 
Continental Tobacco Company owned about one million of the pre- 
ferred and two million, or nearly 70 per cent, of the common stock of 
MacAndrews & Forbes Company, and that they had purchased the 
J. S. Young Company and tried to purchase the licorice business of 
a Mr. Lewis, virtually the only other competitor; that after these 
purchases were made, in May, 1904, the price of licorice paste was 



LICORICE EXTRACT JOHX W. YERKES. 7799 

raised to 9 cents per pound, and in August of the same year the 
price was raised to 10 cents a pound. 

Under these indictments the jury returned a verdict of guilty, as 
against the MacAndrews & Forbes Company and J. S. Young Com- 
pany, which, as I said, were in fact owned by the American Tobacco 
Company. 

From information believed to be reliable I can state that fully 90 
per cent of the licorice made in this country from the imported root 
is either made by the American Tobacco Company or plants which it 
controls. 

The independent tobacco manufacturers believe that if the duty of 
4 cents per pound should be removed from licorice paste that it 
would aid in destroying this monopoly and would reduce the price of 
licorice paste, because then large amounts of it would be imported 
which, under existing conditions, can not be done. 

I inclose herewith a number of letters sent me by various inde- 
pendent tobacco manufacturers bearing upon this subject and show- 
ing their interest in the subject and their desire that the duty on 
licorice paste should be removed. 

Trusting that your committee can meet the wishes of these citizens 
and manufacturers, and which can be done without appreciable loss 
to the revenues of the Government, I am, 
Very respectfully, yours, 

JOHN W. YERKES. 



EXHIBIT A. 

17TH, 18TH STS.. GLENWOOD AND LEHIGH AYES.. 

Philadelphia, Pa., November 21, 1908. 
Hon. J. W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We have been advised by Mr. Campbell, of the United States Tobacco 
Company, that he is trying to have licorice paste placed upon the free list. We surely 
approve of this, as we feel the independent tobacco manufacturers should have some 
market outside of the trust from whom to buy licorice paste. 
Very respectfully, 

FRISHMUTH BRO. & Co. (Inc.), 
H. D. MILLER, Secretary. 



EXHIBIT B. 

BRUNSWICK, Mo., Decembers, 1908. 
Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We understand that there is a movement on foot to put licorice paste 
on the free list so that independent tobacco manufacturers may be able to buy lico- 
rice paste from foreign manufacturers without paying the excessive duty of 4^ cents 
a pound. We are very much in favor of this movement and believe that it would 
be a just one, owing to the fact that the output of licorice paste in this country is prac- 
tically controlled by a monopoly which is under the control of the American Tobacco 
Company, who, in turn, has in its power to force independent tobacco men to pay an 
excessive price for all the licorice they use and under the present tariff schedule are 
aided in this regard by the Government. 

Any favors you might show this matter will be personally appreciated by us and 
of great importance and assistance to us in our business. 
Thanking you in advance for any kindness you may show us, we beg to remain, 
Your&, truly, 

BRUNSWICK TOBACCO Co., 
By J. M. BARKER, Treasurer. 



7800 SCHEDULE A fll KM U'ALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

EXHIBIT C. 

UTICA, N. Y., November 21, 1908. 

Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR- We wish to thank you for your action before the Ways and Means Com- 
mittee in requesting them to put licorice paste on the free list. As every one knows, 
the- manufacture of licorice paste in this country is practically controlled by the Ameri- 
<-un Tobacco Company, for their own benefit, and it seems to us that it would be only 
fair to the independent manufacturers of tobacco of the country that the paste should 
be allowed to come in free of duty. We understand that licorice root is already on 
the free list. We certainly are in favor of this action. 

Very truly, 

L. WARNICK BROWX & Co., 

By L. W. BROWN. 



EXHIBIT D. 

LYNCHBURG, VA., December 8, 1908. 
Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I am advised by our Hugh Campbell, of the Independent Tobacco 
Manufacturers' Association, that you are endeavoring to get the matter before the 
Ways and Means Committee for the withdrawal of the duty on licorice paste of 4 cents 
a pound. We sincerely hope that you may be successful in this movement, as it 
would place the independent tobacco manufacturers in such a position that we would 
not be dependent on the subsidized licorice companies of the United States, the most 
of which at this time are controlled by the American Tobacco Company. We sincerely 
hope that you may be able to get this bill before the Congress of the United States, 
anu assure you we would be glad to cooperate in any way possible for the furtherance 
of the same. 

Very truly, BOOKER TOBACCO Co. (Inc.). 

By G. M. BOOKER, President. 



EXHIBIT E. 

WINSTON-SALEM, N. C., December 4, 1908. 
Hon. Jxo. W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We are advised by Hugh Campbell, president of the Independent 
Tobacco Manufacturers' Association, that he had requested you to appear before the 
Ways and Means Committee, and urge upon it the necessity of putting licorice paste 
on the free list, and we heartily concur in Mr. Campbell's request. 

No better lesson could be taught the licorice trust than to wipe off the import duty 
on licorice paste. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO Co., 
By W. R. LEAK, Secretary and Treasurer. 



EXHIBIT F. 

LOUISVILLE, KY., November 28, 1908. 
Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We are in receipt of a letter from Hugh Campbell, president of the 
Independent Tobacco Manufacturers" Association, relative to having licorice paste 
placed on the free list, and in this connection would say, we wish to indorse this 
measure, and would be very glad to have this done if it is possible. 
Hoping you can assist in the matter, we remain, 
Yours, respectfully, 

RYAN-HAMPTON TOBACCO Co. 



LICOEICE EXTRACT JOHN W. YERKES. 7801 

EXHIBIT G. 

339-353 CENTRAL AVENUK, 
Newark, N. J., November 24, 1908. 
Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: The Independent Tobacco Manufacturers' Association of the United 
States have requested the Committee on Ways and Means to put licorice paste, which 
now pays a duty of 4J cents per pound, on the free list. In bringing this matter, to 
your attention we desire to say that we heartily indorse the association's action for 
reasons as follow." : 

Licorice root is imported into this country free of duty, and the greater part of it is 
manufactured into paste by a trust which the courts have declared a monopoly in 
restraint of trade. 

The tobacco manufacturers of the country are compelled to purchase licorice paste 
from this combine at prices which they see fit to impose. 

Tobacco manufacturers should have the benefit of free paste for the reason that the 
importation is now very limited, and if placed upon the free list the revenue of the 
country will not be greatly reduced, and it would put the independent manufacturers 
in a position to have more than one source of supply. 

It seems to us that this matter is worthy of your earnest consideration, which we 
respectfully request. 

Yours, very truly, CAMPBELL TOBACCO Co., 

HENRY S. PFEIL, President. 



EXHIBIT H. 

READING, PA., November 24, 1908. 
Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I understand you are familiar with the condition of affairs in regard to 
licoriee paste. 

At the present time there is a duty of 4i cents a pound on same, whereas the raw 
product from which it is made is admitted free, and the manufacture of same is really 
a simple process. 

Through the Government's fight the licorice trust was or is supposed to be dissolved, 
and through that dissolution the price of licorice paste, which had been almost dou- 
bled, has been reduced to almost a normal price, or at least price prevailing prior to 
the buying up of the different manufactories by the tobacco trust or their affiliated 
companies. 

As a tobacco manufacturer, it is absolutely necessary for me to have licorice paste, 
and at the present time the price may be put up almost to a prohibitive price at any 
time, and to assure us an open market it is necessary for us to have free trade on this 
article. 

Hoping you will give this your kind attention, I close. 

Yours, truly, GEORGE W. GRKKV. 



EXHIBIT I. 

MARTINSVILLE. YA., November 20, 1908. 
Hon. JOHN W. YERKES, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We have a letter from the president of the Independent Tobacco Manu- 
facturers' Association stating that he was present at a meeting before the Ways and 
Means Committee a few days ago, and at the request of the association ask that licorice 
be put on the free list. The licorice business is now controlled in this country by the 
trust, and all independent tobacco manufacturers are compelled to buy from them. 
We think it would be of inestimable value to the independent tobacco manufacturers 
for the duty to be taken off licorice and put on the free list. 

We hope you will use your influence in having this done. We beg to remain. 
Yours, very truly, 

SPARROW & GRAVELY TOBACCO Co., 
By J. D. SPARROW, President. 



7MI-J III I- 1 1. 1; A- CHKMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

BARYTES. 

[Paragraph* 44 and 489.] 

CHARLES J. STAPLES, OF BUFFALO, H. Y., FILES LETTERS RELA- 
TIVE TO THE FOREIGN BARYTES INDUSTRY. 

BUFFALO, N. Y., February 6, 1909. 

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Jfauw Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR* SIR: Regarding tariff on barytes. Since appearing before 
your committee I have endeavored to get for your use reliable data. 
Herewith I send to you correspondence had with Hon. Robert P. 
Skinner, consul-general at Hamburg, Germany, and others. 

From these statements submitted facts of importance for a proper 
revision of the tariff on barytes appear. I specially call your atten- 
tion to the following: 

A pool has been formed by German producers of barytes to maintain prices. See 
inrlosed letter* from Consul-general Skinner, of Hamburg, and Consul Fee, of Bremen. 

I also refer you to the British Diplomatic and Consular Reports, 
No. 2821, page" 9, which says: 

Baryte* is found in considerable quantities in the Harz Mountains, chiefly in Lauter- 
berg and thr neighborhood and in Thuringia. A syndicate ha? been formed with a 
view to regulate the price*, which are merely nominal, as the syndicate ha? in this 
res pert not obtained its object. There is a prospect in the early future of the trade 
in this article being widely developed 

If "the mining as well as the entire trade in this article is in the 
hands of a syndicate," as stated by American consul, Hon. William T. 
Fee, in his letter of December 28, 1908, then the only way to save the 
American barvtes market along the Atlantic seaboard from foreign 
monopoly is by a tariff high enough to insure free competition to 
Americans. 

By actual business quotation barytes delivered in New York, duty 
paid, was, on January 29, 1908, offered for $5.83 per ton. It can 
safely be assumed that the quotation included profit. Reference to 
statements submitted to your committee shows that domestic barytes 
dug bv American labor at American wages can not be delivered in 
New York for less than $9^0 SI 2 per ton. 

\Vith an efficient pool or syndicate now in force, as indicated by 
United States officials, the sales price on harytes imported will be 
arbitrarily advanced to the sole profit of t!ie foreign syndicate. Is 
it not a wise policy to establish a duty on barytes which at once will 
give good revenue to the Government and which, by protecting 
American competition, will keep down for the consuming public prices 
which otherwise might become monopolistic? 

The rule clearly stated by President-elect William H. Taft should 
be applied in fixing the tariff duty on barytes. At the Ohio dinner 
in New York City, Mr. Taft said:' 

The measure of the tariff should bf the difference between the cost of production 
of the article in this country and such cost abroad, and in the estimate of the cost of 
production abroad and in the estimate of the cost of production here there should be 



BARYTES CHABLES J. STAPLES. 7803 

included, among other elements, what ie regarded in each place as a reasonable man- 
ufacturer's profit. 

The cost of production of unmanufactured barytes in this country deliv- 
ered at New York is, per ton $9 to $12 

The cost of production of unmanufactured barytes from abroad delivered 
at New York is, per ton 4 to 6 



The difference between the cost of domestic production and foreign pro- 
duction is, per ton 5 to 



The cost of production of manufactured barytes in this country delivered at 

New York is, per ton 17 to 21 

The cost of production of manufactured barytes from abroad delivered at 
New York is, per ton 7 to 9 



The difference between the cost of domestic barytes and foreign barytes is, 
per ton .* 10 to 12 

The wages paid, the capital involved, the interest, and other charges 
are all greater in America than abroad. American- producers, under 
present conditions, have in no instance received " a reasonable man- 
ufacturer's profit." Failure in most cases has resulted from the 
unequal competition. 

To conform with the established policy of tariff revision the tariff 
duty should be fixed as follows: 

On unmanufactured barytes, per ton $5 

On manufactured barytes, per ton .' 12 

Respectfully submitted. 

CHARLES J. STAPLES. 



EXHIBIT A. 

HAMBURG, GERMANY, November SO, 1908. 
Messrs. STAPLES, NOONAN & STAPLES, 

736 Ellicott Square, Buffalo, N. Y. 

GENTLEMEN: I have the honor to inclose herewith such information as I have been 
able to obtain without delay, in reply to your inquiry of November 16. It is impossi- 
ble to transmit the reply in time to arrive before December 1. 

a I am asked to supply information respecting the cost of barytes, which, in hearings 
before Congress, were said to be worth $2.78 per ton at the foreign seaports in 1885. 
This material is used almost exclusively in the paint trade, being ground and mixed 
with white paint to give it body. The best grades from the Harz and Thuringian 
mountains are naturally white and can be used without first being bleached. To 
some extent these grades are utilized in the porcelain a*nd white-glass industries. The 
cheaper grades of barytes come from the Rhine, are shipped in crude form, and these, 
both hard and soft, are shipped to the United States, where they are treated chemically 
and made white. Barytes from the Rhine and from Newfoundland has 96 per cent of 
barium sulphate. 

Hamburg exporters invariably buy on terms delivered at seaboard. The prices 
to-day are from $5.47 to $5.71 per ton. The ocean freight from seaboard to New 
York runs from $1.70 to $2.19 per ton. The German rate from mine to seaboard, 
shipments being made in large barges, is from $1.19 to $1.42 per ton. This would 
bring the price to-day at the mine from $4.05 to $4.52, according to circumstances. 

a The exporting points for barytes in Europe are Rotterdam, Antwerp, and Ham- 
burg, especially the first named. There are many mining firms in the business, and 
they have formed a. pool to maintain prices and to apportion the tonnage. Exporters 
tell me that they get the same quotations from all producers, who turn back orders 
when their quota is reached. 



7. MH SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

Miners find that their profit out of the figures last named. What that profit is must 
be left to conjecture. Since the pooling arrangement referred to above, prices have 
been advanced, BO I gather, from $0.50 to $0.75 per ton. It is hardly un air to assume 
that the most of this advance is profit, although labor cost, I believe, has also advanced. 
It is dangerous to conjecture on subjects like this. Exporters work on a narrow 
margin and frequently find their profit by waiting for a good freight rate. 

ROBERT P. SKINNER, Consul-General. 



EXHIBIT 6. 

, BREMEN, GERMANY, December 28, 1908. 

CHARLES J. STAPLES, ESQ., 

Attorney and counsellor at law, 

7S6 Ellicott square, Buffalo, N. T. 

DEAR SIR: Confirming my letter of December 2, and in further reply to your 
inquiry of November. 16, wherein you stated that you had been requested by the 
Ways and Means Committee, which is investigating conditions for tariff revision, to 
submit a brief upon barytes, I now beg to communicate to you such information in 
regard to this subject as I have been able to gather. 

Barytes is mined in Thuringia, and the mining as well as the entire trade in this 
article is in hands of a syndicate. As I had expected, the syndicate refused any and 
all information as to the cost of production, but indirectly I learned the following: 

Barytes can be bought at Bremen at 33 marks per metric ton, in car at railroad sta- 
tion; the expenses for loading into vessel amount to 1 mark per ton; if shipped in 
bags, 3 marks for bags (100 kilograms each) have to be added. The sea freight for 
barytes in bags to Baltimore, Galveston, and Savannah, on Lloyd steamers, is 9 
shillings per ton, but, as the North German Lloyd does not take barytes in bulk, 
no shipments of this article are made from this port. The freight from the Thuringian 
railway station to Bremen, which is included in the aforementioned price of 33 
marks, is 9.50 marks per ton. The railway freight from Thuringia to Nordenham, 
another Weser port, whence large quantities of barytes are shipped in 4,000 and 
4,500 ton lots amounts to 11 marks per metric ton, and the sea freight from this port 
for barytes, either in bulk or in bags, to southern or Gulf ports, amounts to 6 to 7 
shillings per metric ton, while the transfer costs at this port amount to from 4 to 5 
marks per ton. 

According to German statistics, during the year 1907, 19,540 metric tons of barytes 
were exported to the United States, valued at 782,000 marks, or about 40 marks per 
metric ton, 1 mark being 23.8 cents. 
Very respectfully yours, 

WM. THOS. FEE, Consul. 



EXHIBIT C. 

The W. H. FALES COMPANY, 

6t Maiden Lane, New York City. 

GENTLEMEN: I address you, having been advised that you have had experience 
s importers of German dry earth colors, and hoping that you can furnish me infor- 
mation regarding the importation of barytes, and possibly some facts regarding litho- 
phone. It is my desire to have presented to the committee on Ways and Means now 
considering tariff revision correct data on which they can justly formulate proper 
tariff. Will you be so kind as to advise me in reference to the following questions: 

First. The cost laid down at the port of New York of crude German oarytes ore 
and the cost of German lithophone laid down at the port of New York. 

Second. What would be the effect of $5 duty on the crude barytes as regards the 
manufacture of lithophone? 

Third. What is the importance of the various uses of barytes and lithophone? 

Thanking you in advance for your prompt attention, I remain,. 
Yours, very truly, 

CHARLES J. STAPLES. 



BAKYTES CHARLES J. STAPLES. 7805 

EXHIBIT D. 

NEW YORK, January 2, 1909. 
Mr. CHAS. J. STAPLES, 

Attorney, 736 Ellicott Square, Buffalo, N. Y. 

DEAR Sm: Replying to your valued favor of the 30th ultimo, we answer your letter 
by giving the following facts: 

The co.*t of a good grade of crude German barytes c. i. f. the port of New York is 
23.50 marks per 1,000 Kilos, or in our currency $5.08 per ton of 2,000 pounds. This 
price includes the original cost of the goods as mined in Germany, the freight and 
handling charges from the mine to seaboard in Germany, shipping charges, freight 
charges from seaboard in Germany to the port of New York, and cost of marine insur- 
ance; in other words, it is the net cost of the goods to the importer here in New York; 
to which cost, however, would have to be added the present tariff, which is, we 
believe, about 75 cents per ton, making the total net cost to the New York importer 
$5.83 per ton of 2,000 pounds, duty paid. This price applies to direct shipments 
of 200 to 500 tons at a time. The above-mentioned barytes tests from 96 per cent to 
99 per cent of true barium sulphate (BaSO 4 ), containing only small quantities of iron 
and silica (Si0 2 ), and this grade of barytes is used very extensively in Germany for 
the manufacture of lithopone. 

The above price was quoted to us on January 29, 1908, by the firm of Johann Schmel- 
zer, Meggen, western Germany, who are, from information furnished to us from our 
correspondents in Germany, considered to be one of the largest and most reliable 
miners of crude barytes ore in Germany. Kindly find attached letter of Johann 
Schmelzer, dated January 29, 1908, confirming the above-stated facts and quota- 
tions. As this letter was written about one year ago, there most likely has been some 
slight change in price since then, due to market conditions, but as far as we know 
there has been no radical advance in cost. 

From statistics which we have compiled ourselves from data taken out of the list 
of importations in the Oil, Paint, and Drug Reporter, which is the recognized author- 
ity in the chemical and paint trades, we find that during the year 1907 there was 
imported into this country through the ports of New York, Boston, New Orleans, 
Philadelphia, and Newport News, which are the principal ports of entry of chemical 
products into the United States, 8,208 tons of manufactured barytes and 5,357 tons 
of crude barytes. The manufactured barytes is such as is used by the paint manu- 
facturers, while the crude barytes, we think we can safely say, is nearly all used in 
the manufacture of lithopone, as this is about the only industry of any size and impor- 
tance in this country which buys crude barytes in any quantities worth mentioning. 

We attach herewith abstract of importations for year 1907, showing how we obtained 
the above-stated figures of barytes, both crude and manufactured. Tbisabstract 
shows date of importation, quantity, and name of the importer. By way of explana- 
tion, we will say that wherever the word "gray" or "crude" appears it means crude 
barytes ore. If desired, you can easily substantiate the above abstract by com- 
paring same with copies of the Oil, Paint, and Drug Reporter for the year 1907, which 
we believe to be substantially correct. We will say for your further information 
that the importation of barytes, both crude and manufactured, during the year 
1907 was considerably above the normal, due to the fact of increased consumption 
and to the flooding of many of the mines of this country where the crude barytes 
ore is produced. 

Answering your further question, we will say that good grades of German lithopone 
can be bought laid down at the port of New York at about the following figures: 

Lithopone containing about 30 per cent zinc sulphide, $4.13 per 100 pounds; lith- 
opone containing about 15 per cent zinc sulphide, $3.25 per 100 pounds for lots of 
aboutf 10 tons. The above prices include the cost of the goods in Germany, freight 
to New York, duty of $1 .25 per 100 pounds, and the marine insurance. Now, as regards 
the price of a good grade of domestic lithopone, containing about 30 per cent zinc 
sulphide, this can be purchased in the New York market at a price of 3f cents to 
4 cents per pound for 5 to 10 barrel lots (barrels 500 pounds net); for large contracts 
the above prices might be shaded about 10 cents per 100 pounds. 

In answer to your further question, in which you ask what would be the effect of 
imposing a duty of $5 per ton on imported crude barytes used in the manufacture of 
domestic lithopone, we beg to say from data which we have been able to obtain, that 
this would increase the cost of production of domestic lithopone about 20 to 25 cents 
per 100 pounds. We arrive at this conclusion in the following manner: Lithopone is 
made from barium sulphate and zinc ore. It has the following formula, ZnS:BaSO 4 , 
being combined in molecular proportion, and by weight contains 30 per cent of zinc 
sulphide and 70 per cent of barium sulphate. In practical manufacturing these per- 
centages may vary slightly owing to imperfect methods employed. From the above 
figures an advance of duty on the crude barytes to $5 per ton of 2,000 pounds would 

61318 AP 09 5 



7806 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

mean a net advance over the present cost of $4.25 per ton of 2,000 pounds (pn-.-nt 
duty lu-iii-,' 75 cents per ton ol 2,000 pounds) or in other words an advance of about 
Jl i-'.-nt!- |>rr 1<H> pounds in lln- cost of tin- barium sulphate used in the manufacture of 
lithopone, an in KM) pounds of lithopone there is only 70 pounds of barium sulphate. 
The increased cost of the domestic lithopone would be 70 per cent of 21 cents, or about 
15 (nts per 100 pounds. Allowing for impurities in the crude barytes and the Dec- 
enary waste in manufacturing, the actual advance would be about 25 cents to 30 cents 
per 100 pounds, or from 6 per cent to 8 per cent of the selling price of domestic litho- 
pone. At the present time lithopone has a duty of $1.25 per 100 pounds, and the 
freight rate from Germany is about 15 cents per 100 pounds, a protection of about $1.40 
per 100 pounds, so that the increase of 25 cents or 30 cents per 100 pounds in the cost 
of its production would not in our (opinion do any damage to the manufacturers of 
domestic lithopone. 

Now, as regards the relative importance of lithopone and barytes in the arts and 
sci.-iici s in our opinion this can best be stated by saying that lithopone is used mostly 
asasperialtv in the manufacture of paints, enamels, rubber, and com position goods such 
a* oilcloth, linoleum, and insulation materials, but even in these materials the use of 
lithopone is comparatively limited. Barytes, on the other hand, in many lines of 
industry like paint and rubber manufacturing is a staple article, being absolutely 
indispensable, in fact many articles of common use could not be made without it, 
euch as aniline lake colors, which are used in nearly every pound of paint and enamel 
produced : in many forms of rubber manufacturing it greatly increases the durability 
of the finished product and at the same time cheapening the cost to the consumer. 
Barytes is also used in large quantities in oilcloth manufactures, linoleum products, 
and many other lines too numerous to mention. 

To give you a further idea of the relative importance of lithopone and barytes, we 
will mention the fact that during the year 1907, when the importation of all forms of 
barytes was abnormal, there was only about 5,400 tons of crude barytes imported 
into this country through the ports of New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Newport 
New-, and New Orleans, which are the principal ports of entry for all chemical prod- 
ucts entering this country. The above quantity would make about 7,500 tons of litho- 
pone, containing 70 per cent of barium sulphate, while during the same year one 
barytes manufacturing plant in this country, from information we have received 
from reliable sources, had an output of about 25,000 tons of manufactured baryteg 
and there are quite a number of other large barytes manufacturers in this country. 
From our own practical experience in the paint and chemical trades we can safely 
say that the sale of lithopone is comparatively small compared with the sale of barytes. 
To give you a forcible illustration will say that an order of ten barrels (500 pounds) net. 
is considered a fair-sized order, while barytes is very seldom sold in less than carload 
lots, which hold from 40,000 to 50,000 pounds net. 

In answer to your further inquiry we will say that we are not manufacturers of 
barytes or lithopone, but have handled both these products extensively in our busi- 
This applies with equal force to both the domestic as well as the foreign makes 
of lithopone, also the domestic and foreign makes of barytes. 

Trusting that the above information may help you in your efforts, we remain, 
Yours, very truly, 

THE W. H. FALES COMPANY, 
WILLIAM H. FALES, President. 

EXHIBIT E. 

MEGGEN i. WESTF. (LENNE), January 29, 1908. 
Messrs. W. H. FALES & Co., 

New York. 

DEAR SIRS: I thank you for your kind letter of 20th instant. I offer you my gray 
high per cent barytes, suitable for lithopone manufacture, in lumps, cargo of 250 
at ')00 tons at once (Forderware that means the article as it comes from the mines) 
to the price of 23.50 marks per ton of 1,000 kilograms, c. i. f. New York, without 
duties, shipment at normal shipping opportunities, so that extra costs, occurred 
by low water, have to be borne by you, when you can not wait until the water rises. 
The weight stated at the station Grevenbruck and written in the bill of lading is to 
be paid, and no reduction is allowed to be made for weight losses during the voyage. 

Perhaps it will be advantageous for you to give me a trial order. You can then 
ee yourselves how the goods are. 

My gray barytes have 96 till 99 per cent BaSO 4 (barium sulfate). The yield of 
iron is very few, also the yield of SiO 2 (silicic acid). 

I hope soon to be honored with your kind orders and remain, 
Yours, very truly, 

JOH. SCHMELZER. 



UMBER VERMILION RED. 7807 

UMBER. 4 

[Paragraph 49.] 

THE GUNTERSVILLE (ALA.) UMBER AND PAINT CO. CLAIMS THAT 
UMBERS NEED HIGHER PROTECTIVE DUTY. 

GUNTERSVILLE, ALA., February 19, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: I have had some correspondence with our Repre- 
sentative in Congress, Hon. John L. Burnett, in regard to getting 
a higher duty imposed upon the importation of umbers into this 
country from foreign countries. While Mr. Burnett is a free trader, 
yet he is in favor of a higher duty on the article mentioned if it will 
bring into use our home products. The case is simply this. We have 
opened up and developed a very fine vein of umber in our county and 
the quality is as fine as the imported. There is no doubt but we have 
a sufficient quantity to supply the demand of the United States for an 
indefinite time. This product has never been mined in this country 
before to any extent, only being found in a very few places and States 
and in small quantities then. We feel that we are entitled to pro- 
tection and that a higher duty should be imposed upon the foreign 
product. We are handicapped to a great extent in disposing of our 
nome product, that is equal in every respect to the foreign, unless 
some remedy comes from you. We are making preparations to 
manufacture paints and expect to use quite a quantity of umber in 
that way, but we could supply the demand of other concerns at a 
much less figure than they can get the imported, and at the same 
time give them as good quality. We hope that you will give this 
matter your attention, and if it is not asking too much would be glad 
to have a passage upon same very soon. We do not ask the stoppage 
of importation, but simply a higher tariff or duty, so that we can be on 
an equality with importers, etc. 

Yours, truly, GUNTERSVILLE UMBER & PAINT Co. 

VERMILION RED. 

[Paragraph 54.] 

FELIX FEZANDIE, NEW YORK CITY, CALLS ATTENTION TO THE 
STATISTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF VERMILION. 

205 FULTON STREET, 
New York, February 24, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : I beg to call your attention to an error hi the statistics 
of vermilion importations given by the Oil, Paint, and Drug Reporter 
of February 22,, as follows: 

Vermilion. 



Year. 


Pounds. 


Dollars. 


1904 . 


140,066 


42,224 


1905 . . . . 


111,728 


42,503 


1906 


126,837 


46,257 


1907 ' 


180,580 


74,979 


1908 


140, 940 


60,979 









7808 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

These should have been classified under two headings: "Vermilion 
red containing quicksilver" and "Vermilion red containing lead/' 
and a note should have been added that in 1907 and 1908 red colors 
containing only a very small percentage of lead were transferred from 
a classification of 30 per cent ad valorem as painters' colors to a duty 
of 5 cents per pound as vermilion red containing lead. This matter 
was called to the attention of your committee at the beginning of the 
hearings by some of the American manufacturers. 

I beg, therefore, to request that in case the Bureau of Statistics is 
unable to furnish the exact importations under the proper classifica- 
tions that you estimate the proper division yourselves, say one-half 
for each heading in the year 1906-7 and one-third in the year 
1907-8, otherwise the figures or statistics of importations would 
lead your committee to believe in an increase of importations, which 
would be misleading. 

Your kind attention to above will greatly oblige. 
Yours, very respectfully, 

FELIX FEZANDIE, 
Importer of Colors and Dyestuffs. 



BICHROMATES OF SODA AND POTASH. 

| Paragraphs 62 and 74.] 

C. J. MATTHEWS, OF PHILADELPHIA, PA., FILES LETTERS 
URGING REDUCTION OF DUTY ON BICHROMATES. 

417 ARCH STREET, PHILADELPHIA, 

January 14, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: My attention has just been called to George R. Bower's 
letter, written you as president of the Henry Bower Chemical Manu- 
facturing Company, under date of Decemoer 18, 1908, and while 
there are many facts contained in this letter that are misleading, I 
do not think it necessary to go into an exhaustive explanation of 
same, thereby taking up the time of yourself and committee, except 
in one instance, and that is Mr. Bower states that my recommenda- 
tions to your committee are opposed by many prominent houses 
among the morocco manufacturers, and gives under Exhibit C a 
let tcr signed by H. W. Thompson, president of the Chester Enameling 
Company. In reply to this I wish to state that the Chester Enamel- 
ing Company are not manufacturers or tanners of leather, but simply 
buy their tanned leather and enamel same. There is also a letter 
submitted to your honorable committee from the Weber Leather 
Company, of West Lynn, which concern, to my knowledge, has not 
been tanning leather for six months or more. 

To further substantiate my claim that the morocco manufacturers 
are greatly interested in a change in the present tariff on bichromate 
of soda and potash I herewith attach letters addressed to your honor 
able committee from Dungan Hood & Co., Philadelphia, fa.; Brides- 
burg Leather Company, Philadelphia, Pa.; Wilmington Leather Com- 
pany, Wilmington, Del.; Castle Kid Company, Camden, N. J.; Baum 



BICHKOMA IKS op SODA AND POTASH C. J. MATTH K\VS. 7809 

Leather Company, Philadelphia, Pa.; Camden Leather Cornpam-, 
Camden, X. J. : Thomas Kelly & Co., West Lynn, Mass.; Charles 
Beadenkopf, Wilmington, Del.: Charles Baird & Co., Wilmington, 
Del.; Delaware Leather Company, Wilmington, Del.; New Castle 
Leather Company, Wilmington, Del.; Lennox & Briggs, Haverhill, 
Mass.; Leviseur & Con way, Boston, Mass.; Best Kid Company, Phil- 
adelphia, Pa.; Costello, Cooey & Co., Philadelphia, Pa.; Chambers & 
Bond, Wilmington, Del.; Ruby Kid Company, Camden, N. J.; Mitchell 
& Thomas, Wilmington, Del.; Pevear & Co., Boston, Mass.; Wm. 
Beadenkopf Company, Wilmington, Del.: McNeely Company, Phila- 
delphia, Pa.; Surpass Leather Company, Philadelphia, Pa. 

I wish to add, in closing my remarks, that these letters are from 
concerns who constitute some of the largest tanners of goatskins in 
America, 'and you can readily see from their letters to you that they 
are vastly interested in getting relief and opening up competition 
in one of the principal chemicals they use in tanning their leather. 
Yours, respectfully, 

C. J. MATTHEWS, 
Chairman Chemical Section, 
National Morocco Manufacturers' Association. 



EXHIBIT A. 

2100 NORTH AMERICAN STREET, PHILADELPHIA, PA., 

January 7, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Charles J. Mathews, chairman of the chemical section of the National 
Morocco Manufacturers' Association, has been in communication with your committee 
relative to a reduction of the present duty on bichromate of potash and soda, which, 
under the existing tariff, pays 3 cents per pound on potash and 2 cents per pound on 
soda, which is a very high rate compared to other chemicals of similar classes. This 
high rate of duty renders the importation of these articles practically impossible and 
at the same time has been the cause of an increase in price to the consumer by those 
in control of its manufacture here, and we feel that, inasmuch as our product comes into 
competition largely with leather made by these materials in foreign countries, that 
our manufacturers here should have the advantage of as cheap raw material as possible 
without being obliged to suffer this high import duty, which seems to benefit to no 
degree nor stimulate the manufacture of these goods in our own country. 
Trusting that our request will meet your favorable consideration, we remain, 
Respectfully, 

DUNGAN, HOOD & Co. (INCORPORATED), 
FELIX HANLON. President 



EXHIBIT B. 

PHILADELPHIA, PA., January 5, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE. 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: In reference to the question of the present tariff on bichromates of potash 
and soda, would say we are in full accord with C. J. Matthews, chairman of the chemical 
section of the Morocco Manufacturers' National Association in his efforts to reduce 
the tariff on these bichromates. 

Our belief is and our experience has been that the present high rate of duty fosters 
monopoly, and would urge you, please, to exert every effort, by voice and veto, to 
place these on a parity with our chemicals; that is to say, 25 per centad valorem, which 
we consider a fair and more favorable tariff rate for these bichromates. 
Yours, respectfully, 

THE BRIDESBURG LEATHER Co. (INCORPORATED), 
WARNER GRANSBACK. Treasurer. 



7810 SCHI.IH l.H A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

EXHIBIT C. 

SECOND AND GREENHILL AVENUE, 

Wilmington, Del., January 4, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. L. 

DEAR SIR: Being large users of bichromate of potash or soda in the tanning of 
leather made from goatskins and hides, we feel that we are imposed upon by the Ameri- 
can monopoly, who have for their protection an excessive high tariff, 2 cente per pound 
on soda and 3 cente per pound' on potash. This heavy duty makes the importation 
almost prohibitive, preventing fair competition, in consequence of which a monopoly 
is protected. We are opposed to this duty as it is and would ask your honorable com- 
mittee to see that we are relieved in the tariff bill that is now being arranged by your 
committee to a more just and equitable basis. We are of the opinion that the duty 
that is now collected on chemicals for the arts and manufactures, which is 25 per cent, 
would certainly be sufficient on bichromate of potash or soda. 
Thanking you for your consideration of our letter, we remain, 
Very respectfully, 

WILMINGTON LEATHER COMPANY, 
JAMES I. FORD, Treasurer. 



EXHIBIT D. 

1516 BROADWAY, CAMDEN, N. J., 

December SI, 1908. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We would call your attention to the duty that is being imposed on 
bichromates of potash and soda, 3 cents on the former and 2 cents per pound on the 
latter. We think that this duty is excessive, and it is the only duty of this amount 
imposed on any of the chemicals used in the arts. We think that a duty of 25 per cent 
would more than protect this industry against foreigncompetitipn, and thatthis amount 
of duty would be more just and reasonable than the duty which we are compelled to 
pay at the present time. 

Trusting that this matter may have your favorable consideration, we are, 
Yours, truly, 

CASTLE KID COMPANY, 
MILTON J. SCHLOU, Treasurer. 

EXHIBIT E. 

PHILADELPHIA, PA., December 31, 1908. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

MY DEAR SIR: We desire to indorse the efforts put forth by Charles J. Matthews, 
chairman chemical section of the Morocco Manufacturers' National Association, in 
his efforts to reduce the high tariff of 3 cente per pound on bichromate of potash and 
2 cente per pound on bichromate of soda, aa we feel the duty is entirely too high, as 
by it we find it is fostering a monopoly. 

We trust your honorable committee may see the wisdom in placing these two bichro- 
mates on a parity with other chemicals, as 25 per cent ad valorem seems very fair 
and surely protection enough, and would thereby create an open market. 
Trusting that we have made ourselves clear and understood, we remain, 
Very truly, yours, 

BAUM LEATHER COMPANY, 
F. L. THOMSON, President. 



EXHIBIT F. 

615-623 VANHOOK STREET, CAMDEN, N. J., 

January 7, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 

HONORABLE SIR: Regarding the tariff of 3 cents per pound on bichromate of potash 
and 2 cente per pound on bichromate of soda, we feel that this is entirely too high, and 



BICHROMATES OF SODA AND POTASH C. J. MATTHEWS. 7811 

believe that a duty of 25 per cent on thea bove articles, which seems very fair, would 
surely protect this industry against foreign competition. 

Trusting that we have made ourselves clear in regard to the above, we are, 
Yours, truly, 

CAMDEN LEATHER COMPANY. 

EXHIBIT G. 

643 SUMMER STREET, WEST LYNN, MASS., 

January 7, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We most respectfully beg to present to your honorable committee our 
protest against the continuation of the present rate of duty on bichromate of potash 
and bichromate of soda, two of the most essential materials used in the process of 
manufacturing by every leather manufacturer in the United States-. 

The manufacturers of these materials in the United States have joined interests, 
and formed a combination, thus controlling this entire business. The duty the Gov- 
ernment levies on these two articles prohibits their importation and forces all the 
manufacturers of leather in the United States to purchase from this trust, who regu- 
late their price in proportion to the duty, regardless of the cost of production, and 
thus are enabled to reap very large profits at the expense of the leather manufacturers. 

Another very important side of the question to be considered is the effect of these 
prices which we are obliged to pay to this combination as related to the exports of 
leather, which at the present time amount to many million dollars per year. The 
English, French, and German manufacturers are making very rapid strides in the 
manufacture of leather, and are not hampered by any such combination, and thus are 
enabled to purchase their materials at a very low price, and with their low-priced 
labor are becoming very sharp competitors, ft is therefore of the utmost importance, 
if we are to retain our foothold in the foreign market and meet this competition 
in a successful manner, that we have the support and cooperation of the United States 
Government. We therefore earnestly request that a complete investigation of this 
matter will be made by your honorable committee, and that some favorable action 
will be taken. 

Yours, respectfully, THOMAS A. KELLEY & Co. 



EXHIBIT H. 

WILMINGTON, DEL., January 7, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We are manufacturers of glazed kid leather and use large quantities 
of bichromate of soda and bichromate of potash. At the present time those com- 
modities are in the hands of a monopoly, and we most earnestly request that you 
assist the manufacturers of leather who use the chrome process by reducing the import 
duty on chrome potash and soda 25 per cent. By doing this you will relieve us of 
paying excessive charges and also stimulate the manufacture of leather under the 
chrome process. 

Very truly, yours, CHARLES BEADENKOPF COMPANY. 



EXHIBIT I. 

WILMINGTON, DEL., January 8, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We would like to register our protest with you that there should be 
any duty on bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda, which is such an important 
factor in the manufacture of our leather. 

For several years we have suffered great inconvenience and injustice, because not 
only of the fact that we have had to pay too high a price for these articles, but also 
the inconveniences and injustices that we have been subject to. 

We unquestionably feel that the matter would be most justly settled if bichromate 
of potash and bichromate of soda were placed on the 25 per cent basis, which, as we 



7812 SCH I Dl I.I. A rilKMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

;and the matter, would be on a parity with other chemicals imported into this 
country for the art* and manufactures. 

u..~t -inn-rely hope that your honorable committee will see your way clear to 
do tl. 

Ycrv truly, CHARLES BAIRD & Co. 



EXHIBIT J. 

WILMINGTON, DEL., January 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 

HONORABLE SIR: Referring to the matter of duty on bichromate of potash and soda, 
the duty on which to-day is 3 and 2 cents per pound, respectively. 

There" is tanned each day in the United States about 17,000 dozen goatskins The 
bet figures obtainable show that on an average the tanner uses about 1 pound of bichro- 
mate of potash or soda to tan 1 dozen skins for three hundred working days in the year. 

The American manufacturer tans over 5,000,000 dozen goatskins in one year. To fan 
these skins he pays for the protection of the American manufacturer of bichromate of 
potash and soda at the rate of 3 and 2 cents a pound, or a sum of over $100,000 in a year. 

While the duty is intended to protect the American manufacturer of bichroinU- of 
potash and soda," it does not protect the manufacturer of chrome-tanned glazed kid, 
who exports to Europe at least 50 to 60 per cent of his product, which comes in direct 
competition with the chrome-tanned glazed kid manufactured abroad, tanned with 
bichromates which can be purchased for 3 and 2 cents a pound less than it costs the 
American manufacturer. 

Yours, very truly, DELAWARE LEATHER COMPANY. 



EXHIBIT K. 

ELEVENTH, TWELFTH, WILSON AND POPLAR STREETS, 

Wilmington, Del., January 7, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We herewith wish to protest against the present parity existing on chrome, 
and request you to kindly see that the reduction of this duty be put on the 25 per cent 
basis, so as to enable the morocco manufacturers to buy their raw material without any 
monopoly on same. 

Thanking you for your efforts on same, we remain, 
Very truly, yours, 

NEWCASTLE LEATHER COMPANY, 
H. ROBINSON. 



EXHIBIT L. 

HAVERHILL, MASS., January 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We are using large quantities of bichromate of potash and also bichromate 
of soda, and it is the largest material bill we have to pay in the manufacture of leather, 
and the article is controlled by one of our great monopolies, who are never satisfied 
with the price they are getting for the same, and, as you know, the product is a very 
highly protected article. 

We ask you, in the interest of the great tanning industry of the United States, to work 
for a reduction of duties on the same. We think if it were put on a 25 per cent basis, 
which would be on a parity with other chemicals imported into this country for the 
arts and manufactures, the tanning industry would be satisfied. 
Respectfully, yours, 

LENNOX & BRIGGS. 



BICHROMATES OF SODA AND POTASH C. J. MATTHEWS. 7813 

EXHIBIT M. 

157 SOUTH STREET, BOSTON, MASS., 

January 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We wish to add our protest to the continuance of the excessive duty on 
bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda, materials used extensively in our 
leather factories. 

We feel that these articles should at least be placed on a 25 per cent basis, wnicn 
would be a fair rate in comparison to that paid on other chemicals imported for our 
different manufacturing purposes. 

Respectfully, yours, LEVISEUR & CON WAY. 



EXHIBIT N. 

LEOPARD AND WILDEY STREETS, PHILADELPHIA, PA., 

January 5, 1909, 

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We desire to enter our protest against the duty now on bichromate of 
potash and bichromate of soda, and request a reduction of this duty for the following 
reasons: 

Bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda are now absolutely in the hands ol 
monopoly, and while there have been quite a number of concerns who have started 
into the manufacture of these articles in the past they were invariably bought out or 
forced out of business by reason of a few of the larger and stronger concerns who have 
now combined and whose product is now in the hands and is controlled by one party. 

Another reason why the duty on bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda should 
be reduced is that they enter so largely into the manufacture of leather in this country, 
and as the leather is again exported in very large quantities it would enable our 
American tanners to better compete with the foreign tanners by having all material 
that enters into the manufacture of leather as cheap as possible. 

Bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda should be placed on a 25 per cent basis, 
which would be on a parity with other chemicals imported into this country for the 
use of arts and manufactures. 

The present duty is entirely too large on bichromate of potash and bichromate of 
soda and simply fosters monopoly. 

We hope, therefore, that you will recommend and use your good influence to bring 
about a reduction of said duty on bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda. 
Very respectfully, yours, 

BEST KID COMPANY. 



EXHIBIT 0, 

70 NORTH FOURTH STREET, PHILADELPHIA, 

January 5, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

DEAR SIR: We respectfully request that your committee will see fit to advocate 
the reduction in duty on bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda. 

C. J. Matthews, chairman of chemical section Morocco Manufacturers' National 
Association, has presented strong reasons to your honorable body for such reduction, 
and we most earnestly concur in all that he has stated. 

We hope that you will place the duty at about 25 per cent, which would be on a 
parity with other chemicals imported into this country for manufacturing purposes. 
Yours, respectfully, 

COSTELLO, COOEY & Co. 



7814 MMI.K A CHEMICALS, OILS. A X 1 PAINTS. 

EXHIBIT P. 

WILMINGTON, DEL., January 5, 1909. 

Hoo. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and \ftans Committee, Washington, D. G. 

DEAR SIR- We desire to add our protest agakist the injustice we are suffering from 
a combination of chrome potash and soda manufacturers, such combination being 
possible on account of the present excessive duty imposed on the foreign article, and 
to afford us some relief we suggest and request that said duty be reduced to 25 per cent, 
thereby bringing it on a parity with other chemicals imported into this country foi 
manufacturing purposes. We are, 

Very respectfully, yours, CHAMBERS & BOND. 

EXHIBIT Q. 

1051-1063 NORTH SECOND STREET, CAMDEN, N. J., 

January 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

DEAR SIR: We desire to indorse the efforts put forth by our association relative to 
the excessive duty on bichromates. The tariff of 3 cents on potash and 2 cents on soda 
is in our mind an injustice and tends to foster a monopoly. 

We sincerely trust your honorable committee will treat with this subject fully and 
thoroughly, as in our opinion a duty of 25 per cent ad valorem on bichromates would be 
putting them on a parity with other leather chemicals, and surely protection enough to 
allow an open market. 

Trusting you will fully appreciate our position and act accordingly, we are, 
Very truly, yours, 

RUBY KID COMPANY, 

A. LEON RUDOLPH, President. 



EXHIBIT R. 

WILMINGTON, DEL., January 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNB, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

DEAR SIR: In reference to the matter of duty on bichromate of potash and bichro- 
mate of .-< xla. we should like to express ourselves most strongly. It is not just that we 
should favor our foreign competitors as against our home products. In all justice we 
should think that bichromates should be placed on & basis not exceeding 25 per cent, 
which would be on a fair parity with other chemicals imported into this country for 
the arts and manufactures. This is a matter of considerable importance to our trade, 
and we hope it will be placed on an equitable basis. We remain, 
Yours, very truly, 

MITCHELL & THOMAS. 



EXHIBIT S. 

83 HIGH STREET, BOSTON, 

January 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

DEAR SIR: As manufacturers of leather we are users of bichromate of soda and 
potash, and therefore wish to add our protest asking for a reduction of duty on said 
article. We find that up to January 1, 1909, we were paying nearly 20 per cent more 
than the year previous, during which year the trust was formed. 

It is true that the trust has recently reduced the price a very little, owing to the 
investigation of the Ways and Means Committee, but we feel that with the above 
article placed on a 25 per cent basis the price would be further reduced, the trust 
make a reasonable profit, and the users be naturally and rightfully the gainers. 
Yours, truly, 

PEVEAR & Co. 



BICHROMATES OF SODA AND POTASH 0. J. MATTHEWS. 7815 

EXHIBIT T. 

FOURTEENTH AND WALNUT STREETS, WILMINGTON, DEL., 

January 5, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Cfiairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We would respectfully call your attention to an inequality in the existing 
cariff schedules that is probably as iniquitous as any which you may have to consider, 
and should like to add pur protest to those you may have already received covering 
the duty on the articles in question, viz. bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda. 
These chemicals are largely used by manufacturers of morocco leather who are only 
asking a measure of relief already accorded others using chemicals imported for the 
arts and for manufacturing. 

We would furthermore, in conclusion, state that the conditions and circumstances 
covering the importation of these bichromates are radical and savor of the nature of 
an arbitrary monopoly. We ask that they, at least, be placed on a 25 per cent basis, thus 
equalizing the rates with those on other chemicals imported for use in the arts and 
for manufacturing purposes. 

Trusting that you may at least in a measure grant what we ask, we are 
Yours, respectfully, 

WILLIAM BEADENKOPP COMPANY. 
F. B. SALMON, Secretary. 



EXHIBIT U. 

400 ARCH STREET, PHILADELPHIA, PA., 

January 7, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

DEAR SIR: We wish to add our protest and request for the reduction of duty on 
bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda, relieving us, glazed kid manufacturers, 
from the hands of the monopoly, and we would suggest that bichromates be placed on a 
25 per cent basis, which would be on a parity with other chemicals imported into this 
country for the arts and manufactures. 

Respectfully, yours, MCNEELY COMPANY, 

RICHARD P. MCNEELY, 

Vice-President. 



EXHIBIT V. 

TENTH AND WESTMORELAND STREETS, PHILADELPHIA, PA., 

January 8, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We wish to associate ourselves with the request, made by the chemical 
section of the Morocco Manufacturers' National Association, for the reduction of the 
tariff on bichromate of potash and bichromate of soda. We are very large users of 
bichromate of potash for the production of glax.ed kid and advocate these materials not 
being taxed over 25 per cent of their value. A reduction in the price of bichromate 
of potash would be of material assistance to us, both in the production of leather for 
this country and for increasing the large amounts we export to Europe and other places, 
where we have to compete against leather manufactured by French and German firms 
who have the benefit of cheaper bichromates. 

We should be glad to place any information we have at your disposal, and beg to 
remain, 

Yours, truly, SURPASS LEATHER COMPANY, 

P. CROMPTON. 



7816 sen i .in u: A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

CHLORATE OF POTASH. 

[Paragraph 63.] 

THE PACIFIC SAFETY POWDER COMPANY, SEATTLE, WASH., 
ASKS FOR A LOWER DUTY ON CHLORATE OF POTASH. 

813i EIGHTH AVE., 
SEATTLE, WASH., February 18, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: I wish to call your attention to the inclosed letters 
from Montreal regarding chlorate of potash. 

Chlorate of potash is manufactured in the United States for about 
2 cents per pound, but all the output is sold through their sales 
iiirciits in New York, who also supply most of Canada, and it is sold 
there for 2 cents per pound less than it can be bought in the United 
States; 9J cents per pound is the price f. o. b. factory, while, as you 
sec. it can be bought for 7J cents in Canada, and a duty of 2J cents 
prevents reshipment. 

Chlorate of potash is used largely in the manufacture of a safety 
stumping powder, and the price paid for powder is the big end for 
clearing logs off lands. 

I am in the business of manufacturing powder, and on account of 
the duty on chlorate of potash I am restricted to local demands and 
can not go into competition in the market, and there are others in the 
same position, w r hich makes what should be a thriving business a 
struggle for existence. 

Hoping you will wipe out the duty on chlorate of potash, I remain, 
Yours, truly, 

P. E. DEAN, 
President Pacific Safety Powder Company. 



EXHIBIT A. 

MONTREAL, December 29, 1908 
P. DEAN, Esq.. 

813% Eighth Avenue, Seattle. 

DEAR SIR: We are in receipt of your favor of the 24th instant. In reply beg to say 
that we are unable to sell chlorate of potash in the United States, having the sale of it 
only for Canada. 

If you will inquire of some wholesale firm in Seattle, no doubt they will be able to 
supply you. 

Youre, truly, DILLONS (LIMITED), 

Per G. A. DILLON. 



EXHIBIT B. 

, MONTREAL, November 16, 1908. 

JOHN M. WHITE, Esq., 

2t49 Westminster Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia. 

DEAR SIR: We are in receipt of your esteemed inquiry for chlorate of potash, and 
bee to offer you powdered at 7J cents f. o. b. here. We can not quote delivered 
and would be glad to receive your esteemed order. 



CHLORATE OF POTASH CHLORAL HYDRATE. 7817 

We could ship direct from the other side at a more favorable rate. We can not say 
exactly how much, but we think there would be a saving of 1 cent per pound over the 
rail rate from Montreal. 

Any orders you may send to us will have to be accompanied by sufficient reference 
for us to ship the goods. 

Yours, truly, DILLONS (LIMITED), 

Per G. A. DILLON. 



EXHIBIT 0. 

UNITED STATES CUSTOMS SERVICE, 

Sumas, Wash., January 15, 1909. 
Mr. P. E. DEAN, Seattle, Wash. 

SIR: Replying to your inquiry of the 12th instant, I beg to advise you that chlorate 
of potash imported from Canada is dutiable at the rate of 2 cents per pound. 
Respectfully, 

J. A. LOCHBAUM, Deputy Collector. 



CHLORAL HYDRATE. 

[Paragraph 67.] 

SOBERING & GLATZ, NEW YORK, THINK DUTY SHOULD BE 
EEDUCED ON ARTICLES MADE WITH DENATURED ALCOHOL. 

No. 58 MAIDEN LANE, 
New York, February 27, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We beg to call your attention to- the fact that the im- 
port duty on this article now amounts to about 200 per cent on the 
German market value, it being dutified as an alcohol product at 55 
cents per pound. This high rate was made because of the high internal 
revenue tax on alcohol. Since the passage of the denatured alcohol 
act, however, this duty has become obsolete and burdensome. 

Chloral hydrate is only a specific instance of a series of chemical 
products, in the manufacture of which alcohol is used. 

We submit that there should be a much lower rate of duty on arti- 
cles prepared with the aid of denatured alcohol. 
Yours, respectfully, 

SCHERING & GLATZ. 



7818 SCMlKDfLK A- HKMKM.S, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS. 

[Paragraphs 67 and 68.) 

BRIEF SUBMITTED BY THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
OF NEW YORK, ON BEHALF OF THE IMPORTERS OF FRENCH 
PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS. 

32 BROADWAY, 
New York City, February 27, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We beg to submit to the careful attention of your 
honorable body the following remarks : 

The actual duties paid on French pharmaceutical specialties are: 

First. For the products containing no alcohol, 25 per cent ad 
valorem. 

Second. For the products containing alcohol 55 cents per American 
pound, or 6.50 francs per kilogram, or in the majority of cases more 
than 100 per cent. 

The duties on nonalcoholic products are more than sufficient to 
protect the American industry against the competition of French 
goods; in fact, they are prohibitive. 

The cost of the raw material is about the same in the United States 
as in France. The workmanship, which only enters for a very small 
share into the cost price, is 30 per cent higher. Therefore we can con- 
>i-tcntly say that the cost price in both countries is about the same, 
more especially as, besides the duties, the French products are handi- 
capped by the freight and other expenses, representing about 10 per 
cent, and about 15 per cent paid to the manufacturers' agent in this 
country, as it is impossible for any French house to do its business 
directly with this country, to attend to the necessary advertising and 
to the selling without a representative in America. We can therefore 
state that the value of all French pharmaceutical products is increased 
by 55 per cent over the selling price in France when it is offered for 
consumption here. 

For instance, if the wholesale price is 2 francs, the same wholesale 
price will be in the United States 3.10 francs, or 60 cents, and the 
retail price $1, as the apothecaries ask a minimum profit of 30 per 
cout and the wholesale druggist 15 per cent. The same product 
mad > in America, and for which the wholesale price is the equivalent 
of 2 francs, will be sold to the public at about 65 cents. Further- 
more, the apothecary will often cut this price of 65 cents because he 
has a ready sale for such goods, and he will not cut the price of $1 
on the French products because he seldom sells them and only to 
people who must have them. 

As far as the French products containing alcohol are concerned, 
we are free to state that the exorbitant duties on the same are abso- 
lutely prohibitive, and we deem that it is absolutely unfair that a 
product containing 2 per cent of alcohol, for instance, should pay on 
an equal weight the same duty as the one that contains 80 per cent. 

In short, taking as a basis the principles which have inspired the 
fnuners of the present tariff, which was intended to allow the Amer- 
ican manufacturer to compete with even chances with the foreign 
manufacturer, it seems to us that it would be reasonable 



PHARMACEUTICAL PEODUCTS VACINES AND SERUMS. 7819 

First. To place a duty of from 10 to 15 per cent on pharmaceutical 
products containing no alcohol. 

Second. To tax the products containing alcohol according to the 
degree of the same. 

In so doing your honorable body would not go against the prin- 
ciple of protection, the American manufacturers would not suffer, 
the French producers would be encouraged to make exchanges with 
the American ones, and the American public would procure at a 
more reasonable price the French product when it is essential to its 
health and ordered by the physician. 

Trusting that these considerations will appeal to your sense of 
equity, we remain, gentlemen, 
Very respectfully, 

THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, 
HENRY E. GOURD, President. 



VACCINES AND SERUMS. 

[Paragraphs 68 and 692.] 

THE PASTEUR VACCINE COMPANY, NEW YORK, WISHES ALL 
VACCINES AND SERUMS ADMITTED FREE OF DUTY, 

366 AND 368 WEST ELEVENTH STREET, 

New York, January 18, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: In the matter of vaccines and serums for medical 
administration it is respectfully urged that tariff in connection with 
them is entirely opposed to principles of humanity. 

The serums and vaccines for such use which we bring to this coun- 
try are in some cases unique, and are always the product of labora- 
tories of investigators who stand at the head of their profession and 
who have done the initial work upon such vaccines and serums, so 
that many other products are only imitations of these originals and 
are often, to say the least, not reliable. 

These serums and vaccines surely can not be regarded merely as 
commercial products. They are produced at great cost and not only 
with large expenditure of money out with large expenditure of time, 
for not only their manufacture but the research connected with them 
extends over considerable periods of time. They are also, in many 
cases, very dangerous to tne life of the scientific investigators and 
the workers in the bacteriological laboratories where they are pro- 
duced. Therefore it is evident that they can not be distributed 
absolutely free, but it is also evident, it seems to us, that their dis- 
tribution should be assisted in every way at as low a rate as possible 
in order to prevent and check disease. Instead of encouraging do- 
mestic products of this sort solely, it is far better for all concerned 
that honorable competition should reduce the prices of all serums 
and vaccines. 



>_(> SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PATNTS. 

The scientists in their laboratories are instructing students from all 
part* of the world in the methods of producing these serums and 
vaccines practically without charge, and the results of this instruction 
given freely to properly accredited persons should not be made the 
subject of commercialism. 

Antidiphtheric serum is most largely the result of the investigations 
of Pmfcssor Roux, director of the Pasteur Institut, of Paris, whose 
sole concessionaires we are. Antidiphtheric serum has reduced the 
mortality from diphtheria so greatly that it stands side by side with 
smallpox vaccine in the estimation of the medical profession as a 
benefactor of humanity. 

Antitetanic serum has greatly reduced the mortality from lockjaw. 

Antistreptococcic serum, also a product of a scientist in the Pasteur 
Institut, Paris, is intended for treatment of puerperal fever, ery- 
sipelas, etc. 

Bubonic plague serum and vaccine, two of the most important 
products for the benefit of humanity that have ever been discovered, 
also owe their origin to the Pasteur Institut, Paris, and have since 
been greatly improved through the scientific work of the leading men 
in Europe, viz, Professors Kolle and Tavel, of the University of Berne. 

Anticholera serum is the result of Professor Kolle's researches. 

Both bubonic plague and anticholera serums and vaccines are now 
used by governments all over the world to combat the widespread 
epidemics of bubonic plague and cholera. 

The free distribution of anthrax vaccine for the prevention of 
anthrax in cattle has practically ^iped out that disease, and anthrax 
vaccine, like other vaccines, is admitted to this country free. 

It certainly does not seem right when these are the only serums 
and vaccines for these diseases, that a duty should be imposed upon 
them vhen brought into this country to combat disease to relieve 
humanity and to protect commerce, which is always retarded and 
injured in times of epidemics. 

Serums and vaccines are intended to be sold so cheaply that they 
may be v ithin reach of the poorest people. Boards of health through- 
out this country and other countries that we reach can obtain them 
at lowest possible cost from us. 

Duties imposed upon them act merely to restrain the control of 
many of the most malignant diseases and are not necessary to the 
support, encouragement, or development of any manufacturing 
interests. 

Such duties damage all manufacturing and commercial interests 
generally, for they prevent the production of those agents which are 
alone able to check widespreading epidemics, which are so often dis- 
astrous to the industries of a country. 
Very respectfully, yours, 

NEW YORK BRANCH OF THE 
PASTEUR VACCINE Co., LIMITED, PARIS. 
C. A. WELLIS. 



SULPHUR UNION SUGAR CO. 7821 

SULPHUR. 

[Paragraphs 84 and 674.] 

HON. S. C. SMITH,* M. C., SUBMITS LETTER OF UNION SUGAR 
COMPANY, BETTERAVIA, CAL., OPPOSING ANY INCREASE OF 
THE DUTY ON SULPHUR. 

BETTERAVIA, CAL., January 7. 1909. 
Hon. S. C. SMITH, M. C., 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I understand that during this session of Congress 
when the question of revision of tariff comes up an effort will be made 
to have a very material change made in the duty on sulphur coming 
into this country. I believe that the revision of the tariff on this 
article is urged by owners of small sulphur mines in the United States, 
as they claim that all crude sulphur coming into this country is really 
refined sulphur. It is true that this crude sulphur has been sub- 
mitted to a preliminary refining process to separate it from its ore, 
as pure native sulphur is hardly ever found hi nature. But it is 
equally true that only this class of sulphur is generally known to the 
trade as crude, and it is evident that Congress can only have meant 
this superficially refined sulphur when the present law was enacted 
admitting the same free of duty. The interpretation is also sub- 
stantiated by an official decision addressed by the Secretary of the 
Treasury to the collector of customs of New York City, dated Wash- 
ington, D. C., November 28, 1876. 

As you know, we use considerable sulphur in our process of manu- 
facturing sugar, and if the tariff on this material is increased it will 
put an unfair burden on the beet-sugar industry and would hurt 
agricultural interests generally without really benefiting the general 
American people. 

As it is practically impossible to specify the many forms in which 
sulphur can be molded and imported, sucn as: Rolls, sticks, squares, 
cones, pyramids, etc., and it is imported in straw mats, and at other 
times in sacks and in bulk, it would be well that the law make no 
distinction in this regard, but simply admit crude sulphur free of 
duty, without mentioning the way it is packed at all. 

After studying the case, which we have done very carefully, and 
in order to be fair to all consumers and refiners, we propose tne fol- 
lowing wording, which, we think, will cover the ground thoroughly 
and leave no loopholes: 

Par. 84. Sulphur, refined or sublimes, or flowers of, or ground, and sulphur not 
otherwise provided for, $8 per ton. 

Par. 674 (free list). Sulphur, lac or precipitated; sulphur or brimstone crude; sulphur 
ore as pyrites, or sulphide of iron in its natural state, containing in excess of twenty- 
five per cent of sulphur. 

I would thank you to look into this matter and give it your careful 
attention when it comes up. 
Very truly, yours, 

J. W. ATKINSON, 

Manager Union Sugar Co. , 

61 318 AP 09 6 



7822 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

THE UTAH SULPHUR COMPANY, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, APPEALS 
FOR TARIFF PROTECTION FEOM JAPANESE SULI>HUR. 

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, February 1, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, 1). c. 

GENTLEMEN: The Utah Sulphur Company, a corporation under 
the laws of Utah, respectfully submits that the United States contains 
more than sufficient sulphur to supply our domestic consumption 
and that the reason that the mines within the United States have not 
been sufficiently developed to produce the sulphur consumed within 
our borders is because of the high cost of labor at home and the cheap 
cost of labor in Sicily and Japan, taken in conjunction with the inex- 
plicable rulings of the Treasury Department upon the existing or 
Dingley tariff. 

The tariff of 1897 provides respecting sulphur: 

SEC 84. Sulphur, refined or sublimed or flowers of, $8.00 per ton. 

SEC G74. Sulphur, lac or precipitated and sulphur or brimstone crude, in bulk, 
sulphur ore as pyrites or sulphuret or iron in its natural state containing in excess 
of twenty-five per cent of sulphur and sulphur not otherwise provided for, free. 

It seems to be obvious that the intent of these sections of the 
Dino-ley tariff have been nullified by a line of decisions of the Treasury 
Dsplrtment and of the United States general appraisers, which 
decisions are based upon the conclusions of Secretary of the Treasury, 
Lot M. Morrill, in Treasury decision No. 3032, as follows: 

The only article known in commerce as refined brimstone is that which is obtained 
from the crude brimstone by the process of vaporization and sublimation, which 
releases the sulphur from all foreign matter, and leaves it chemically pure. It is 
found in commerce under the designation of virgin-rock brimstone, roll brimstone, 
and flowers of sulphur. 

We respectfully submit that all sulphur exported from Japan to the 
United States has been retorted or melted, a fact susceptible of dem- 
onstration by inquiry from our consuls at points of departure or from 
our Treasury officials at points of receipt. 

We further submit that the process of retorting or melting sulphur 
or brimstone is a process of refining the product of such melting or 
retorting being no longer the crude product of the mines. In substan- 
tiation of this allegation we refer, first, to the fact that the average sul- 
phur content of the crude ores as extracted from the mines of the Utah 
Sulphur Company docs not exceed 20 per cent, and we believe that the 
average purity in sulphur of the products of other mines in the United 
States and of the mines of Japan does not exceed the percentage stated ; 
and, second, we assert upon the tests made by the agricultural experi- 
ment station of the University of California and upon the analysis 
made October 10, 1905, by Herman Harms, Utah state chemist, that 
the percentage of sulphur in the product resulting from the retorting 
or melting of American crude ores is between 99.70 per cent (in the 
case of the average samples of our retorted product submitted to Doc- 
tor Harms), and 99.89 per cent (as shown by one of the samples sub- 
mitted to the California experiment station). We assert, further, that 
the Japanese sulphur admitted free of duty under the aforesaid rulings 
as crude and unrefined show r s a sulphur content equal in percentages 
to that hereinbefore last mentioned. 



SULPHUR UTAH SULPHUR CO. 7823 

The statement of Lot M. Morrill, above quoted, that 

the only article known in commerce as refined brimstone is that which is obtained 
from the crude brimstone by the process of vaporization and sublimation, which 
releases the sulphur from all foreign matter and leaves it chemically pure, 

is unsound and opposed to the facts, inasmuch as the chemical analy- 
ses of our sulphur made by Doctor Harms, Utah state chemist, show 
that sublimed sulphur is actually less pure than retorted or melted sul- 
phur, inasmuch as the process of sublimation results in the formation 
of free sulphuric acid and does not result in the expulsion of other for- 
eign matters, the fact being that the process of melting or retorting 
rids the sulphur, as demonstrated by the analyses above referred to, of 
practically all impurities. 

Doctor Harms' s analysis of an average sample of our melted or re- 
torted product was as follows: 

Per cent. 

Actual sulphur 99. 71 

Nonvolatile residue, silica, iron oxide, etc .23 

Free sulphuric acid Mere traces 

Sulphurous acid None 

Arsenic None 

Moisture at 100 C. (212 F.) .06 

Total 100. 00 

And his analysis of a sample of our "flowers of sulphur" manufac- 
tured by the sublimation of our retorted or melted product was as 
follows: 

Per cent. 

Actual sulphur 99. 028 

Free sulphuric acid . 755 

Sulphuric acid None 

Arsenic None 

Selenium None 

Residue, silica, iron oxide, etc . Ol.'i 

Moisture at 100 C. 212 F . 20-1 



Total 100. 000 

It is apparent from the foregoing analyses that the process of sub- 
limation does not tend to make the sulphur chemically purer, the 
principal change being physical or mechanical in that the "flowers of 
sulphur" is more flocculent than the retorted product. From the 
foregoing it seems obvious that the rulings of the Treasury Depart- 
ment have been both erroneous on principle and highly injurious to 
the American industry. 

The injury to the local industry becomes the more apparent when 
we comprehend that the average price of Japanese sulphur as im- 
ported into the United States is $20 per ton and that the average cost 
of producing sulphur by the Utah Sulphur Company (which, it ap- 
pears, is substantially the same as the cost of producing the domestic 
article in Nevada) has been $29 per ton, much the greater proportion 
of which has been expended for the item of labor. Experience has 
shown that this cost may be somewhat diminished by increasing the 
output; but the output can not be increased in the face of the free 
entry of the cheap sulphur produced by oriental or Sicilian labor and 
brought by cheap water transportation to our shores. 

Under existing conditions, therefore, the American laborer must 
give way to the oriental laborer, and this in apparent violation of the 
express provisions of law and because of decisions based upon insuffi- 



7>>'J4 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

cicnt data or upon misinformation furnished by importers of the for- 
eign product. 

We do not ask that the duty be increased beyond $8 per ton, but 
we do feel that the new tariff shall clearly and explicitly provide 
that the rate mentioned shall be collected upon all sulphurs that 
may have been retorted or melted or may have gone tlirough any 
process that changes their composition from the crude state under 
wlu'ch they are mined from the ground. To make the matter more 
certain, "crude sulphur" should be defined as "crude sulphur con- 
taining less than 25 per cent of sulphur." 

It would seem to be suicidal that this nation should rely upon 
foreign sources of supply for its sulphur a product so important 
both in times of peace and in times of war and yet it seems to be 
a foregone conclusion that, without sufficient protection, most of 
our mines must close and our consumption be supplied largely by 
foreign importation. It is confidently believed that with adequate 
protection from cheap foreign labor the production within this 
country would be largely increased, even to the extent of supplying 
the whole demand, and that domestic competition would result 
before long in a reduction in price below the prices that have here- 
tofore obtained with foreign sulphur admitted free of duty. 

Respectfully submitted- 

UTAH SULPHUR COMPANY, 
By N. W. CLAYTON, President. 



ARSENIC. 

[Paragraph 479.] 

MYRON WARD, YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO, THINKS AMERICAN MAKERS 
OF ARSENIC SHOULD BE PROTECTED BY A DUTY. 

YOUXGSTOWN, OHIO, February 2A, 1909. 
Hon. S. E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. O. 

HONORABLE SIK: The writer together with others have an invest- 
ment of $200,000 in an arsenic mine and mill in Virginia. We can not 
operate this plant for the reason that our product, viz, white arsenic, 
is on the free list and is" imported duty free. The white arsenic 
imported is a by-product from the tin mines in Cornwall, England, 
Hartz Mountains in Germany. We can not pay American 
miners and mill men the average rate and compete against a by- 
product ot fore^n corporations. 

There are 6,000 net tons of this product imported annually, all of 

which can be produced here. If a duty of 1* to 2 per cent per pound 

was placed upon it for say five years, it would put a new industry in 

a meet competition. A duty of 2 cents would mean about 

300 annually to the revenues of the United States, and would 

develop a new industrv. 

Under present conditions the glass manufacturers who use this 

enal would be benefited by a duty, because at present they must 

lepend on buying the surplus arsenic coming from Europe, and the 



AKSKNIC OONFBCTIONEB8 COLORS. 7825 

price varies from 3 cents to 15 cents per pound. In fact the market 
is not in any way staple, as it would be i/ our Virginia plant were 
protected enough so it could operate regularly and continuously. 

The writer would be pleased to hear that your honorable committee 
has given this letter such consideration as it merits. 
I remain, sir, very respectfully, yours, 

MYRON WARD. 



CONFECTIONERS' COLORS. 

H. KOHNSTAMM & CO., NEW YORK CITY, ASK FOR A PROTECTIVE 
TARIFF ON COAL-TAR CONFECTIONERS' COLORS. 

87 PARK PLACE, NEW YORK CITY, 

January 29, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

HONORABLE SIR: In this brief we are asking for a tariff rate suit- 
able for the protection of an industry not existing prior to its creation 
by Americans. We desire that coal-tar colors intended for food-color- 
ing purposes and imported from abroad in a condition ready for certi- 
fication be specifically taxed. 

The production of certified food colors is distinctly an American 
enterprise. Its origin lies in our own food and drugs act, and more 
particularly in the food-inspection decisions 76 and 77, in which cer- 
tain coal-tar colors, seven in number, are permitted in foods only, if 
in a proper state of cleanliness. Prior to this act, it is safe to say, all 
the coal-tar colors used for food-coloring purposes in the United States 
were made abroad and imported therefrom. The requirements of 
the Department of Agriculture were published on July 13, 1907. To 
date not one foreign manufacturer has placed upon this market any 
certified food colors. The attitude of a large number of foreign coal- 
tar color makers, who had under the old conditions willingly sold 
their products for food-coloring purposes, with more or less implicit 
or explicit guarantee of special care in selection of such of their 
products as were offered for food-coloring purposes, upon the issue 
of the food-inspection decisions 76 and 77, was that such requirements 
were unheard of, unprecedented, unwarranted, and impossible of 
execution. Voluminous and extended correspondence both by mail 
and by cable and personal visits and solicitations abroad brought 
no permanent or usable or useful result. 

In the face of such apparently authoritative discouragement on the 
part of a set of manufacturers controlling large plants, abundant 
capital, almost inexhaustible sources of supply of materials, large and 
experienced staff of expert chemists, manufacturing chemists and 
chemical engineers and an enormous amount of special and unpub- 
lished information substantially alone and unaided, we set about the 
task of making certified food colors. We found it no easy matter. 
We have spent eighteen months of our time in the accomplishment of 
this result and have devoted a considerable portion of our energies 
and manufacturing facilities to the work. Some of the colors pur- 
chased by us abroad were so dirty and so contaminated with arsenic 



7826 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

and other mineral or metallic poisons, that cleaning them up was an 
i,,mo^il>!<> task: others could be purchased abroad in such condition 
that they could be satisfactorily cleaned up; for those colors that 
could not be purchased abroad in a cleanable condition we attempted 
to buy the raw materials abroad in a condition of cleanliness which 
would enable us to produce the colors here in a satisfactory form. 
This in itself, apparently a simple thing, has also been accom- 
plished only after incredible efforts and failures. Other difficulties 
encountered have been the uncertainty of getting successive lots of 
color or raw material in the theretofore obtained and specified condi- 
tion for further manufacture and refinement here, all of which 
irregularities have been the cause of very expensive embarrassments 

for us. 

As a result wholly and singly of our confidence in our own judg- 
ment, and of our perseverance in the face of many discouragements 
and in the face of the tremendous handicap we were under as against 
these experienced large and powerful foreign makers, we have now 
demonstrated to these foreign manufacturers and to the users of coal- 
tar colors for food-coloring purposes that they were wholly and 
utterly wrong when they assumed that the conditions of food-inspec- 
tion decisions 76 and 77 were impossible of execution. With this 
conclusive and final demonstration of their error it is to be expected 
that the foreign makers of coal-tar colors will at once attack the 
problem, and with their great facilities, their great plants, their cheap 
labor, their ability so to choose their materials as to make their prod- 
ucts of extraordinary purity, thus rendering the needful and subse- 
quent refining steps less difficult and less arduous, and therefore less 
expensive, will solve this problem which they have confidently re- 
garded as incapable of solution. 

Any domestic manufacturer would therefore be at certain disad- 
vantages with respect to the foreign maker: 

1. The domestic maker must purchase his raw materials whether 
partly finished color or not, from abroad, and the foreigner certainly 
makes a profit on these sales. 

2. The foreign maker has the source of all the materials he sells to 
the domestic maker under his control and he can therefore, without 
any added substantial expense to himself, so select his raw material 
as to make the material supplied by him to the domestic maker of 
greater purity and easier or refinement, and unless the domestic 
maker snould by some fluke or accident ascertain this fact the do- 
mestic maker would be operating on this less advantageous material 
at a correspondingly greater disadvantage to himself as against the 
foreign maker. 

3. The suitable refining of the colors is the most expensive single 
operation in the series of operations needed for the production of certi- 
fied food colors, so far as labor and loss of material are concerned. 
The foreigner has access to cheaper labor; the loss of material re- 
ferred to is the loss of material which occurs in the cleaning-up or 
refining process. In this refining a certain fraction only of color can 
be effectively separated from the contaminations; tne remainder 
stays with the dirt and impurities. To the domestic maker this repre- 
sents a very substantial loss, because he can not dump this product 
into this market as can the foreign maker upon his own domestic 
market. At this point, therefore, the domestic maker is at a double 



CONFECTIONERS' COLORS H. KOHNSTAMM & co. 7827 

disadvantage, (a) more expensive labor per unit of product made; 
(6) practically irreducible losses due to the refining process which are 
not present in the case of the foreign maker. 

With this demonstration by American initiative, enterprise, and 
perseverance that coal-tar colors for food-coloring purposes are prop- 
erly subject to regulation, and that regulation which insures the high 
quality of food colors possible under our own food-inspection decisions 
is both feasible and practicable, it is to be expected that foreign gov- 
ernments will not be long and very likely prior to the revision of the 
tariff succeeding this one in adopting regulations either identical 
with or patterned after our own procedure. In such case the foreign 
maker, with his tremendous natural advantages of position, will have 
added incentive to solve the problem, since his market for uncertified 
food colors will be shrinking and the market for certified colors will 
be expanding. 

American enterprise, American industry, American initiative, and 
American perseverance have presented to the world a new and use- 
ful commercial commodity, namely, certified food colors. 

This they have done while the world's most expert and experienced 
manufacturers of coal-tar colors, namely, the foreign makers, have 
sat idly by doing nothing effective toward solving a problem uni- 
versally looked upon as highly desirable of solution. Prior to the 
enactment of our food and drugs act they were more than willing to 
take what profit they could from the American market. When, in 
the course of protecting the American consumers of food colors, our 
Government called upon these foreign makers to subject their goods 
to the impartial scrutiny of its officers these foreign makers failed 
to make good their widely heralded guaranty of their food colors, 
for, to date, none of them has offered any certified colors to the 
American people and they have by w r ord and by deed signified their 
absolute willingness to abandon entirely the legitimate domestic 
user of food colors by making no effort to reassure such users that 
colors properly cleaned and certified would be the object of his 
attention, and openly or otherwise informing his customers that 
the conditions exacted by this Government were incapable of ful- 
fillment. So far as we are aware, the foreigner has made no real 
effort to support our Government in the enforcement of this law. 

After Americans have demonstrated at a great expenditure of 
time, labor, energy, and money that our Government was and is 
right in its requirement for a cleaning up among the food colors, 
shall the foreigner, contributing nothing whatsoever toward the 
assumption of the risks of that expensive demonstration, be placed in 
a position where he can wipe the American maker out of existence 
because of the latter's disadvantageous economic position? 

We believe that the fair answer is, no. 

If ever there was an infant industry, then the making of certified 
food colors is such a one. The incentive for its existence dates no 
further back than Food Inspection Decision 77, published July 13, 
1907. 

If ever there was an American industry dependent upon foreign 
sources for its raw materials, then this is such a one. 

If ever there was an American industry open to the sharpest kind 
of competition with foreign experience, with foreign labor, with 
foreign sources of supply, then this is such a one. 



7828 SCHEDULE A CHEMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 

In order that tliis industry may remain permanently here and may 
grow and develop, it must receive protection against foreign com- 
petition. 

The specific duty suggested is Hot high, for the reason that in many 
cases it is necessary to work up as much as 4 pounds of imported 
crude dye to recover 1 pound or color fit for certification. 

For the accomplishment of this the following suggestions are 
made: 

I. (a) Colors imported for certification as food colors must be so 
declared, and they shall then be subjected to a specific duty of $1 
per pound. (6) No colors shall be certified whose origin is not stated 
and proven. 

II. Raw materials or crude dyes imported from abroad and here 
manufactured into colors and certified, or here refined and certified, 
shall, upon proof of such origin and such certification, be entitled to 
a drawback of all the duty paid, but without interest; but all such 
raw material or crude dyes must be declared as being intended for 
use in the production here of certified food colors. 

Suggested forms or blanks for I (a) and (6). 

I. (a) Invoice should state the package numbers, steamer, and date of invoice: 
pounds color. Imported for certification as a food color. 

I. (6) See F. I. D. 77, page 2, last line of "Manufacturers' Certificate," erase the 
period after "pounds" and in lieu thereof insert: "; and I further certify under oath 
that all the goods offered for certification herein referred to were (Here insert ) 

"(a) imported from abroad in the steamer on the date in packages 

number 

or "(6) manufactured by me within the United States." 

Suggested forms or blanks for II. 

1. Invoice should state the package number, steamer, and date of invoice. 

pounds (crude dye; raw material) imported for use in production of certified 

colors. 

2. See F. I. D. 77, page 2, last line of "Manufacturer's certificate," erase the period 
after "pounds," and in lieu thereof insert: " ; and I further certify under'oath that. 
the goods offered for certification and herein referred to were" (Here insert 

(a) made from the raw materials of packages of invoice of steamer 

or (b) made by refining the crude dye of packages of invoice of 

steamer . 

3. A form of demand on the Treasury for a refund of the duties paid upon the 
materials referred to in a certified copy of No. 2 above. 

Of course, the above forms are simply suggestions to show that 
so far as the administration of the law is concerned, there would be 
no difficulty in carrying out the provisions of this clause. 

Respectfully submitted. 

H. KOHNSTAMM & Co. 

DUTIES ON CHEMICALS. 

HENRY HOWARD, FOR THE MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS' ASSO- 
CIATION, COMPARES THE IMPORTATIONS UNDER THE VA- 
RIOUS TARIFF SCHEDULES. 

33 BROAD STREET, 
Boston, January 26, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Under date of December 3, 1908, I submitted to you 
on behalf of the Manufacturing Chemists' Association of the United 



DUTIES ON CHEMICALS HENRY HOWARD. 7829 

States a brief embodying a complete chemical schedule as desired 
by this association. This brief with few exceptions advocated the 
maintenance of the tariff rates of the act of 1897. 

At the time this brief was prepared the association was of the 
opinion that the rates prescribed in the chemical schedule under the 
Dingley Act were not exorbitant and, indeed, were not sufficiently 
high to prohibit importations. At that time, however, statistics 
showing the relation of imports to domestic production were not 
available, but since then the association has procured such statistics 
from the Bureau of the Census, and for the benefit of your committee 
has made an analysis of them as shown in the annexed table. 

This table gives in the first column the value of the imports for 
the year ending June 30, 1905, in the second column the value of the 
country's productions as given in the census of 1905, in the third 
column the total of the imports and productions called the "gross 
consumption," and in the fourth column the percentage of the imports 
to the " gross consumption." 

Under Schedule A ilT will be noted that the imports constitute 
6 per cent of the gross consumption. It will also be noted that 
under the "free list" the imports constitute 32 per cent of the gross 
consumption. When it is considered that the "free list" consists 
principally of raw materials and articles not generally produced in 
this country, the conclusion is inevitable that the percentage of 
imports under Schedule A is very high as compared with the "free 
list." In other words, these figures alone indicate very strongly that 
the rates established in Schedule A are not generally prohibitive. 

Of all the schedules from A to N there are but three which show a 
materially higher percentage of imports than Schedule A, to wit, 
Schedule E, sugar and molasses; Schedule J, flax, hemp, and jute; 
and Schedule L, silks and silk goods. That these three schedules 
should show very high percentages of importations is to be expected, 
because none or the industries included in these schedules nave a 
natural development in the United States owing to the climatic 
conditions. 

Apart from the three schedules above enumerated but one sched- 
ule K, wool and manufactures of wool shows a higher percentage 
of importations than Schedule A, and this schedule shows but 0.2 
per cent higher. 

The remaining nine schedules show a smaller percentage of impor- 
tations than Schedule A, and of these nine five show less than one- 
half the percentage of importations. 

The argument has been made that from the point of view of revenue 
the present rates of duty are too high and that the maximum in- 
come to the Government would be attained by lower rates, which 
would tend to stimulate importations. Assuming that this argument 
may be based on fact, the statistics in the annexed table demonstrate, 
clearly that the argument is more applicable to at least nine schedules 
than the chemical schedule. Furthermore, it will be noted that of the 
nine schedules showing smaller percentages of importations than the 
chemical schedule, five show a gross consumption from two to six 
times greater. 

That the Government, as a practical measure, can secure greater 
revenue from an increase of the percentage of importation in schedules 
where the gross consumption is great than in schedules where the 



7830 



S( IIKDULE A CEIKMICALS, OILS, AND PAINTS. 



consumption is comparatively small, like the chemical schedule, is a 
proposition \\liirh needs no argument. 

In rom -lii-ion, the association respectfully submits to your com- 

Til 1 1 f O A 

(1) That the annexed table demonstrates that the existing rates 
under Schedule A are not prohibitive. 

(2) The statistics further show that Schedule A has contributed 
more than its proportionate share of the country's revenue from im- 
port duties. It is the opinion of the association that a slight increase 
of importations under Schedule A by a reduction of duties would not 
materially increase the revenue, while an effort to increase the im- 
portations to any great extent would necessitate such radical reduc- 
^ions of duties that many of our manufacturers would be driven out 
of business. 

(3) In the event of a reduction of duties as a revenue measure 
this association earnestly requests of your committee a careful exami- 
nation of the table. This association does not desire to place the 
burden of reduced revenues unfairly on other American manufac- 
turers, but the statistics submitted clearly demonstrate that in an 
equitable readjustment of tariff rates schedules other than Schedule 
A should receive the reduction of rates, owing to the smaller per- 
centages of importations Ayhich they have shown and the larger 
market which they have enjoyed. 

Respectfully, yours, 

MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS' ASSOCIATION, 
HENRY HOWARD, 

Chairman of the Executive Committee. 

Table showing relation of imports to gross consumption under the act of 1897. 





1905. 


Percent- 
age of 
imports 
to gross 
consump- 
tion. 


Imports. 


Production. 


Gross con- 
sumption. 


Schedule A. Chemicals, oils, and paints 


131,264,406 
22,076,924 
36,640,339 
16,708,198 
91,578,130 
20,726,855 
27,079,034 
17,046,464 
24,204,005 

72,318,812 
53,470,142 
31,779,358 
11,974,953 
88,815,463 
439,439,240 


$494,026,148 
406, 344, 704 
2,977,025,253 
1,454,777,286 
413, 085 .OT 
331,105,340 
1,873,893,685 
474,487,379 
870,198,012 

176,219,826 
803,219,168 
125,322,131 
415,249,829 
1,490,540,747 
940,328,050 


$525, 290, 554 
429,021,628 
3,013,665,592 
1,471,485,484 
504,603,463 
351,832,195 
1,900,973,319 
491,533,843 
894,402,017 

248,538,638 
856,689,310 
157,101,489 
427,224,782 
1,579,356,210 
1,379,767,290 


6.0 
5.3 
1.2 
1.1 
17.9 
5.9 
1.4 
3.5 
2.7 

29.1 
6.2 
20.2 
2.9 
5.6 
32.0 


Schedule B. Earths, earthenware, and glassware.. 
Schedule C. Metals, and manufactures of . .. . 


Schedule D. Wood, and manufactures of 


Schedule E. Sugar, molasses, and manufactures of. 
Schedule F. Tobacco, and manufactures of 


Schedule O. Agricultural products and provisions. 
Schedule H. Spirits, wines, and other beverages... 
Schedule I. Cotton manufactures 


Schedule J. Flax, hemp, and jute, and manufac- 
tures of. 


Schedule K. Wool and manufactures of wool.. . 
Schedule L. Silks and silk goods 


Schedule M. Pulp, papers, and books 


Schedule N. Sundries 


Free list 





NOT A TRUST GENERAL CHEMICAL CO. 7831 

NOT A TRUST. 

THE GENERAL CHEMICAL COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY, REPU- 
DIATES THE CHARGE THAT IT IS A TRUST. 

25 BROAD STREET, NEW YORK, N. Y. 

February 9, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIRS: In the report of tariff hearings we find this company 
referred to as a trust controlling 70 per cent of certain products, 
namely, borax, tannin, sulphuric ether, and vanillin products alleged 
to be protected by duties of 151 to 320 per cent. It so happens that 
this company neither makes nor deals in any one of these articles, and 
so far is it from being a trust that its total capital is only $18,500,000, 
while the United States Census Reports for the year 1905 show that 
the capital invested in chemicals and allied products was $323,000,000, 
and the amount invested in chemicals, such as sulphuric, nitric, 
mixed acids, and wood distillations was $119,000,000 and upward. 

We have heretofore submitted to your honorable committee a brief 
on the subject of retaining pyrites and pyrrhotite ore on the free list. 
We do not wish to have the strength of our position in that matter in 
any respect weakened by false statements made against us. 
Yours, respectfully, 

GENERAL CHEMICAL COMPANY, 
CHAS. ROBINSON SMITH, 

Second Vice-President. 



SCHEDULE B-EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND 
GLASSWARE. 



LIME. 

[Paragraph 90.] 

THOMAS W. CARTER, BOSTON, MASS., CLAIMS THAT THE LIME 
INDUSTRY NEEDS PRESENT PROTECTION. 



30 KILBY STREET, BOSTON, 

January 19, 1909. 
Hon. S. W. McCALL, M. C., 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. 0, 

DEAR SIR: At the risk of boring you, I would like to state to you 
in a few words my views on the proposed reduction of the tariff on 
lime, as I feel so strongly that the present duty is a wise one and only 
sufficient to prevent the importation of lime from the provinces, to 
the injury of the lime industry of New England, as a little considera- 
tion of our experience here previous to the old McKinley tariff seems 
to me to clearly demonstrate. At the time the McKinley tariff went 
into force two- thirds of the lime which I was selling at that time was 
imported from the provinces, and in less than a year I was not sell- 
ing a barrel of imported lime, but was dealing quite largely in lime 
from Knox County, Me., and selling at a lower price than the year 
previous. 

For the past five years, only, I have been manufacturing lime 
myself in Rockport, Me., having leased a bankrupt lime plant, which 
had lain idle for sometime; since that time I have manufactured 
about 100,000 casks per year, which I have sold at a very small profit, 
so small, in fact, that should there be any considerable reduction in 
the present tariff, I should be very much inclined to give up my 
lease (which I can do at any time) and look into some properties, 
which I have been solicited to do, in the provinces, where both lime 
rock, wood, and labor can be had at a very much less price than in 
New England. In view of these, and many other facts which could 
be shown, it does seem to me that to make any material reduction 
in the present tariff on lime would be a great mistake, and I will 
frankly state that during the past year my profit on the lime manu- 
factured has not been over 5 cents a barrel, a profit which could be 
easily put out of sight by the low prices of wood and labor in the 
provinces. Trusting you will see your way to oppose any reduction 
in the lime schedule of the new bill, I remain, with great respect, 
Yours, sincerely, 

THOMAS W. CARTER. 
7833 



7834 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

THE EASTERN LIME MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION REQUESTS 
RETENTION OF PRESENT DUTY ON LIME. 

949 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, January 29, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Inclosed we hand you resolutions and petition of the 
Eastern Lime Manufacturers' Association requesting that the present 
duty he maintained on lime. 

During the last year of free lime over 200,000 barrels of foreign 
lime came into the city of New York alone. Many thousand barrels 
were sent to other points along the coast where American lime would 
have been used. Many thousand barrels were also put into the Lake 
ports. The lime coming into our markets from Canadian points is 
manufactured at coast ports and is usually shipped with part cargo 
of lumber. Consequently transportation charges are not high. 
That, together with the low 'rate of wages and no duty, would put 
foreign lime manufacturers in position to flood our coast ports with 
cheap lime, and to hold our trade we would have to make a reduction 
in price. Because of the extended use of Portland cement for 
building purposes, lime has to be sold at a very close margin. Con- 
sequently, a reduction in price would have to be met by a reduction in 
wages. The latter would cause hardship among the men at the 
various plants because of the high prices of provisions and other 
necessities. Notwithstanding reports to the contrary, the New York 
state manufacturers (not members of the association) are very much 
in favor of maintaining the present duty. 

In view of the above facts, we would petition your honorable body 
to maintain the present tariff. 
Respectfully, yours, 

EASTERN LIME MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION, 
F. N. STRANAHAN, Acting Secretary. 



WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We, the undersigned, members of the Eastern Lime 
Manufacturers' Association, believe that any reduction in the tariff 
on lime would mean a severe loss to the lime manufacturers because 
of the reduction in price to meet foreign competition that would 
naturally follow. 

We believe it would also bring hardship to the men employed at 
the various lime plants, as any reduction in selling price would 
necessitate a reduction in wages. 

In consideration of the above facts, we would petition your honor- 
able body to maintain the present tariff on lime of 5 cents per 100 
pounds. 

Palmer Lime and Cement Company, by Lourllell Palmer, 
vice-president, York, Pa., capacity 1,500 barrels 
daily; Lourllell Palmer Company, by Lourllell Pal- 
mer, president, Yorktown Heights, N. Y., capacity 
750 barrels daily; Steacy & Wilton Company, by 



LIME EASTERN LIME MANUFACTURERS* ASSOCIATION. 7835 

S. S. Wilton, vice-president and general jnanager, 
Wrightsyille, Pa., capacity 600 barrels daily; John 
R. Bittinger, Hanover, Pa., capacity 600 barrels 
daily; York Valley Lime Company, W. F. Myers, 
president, York, Pa., capacity 96 tons daily; M. J. 
Grove Lime Company, E. H. Grove, secretary, 
Lime Kiln, Md., capacity 400 tons daily; J. E. Baker 
Company, J. E. Baker, president, York, Pa., 52 
kilns, annual capacity 120,000 tons; American Lime 
and Stone Company, A. A. Stevens, vice-president 
and general manager, 84 kilns; Thomasviile Stone 
and Lime Company, James C. Citings, president, 
capacity 54 tons daily; Knickerbocker Lime Com- 
pany, Wm. B. Irmes, president, Philadelphia, Pa., 
20 kilns, annual capacity 1,250,000 bushels; Charles 
Warner Company, Philadelphia, Pa., 35 kilns, annual 
capacity 110,000 tons; The Shennan Lime Company, 
Henry L. Shennan, secretary, capacity 75 tons daily; 
Finch, Perryn & Co. (Incorporated), H. H. Perryn, 
treasurer, capacity 150 tons daily; The F. W. Wait 
Lime Company, F. W. Wait, president, capacity 70 
tons daily; Lee Lime Company, by M. H. Deely, 
capacity 150 tons daily; Connecticut Lime Company, 
by M. H. Deely, president, capacity 80 tons daily; 
Harry M. Farnam, capacity 150 barrels daily; Ches- 
hire Lime Manufacturing Company, by W. B. Dean, 
capacity 200 barrels daily; The Connecticut Western 
Lime Company, by Geo. A. Marvin, treasurer, 
Canaan, Conn., capacity 50,000 barrels yearly; 
New England Lime Company, C. E. Griffing, presi- 
dent ; Farnam Cheshire Lime Company, C. J. Curtin, 
president, 39 Cortlandt street, New York, N. Y., 
capacity 1,000 barrels daily; Pittsfield Lime Com- 
pany, Pittsfield, Mass., and 39 Cortlandt Street, New 
York, N. Y., capacity 50 barrels daily; Rockland- 
Rockport Lime Company, by O. F. Perry, manager, 
82 kilns; West Stockb ridge Lime Company, by 
Clifford L. Miller, president, capacity 400 large 
barrels daily. 



949 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, 

January 29, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

House of Representatives , Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Pursuant to instructions I beg to submit a copy of 
preamble and resolutions adopted by the members of the Eastern 
Lime Manufacturers' Association, at the annual meeting of said 
association held at The Walton, Philadelphia, Pa., on Friday, Decem- 
ber 11, 1908: 

Whereas, under the provisions of the Wilson bill, enacted by Congress in 1894, the 
duty on lime was fixed at 5 cents per hundred pounds, and said rate of 5 cents per 
hundred pounds was reenacted in the Dingley bill in 1898; 



7836 srm-lWLK B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

And whereas the duty of 5 cente per hundred pounds is not now nor never has been 
prohibitive 'in its effect upon importations, and only partially reconciles the dif- 
ference in the cost of labor and material in this country and in Canada: Aow, therefore, 

Resol'ied That it is the sentiment of the members of this association that a reduc. 
tion of the present duty would inflict a serious and unnecessary injury to the labor 
and capital interested in the lime business in the United States. 

Resolved That the secretary of this meeting be, and he hereby is, directed to send a 
copy of this resolution to the Ways and Means Committee of Congress at Washington. 

F. N. STRANAHAN, 
Acting Secretary, Eastern Lime Manufacturers' Association. 



THE KELLEY ISLAND LIME AND TRANSPORT COMPANY, CLEVE- 
LAND, OHIO, THINKS PRESENT DUTY ESSENTIAL TO PROS- 
PERITY OF LIME INDUSTRY IN THIS COUNTRY. 

CLEVELAND, OHIO, February 8, 1909. 

Hon. HENRY S. BOUTELL, M. C., 

Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I understand that at just this time you are deciding 
upon the duty on lime into this country, and for this reason 'I desire 
to point out to yourself a few of the points against the reduction in 
the duty on lime into this country. The maintenance of the present 
duty on lime is absolutely essential to the lime manufacturers of this 
country. 

Lime manufactured in Canada is the lime which would come into 
this country in large quantities if the duty was reduced, or taken off 
on this article. The Canadian manufacturers are able to manufac- 
ture lime much cheaper than we are in this country; due, first, to 
the lesser cost of fuel to them, and second, to the lesser cost of labor 
to them than it costs the manufacturers of this country. The 
cheapest and the best fuel to burn lime \\ith is wood, and wood has 
become so scarce in the United States that only a small proportion 
of it is used here for lime burning. The Canadian lime manufacturers 
are situated where there is an abundance of wood, and this wood is 
used as fuel nearly exclusively by these lime manufacturers, and as 
a result they can produce a greater quantity of lime at a less cost per 
barrel. 

Labor there is from 25 to 35 per cent cheaper, and in this they 
would have great advantage over manufacturers in the United States. 
The lime manufactured in this country for ordinary building pur- 
poses (which is the main thing that Canadian lime would be shipped 
in for) has decreased enormously in the last few years, and as a result 
there are to-day standing in the United States nearly twice as many 
kilns and manufacturing plants for the manufacture of lime as is 
produced. So that the more the foreign importations of lime come 
in the worse would it make the present conditions of the lime busi- 
ness in this country. The lime business in this country needs abso- 
lutely all the protection that can be given it, and, as a matter of fact, 
the duty should be increased if any change were to be made. 

Also, the Canadian government tries to exclude any opportunity 
United States manufacturers might have of shipping into their coun- 
try by putting on a duty of 20 per cent ad valorem, which is a higher 
duty than the United States duty is into the United States, viz, a 



LIMB. 7837 

duty of 5 cents per hundredweight. If Canada prevents American 
manufacturers from going into their country with a higher rate of 
duty than they have into this country, there is absolutely no reason 
why we should reduce the present tariff and make the difference 
between the two duties all the more marked. 
Yours, very truly, 

KELLEY ISLAND LIME AND TRANSPORT COMPANY, 
LAWRENCE HITCHCOCK, Assistant to President. 



HON. W. I. JONES, M. C., FILES LETTER OF THE TACOMA AND 
ROCHE HARBOR LIME COMPANY, ASKING PROTECTION ON 
LIME FROM CHINESE LABOR. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 8, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, M. C., 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives. 

DEAR SIR: I desire to call your attention to the inclosed copy of 
letter which I have received from the Tacoma and Roche Harbor Lime 
Company, of our State. I am personally acquainted with Mr. 
McMillin, the signer of the letter and president of the company, and 
know him to be a man of splendid character and ability, and I think 
I can vouch for all the statements made in his letter, as I am satisfied 
he knows the subject thoroughly about which he writes. I invite 
your careful consideration to this matter. 

Very sincerely, yours, W. L. JONES. 



TACOMA AND ROCHE HARBOR LIME COMPANY, 

Roche Harbor, Wash., January 26, 1909. 
Hon. WESLEY L. JONES, M. C., 

Washinaton, D. C. 

DEAR SIR : We write to call your attention to an inequality and an 
injustice to us on import duty on lime. As you know, we are located 
right upon the British Columbia frontier. The market for lime in 
British Columbia is very limited, while the market for lime upon this 
side of the line is very extensive. The manufacturers of lime in 
British Columbia are able to turn out their product at a very low 
price by the employment of Chinese labor at about 90 cents per day. 
One of the manufacturers of lime upon that side told the writer a short 
time ago that that was what they paid their Chinese laborers. On this 
side of the line we pay from $1.75 to $2.50 per day for white labor. 
The manufacture of lime is practically a question of labor. You will 
thus note the great advantage in favor of the British Columbia manu- 
facturers. The present rate of duty on importation of lime to this 
country is 5 cents per 100 pounds. British Columbia lime manu- 
facturers are able to put their product on the markets of Puget 
Sound at a very low price. They are also able to reach the mar- 
kets of the Hawaiian Islands by the Canadian Pacific Steamship's 
line of steamers at a lower rate than ourselves. This is accounted for 

61318 AP 09 7 



7838 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

in the fact that the Canadian Pacific line of steamers makes to them 
a much lower rate of freight to Hawaii than we are able to get from 
the Sound by American lines. The difference in rate of freight is 
more than enough to pay the duty, which thus places us at an actual 
disadvantage in competition with them in our own American market 
of Hawaii. 

On the other hand, while the market in British Columbia is very 
limited, the manufacturers upon that side are protected against com- 
petition from us by a duty or 20 per cent ad valorem. In addition to 
that, the customs authorities on that side insist upon calculating the 
rate of duty upon an arbitrary selling price for our lime on this side 
without regard to the actual price at which we sell it or offer it for 
sale. 

These conditions place us at a very great disadvantage, with the 
result that the British Columbia manufacturers are shipping their 
product largely into the Hawaiian Islands, the Oregon and Puget 
Sound markets in competition with us on a basis of lower cost of labor 
in production, while we are shut out of their markets by a protective 
law. We have no complaint to make of their law if they see fit to 
protect themselves to that extent. We do think, however, that it is 
manifestly unfair for our laws to permit them to stand behind an 
impregnable wall of protection and thus invade our markets at will. 
These invasions are also made in sweeping -cuts in the price of lime in 
order to try and force us to buy off their competition. In fact, they 
have repeatedly made deliberate offers to remain out of our markets 
entirely for a cash consideration, without which they insisted upon 
continuing to practice piracy upon our markets, knowing that we 
have no means of retaliation under the existing laws. The injustice 
of this situation should be manifest to you. We presume some changes 
will likely be made in the tariff schedule during the present session of 
Congress. We therefore write to ask you in connection with our 
other Representatives in Congress to endeavor to secure some relief 
for us sufficient to cover the inequality above mentioned. We think 
the rate of duty on importation of lime under the circumstances 
should not be less than 25 per cent ad valorem. A more satisfactory 
bn' is, however, would be a duty of 25 cents per barrel of 200 pounds. 

There are five companies manufacturing lime on Puget Sound at 
this time. They employ collectively, directly and indirectly, in 
the neighborhood of 500 or 600 men and have a capital engaged of 
more than $1,000,000 in value. All of these institutions and their 
employees are greatly interested in this subject, and will be grateful 
for any effort that you may make in their behalf. 

We will send similar letters to our other Representatives in Congress 
from this State, and especially ask the cooperation of all the members 
of our delegation upon this subject in the hope that we may have as 
early relief as possible for the reason that every day represents a 
very large loss to us on account of the slaughter of prices which is 
represented by the acts of piracy practiced upon our markets from 
across the line. 

Thanking you in advance for any effort, and hoping to have an 
early reply, we are, 

Very truly, yours, 

TACOMA AND ROCHE HARBOR LIME COMPANY. 
By JOHN S. McMiLiN, President. 



PUMICE STONE JAMES H. RHODES & CO. 



7839 



PUMICE STONE. 

[Paragraph 92.] 

JAMES H. RHODES & CO., OF CHICAGO, ILL., FILE SUPPLEMENTAL 
STATEMENT RELATIVE TO PUMICE STONE. 

CHICAGO, January 23, 1909. 
Hon. S. E. PAYNE, M. C., 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. G. 

DEAR SIR : We have carefully noted the statements made by Mr. 
Garlow relative to pumice, reported in your hearing for December 4, 
and beg leave to submit the following facts as contra evidence, which 
we trust will receive the careful consideration of yourself and com- 
mittee. 

Mr. Garlow states that the Cudahy Packing Company's cost of 
pumice stone f. o. b. the cars for shipment is $13.75, and the freight 
to New York is $11.40, making an f. o. b. New York price of $25.50. 

We clearly show in our statement of December 7 that the actual 
cost of producing American ground Italian pumice stone is $23.50 
f. o. b. New York. Mr. Garlow works on the assumption that there 
is a quantity of pumice stone consumed in New York. The fact is 
that 65 per cent of all the pumice stone we make is consumed west of 
a line drawn from Buffalo to Harrisburg. 

To arrive at a fair idea of what their chances in open competition 
would be, we show the comparative costs per ton of the Cudahy 
pumice and Italian pumice at the largest consuming centers. 



Cudahy's pumice. 


Price per 
ton. 


For Rhodes's Italian pumice shipped from 
their Brooklyn mill. 


Price per 
ton. 


Buffalo, N. Y. 
Cost f. o. b. Omaha 


$13. 75 


Buffalo, N. Y. 
Cost f. o. b. New York 


$23.50 


Plus freight from Omaha, at 45 cents per 
hundredweight 


9.00 


Plus freight from New York, at 15 cents 
per hundredweight 


3.00 










Total 


22.75 


Total 


26.50 


Cleveland, Ohio. 
Cost f. o. b. Omaha 


13.75 


Cleveland, Ohio. 
Cost f. o. b. New York 


23.50 


Plus freight from Omaha, at 42 cents per 
hundredweight . .... 


8.40 


Plus freight from New York, at 21 cents 
per hundredweight 


4.20 










Total 


22.15 


Total 


27.70 


Cincinnati, Ohio. 
Cost f. o. b. Omaha 


13 75 


Cincinnati, Ohio. 
Cost f. o. b. New York 


23.50 


Plus freight from Omaha, at 37i cents per 
hundredweight 


7.50 


Plus freight from New York, at 26 cents 
per hundredweight 


5.20 










Total 


21.25 


Total 


28.70 


Chicago, Itt. 
Cost f. o. b. Omaha 


13.75 


Chicago, III. 
Cost f. o. b. New York 


23.60 


Plus freight from Omaha, at 27 cents per 
hundredweight 


5.40 


Plus freight from New York, at 30 cents 
per hundredweight 


6.00 










Total 


19 15 


Total . 


29.50 











7840 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

The Italian pumice stone is produced by running drifts or tun- 
nels into the sides of Monte Bianca, in the island of Lipari, Italy. 
The average depth of these workings would be 60 to 75 feet. I 
have personally examined them during two different trips. The 
pumice stone occurs in pockets and is mixed with coarser grades 
of stone, so that the lumps have to be separated; even the small 
lumps for grinding. It is then transported on the backs of burros 
and human beings for 1\ miles to the village of Canneto. During 
ten months of the year it is sent by a small steamer to Messina, 
where it is transshipped to New York. During two months of the 
year a vessel will occasionally stop at the island to take on a cargo. 

Compare this difficult operation with the fact that this Nebraska 
silica occurs as a powder or "volcanic dust," as stated by Professor 
Barbour (in his glowing recommendation, which sounds as if it was 
dictated by the Cudahy Company's advertising department). 

While it is necessary to first crush, then remove the moisture, 
then mill and then sieve Italian pumice, it is only necessary in their 
case to shovel the stuff out of the ground, dry it, and sift it. We 
speak from knowledge, having had the Cudahy's crude material in 
our Chicago warehouse and have examined it. Furthermore, there 
is a great deal of this Nebraska silica which is 4 to 10 inches under 
the surface of the ground. 

QUALITY. 

With a lower cost price in all of the principal consuming markets 
and the unlimited capital of the meat trust behind them, with local 
warehouses in every large city to aid their distribution, why should 
this industry ask a protection? The truth of the matter is that 
American silica so-called pumice never is and never will have 
the cutting power and other qualities possessed by the Italian article. 
That is why the Chicago Pumice Company, in" which Mr. Quigley 
was formerly interested, failed; because they could not find a market 
for their stock. Before they failed they bought considerable Italian 
pumice stone from us, for which they still owe us. 

ANALYSIS. 

Of what weight are their analyses? Every chemist will tell you 
that the analyses of limestone and chalk are exactly the same; yet, 
anv person without any knowledge whatever could tell you the 
difference between limestone and chalk, and one could not be used 
for the same purpose as the other. The same thing applies to many 
grades of fuller's earth and also to whiting, some of which sells for 
75 cents and others at 30 cents, and they all analyze the same. 
Coal and diamonds also practically analyze the same and pumice 
stone and silica will analyze the same, vet there is a physical differ- 
ence, the same as in limestone and chalk, that can not be overcome. 
Therefore their chemical analyses are of absolutely no avail. Pumice 
stone is used in soap only to make up weight and furnish grit, and 
silica or silica sand can be used for the same purpose, but you will 
notice that the Haskell Brothers Soap Company are the only con- 
sumers whom the Cudahy Company has ever sold a car to. 



PUMICE STONE JAMES H. RHODES & CO. 7841 

They claim to have invested about $75,000, but this was invested 
before they ever dreamed of going into the pumice stone business, 
for the following reasons: The Cudahy Company have a scouring 
compound known as "Dutch Cleanser," the base of which is this 
silica, which they shovel up in Nebraska sometimes 4 inches under 
the surface. After three years it occurred to them that the same 
machinery and sifting apparatus which prepared the article for their 
use could just as well make some for the pumice stone market. 
Therefore, as far as an investment for the express purpose of com- 
peting in a general pumice stone market, they have not 1 cent. 
Why should they ask protection? 

OCEAN FREIGHT. 

He states that the ocean freight is $2.92 a ton. The lowest rate we 
have paid in a year is 18s., or $4.32 a ton. 

AMERICAN LABOR EMPLOYED. 

You have our statement that we employ and pay $25,000 for labor 
and American materials, and have an actual investment for the express 
purpose of furnishing pumice stone, and are liable to become bank- 
rupt unless some protection is granted against Italian grinders. 

DO JOBBERS OR BROKERS PREFER TO HANDLE THE ITALIAN PUMICE? 

Mr. Quigley's statement is that jobbers do not handle his pumice 
stone because they could make two or three times as much in handling 
Italian pumice. This is absolutely ridiculous. It would be much 
easier for the average jobber to buy his pumice from the Cudahy 
Company and get delivery from Omaha at a week's notice rather than 
import his goods from Messina and have the money tied up for three 
months. 

As to his statements that three times more profit is made on the 
Italian pumice stone than on their silica, you can see by the cost prices 
to the jobbers f. o. b. any city how ridiculous this statement is and 
that the jobber could make more money on Cudahy's product. But 
the fact is that it is not the proper article and does not take the place 
of Italian pumice stone. 

PRESENT SELLING PRICES FOR CUDAHY'S AMERICAN PUMICE. 

On October 14 the Cudahy Packing Company, W. H. Krebs, wrote 
us as follows: 



7842 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

We purchased 2 bags on October 26, so we could test the material; 
copy of their bill is as Allows: 

Bought of the Cudahy Packing Company. 

33 MICHIGAN AVENUE, CHICAGO, ILL., 

October 26, 1908. 

Delivered from stock at Chicago; sales ticket No. 170515. 

2 sacks XX pumice, 795 pounds, $19.50 per ton $7. 75 

Order No. 10897. 

American-ground Italian pumice stone costs us at Chicago $29.50 
per ton, yet they can sell their material at $19.50 per ton at a profit 
and still ask protection. 

This statement is made with the hope that your committee will give 
us the necessary protection on the Italian pumice stone, which we 
grind at Brooklyn, and asked for on December 7, page 4058. 

The writer would be especially anxious to appear before your com- 
mittee and give any further information relative to these statements 
that you may consider necessary. We will also show in confidence 
any of our audits. 

Yours, very truly, JAMES H. RHODES & Co. 

ELMER R. MURPHEY, President. 



HON. R. W. BONYNGE, M. C., SUBMITS LETTER OF J. A. McNAUGH- 
TON, SOUTH OMAHA, NEBR., RELATIVE TO PUMICE. 

SOUTH OMAHA, NEBR., January 30, 1909. 
Mr. C. E. STUBBS, 

Denver, Colo. 

DEAR MR. STUBBS: The Cudahy Packing Company has presented 
through its representative, Mr. M. T. Garlow, a proposition to the 
congressional tariff committee to place a duty of one-half cent per 
pound on imported pumice, and there are some others, who are also 
interested in the proposition, likewise working to the same end. 

Such others and the Cudahy Packing Companv own more or less 
pumice located in Kansas and Nebraska, and there are also large 
quantities in Colorado and Utah as well as several other States. The 
pumice owned by the Cudahy Packing Company is now confined to 
the manufacturing of "Old Dutch Cleanser," a cleaning and scouring 
compound. 

The Cudahy Packing Company has made a very thorough and 
exhaustive examination into the uses of pumice in the commercial 
world generally and find that there is quite a large quantity used in 
various ways, but the trade is supplied practically 100 per cent by 
foreign pumice produced in Italy, quite accessible to shipping ports, 
at a nominal laoor expense, and brought to this country as ballast 
and at a nominal transportation expense. The practice is to ship it 
in rock form, and it is ground up and graded at the Atlantic seaboard, 
being distributed from there into the territory east of Chicago, which, 
as you will appreciate, is the most densely populated, and hence the 
field for the sale of this article. 

After having obtained prices at which the product is distributed 
throughout the eastern territory and figured on the cost of production 
of the American article, it is plainly evident that the American article 
can not be marketed under the present nominal duty assessed against 



PUMICE STONE J. A. M'NAUGHTON. 7843 

the foreign; hence our only hope lies in the direction of getting a duty 
of at least one-half cent per pound placed against the foreign article, 
and this we figure will not be prohibitive but protective. 

Certainly the State of Colorado, as well as many other western 
States, are vitally interested in this because the development of the 
industry means the disbursement of a large amount of money. The 
article mny lies in the ground valueless; it ought to be taken out and 
made to yield a large sum to the laboring element of our country, and 
it will be if we can properly impress the congressional committee with 
the merits of our case. 

Mr. R. W. Bonynge, one of your representatives, with an office 
in the Equitable Building, is a member of the Congressional tariff 
committee, and I will very much appreciate your doing what you can 
to impress upon him the importance of this proposition to the western 
country, particularly the State of Colorado. You may say to 
Mr. Bonynge that you are well assured that ample capital lies ready 
to develop this industry whenever it has received such protection as 
the conditions clearly require. 

It would be well to impress upon Mr. Bonynge also that there 
is a very wide field and the deposits are so extensive, covering over 
such an area of country, that it would be impossible for anyone to 
get a monopoly even if he were so disposed. The field is open 
For everyone, and unquestionably within a few years time American 
industry and ingenuity will materially lessen the cost of production 
so that the trade will buy it fully as cheap, if not at less cost than 
the foreign article, but without some protection to foster the propo- 
sition there is no sane person who would be willing to put his capital 
into the business, which, as it appears to-day, has no show of suc- 
cessfully competing with the foreign article. 

Then again we have got to consider the prejudice that exists for 
the foreign article, which has been tried and found satisfactory, 
while the American article is to a great extent untried, but the 
congressional committee was given such proof as satisfied them 
that the American pumice exists in kind equal to any foreign pro- 
duction and in quantities sufficient to meet the American require- 
ments for many years to come. 

Another thing. Those interested in the foreign article have never 
tried to see how much they could increase the use of this very useful 
material, and I believe that if American industry got hold of it or 
was given any reason to take hold of it with a fair chance to make a 
living the uses would be very much increased. 

You will pardon me for troubling you with this proposition, but 
I know that your influence will be very valuable to the Cudahy 
Packing Company, and I wish to assure you that anything you can 
do toward helping out on the subject will be highly appreciated. 

Of course I do not know how close you stand to Representative 
Bonynge, but it is a proposition that really should not require very 
much argument to convince that gentleman that the interests of his 
State are at stake. The time to do effective work is now. 

I should very much appreciate an expression from you. 

With kind regards and best wishes, I am, 
Yours, very truly, 

J. A. McNAUGHTON, 

Traffic Manager Cudahy Packing Company. 



7844 SCHEDULE B EABTHS, EABTHEN WARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

ASPHALTUM. 

[Paragraph 93.] 

J. W. HOWARD, NEW YORK CITY, SUGGESTS A NEW CLASSIFICA- 
TION FOR ASPHALTTJM AND ITS COMPOUNDS. 

1 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, January 12, 1909. 

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washinffton, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Permit me to submit the following statements on the 
subject of tariff on asphalt and its compounds, speaking, as I do, 
from the standpoint of a consulting engineer of municipalities, etc., 
in almost every State, having devoted the greater part of my time 
during the past twenty-one years to pavements, especially to asphalt 
pavements, which absorb more than 90 per cent of all asphalts 
imported and produced in the United States; also from a personal 
knowledge of practically all the sources of asphalts, cost of produc- 
tion, refining, shipping, etc., together with their qualities and quan- 
tities used annually. 

First. The tariff act of 1907 provides a dutv of $1.50 per ton on 
crude asphalt and $3 per ton on refined asphalt. 

This should be modified by a reduction on crude and a slight 
change hi the rate and manner of applying it to refined asphalt, to 
have it apply to the pure bitumen or pure asphaltum content in the 
various refined asphalts and their compounds imported. It is the 
asphaltum or bitumen which is of value in such importations, not the 
various foreign substances found in different proportions in different 
asphalts. 

The modifications I suggest below are in accord with the Repub- 
lican platform promise that "the duties will equal the difference 
between the cost of production at home and abroad, with reasonable 
profit to American industries." 

Crude asphalt and crude bitumen and their natural compounds 
should be returned to the free list, being admitted free of duty; but 
any and all of said substances, if refined or advanced in value by 
artificial or special treatment, should pay a duty of $5.60 per ton 
(2,000 pounds) of pure asphaltum or pure bitumen content. 

This is the differential in cost of production, labor, mining, refining 
in the United States, with a fair profit, compared with 1'ke foreign 
materials. This also takes into account the average transportation 
charges within the United States for domestic asphalts from many 
points where now produced in the United States (California, Utah, 
Colorado, Oklahoma, Kansas, Kentucky, Texas, etc.) to several 
hundred cities where such domestic products compete with imported 
asphalts such imported asphalt all arriving on the Atlantic seaboard 
and not being able to penetrate far because of westbound freights. 

Second. To return crude asphalt to the free list and to place refined 
asphalt upon a scientific and economic basis of its purity, as suggested, 
will encourage and add to the labor of refining foreign products after 
importation into the United States. This will also assist the pro- 
ducers of American asphalts, because they are purer and, as a whole, 
superior to imported asphalts, not only in quality, but because a less 



ASPHALTUM J. W. HOWARD. 7845 

quantity is needed to produce the same area of pavement, water- 
proofing, and other constructions. 

Third. A healthy competition, not only between producers of 
domestic asphalts, but with foreign asphalts, has existed for a long 
time. The foreign asphalts also compete against each other. The 
production of domestic asphalts during the past ten -years has 
increased 500 per cent, or to more than five times the amount per 
annum of domestic production ten years ago; whereas the importa- 
tions of foreign asphalts, have steadily decreased, until, during the 
past year, the amount of importations, on a pure bitumen or pure 
asphaltum basis, are only about one-half the quantity of domestic 
production. Ten years ago the quantity imported was more than 
twenty times the domestic production. 

The history of asphalt, which is used as a bituminous cement, is 
following the history of Portland cement in the United States. All 
Portland cement was formerly imported, but is now produced in the 
United States cheaper than the cost of foreign Portland cements 
f . o. b. foreign ports. American Portland cements are being exported. 
Very little foreign Portland cement is imported. Asphalt, or its 
equivalent, asphalt cement, has displaced during the past ten years, 
one-half of the importations, and under a modified tariff, as suggested 
in section first above, will continue, under a healthy competition 
between domestic asphalts, to replace practically all imported 
asphalts. 

An illustration of the present healthy competition is found in the 
several powerful groups and many small producers which compete 
with each other at home; several exporting from the United States, 
(a) A California group, which combined about 10 producing com- 
panies under the leadership of the manager of what is understood to 
be the sales department or the Union Oil Company, and manager of 
the "California Asphaltum Sales Agency," of which Mr. Fillmore 
Condit is resident eastern agent at New York. This agency and about 
a dozen other competing producers in California have a special $10 
per ton freight rate to Atlantic seaboard cities, with proportional 
reductions to interior points. Incidentally, permit me to state a few 
errors from oversight or lack of knowledge of cost of production, 
refining, etc., of foreign asphalts, including the omission to mention 
several American asphalts produced at different parts of the United 
States between California and Texas; which errors and omissions 
appear in the statement of Mr. Condit before your committee on 
November 23, 1908, including additional statement dated New York, 
December 3, 1908, viz: 

" That low tariff has never benefited American consumers of asphalt 
or American cities." It benefits both, because the real consumers 
are the thousands of contractors and builders who purchase asphalt 
and asphalt cement. The final consumers are the property holders 
and taxpayers who are assessed to pay for pavements constructed by 
municipalities. Pavements alone absorb 90 per cent of all asphalt 
produced at home and imported. 

"That Bermudez asphalt when refined and sold f. o. b. New York 
costs the company $12.50 per ton," or a tabulated statement to this 
effect. He forgets to add $7 per ton, mentioned at another point in 
his statement, which must be paid to Venezuela to cover the cost of 



7846 SCHEDULE B EABTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

production, and a profit in the form of an export duty there. There- 
fore the cost to the American producer of this asphalt f. o. b. cars New 
York should be $19.50 per ton without any allowance for a loss of 28 
per cent of the imported crude which occurs by refining. Nor has he 
added anything for profit. The California asphalts and other domes- 
tic asphalts have for many years been sold at a cheaper rate per ton 
than imported asphalts at almost every point in the United States, 
including cities on the Atlantic coast. Domestic asphalts enjoy a 
practicaf control of the center and west of the -United States because of 
the westbound freights needed to be added for delivering imported 
asphalts to western points. 

(b) A Trinidad group which leases a deposit in Trinidad, West 
Indies, from the Crown of England, to tne New Trinidad Lake 
Asphalt Company, which company, with the Barber Asphalt Paving 
Company, is owned or controlled by the General Asphalt Company. 
This group, directly or indirectly, controls or produces American 
asphalts in California and other States. It is possibly the strongest 
group and does not depend entirely upon either foreign or domestic 
asphalts. It uses both in cities located between the Atlantic and 
Pacific coasts. 

(c) A Venezuela group which may be regarded as composed of the 
A. L. B. Asphalt Company, importing Bermudez asphalt from 
Venezuela and selling it to members of the "Independent Asphalt 
Association" and others. This group includes 25 or more contractors 
and purchasers. Cost of production and especially freight rates from 
New York to the West, where most asphalt is used, prevents Ber- 
mudez or Venezuela asphalt from more than a feeble competition with 
domestic asphalts. 

(d) A Texas group is not one of a combination of companies, but 
means that there are several producers, such as the Texas Company, 
the Sun Company, the Ellis Company, and others, producing asphalts 
which compete with each other and with all others from elsewhere. 
These Texas asphalts are extensively used for many purposes and are 
regarded as sold at lower rates to consumers than asphalts from any 
other source and delivered at cities not only on the Atlantic coast but 
in the Middle West. 

(e) A Kansas-Indian Territory group of producers has a large 
refinery in Kansas and competes, with its products of various asphalts 
or bitumens, over a large area as far east as New York City. This is 
probably the newest source of supply. 

(0 A Utah group of producers competes within itself and with 
others. It has long supplied special high-grade asphalt for various 
uses, and because of its peculiar excellent quality for purposes gen- 
erally other than paving it is sold for the highest prices and even 
exported. 

(g) Miscellaneous producers of asphalt and its natural and pre- 
pared compounds are located in Kentucky and at other producing 
points in the United States. Although individually many are small, 
their aggregate production is large. 

Fourth. The cost of production of refined asphalts from domestic 
crude materials is not affected whether or not crude foreign asphalts 
are subject to duty. This is because California produces refined 
asphalt f. o. b. there probably cheaper than any other refined asphalt 



ASPHALTUM J. W. HOWARD. 7847 

is produced in any part of the world. This is due to the enormous 
amount of asphalt base or maltha, thick oil found over large areas 
of that State and which, with little labor and the use of some of the 
oil itself as fuel, is made into refined asphalt. The problem of Cali- 
fornia asphalts is entirely one of freight. In fact, this applies to al- 
most all locations of domestic production of crude and refined asphalts. 
Each governs a large area or zone within which it is produced. This 
is somewhat analogous to the production and supply of coal from 
different coal-producing centers of the United States. An increased 
duty on crude foreign asphalts might tend to enable the California 
combination, in conjunction with possible special freight rates, to 
crush other domestic producers in the United States, certainly to 
seriously damage all importers of asphalts by artificial tariff means, 
which would check the present healthy competition and develop- 
ment of the asphalt resources throughout our country. 

The Trinidad group, while benefited a little by returning crude 
asphalt to the free list, would probably pay equivalent duty on im- 
ported refined asphalt or would abandon slowly the use of what is 
regarded by some as an inferior foreign asphalt and increase its 
domestic production to the benefit of American industry and labor. 

The Venezuela group would be possibly likewise affected and 
could turn to the production and sale of American asphalts. It is 
a wise policy for the Government to help keep the Venezuela asphalt 
as an independent competitor, as it has been since the withdrawal of 
the Bermudez deposit from the control of the Trinidad group. Since 
this withdrawal the exportation of Venezuela asphalt has enormously 
increased and not been kept at a minimum, as it is believed by many 
was the case when the Bermudez deposit was controlled by Trinidad 
interests. 

The California, Trinidad, and Venezuela asphalt groups seem to 
make efforts to get the United States Government to help now one 
then the other, to get the upper hand, through reduction or increase 
of duties or otherwise. The best policy in reference to tariff on 
asphalt seems to be the one advocated in section first of this com- 
munication. 

Fifth. The railway companies would probably absorb by increased 
freight rates a large part, if not all, the increase of price of asphalts 
which might accrue in a few cases from an increase of duty. The 
present adjusted freight rates on asphalt, used as it is by several 
hundred cities, is the result of twenty-seven years, growth of the 
asphalt industry, especially of asphalt pavements, of which about 
$60,000,000 worth are upon the streets of cities and of which more 
than $6,000,000 worth are being laid annually. 

In addition to cities there are thousands of counties in many States 
which are endeavoring, through State and national aid, to conserve 
and improve their roads with asphaltic compounds all at public 
expense. This means that there is a large and increasing demand 
for asphalts and asphalt products at low prices, necessary for such 
improvements. This can be readily verified from the printed reports 
of the Office of Public Roads of the Department of Agriculture and 
from the highway departments doing excellent work in several States 
in an aggregate amount of at least $10,000,000 annually of new public 
roads. 



7848 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

Hoping I have not encroached on your patience, and that you will 
know that I am speaking from a professional engineering standpoint, 
without commercial bias, for the benefit of good roads and pave- 
ments of good quality and at minimum cost, I remain, 
Very respectfully, yours, 

J. W. HOWARD, 
Consulting Engineer Roads, Streets, and Pavements. 



WALTER F. SLADE, COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS, PROVI- 
DENCE, R. I., WANTS CRUDE ASPHALT MADE FREE. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 5, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I inclose herewith a communication received 
to-day from the commissioner of public works, Providence, R. I., in 
favor of the admission of crude asphalt free of duty, which com- 
munication I should like to have printed in the record if it is not 
too late. 

I am, very truly, yours, D. L. D. GRANGER, M. C. 



PROVIDENCE, R. I., February 4, 1909. 
Hon. D. L. D. GRANGER, 

House of Representatives , Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR : I am informed that there is a strong movement toward 
increasing the duty on asphalt. I feel that it is a duty that I owe to 
this city to briefly call your attention to the subject and to state that 
anv duty imposed upon asphalt, especially crude asphalt, will neces- 
sarily increase the cost of asphalt pavements. 

It is a matter of great importance to eastern cities and towns. The 
advent of the automobile demands new methods of road construction 
for both urban and suburban traffic, that will call for a continually 
increasing use of the article of asphalt. 

As an encouragement to economically build and maintain good 
roads, I would ask that the article of crude asphalt be admitted free 
of duty. 

'Yours, respectfully, WALTER F. SLADE, 

Commissioner of Public Works. 



POTTERY. 



7849 



POTTERY. 

[Paragraphs 94-96.] 

THE ONONDAGA POTTERY COMPANY, SYRACUSE, N. Y., SUBMITS 
TABLE SHOWING EFFECT OF REAPPRAISEMENT OF VALUES OF 
IMPORTED HOLLAND GOODS. 

SYRACUSE, N. Y., February 27, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I beg to hand you herewith a copy of the decision of 
General Appraisers in the case of George Borgfeldt's importations of 
Holland earthenware. We think that this decision emphasizes the 
necessity of some different method of valuation. 

By referring to the inclosed memoranda of decision you will find a 
lot of articles which are not marked at all. These are articles which 
are sold in Holland. You will notice that in nearly every case they 
have been advanced, and the advance is to make the import price 
agree with the wholesale selling price in Holland. 

Notice again items which are marked "a." In these cases the 
articles are not sold in Holland, but are sold in other countries. They 
also are advanced, nearly all of them, and this advance is to make the 
import price agree with the export price from Holland to other 
countries. 

The third class of items, those marked with a " &," are items which 
are sold, or which we can only show to have been sold, to Borgfeldt 
and no others. You will notice in every case the import prices to 
Borgfeldt & Co. have been maintained. 

We feel that this decision in itself is the strongest evidence of the 
impracticability of arriving at a just valuation of the goods under the 
administrative features of the old tariff bill. Of course we can under- 
stand the howl made by the importers against a change to an Ameri- 
can valuation. It would be so simple that fraud would be easily 
detected, while the methods necessary to get at a valuation under the 
administrative features of the present tariff law are so complicated 
that it is hardly possible to get experts to agree on what is or is not a 
true valuation. The more complicated the method of determining 
the valuation is, the greater ease there will be in evading the law. 
Very truly, yours; 

ONONDAGA POTTERY Co. 
JAMES PASS. 

EXHIBIT A. Decision of general appraisers G. Borgfeldt's Holland earthenware. 





No. 


Entered. 


Reap- 
praised. 


Plates: 
Print 


32/526 


0.499 


0.579 


Decorated . . .. 


36/507 


.822 


.886 


Print... 


37/517 


.676 


.813 


White * 


38 


.456 


.576 


Lustre 


38 '507 


.98 


1.05 


Decorated 


89/507 


.894 


.964 


White... 


274 


.375 


.448 


Do... 


278 


.458 


.576 


Do . 


280 


.458 


.576 


Do 


408 


.499 


.589 


Do... 


409 


.499 


.589 



7850 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHEN WARE, AND GLASSWARE. 
EXHIBIT A. Decition of general appraitera 0. Borg/eldt's Holland earthenware Con. 





No. 


Entered. 


Reap- 
praised. 


Plates Continued. 
Print 


36/526 
37 
27/526 
38/567 
89 
248 
276 
279 
402 
408/980 
415 

3/517 
5/707 
8/507 
9 
9/f>39 
10/515 
10/507 
11/575 
11/507 
12/507 
14.507 
15/507 
17/607 
353/707 
3/507 
6/515 
6/567 
9/u32 
9/507 
10/507 
10/o39 
11/567 
11J/567 
lii/567 
14/507 
15/567 
17/567 

55 
59 
94 

294 
401 
60/567 
62 
151/526 
293 
292 
5.'/517 
94/'26 
294/ 67 
295J/ 67 
407/980 
6(V)07 
62/-.07 
151/307 
404 

285 
31S/>17 
317/317 
410 
31'/517 
316/517 
318/517 

18/507 
19/567 
281 
19/526 
19/507 

263/526 
964/807 

301 '526 
29/507 
26/567 


0.624 
.447 
.676 
.686 
.447 
.478 
.437 
.447 
.499 
.759 
.499 

.281 
6.385 
.803 
.447 
6.833 
.634 
a 1.04 
.842 
a 1.24 
a 1.-C6 
2.86 
3.74 
65.20 
6.78 
.426 
.406 
.447 
.634 
.936 
.714 
6.884 
.936 
a 1.196 
1.31 
2.371 
3.14 
64.368 

.551 
0.551 
.551 
.551 
.551 
.717 
.499 
.717 
.499 
.469 
.77 
.77 
.832 
6.832 
.77 
al.902 
1.092 
61.092 
6.52 

6.572 
61.144 
6.489 
.27 
61.404 
6.884 
6.406 

6.364 
.291 
.187 
.291 
6.364 

6.406 
6.759 
6.832 
1.76 
a. 832 


0.715 

.554 
.813 
.95 
.554 
.652 
.537 
.554 
.589 
.834 
.589 

.399 
.385 
1.031 
.531 
.833 
1.344 
1.20 
1.63 
1.41 
1.812 
3.289 
4.121 
5.20 
.78 
.496 
.489 
.635 
1.018 
1.05 
1.467 
.884 
1.711 
1.306 
2.037 
3.36 
4.034 
4.368 

1.026 
.708 
1.026 
1.026 
1.026 
1.10 
.815 
1.10 
.88 
.774 
1.369 
1.369 
1.369 
.832 
1.467 
1.151 
1.354 
1.097 
.520 

.529 
1.144 
.4*9 
,635 
T.404 
.884 
.406 

.364 
.342 
.236 
.342 
.364 

.406 
.759 
.832 
1.93* 
.91 


\\ lull- 


Print : 


Do 


Whit<> 


Do 


Do 


Do ; 


Do 


Print 


White 


Bowls: 
Print 




Do 


White . 


Decorated 


Print 


Decorated 


Painted 


Decorated . . . 


Do .. 


Do... 


Do... 


Do 


Do... 


Do 


Print... 


Do... 


Do 


Decorated 


Print 


Decorated 


Print 


Do 


Do 


Do 


Do 


Do 


Teas: 
White 


Do 


Do.... 


Do 


Do 


Print.... 


White 


Print 


White 


Do 


Print. . . . 


Do 


Decorated... 


Do... 


Print 


Decorated... ""." 


Do.... 


Do 


White... 


Sllvi- 

White 


Do 


White 
Print... 


Do 
Saucers: 
Decorated 
Print 

\\hit,... 


Print ."" 
Decorated 

Oatmeal: 
Print 


Jugs, print 
Rice dish, decorated 





POTTERY AND GLASSWARE NEW YORK WHOLESALERS. 7851 

POTTERY AND GLASSWARE. 

HON. WILLIAM H. DRAPER, M. C., FILES PETITION OF CERTAIN 
NEW YORK WHOLESALERS OPPOSING INCREASE OF DUTIES 
ON CROCKERY, CHINA, AND GLASSWARE. 

SANDY HILL, N. Y., January 25, 1909. 
Hon. WILLIAM H. DRAPER, M. C., 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Inclosed I hand you petition to be handed to the Ways 
and Means Committee, which explains itself, as a protest against any 
increase in the duty on crockery and china. 

As one of the signers I desire to say that we deal in both American 
and foreign earthenware and are familiar with the merits of both, and 
this petition is signed by, so far as we know, every dealer in the towns 
through which a commercial traveler has been recently, and he says 
that every dealer to whom he presented the petition signed it without 
qualification. 

While we believe in reasonable protection on American industries, 
we think the duty on earthenware, nominally 55 per cent on white 
and 60 per cent on decorated, counting the same duty on the outside 
packages, which makes really a protection of between 80 and 90 per 
cent, is high enough, and to put it higher would be to cut down the 
revenue to the Government and also bar out many kinds of useful 
earthenware. 

Truly, yours, WARREN P. BURR. 



The undersigned dealers in crockery, china, and glassware, dealers in both the 
foreign and domestic products, familiar with the merits and value of each, view with 
alarm the purpose of the United States Potters' Association, the attempt to add new 
tariff taxes on an article of necessity of every family in the land. 

We believe the present duty while nominally 55 per cent on white and 60 per cent 
on decorated is really more than 85 or 90 per cent protection. 

We believe in giving the consumer the benefit of reasonable competition. 
The attempt to engraft a specific duty appears to us unnecessary, calculated to dis- 
guise and blind the real rate of tariff tax imposed. 

Henry B. Belknap, Boonville, N. Y.; Alton Bros., Antwerp, N. Y.; A. 
Bushnell & Co., Watertown, N. Y.; E. H. Murray, Watertown, N. Y.; 
Chas. A. Ellis Co., Clayton, N. Y.; Cornwall Bros. Co., Alexandria Bay; 
Nathan Frank Sons, Ogdensburg, N. Y.; W. E. & J. B. MacGregor, 
Massena, N.Y.; A. H. Mould, Malone, N. Y.; J. H. King, Malone, N.Y.- 
Adirondack Hardware Co., Saranac Lake, N. Y.; The Tuttle & Parshall 
Co., Plattsburg, N. Y.; Myers & Belden, Platteburg, N . Y. ; Frank L. 
Brust, Ticonderoga, N. Y.; Warren & Bun, Sandy Hill, N. Y.; B. B. 
Fowler Co., Glenn Falls, N. Y.; Bickley Bros., Glens Falls, N. Y.; 
Towne Hardware Co., Saratoga, N. Y.; The John G. Myers Co., Albany, 

N. B. -Every signer a dealer in crockery, china, and glassware. 



7852 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWAKE, AND GLASSWARE. 

CHINA INSULATORS. 

[Paragraph 95.] 

HENRY CREANGE, NEW YORK CITY, THINKS CHINA INSULATORS 
SHOULD BE FREE OR THE DUTY REDUCED. 

27 BARCLAY STREET, NEW YORK, 

January 18, 1909. 

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Under paragraph 95 of the tariff act china insulators 
used for the transportation of electric power, if imported, would pay 
a duty of 55 per cent ad valorem. Owing to the duty, however, 

E radically none are imported, but on the contrary they are manu- 
ictured and exported from the United States to all parts of the 
world. The cost of labor of these articles is comparatively small, 
nearly all of them being cast and the greatest percentage of expense 
being the cost of filing and the material used. On account of the 
great weight of these insulators and the elaborate packing they require 
the transportation and packing charges should be ample protection 
for the American manufacturers, and I therefore ask that these arti- 
cles either be placed on the free list or a duty not higher than 10 per 
cent be placed thereon. It is suggested that a low duty on these 
articles would result not only in an increase of revenue to the Gov- 
ernment, but would benefit the consumer. 

Respectfully, HENRY CREANQE. 

CARBON ELECTRODES. 

[Paragraph 98.] 

C. H. HALCOMB, CAZENOVIA, N. Y., THINKS CARBON ELECTRODES 
FOR STEEL MAKING SHOULD BE FREE OF DUTY. 

CAZENOVIA, N. Y., February 17, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : The electric furnace is destined to play a very impor- 
tant part in the steel making of the future, and the one which is 
recognized as the best was invented by Dr. Paul Heroult, of La Praz, 
France. Several of his furnaces are now in use in Europe, and are 
being introduced into the United States also. This Heroult furnace 
is worked by two electrodes, each of which weighs from 1,000 pounds 
upward, according to the size of the furnace. The present tariff pro- 
vides a duty of 35 per cent ad valorem on electrode carbons wnich 
are used for arc lights. 

Large electrodes for electric melting furnaces weighing over 500 
pounds each are assessed at 20 per cent ad valorem, as manufactures 
not otherwise provided for. These electrodes are made of pure retort 
carbon, which is the principal cost of their production, the labor 
required being a very small item of the cost. 



CARBON ELECTRODES ELECTRIC-LIGHT CARBONS. 7853 

Retort carbon is a by-product from coal gas, and, as water-gas 
production is growing very rapidly in the United States, retort car- 
bon is getting very scarce. 

The present rate of 20 per cent, duty on these large melting elec- 
trodes would seriously hamper the development and progress of elec- 
tric steel making in this country, and as American makers who make 
electrode carbons for lighting purposes are unable to produce these 
large electrodes for smelting purposes satisfactorily, I respectfully 
suggest that electrodes for electric smelting furnaces weighing above 
500 pounds each be placed on the free list. 

This would not interfere with any established business here nor 
with any product now made in this country. 
Very respectfully, 

C. H. HALCOMB. 



ELECTRIC-LIGHT CARBONS. 

[Paragraph 98.] 

THE NATIONAL CARBON COMPANY, CLEVELAND, OHIO, WISHES 
CARBONS FOR ELECTRIC LIGHTING ASSESSED FOR DUTY 
ACCORDING TO THEIR LENGTH. 

CLEVELAND, OHIO, February 16, 1909. 

GENTLEMEN: Our attention has been called to letters sent to the 
various lighting companies by some of the importers, relative to 
tariff on electric-light carbons, and on account of the misleading 
and incorrect statements contained therein we feel that a statement 
of facts is in order. 

The tariff of 1897 reads, "Carbons for electric lighting, 90 cents 
per 100," and there can be no doubt that Congress intended this to 
cover lengths which were then and are still used commercially. Our 
petition to the Committee on Ways and Means simply asks that the 
word "feet" be added, making the duty 90 cents per 100 feet. Under 
the present tariff 9 inch carbons carry the same duty as 12 inch, and 
as the average of lengths used is not more than 1 1 inches, the change 
we have asked would really be equivalent to a reduction of 8J per 
cent, since the average duty collected would be only eleven-twelfths 
of 90 cents per 100 pieces. 

We are only seeking to have the new tariff provide for a duty hi 
proportion to the length of the carbons, and thus prevent a practice 
which has developed during the past five years of importing carbons 
in double and triple lengths. That this practice has added greatly 
to the profits of importers can not be denied; but they have retained 
the money they saved by importing the equivalent of two or three 
electric-light carbons and paying duty for one, without giving any 
benefit to the consumer in whose interest they now claim to be acting. 
The statistics compiled by the Department of Commerce and Labor 
show that the declared value of carbons for electric lighting imported 
during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1908, increased 217 per cent 
over that of 1903, and that the duty paid increased only 37 per cent. 
In 1897 not more than 10 per cent of the high-grade carbons used in 

61318 AP 09 8 



7854 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

the United States were made at home, not sufficient to have a restrain- 
ing effect on the importers, who in that year fixed prices, which were 
very much higher than was justified by tariff. Since that time prices 
to the consumer have been reduced 15 to 20 per cent, and this reduc- 
tion is due entirely to the competition of domestic manufacturers. 

You will therefore perceive how false are the importers' statements 
that we are seeking to have the tariff doubled and that the change 
we have asked would permit increasing prices on high-grade carbons 
$9 per 1,000. The policy of this company has always been to reduce 
prices as economies in manufacture are effected, and no change in 
this policy is contemplated. 

Very truly, yours, NATIONAL CARBON COMPANY, 

N. C. COTABISH, 

Sales Manager. 



GINGER ALE BOTTLES. 

THE CLICQUOT CLUB COMPANY, MILLIS, MASS., THINKS THAT 
GINGER ALE BOTTLES SHOULD BE TAXED. 

MILLIS, MASS., January 19, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The present duty is 18 cents a dozen on ginger ale, 
but there is no duty on the bottles. The empty bottles are sold at 
15 cents a dozen or more, which virtually makes the tariff only 3 
cents a dozen. These bottles can be purchased abroad at about $2 
a gross, but they can not be produced in this country for less than 
$3 a gross. It seems to us that there should be a tariff on the bottles, 
and thus preserve what is evidently intended to be a tariff of 18 
cents a dozen on ginger ale, instead of a fictitious duty, which is 
really but 3 cents. 

Very respectfully, yours, 

CLICQUOT CLUB Co. 



PLATE GLASS. 

[Paragraphs 103-107.] 

THE PITTSBURG (PA.) PLATE GLASS COMPANY FILES SUP- 
PLEMENTAL BRIEF IN ANSWER TO THE STATEMENT MADE 
BY SEMON BACHE & CO. 

FRICK BUILDING, PITTSBURG, PA., 

February 2, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : We have received the supplemental brief and appen- 
dix filed by Messrs. Semon Bache & Co., January 11, 1909. Re- 
plying to the same, we wish to say that this long brief has the fault 
of proving altogether too much. This fault is very common with 
people who attempt to discuss problems with regard to which they 



PLATK CLASS PITTSBURG PLATE GLASS CO. 7855 

have no actual knowledge, and, unfortunately for you, such an argu- 
ment drawn out to such length involves on our part a reply alto- 
gether longer than is necessary to treat real (not imaginary) facts. If 
they had confined this to the five propositions which they lay down, 
our reply could be simple and short. We will take these five assumed 
propositions up first and leave the other matter for later consideration: 

1. That the present tariff is prohibitory on plate glass for ordinary purposes, store 
fronts, windows, and building purposes in general. 

So far as this relates to glass over 10 square feet in area, we gladly 
admit the fact, and have always maintained that the tariff as con- 
structed was unfair the duty on large glass being too high and the 
duty on small glass being too low. This fact needs little argument. 
The imports themselves clearly sustain it; but please do not forget 
that the imports show just as clearly that the duty on small glass is 
too low as the other fact, that the duty on large glass is too high, and 
one fact can not be accepted without the other. 

2. That of the glass now imported a great part consists of a grade that, commercially 
speaking, is not obtainable in the United States, and that practically all of the impor- 
tation consists of glass for special purposes imported by reason of superior quality and 
not on account of low prices, and that this market can in no sense be described as a 
"dumping ground." 

So far as this proposition sets forth the fact that the glass imported 
consists of glass of superior quality it is also admitted. But the ques- 
tion immediately arises as to why it "is not obtainable in the United 
States." 

In the first place, there have been times prior to 1900 when this 
glass was obtainable and when the imports of it were very small (note 
the small imports for the years 1897, 1898, and 1899), due to the fact 
that the difference between foreign and domestic cost was not so 
great, and we were receiving a much better price for large glass at 
that time, which kept up our average price. While the prices at 
which some of this imported glass has been brought in may seem like 
remunerative prices as compared with our cost, the serious trouble 
with the American manufacturer arises from the fact that in cutting 
up large glass, from which the best quality is obtained, and which 
usually exists in patches here and there with defective quality 
between, he secures in addition to the small sizes of desirable quality 
required to supply the consumption now being taken care of by the 
imports such a large quantity of other smaller sizes and strips of infe- 
rior quality that the resultant average price is altogether too low. 
Hence we have been helpless. This is evident; otherwise the imports 
would not have existed. 

The great decrease in imports referred to during the calendar year 
1908 was due not to the causes stated, although they may have had 
slight influence in the matter, but primarily to two other reasons: 

(a) Because the business of the furniture manufacturers of the 
country, who are the great consumers of this product, fell off about 
50 per cent during the year 1908; and 

(6) To the fact that the mirror manufacturers of the country were 
loaded up with very heavy stocks of imported glass when the panic 
came, and also had large quantities to arrive, so that they had nearly 
enough to supply the limited demand for the calendar year 1908. 



7856 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

3. That the principle of a flat rate of duty is incorrect. 

It seems axiomatic that the rate of duty should represent the differ- 
ence between foreign and domestic cost, quite irrespective of whether 
the cost of production is the same for small as for large sizes. The 
tact would still remain that the difference between producing small 
sizes there and here must be just as great as the difference in cost of 
producing large sizes, because the same difference in cost that sur- 
rounds the manufacture there and here pertains to the one range of 
sizes as much as to the other. But as a matter of fact the difference 
in producing small and large sizes is substantially the same, and the 
production of plate glass the world over, no matter where made, has 
always been figured and considered at so much per foot, irrespective 
of the sizes produced. 

Their argument, based upon factory conditions, is entirely irrele- 
vant, because it is based upon ignorance. No one who has ever 
actually been engaged in the manufacture of plate glass would dispute 
this proposition. It is true that glass in the casting department does 
undergo a kind of inspection, but it is an inspection of the crudest 
character, due to the fact that nothing but defects of the most glaring 
nature can be seen in glass in its rough state. In the first place, the 
plates must be cut, i. e., squared up; otherwise they can not be 
safely handled or advantageously laid on the grinding tables; and in 
squaring up the plates any defects sufficiently glaring to be seen in 
the rough glass are cut out. The trimmings resulting from these oper- 
ations have no value except as cullet to be remelted, which is trifling. 
The sizes resulting pass on through the grinding and polishing depart- 
ments into the warenouse; and the entire cost of production in casting, 
grinding, and polishing departments is based upon and charged to 
the feetage thus produced, irrespective of size, the actual inspection 
not being possible until the glass is polished and passed into the ware- 
house where nearly all the small glass is produced in the cutting nec- 
essary to eliminate the defects which could not be seen until the glass 
was finished. 

As a matter of fact, you will see that this being true, that the pro- 
duction of small sizes really is somewhat more expensive than the 
production of the large sizes. To illustrate: A plate containing 100 
square feet which had no defects would be sold full size and net the 
manufacturer 100 square feet. If the plate had contained a large 
number of defects, as most plates do, it would have to be cut up 
into a great many smaller sizes, resulting in strips and waste, for the 
purpose of eliminating defects. Hence, in addition to having smaller 
sizes, which yield him a much smaller price, he would have an initial 
cost of 100 feet of glass to produce 90 feet of actual sizes; hence these 
small sizes actually cost more than the large. If this is not sufficient 
to justify the flat rate, also please bear in mind that the United States 
is the only country in the world having a graduated scale of brackets, 
with such radical differences in the rates of duty imposed. Germany, 
where the matter had very careful consideration by the German 
tariff commission, so much talked of, imposed a flat rate of duty 
equivalent to 0. 1242 cent per square foot on all sizes. Other European 
countries have done the same. France has three brackets, but the 
rates of duty on two of them are the same, i. e., under 5 feet and 
above 10 feet, with just a slightly lower rate of duty on the bracket 
from 5 to 10 square feet. Italy has two brackets, with only a slight 
difference between them. 



PLATE GLASS PITTSBURG PLATE GLASS CO. 7857 

4. That the difference im the cost of production here and abroad is not an average 
of 18 cents per square foot, as claimed by the manufacturers, but is very much less. 

The difference in cost of production here and abroad for the period 
named in a former brief from 1901 to 1907, both inclusive was 
18 cents, because we know it, being familiar with conditions in both 
countries, as manufacturers, and you already have our sworn state- 
ment and a member of your committee has a detailed statement 
setting forth the facts. 

5. That our proposal for cutting the present duties practically in half would work 
no hardship to the domestic manufacturer and would afford the consumer much 
needed relief. 

The following statement shows what their proposal would have 
meant on the imports for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1907. 

Revenue based on rate suggested by Semon & Bache Co. 

1, 207, 576 feet, at 4 cents $48, 303. 04 

4, 577, 059 feet, at 5 cents 228, 852. 95 

741, 947 feet, at 12 cents 89, 033. 64 

180, 913 feet, at 20 cents 36, 182. 60 



6, 707, 495 feet a 402, 372. 23 

They admit that they are entirely in accord with the general prin- 
ciple laid down in the Republican platform of 1908; that is, that the 
tariff should be sufficient to cover the difference in cost of production 
here and abroad, yet they admit that they are not manufacturers 
and have no definite knowledge on the subject, and propose a sched- 
ule of rates which if in existence would have yielded an average 
duty to the Government of 0.059 cent per square foot, whereas the 
actual difference in cost is more than three times that amount. 

Contrast this with conditions in Germany, where the rates of wages 
are not so very much higher than those in Belgium, and where the 
general conditions do not differ nearly so widely as they do in this 
country. There a special tariff commission of 20 men, after laboring 
five years over the problems as to difference of cost between Ger- 
many and other countries, and also the surrounding commercial 
problems (the dumping process), conceded to the German manu- 
facturers a flat rate of duty equivalent to 0.1242 cent per square 
foot. I believe the same commission dealing with American prob- 
lems would have granted us twice that rate, if not more. Do you 
think they would have given any consideration whatever to such a 
proposition as is made by Semon Bache & Co., which is absolutely 
at variance with their (Semon Bache & Co.'s) declared attitude to- 
ward American manufacturers? 

We quote from their statement as follows : 

This definite statement of a cost of 32 cents per square foot has been made by only 
one person, Mr. Clause, of the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company, and we may add that 
he has been very careful not to state specifically that this is the present-day cost, but 
puts it as "the cost for a period of years, those just last passed," which may mean any 
period from the last two or three years to the period from 1865 to date. 

This statement is absolutely false, because our supplemental brief, 
filed December 17, clearly sets forth that the cost of 0.3265 cents per 
square foot, referred to, covers the years 1901 to 1907, both inclusive, 

<* Equals average 0.05998 cent per square foot. 



7858 S( III ITLE B EAKTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASS \V.\KK. 

and is based upon our actual books for that period, because it covers 
the period during which the large increase in imports took place, and 
also because in treating a problem of this kind genera] con. I a ions 
covering a period of years, rather than temporary conditions, which 
may change radically, should govern. 
They say : 

It is further stated by the commercial agencies that the Pittsburg Plate Glasb Com- 
pany buys very little in the regular market channels and takes the entire output of the 
Columbia Chemical Company and a large share of the product of the Pittsburg Valve 
and Fittings Company. 

These statements are absolutely false. The Columbia Chemical 
Company manufactures many things which the Pittsburg Plate Glass 
Company does not use at all; and of soda ash, which is the only thing 
manufactured by it which the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company does 
use, the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company only consumes a very small 
part of the product. And as to the Pittsburg Valve and Fittings 
Company, the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company rarely uses 1 per cent 
of its output. The relationship between the stockholders of the 
companies referred to is pretty generally known, and had Semon 
Bache & Co. desired to know, they could have easily ascertained the 
real facts. 

As to their insinuations that 

we could work out any kind of a manufacturing cost and do it more or less legiti- 
mately 

is this an evidence of the kind of methods they employ? There is 
no concern in the country that has followed more conservative and 
saner methods in the treatment of its stockholders than has our 
company. The methods and accounting connected with every 
branch of its business has followed entirely legitimate lines for the 
honest purpose of having every department stand upon its own 
merits. 

We quote again: 

We may remark in passing that even according to the domestic manufacturers' 
own figures the difference in the cost of production here and abroad is given as 18 
cents, while they ask a flat rate of duty of 22J cents. 

Here they overlook the platform which they accepted and which 
promised the difference plus a reasonable profit, to which we feel 
we are fully entitled. If the rate of duty only measured the exact 
difference in cost, the foreign manufacturers could, by selling what 
to them was a small part of their product in this country at cost, 
compel the American manufacturer to sell his entire product at cost. 

We quote again: 

The census of 1900 gives the production of plate glass in the United States as 
16,883,578 square feet of a value that is a market price of $5,158,598, which figures 
out about 304 cents per square foot. 

In 1900 the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company, according to its annual statement, 
earned net $2,026,607. 

In 1900 the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company owned 10 of the 13 plate glass plants 
in operation that year (see Census Bulletin No. 228 of July 3, 1902, page 16). 

In 1900 the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company possessed very few of the auxiliary 
sources of revenue to which they ascribe their present income. The paint factory 
was bought late in 1900. Their foreign plate-glass factory was acquired in 1902; 
their coal properties were also bought after that date, and in 1900 only eight or nine 
of their branch warehouses were in existence, and these were all comparatively new 
enterprises and were fighting hard with*long-established competitors for existence. 
The Pittsburg Plate Glass Company's large earnings of 1900 were therefore mainly 
earned in the manufacture of plate glass. 



PLATE GLASS PITTSBURG PLATE GLASS CO. 7859 

Allowing them ten-thirteenths of the production and assuming that they sold their 
jjlass ai the average price in 1900 of 30J cents per square foot, they have made over 
2,000,000 by selling almost exactly 13,000,000 square feet of glass at 30 cents per 
square foot. Admitting that their branch houses may have made, say, half a million 
dollars of this total a most extraordinary profit, far beyond that the average jobber 
of the same size was able to make in that year the profits on the manufacture of the 
plate glass works out at a little over 11J cents per square foot, which, deducted from 
the selling price of 30 cents per square foot, leaves a cost, roughly speaking, of 19 
cents per square foot. 

That you may properly understand the inaccuracies in this state- 
ment and the fallacious conclusions deduced therefrom, we give you 
the following facts from the books of our company: 

The actual sales of this company for the year 1900 were 13,637,146 
feet, which the factories sold at an average price of $0.3877 per square 
foot. The company had twelve (not eight or nine) branch houses 
at that time, which yielded a profit for the year 1900 of $1,086,414.54 
(not $500,000, as they surmise), out of a total profit of $2,026,607.94. 
Its principal and by far the most valuable of its coal properties, at 
Charleroi and Creighton had been in possession of the company 
since its organization, in 1895. Later additions were simply pur- 
chases of some adjoining coal. 

With these facts before you, you will at a glance see how their 
Avhole chain of argument as to cost falls utterly to the ground. They 
know, or ought to know, that 30 \ cents per square foot was not the 
market price at that time. At a recent meeting of mirror manufac- 
turers held in Chicago, January 6, 1909, Mr. Goertner stated that he 
did not know whether 30 cents was the market price or the cost 
price. (In this brief they say they do know.) Semon Bache & Co. 
have been in the plate-glass business for generations and are 
large buyers of plate glass for all the different purposes for which it 
is used, and their purchases certainly afforded them every oppor- 
tunity to 'know that the average selling price was decidedly in excess 
of 30 \ cents per square foot. If they know such was the case, then 
they are trying to mislead the committee. If they do not know, 
then they are not familiar with facts which readily come within their 
observation. 

This brings us up to their long quotation from Census Bulletin 
No. 228, pages 16 to 19, referring to the great improvement made in 
the manufacture of plate glass by the Marsh Plate Glass Company 
and the introduction of the lehr in the manufacture of plate glass, 
which the quotation states can be built for $20,000, and that the 
building covering the same would cost $6,000, taking the place of 
96 kilns at a cost of $1,000 each, etc. 

This is another case where Semon Bache & Co. either know or 
ought to know better than to quote such a statement. If they know 
better, their only purpose must be that of misleading your commit- 
tee. If they don't know better with regard to a matter of such com- 
mon knowledge, I do not see how they can expect anyone to believe 
them with regard to other matters which they and the public can not 
be expected to know. I say this because it is a matter of common 
knowledge that the Marsh Plate Glass Works were a failure and that 
the works have never operated successfully. 

The lehr referred to was a prophecy rather than a realization. It 
was found to be totally unsatisfactory to the necessities of modern 
plate-glass making, and the ultimate development of a successful lehr 



7860 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

took years of time and hundreds of thousands of dollars. We have 
just completed a lehr which cost over $130,000 instead of $26,000, as 

stated. 

We quote again, not from the census report, but from Semon 
Bache & Co.'s statement in reference to this lehr: 

It is certainly remarkable that this invention, which saved 95 per cent of the fuel 
and time required in a very important part of the manufacturing process, which 
reduced the amount of material used very considerably, which effected an enormous 
saving in the grinding and polishing processes, and which, furthermore, knocked 80 
per cent off the original cost of a large part of a plate-glass factory's equipment, and 
which evidently possesses these merits, as every plate-glass factory is now equipped 
with these lehrs, should have operated to increase cost of production 50 per cent or 
more. 

There is not a truthful statement in the whole paragraph. To 
begin with, there isn't a word in the quotation from the census with 
regard to the Marsh Plate Glass Company which says anything about 
saving 95 per cent of the fuel, nor has any such a saving ever been 
effected. In fact, up to about the time that works was built free or 
cheap natural gas was the fuel used in operating the annealing kilns 
then hi use, and while the lehr does save some Fuel, still it had been 
cheaper to run the old type of kilns with natural gas at such prices 
as it then cost than to run lehrs to-day with gas produced from coal 
or natural gas at practically an equivalent price. There is no very 
material difference in the grinding and no difference whatever in the 
polishing of glass made by the lenr as against that made in the old 
type of kiln ; and as to a saving of 80 per cent of the original cost of 
lams, that is also shown to be erroneous. 

With regard to his closing sentence, nobody has ever said that the 
operation pf a lehr has increased the cost of production by 50 per cent. 

Next they quote Mr. John Pitcairn's testimony before the Indus- 
trial Commission, in which they say that the wages reported by Mr. 
Pitcairn average $74 per month, or almost $3 per day. As a matter 
of fact, Mr. Pitcairn's testimony did not show anything of the kind, 
and he did not make such a statement. He simply showed the rates 
of about 60 men in the different departments as compared with the 
rates paid for similar work in Belgium Semon Bache & Co. have 
simply added up the rates and divided it by the number of different 
kinds of work specified (about 60), whereas the total number of 
men employed is ten or twenty times that number, according to 
size of works, and there are 20 men employed at the low rates 
to 1 at the high rates. To illustrate: A foreman receives $150 
per month, glass washers receive $37.50 per month, making a total 
of $187.50. Average the two and it would be $93.75. Whereas 
there is one foreman at $150 and probably a dozen glass washers at 
$37.50, making a total of $600, $46.15 being the average for 13 men 
instead of $93.75. We don't give this as showing the average rate 
in factory, but simply to show here, as elsewhere, how entirely mis- 
leading and useless their conclusions are. As a matter of fact, the 
average rate of wages for an entire plant and for the full number of 
men employed was at that time about $1.85 per day (and not $3, 
as they wish you to believe), whereas to-day it is about $2.25 as 
against $0.65 to $0.70 in Belgium. 

This is still a further enigma to them, because they say: 

Of couree, we will have- to be contented with the statement that Italian and Slav 
labor is so much more expensive than the native American labor, etc. 



PLATE GLASS PITTSBUBG PLATE GLASS CO. 7861 

We have at no time made such a statement. What we said is, that 
we are to-day paying rates of wages which average about $2.25 for 
labor, about 60 per cent of which is Slavish and Italian, whereas ten 
years ago our average rate of wages was only about $1.85 for labor, 
a vast majority of which was English-speaking labor. 

We quote again: 

As for materials, there has undoubtedly been an increase in the cost in the last ten 
years. Materials, however, are a small item in the cost of producing plate glass, being 
only a matter of 2 or 3 cents per square foot, even of to-day, as set forth in the preceding 
paragraph. 

This statement is based on the grossest ignorance, as anybody 
who knows anything about the manufacture of plate glass would 
readily perceive. 

We now wish to' make a few quotations from their appendix. They 
state : 

The various plants of the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company that were acquired at the 
time (1895) were actually worth not much more than one-half the capitalization; in 
fact, if we recollect correctly, the stock for a considerable period sold for around 30. 

This statement is absolutely false, as an examination of the records 
of the stock market will show. 

They next quote our statement that 

We have made two increases of capital in cash actually paid in * * * prac- 
tically all of it is represented by other interests of the company outside of the manu- 
facture of plate glass. 

Then they quote from the annual statement of the company of 
February, 1906, as follows: 

The proceeds of the $5,000,000 common stock which is offered at par will be used 
in providing for the manufacturing of all products handled by the warehouses of the 
company, and for the erection of a large plate-glass factory at Crystal City, Mo. 

They quote these two statements as being in conflict with each 
other. The contradiction is apparent, rather than real. 

While it is true that some of the proceeds of the increase in our 
capital stock went into the Crystal City works, it is also true that the 
company's investment in plants for the manufacture of plate glass 
stands at a figure not in excess of the amount so invested at the time 
of its organization; so that the outside investments which have been 
acquired since the organization of the company, represent an amount 
just about equal to the cash additions to our capital stock and the 
surplus of the company. 

We now come to their quotations from an alleged contract between 
the American Plate Glass Association and the buyers of the country. 
Here again they are simply trying to mislead those who are not 
familiar with the history of the business. In the first place, the 
American Plate Glass Association was not an association of the plate- 
glass manufacturers at all. It was an association composed primarily 
of independent jobbers of the country and sought the cooperation of 
the manufacturers. For the brief period during which the Pittsburg 
Plate Glass Company had relations with that organization, it as a job- 
ber (not as a manufacturer) had one vote as against a membership of 
approximately 40. We had nothing whatever to do with the contract 
referred to, and never entered into such a contract, and so far as we 
know, the jobbers of the country never actually carried their scheme 
into effect. Furthermore, the American Plate Glass Association soon 



7802 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

went to pieces, because we, as well as other plate-glass manufacturers, 
refused to support it. 

Next they show what our profits have been for a part of the period 
covered by the operations of the company. Here again the facts are 
presented with tne purpose of misleading. Please bear in mind that 
these figures are gross before any depreciation is charged. A depre- 
ciation, even if no more than 5 per cent per annum, would have 
amounted to $5,500,000 out of the $13,962,425.07 profits shown, 
which any competent manufacturer would concede is very moderate. 
We have a very large capital employed, and the earnings necessarily 
must look large when stated simpiy m dollars rather than in per cent. 
The fact still remains that the dividends paid on the capital stock 
average a trifle less than 4$ per cent per annum for the period of its 
existence and that our surplus account is equivalent to about 3 J per 
cent per annum on the capital invested. These percentages will be 
somewhat modified when the figures for the past year are completed, 
because the surplus has been reduced somewhat during that year. 

We wish again to state also that these earnings have been made 
largely from the auxiliary sources. 

They next allude to the depreciation charges of our company. 
These depreciation charges, while large in one special year, 1904, are 
in the aggregate very low, indeed, considering the character of the 
wear and tear incident to the manufacture of plate glass and to the 
fact that the modern trend of manufacture has been of a character 
that made reconstruction excessively expensive. Please do not for- 
get that you are dealing with large figures, and an annual depreciation 
charge, even if it were no more than 5 per cent, would in the course of 
the fourteen years that we have been in business aggregate many 
million dollars. 

In addition to the foregoing, they make various other arguments 
and deductions which can be just as readily answered, but inasmuch 
as they have only a minor relation to the real problem, andinasmuch 
as they would simply draw this reply out to tedious length, we will 
conclude by saying that their entire case is based upon erroneous in- 
formation and assumed facts. Hence their deductions fall com- 
pletely in the presence of the actual facts and conditions. 
Yours, respectfully, 

PITTSBUBG PLATE GLASS COMPANY, 
By W. L. CLAUSE, President. 



SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FILED IN BEHALF OF ELEVEN AMERI- 
CAN MANUFACTURERS OF PLATE GLASS. 

PITTSBURG, PA., February 11, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The eleven American companies manufacturing 
polished plate glass, all there are in the United States outside of the 
Pittsburg Plate Glass Company, have felt that the committee repre- 
senting them before your body on Tuesday, November 24, 1908, 
covered the plate-glass industry sufficiently well and would not burden 



PLATE GLASS ALLEGHENY PLATE GLASS CO. ET AL,. 7863 

you with this additional brief, except for the fact that persons not 
manufacturers have since seen fit to file briefs with you. 

F. J. Goertner, of New York, representing Semon Bache & Com- 
pany, importers, has filed a supplemental brief since appearing at the 
hearings of Tuesday, November 24, 1908, of which we oeg to quote: 

Mr. DALZELL. Can you give us any figures as to the cost of production of plate glass 
abroad and the cost of production here? 

Mr. GOERTNER. Generally stated, the difference is generally accepted among the 
trade 

Mr. DALZELL. I am not asking you what the trade accepts, but I am asking you if 
you have any personal knowledge of the cost of production abroad and the cost of pro- 
duction here? 

Mr. GOERTNER. No, sir; I have not. 

Mr. DALZELL. You do not know anything about it? 

Mr. GOERTNER. Not of my own personal knowledge. 

This testimony proves conclusively the incompetency of the wit- 
ness. Strange enough, though, from November 24 to January 15, 
in the brief space of fifty-two days, without receiving any informa- 
tion from any manufacturer, he reels he has learned the business of 
manufacturing polished plate glass sufficiently well to file a brief, 
reported January 15, 1909, telling all things he did not know in 
November when he appeared before you. We have been engaged 
in the business in periods varying from several years to twenty-eight 
years, and we venture to say none of us knows his business as \\ell 
as Mr. Goertner, and his principals seem to think they know it, yet, 
remember, they have never been engaged in the manufacture of 
polished plate glass. 

MATERIALS. 

That you may know that Mr. Goertner is no better advised in 
our business to-day than he was when he first appeared before you, 
we shall call your attention to parts of his brier, given January 15, 
1909. He refers to the use of nitrate of soda and manganese in the 
manufacture of polished plate glass, neither of which is used. He 
also states that the materials entering into the making of plate 
glass "do not amount to more than 2 cents or 3 cents per square 
root at the very outside." We state as a fact the common and 
least expensive sand which is used for grinding the surface of the 
glass alone, and without taking into account the more expensive 
silica sand, and other materials entering into the composition of the 
glass, costs about~as much per square foot of polished plate glass 
produced as Mr. Goertner would have you believe all materials 
together cost. We shall point to one instance only of the great 
difference in cost of materials abroad and here in favor of the Euro- 
pean manufacturers. The character of the silica sand, and the 
purity of the salt cake, abroad, both entering into the body of the 
glass, are such that the ^European manufacturers do not need to 
use soda ash as we do. This difference in cost amounts to about 
one-half of what Mr. Goertner will allow for all materials per square 
foot of polished plate glass produced. It would only be occupying 
much of your valuable time needlessly to go into further detail; 
suffice it to say as a fact the materials entering into American-made 
plate glass cost fully four times as much as Mr. Goertner states. 



7864 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

Mr. Goertner discusses at length the labor question. It is not a 
matter of the nationality of employees, but a question of the increased 
wages the American manufacturer must pay, and we restate labor 
in an American plate-glass factory to-day averages about $2.25, against 
60 to 65 cents in Belgium and other European countries. 

MECHANICAL IMPROVEMENTS. 

Mr. Goertner says: 

Th-re have been so many improvements in the mechanical processes since 1900 that 
a great part of the work formerly done by hand is now done by machinery. 

The truth is, there have been very few new devices come into use 
since 1900, and none, so far as we know, that, if in use in this country, 
are not also in use in European factories. Mr. Goertner says all fac- 
tories have displaced kilns with lehrs, whereas the truth is a large 
number of plants still have kilns, and the advantage of the lehr over 
the kiln is still such an open question that in all Europe there is but 
one lehr in operation at the Pilkington factory, St. Helens, Eng- 
land. Belgium, which produces more plate glass than any other 
country in the world, and exporting most of its product, as it does, 
by reason of small home consumption, must be alert to any cost- 
reducing improvements, yet not one lehr is in use in that country. 

COST OF MANUFACTURE. 

Mr. Goertner refers to the total cost of manufacture of a square foot 
of polished plate glass as being 17, 18, 19, and 20 cents, and none of his 
four guesses is anywhere near correct. The total average cost per 
square foot of polished plate glass produced for the period of years 
covered by the Dingley tariff law in the factories of trie eleven com- 
panies whose brief this is will reach 32 cents, as shown by use of their 
respective records, which are open to your inspection. Some com- 
panies have charged depreciation and show costs hi excess of 32 
cents ; others show costs in excess of 32 cents without figuring depre- 
ciation. The life of a plate-glass factory, as proven by the four or five 
factories dismantled within the past few years, is about twenty years, 
so that each and every factory should have included depreciation as 
an item entering into its cost of manufacture amounting to 2 cents 
to 3 cents per square foot at least. The only reason some manu- 
facturers have not included depreciation is because the business has 
been too unprofitable to allow tnem to do so. 

QUALITY. 

Mr. Goertner says the glass that is imported into this country is 
principally for mirror purposes, and of a quality which can not be 
made here, thus accounting for the importation. We admit the 
bulk of the glass imported is for silvering purposes, and it comes into 
this country by reason of the existing tariff, and at times the willing- 
ness of the foreign manufacturer to accept a lower price in America 
than he does at home, but we deny the inability of the American 
manufacturer to produce glass for silvering purposes. We call your 



PLATE GLASS ALLEGHENY PLATE GLASS CO. ET AL. 7865 

attention to the following statement of the Heidenkamp Mirror Com- 
pany, one of the subscribers to this brief: 

Prior to our engaging in the manufacture of polished plate glass, we were, from 
1892 until 1901, engaged in the manufacture of mirrors in competition with Semon 
Bache & Co., and others. During all that time we purchased our entire supply of 
polished plate glass from American manufacturers, and we produced mirrors of as high 
quality as were made in America. 

All of the companies who are parties to this brief have made and 
still do make and sell quantities of polished plate glass of the highest 
grades for silvering purposes, and wnile it is a fact they could manu- 
facture larger percentages of their total product in these qualities 
with a continuance of the present tariff, they can not afford, hope, or 
expect to do so. 

SELLING PRICE. 

The Goertner testimony very carefully avoids any discussion of an 
average selling price to the manufacturer for his total product, 
referring only to what he claims were glazing stock sheet prices. The 
manufacturer is burdened with cuttings from stock sheets, by the 
trade called strips, with second quality, and with inferior quality 
called O. B.'s, which glass sells at about one-third of cost. There are 
also large quantities of small glass sold not included, in the customary 
car of glazing stock sheets at prices far below cost. The result is, the 
average selling price for the entire product is much less than the 
average price received per square foot for a carload of glazing stock 
sheets. The consumption of small sizes is from 60 to 70 per cent 
of the entire demand, while the normal production scarcely exceeds 
25 per cent. The American manufacturer must cut down from large 
sizes the difference of 45 per cent, and sell it, together with his normal 
production, at less than American cost in competition with the for- 
eign manufacturer, all of which reduces the total average selling price 
to an extent rendering the entire business unprofitable. The Ameri- 
can manufacturer is able to and wants to take care of the American 
demand for plate glass, but he should not be asked to do it without 
profit, and much less, at a loss. 

The reference of January 15, 1909, to English prices as compared 
to American prices, wherein are shown list prices instead of actual 
selling prices, is liable to deceive, from the fact that these are the 
jobbers' list prices, from which there is a very large discount not 
mentioned. 

NO COMBINATION. 

There are quotations from contracts of the American Plate Glass 
Association, marked Document E of 1903, and of the American 
Mirror Plate Company, marked Document F of 1902, so segregated 
as to convey meanings other than those of the contracts themselves. 
The American Plate Glass Association was organized and operated 
by and belonged to the jobbers. The effort on their part was futile, 
because it failed to receive support from the plate-glass manufac- 
turers. The American Mirror Plate Company was a mirror manu- 
facturers' proposition, organized against the judgment of the plate- 
glass manufacturers, and failed for the same reason as the Jobbers' 
Association. 



7860 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EAI5TIIKX \VAKK, AND GLASSWARE. 

There is nothing more false than the statement that, there is a 
combination of American plate-glass manufacturers. No matter in 
what business a man may be engaged, the selling price of his product 
and that of his competitor will always be about the same, for the 
cost of manufacture can not differ materially, one factory from 
another, so that, if a profit is possible, it will be held reasonable by 
competition. A manufacturer naturally knows his price must be 
about the same as his competitor's, otherwise he would receive no 
business. We repeat, there is no combination of American plate- 
glass manufacturers. 

FLAT COST. 

It is utterly impossible to arrive at a cost of production on any 
other basis than an average cost per square foot of all glass produced. 
regardless of size or quality, for, as a matter of fact, each and every 
square foot of glass made goes through exactly the same process and 
does cost the same. Not until finally examined in the warehouse, 
after having entailed the full cost of manufacture, can the size, 
shape, or quality of the glass be determined. Defects cause the 
cutting of many large plates into small pieces, accounting, in the main, 
for about 25 per cent of the natural production in small sizes, to 
market which we must accept orders for more than the normal pro- 
duction, resulting in our disposing of about two-thirds of our total 
product (unjustly called "waste" by Mr. Goertner) below cost, 
because of low tariff on small glass. The remaining third will not 
bring high enough prices to make the business profitable. 

IMPORTS. 

We call your attention to the large quantity of polished plate glass 
imported during a period of five years, 1903 to 1907, both inclusive, 
as under: 



. 


Square feet. 


Duty. 


Upto- 
16 by 24 


4 160 107 


Cents. 
08 


24 by 30 


19' 81fi' 024 


10 


24 by 60 


4 435 305 


225 


Over 24 by 60 


2' 368^ 078 


35 









You will note the quantity of glass imported exceeding 24 by 30 
inches in size is more than one and a half times as much as up to 16 
by 24 inches, proving the 22^-cent and 35-cent rates not to be pro- 
hibitive. The fact that 64 per cent of the imports for this period 
range in size between 16 by 24 inches and 24 by 30 inches, a variation 
of only 2J square feet, the bulk of sizes being between 4 and 5 square 
feet, paying a duty of only 10 cents against 22 cents a plate an inch 
larger would pay, proves the need of an increase in tariff on glass not 
exceeding 5 square feet to the plate. This is not a trifling matter, as 
Air. Goertner characterizes it, but very serious. 



FLAT TARIFF. 



Mr. Goertner states 10 pieces of plate glass each containing 1 
square foot are not worth to-day in United States what one piece of 
glass containing 10 square feet is worth, calling your attention to a 



PLATE GLASS ALLEGHENY PLATE GLASS CO. ET AL. 7867 

graduated scale of prices per square foot of glass dependent upon the 
sizo of the plate, a condition that has been brought about entirely by 
a graded and improper tariff, yet because of this improper method of 
selling glass he argues the tariff shall remain a graded one, citing the 
Chicago Packing House as a fit illustration. The product of a plate- 
glass factory is always plate glass and nothing else, while the product 
of the packing house is meat and what not. Mr. Goertner asks that 
the present tariffs be cut practically in half, claiming the cut would 
work no hardship upon the American manufacturer and would afford 
the consumer much-needed relief.' To follow his advice would prac- 
tically close every plate-glass factory in the United States belonging 
to a company whose business is exclusively manufacturing, unless the 
wages of the American workman were reduced to the standard paid 
in European factories, and on this basis he could not support his 
family. Besides, the prices of raw materials would havj to be reduced 
at least one-half, or we could not 'meet foreign competition. The 
country would lose an industry worth millions of dollars a year, and 
thousands of people dependent upon it would be without employment. 
We charge that Semon Bache & Company are not sincere in request- 
ing this reduction in tariff for the benefit of the consumer. There is 
no logic in a consumer's demand for relief when he is actually buying 
a staple product at less than it costs the manufacturer to make it. 

We think we have shown conclusively the justice of our request for 
a Hat rate of tariff, for the only way we can arrive at a selling price 
based on a cost as it should be is on a flat cost. We have shown a 
condition in the marketing of our product that compels us to sell most 
of it below cost. We want a tariff that will take care of the difference 
between foreign cost and our own, plus a reasonable profit. Mr. 
Goertner's statement refers to a difference in cost, but he forgets 
about the profit, since he is not engaged in the manufacture of pol- 
ished plate glass. We want a reasonable profit on our entire product; 
we do not want to give away at a large loss 60 per cent to 70 per cent 
of our product, and then try to get high enough prices for the remain- 
ing 30 per cent to make up the loss and give us a profit. A rate of 25 
cents per square foot on all sizes will assist us to a reasonable profit 
and nothing more. It will not exclude imports, the government 
records showing large quantities of glass over 10 square feet to the 
plate entering the country at a 35-cent rate, which, it is reasonable to 
expect, will increase greatly by reduction of 10 cents per square foot. 
Imports between 5 and 10 square feet should hold their own, and the 
competition on glass 5 square feet to the plate and under is so very 
keen now that we can not expect to eliminate it by the change of 
tariff we request. The plate-glass industry has been a losing venture 
in this country for a number of years, and especially because our 
market is limited to the United States, while United" States is the 
market of every other plate-glass-producing country. 

We sincerely trust you will realize the Goertner testimony, the 
Interstate Furniture Manufacturers' Association brief, given on 
Tuesdaj", January 5, 1909, and a number of others reported elsewhere, 
coming from sources which have no knowledge of the manufacture of 
polished plate glass, are incompetent, and that you will, therefore, 
give consideration only to the testimony of those properly equipped 
to give reliable information, and in so doing grant the American 
plate-glass industry the much needed relief it deserves by the recom- 
mendation of your committee of a 25-cent flat rate of duty. 



7868 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

The Goertner testimony of January 15, 1909, contains statements 
purporting to come from commercial agencies. Those references 
are in many cases untrue, in others distorted so as not to resemble 
the truth, but all arranged to give the impression that the manufac- 
ture of plate glass has been and is a very profitable business, whereas 
the truth is, for years it has been and is the very opposite. We call 
your attention to the following detail with reference to the several 
companies. 

The Kittanning Plate Glass Company has a bonded indebtedness 
of $250,000. Its capital stock is $700,000, $500,000 in common and 
$200,000 preferred, upon which it has never been able to pay a single 
dividend. 

The Allegheny Plate Glass Company was incorporated during 
1900, has a capital stock of $1,000,000, and a bonded indebtedness 
of $500,000. Its earnings have been so meager that it has not been 
able to return to its stockholders dividends equal to the interest they 
might have received by placing their money in a savings bank. 

The Standard Plate Glass Company has a capitalization of $750,000, 
has been engaged in the manufacture of polished plate glass for a 
period of twenty-one years, and has only been able to return to its 
stockholders during this entire period an average of 3 per cent per 
year. From the beginning it has had the advantage of natural gas 
as fuel, costing as low as $5,000 per year, but now its natural-gas 
supply is being exhausted and it will be compelled to use coal for 
fuel, which is going to cost $75,000 per year. Its earnings have been 
on fuel, not on plate glass. 

The statement given for the Heidenkamp Mirror Company is 
incorrect. While it has made money, its natural-gas supply and 
real-estate investments have contributed largely to its earnings. 

The Edward Ford Plate Glass Company has never been able to 
pay a single dividend, which fact refutes the statement that it has 
'notoriously been a very large money-maker from the start." 

The increase in capital stock of the Saginaw Plate Glass Company 
was made by the introduction of new capital, all of which was 
invested in the erection of a factory for the manufacture of salt. The 
company has not been and is not a paying proposition. 

The Penn Plate Glass Company was incorporated in the year 1904 
as a Pennsylvania corporation, with a paid-up capital stock of 
$250,000, with a factory at Irwin, Pa. 

In the year 1900 it consolidated with the American Plate Glass 
Company, of Alexandria, Ind., who had a factory at that point, the 
new company being known by the name of the Penn- American Plate 
Glass Company, the capital of which was $2,000,000, and represented 
the actual values in cash and property and additional money spent 
on the Irwin (Pa.) plant in excess of their original capitalization. 
There was not one dollar of water in the capitalization. 

Since the year 1903 $700,000 additional money has been spent on 
the Alexandria factory for improvements, $600,000 of which was 
raised by the issuing of bonds, which are still outstanding and unpaid. 

Prior to the year 1903, when the company had the benefit of low- 
price .natural gas as fuel, low-priced materials, when there was no 



PLATE GLASS ALLEGHENY PLATE GLASS CO. ET AL,. 7869 

overproduction in the finished product, they had earnings and paid 
dividends, but since which time this has been impossible. 

We give these facts in full in order to disprove Mr. Goertner's state- 
ments about overcapitalization, etc., which he could have very read- 
ily ascertained if he nad shown any disposition to get at truths. 

In the statement of the Columbia Plate Glass Company Mr. Goert- 
ner has omitted a bonded indebtedness of $750,000, and neglected 
to state that this company has never been able to pay a dividend. 

The capital stock of the St. Louis Plate Glass Company is $1,500,000, 
with a bonded indebtedness of $750,000. Mr. Goertner says, "In 
November, 1904, the secretary stated the above facts, and, in addi- 
tion, estimated the company's holdings at $300,000." The intended 
meaning of this latter statement is not true. The $300,000 referred 
to were bills payable, and were therefore obligations of the company. 
A valuation of the property in September, 1905, is given as $2,000,000. 
The secretary's figures represented money invested in the plant of 
the St. Louis Plate Glass Company, land and houses of the Valley 
Park Land Company, consisting or about 800 acres of ground and 
250 houses, and the property of the Pacific Glass Sand Company, at 
Pacific, Mo., consisting of 200 acres of silica-sand property, together 
with a modern sand plant. This was all original or new money, none 
of it coming from operations or earnings. 

EXPLANATION. 

Each company whose name is signed hereto vouches for the truth 
of any statements contained herein specifically referring to that 
particular company and for all statements which are general in 
character. We have given facts without reserve, and stand ready 
to give you any other information within our power that will help 
you to arrive at a just conclusion: 
Respectfully submitted. 

Allegheny Plate Glass Company, by W. J. Strasburger, 
secretary and treasurer; American Plate Glass Com- 
pany, by A. H. Gaffney, president; Columbia Plate 
Glass Company, by Chas. W. Dahlinger, chairman 
executive committee; Federal Plate Glass Com- 
pany, by E. F. Achard, general manager; Edward 
Ford Plate Glass Company, by Edward Ford, presi- 
ident ; Heidenkamp Mirror Company, by Jos. Heiden- 
kamp, president; Kittanning Plate Glass Company, 
by Geo. W. Reese, president; Penn- American Plate 
Glass Company, by W . L. Kann, vice-president and 

feneral manager; Saginaw Plate Glass Company, 
y G. C. Eastwood, secretary and treasurer; Stand- 
ard Plate Glass Company, by J. H. Troutman, secre- 
tary and treasurer; St. Louis Plate Glass Company, 
by W. J. Vance, secretary and assistant treasurer. 

61318 AP 09 9 



7870 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

THE STANDARD MIRROR CO., PITTSBURG, PA., RECOMMENDS 
A FLAT RATE PER SQUARE FOOT ON PLATE GLASS. 

PITTSBURG, PA., February 15, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The Standard Mirror Company owns and operates at 
High Point, N. C., a mirror factory which probably consumes more 
plate glass for mirror purposes than any other single factory in the 
country, and probably more than any company exclusive of the 
combined factories of one company. The great bulk of the sizes we 
use are such as are imported into this country, so that we feel our- 
selves in position to express an opinion on the changes in tariff on plate 
glass proposed. 

We have great difficulty endeavoring to get our entire supply of 
plate glass in this country, not because the quality can not be made, 
for it can, but because the manufacturers of plate glass insist they 
can not afford to cut down the quantity of large glass into small 
sizes necessary to take care of the American demand because these 
small sizes are sold in competition with foreign-made glass at less than 
American cost of manufacture. 

There is certainly no wayto arrive at a cost of manufacture of plate 
glass except a flat cost. We, therefore, feel a flat rate of duty per 
square foot will be much better than a graded tariff and will at the 
same time enable the American manufacturer to take better care of 
the American market without suffering a loss. Not being manu- 
facturers we do not know the cost of making plate glass, but our 
judgment is the tariff should be such as will take care of the differ- 
ence between American and foreign cost, plus a reasonable profit. 
Yours respectfully, 

STANDARD MIRROR COMPANY, 
By FRANK M. KNIGHT, President. 



SEMON BACHE & CO., NEW YORK CITY, SUBMIT AN ADDITIONAL 
STATEMENT RELATIVE TO PLATE GLASS. 

WEST AND HUBERT STREETS, NEW YORK, 

February 16, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Mr. Clause, of the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company, 
having filed an additional statement on February 2, regarding the 
glass tariff, we ask your acceptance of a few very brier additional 
remarks on our part. 

To most of their statements a reply is unnecessary. Having a case, 
we are not compelled to resort to abuse of our opponents. Accusa- 
tions of falsehood, intent to mislead, gross ignorance, etc., are hardly 
a substitute for argument in a matter which essentially is a question 
of arithmetic. In our statement of January 11 we quoted our 
authorities, chapter and verse, for every point made as far as it could 
possibly be done. We ask nothing better than that our statement 
and theirs be read side by side. 



PLATE GLASS SEMON BACHE & CO. 7871 

We have been tempted to reply to Mr. Clause in extenso, but on 
the whole there is no use in wrangling over details with the effect of 
making the discussion interminable. We think the true facts in the 
matter will be readily apparent upon careful reading of their state- 
ment of their case and our statement of our case. 

In their last statement there are two matters that require comment. 
One is the German tariff which they represent as designed to protect 
German plate glass against the pauper-produced Belgian product. To 
anyone familiar with the plate-glass business this is somewhat amus- 
ing. It is sufficient to point out that both the St. Roch and St. Go- 
bain companies, the former a Belgian concern, and the latter operat- 
ing both French and Belgian factories, also own and operate plants 
located in Germany. Either of these companies ships its glass to the 
United States from whichever plant the buyer elects, leaving the 
obvious inference that the manufacturing cost in all three countries is 
substantially the same, although they impose high tariffs on importa- 
tions of glass from one another. 

The other matter is whether in the 1900 census, the "value of 
products" means cost or selling price. This is easily disposed of. 
We quote from the Census Bulletin itself, that relating to glass 
manufacture (No. 228, July 3, 1902, p. 2): 

It is not to be assumed, however, that the difference between the aggregate of 
these sums (the itemized cost of material, labor, miscellaneous expense, etc,) and 
the value of the products is, in any sense, indicative of the profits on the manufac- 
ture of the products during the census year. The census schedule takes no cogni- 
zance of the cost of selling manufactured articles or of interest on capital invested, 
or of the mercantile losses incurred in the business, or of depreciation in plant. The 
value of the product given is the value as obtained or fixed at the factory. 

Comment is siiperfluous. The value of the products as given in 
the census is obviously the selling price. 

Incidentally, Mr. Clause's figures to refute the conclusions to be 
drawn from the census of 1900 as to the selling price are an excel- 
lent illustration of the inaccuracy and unreliability of his own state- 
ments. 

Mr. Clause is on record to the effect that there has been a very 
great increase in cost since the year 1900, and furthermore to the 
effect that the earnings of the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company have 
been largely derived from auxiliary sources of revenue, among which 
one of the most important was their coal properties. 

In his last statement he says that of the profit of $2,026,607.94 
earned in 1900, the branch warehouses contributed $1,086,414.54, 
leaving a profit of $940,193.40 earned by the manufacture of 
13,637,146 square feet of plate glass at a selling price at the factory 
of SO. 3877 per square foot, and by the operation of their coal prop- 
erties. 

In the first place, the thirteen million odd feet at Mr. Clause's 
alleged selling price of $0.3877 per square foot figure a total of 
$5,287,121. The census of 1900 gives the total value of the 16,883, 78 
square feet produced in the United States in that year as $5,158,598, 
which is considerably less than Mr. Clause's statement of the value 
of the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company's product alone. 

Mr. Clause's company provide'd ten-thirteenths of the figures for 
the 1900 census. In regard to the total quantity produced, the 
census and Mr. Clause's statement agree very closely. The wide 
divergence in values is certainly mysterious. 



7872 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

Going back to Mr. Clause's statement that there was a profit of 
$940,193.40 in 1900 earned jointly by plate-glass manufacture and 
profit on coal properties, we will assume from Mr. Clause's frequent 
reference to tnese coal properties as among his company's most 
important sources of revenue that they earned, say, one-half of this 
$940,193.40. This leaves us about $470,000 earned in the manufac- 
ture of plate glass, which on that product of 13,637,146 square feet 
for that year gives us an average profit per square foot or $0.0345. 
This, deducted from his alleged selling price of $0.3877 per square 
foot, leaves us a cost of $0.3532 per square foot. If this is the case, 
what becomes of Mr. Clause's assertion that the cost has greatly 
increased since 1900? 

The fact is that if the coal and gas properties, which are described 
by Mr. Clause as the "best in western Pennsylvania," etc., yielded 
anything more than a negligible profit in 1900 the cost of manufac- 
turing plate glass has not increased since that year, but has decreased 
according to Mr. Clause's own figures. Even if "our fine gas and 
coal properties" did not pay a cent of profit in 1900, and all this 
profit of $940,193.40 was earned in the manufacture of plate glass, 
still the increase in cost since that year, according to Air. Clause's 
own figures, is only about three-fourths of 1 cent per square foot, 
which can not be described as a great increase. 

In short, if we assume that the coal and gas properties earned no 
profit worth mentioning in 1900, they disappear as "important 
auxiliary sources of revenue." If they did earn a substantial profit, 
there has been no increase in cost of manufacture since 1900; in 
fact, there has been a decrease. We should like to see Mr. Clause 
apportion that profit of $940,193.40 between the manufacture of 
plate glass and the operation of the coal and gas properties so that 
it does not interfere with his other statements above quoted. 

It goes without saying that although we have used the foregoing 
figures as an illustration we have simply done so to demonstrate 
the eccentricities of Mr. Clause's argument and not as an expression 
of belief in them. We adhere to our opinion that the selling price 
as stated in the census of 1900 is correct. 

In this connection we call your attention to Bureau of the Census 
Bulletin No. 62, Census of Manufactures, 1905, page 27, in which it 
is stated "the price (of polished plate glass) per square foot in 1905 
was 29 cents as compared with 31 cents in 1900." We may add 
that the jobbing profit quoted for 1900 is simply preposterous and 
confirms our statement that the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company, 
with its many ramifications, can show any manufacturing cost or 
any profit in any department that it chooses. We doubt if the 
profits of the 12 oldest and largest and most prosperous glass jobbers 
in the United States in that year showed an aggregate even approach- 
ing that reported for the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company's 12 newly 
established branches. We, ourselves, are counted one of the largest 
and most successful jobbing concerns in the country, and in that 
year we did not net anywhere near the average amount alleged to 
be earned by the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company's branch ware- 
houses, and do not know of any jobbing concern that did. 

The fact is that the general tendency hi all business toward the 
elimination of the jobber has progressed as rapidly in the glass trade 
as in any other. At the present time any consumer who can buy a 



PLATE GLASS SEMON BACHE & CO. 7873 

carload quantity is in practically as good a position as the largest 
jobber in the country. 

Thanks are due to Mr. Clause for pointing out that his alleged 
cost of SO. 3265 per square foot covers the period from 1901 to 1907. 
His original statement of November 24, 1908, was so hazy on this 
subject that we had paid no attention to it. 

Reaffirming our statement that the average cost of SO. 3265 for the 
years 1901-1907 is absolutely incorrect as a practical matter, and 
that it can only be reached by a fantastic method of cost figuring, 
what in the name of common sense has the cost from 1901 to 1907 
to do with the problem before your committee, who are not holding 
an inquest into what the glass tariff should have been during those 
years, but are to decide as to what it justly shall be in the future? 

These years, 1901-1907, particularly the earlier part of the period, 
were those in which manufacturing conditions in the plate glass 
industry were revolutionized. Mr. Clause may minimize all he likes 
the practical effect of the improvements in manufacturing processes 
such as the continuous lehr, etc., but he practically admits them by 
laying stress upon the enormous expense to which his company has 
been put in remodeling and improving its plants. 

In addition to this, their annual statements contain items amount- 
ing to millions of dollars to cover depreciation caused by the aban- 
donment of some of their factories, which special depreciation has 
of course been included in their cost figures. 

Your committee is legislating probably for ten years to come 
possibly for a longer period. Mr. Clause's theory appears to be that 
during these coming years the public shall pay an annually increasing 
amount, many times over, for the blunders made by the last genera- 
tion of plate-glass manufacturers. 

In concluding the discussion, two vital matters stand out with 
special prominence. 

One is the stake the manufacturers are playing for. The produc- 
tion of plate glass in the United States is about 40,000,000 square 
feet. Thirty-five per cent of this, or about 14,000,000 square feet, 
are under 5 square feet in area. The importation in 1907, for 
instance, sizes under 5 square feet in area, was nearly 6,000,000 
square feet, making a total consumption in the United States in 
these sizes of 20,000,000 square feet annually. 

Using 1907 as an illustration, here is the arithmetic of the proposi- 
tion: 

The importations of these small sizes were 5,784,635 square feet, 
of a foreign value of $1,153,497, from which the Government received 
revenue amounting to $554,312. 

Adopt the manufacturers' proposed flat rate of 22 cents per square 
foot and these importations would practically cease, so that the 
Government would be deprived of half a million dollars revenue. 

The average advance in duty on these small sizes if the 22J-cent 
rate were adopted would be 13| cents per square foot, which, on the 
annual consumption of 20,000,000 square feet in small sizes, is equal 
to 2,700,000. 

Therefore the only possible benefit to the United States by ad- 
vancing the duty would be to get about 6,000,000 square feet of 
glass, of a total value of $1,150,000, made in this country. For this 
it is proposed to give the manufacturers the opportunity of collecting 



7874 S( III IHLE B EARTHS, EARTH KN WARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

an additional tax from the consumer of $2,700,000, besides depriving 
the Government of the revenue derived from the present importations. 

The other vital fact is that the whole of the manufacturers' argu- 
ment is based upon a sweeping claim of an average cost of $0.3265 
per square foot, no details whatever being given, and even this cost 
based upon the operations of a very large company with many fields 
of activity, and even then upon the period from 1901 to 1907. 

We submit that in view of the demonstrated inconsistencies in 
Mr. Clause's various statements as shown in his last communica- 
tion, that it is absolutely essential that the plate-glass manufacturers 
should be required to prove their case and to produce a detailed 
statement of cost and subject it to public criticism. 

Furthermore, we respectfully submit that the operations of a 
single company are hardly conclusive, particularly a company with 
so many ramifications as the Pit tsburg Plate Glass Company. There 
are a number of prosperous plate glass manufacturers who, we believe, 
confine themselves exclusively to the manufacture of plate glass, as 
for instance, the Heidenkamp Mirror Company (this company does 
not manufacture any mirrors, in spite of its name), the Edward 
Ford Plate Glass Company, the Allegheny Plate Glass Company, 
and the Saginaw Plate Glass Company. 

A cost arrived at from the operations of any of these companies 
would in any event be free from complexity. All these companies 
were established during the period from 1899 to 1902, and their 
cost in recent years would undoubtedly be a fair guide to actual 
conditions in the industry. 

We submit, however, that in any case a detailed cost should be 
supplied. By this we do not mean that a manufacturer should be 
asked to disclose any trade secrets, but simply show in reasonable 
detail the items of which his aggregate cost is composed. 

We reiterate that we stand firmly upon the Republican platform 
of 1908. Justice to the manufacturer requires that he be granted 
protection in accordance with that platform. The manufacturer, 
however, is asking for protection to an extent apparently five or 
six times greater than he is entitled to, and we submit that justice 
to the consumer requires that that protection be based upon ascer- 
tained facts and not upon sweeping unsubstantiated statements of 
the manufacturers. 

Respectfully submitted. 

SEMON BACHE & Co., 

F. J. GOERTXER, Sales Manager. 



LOUISVILLE (KY.) MIRROR MAKERS SUBMIT NEW CLASSI- 
FICATION AND SUGGESTED RATES FOR PLATE GLASS. 

LOUISVILLE, KY., February 20, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We, the undersigned manufacturers of mirror plates 
and large consumers of American and foreign plate glass of Louisville, 
Ky., hereby respectfully petition you to make only such revision of 
the glass schedule now covered by paragraphs 102 and 112, inclusive, 



PLATE GLASS LOUISVILLE MIRROR MAKERS. 7875 

of the tariff act of 1897 as will not only continue to afford us a just 
and equitable protection against foreign mirror competition, but also 
a protection against a possible monopoly on the part of the American 
plate-glass manufacturers, which would be feasible under an increase 
of present rates, or under such a change or classification of the import 
duties on plate glass, which would establish a flat duty at a high and 
inconsistent rate. 

We favor the elimination of the present bracket schedule and the 
establishment instead of a 1 to 12 bracket and an over 12 square 
feet bracket, making only two brackets in all. 

Under a flat rate of duty at 22^ cents per square foot, importations, 
especially in sizes up to 5 square feet, now covered by the two smaller 
brackets, and which constituted 86 per cent of the entire importation 
in 1907, would practically cease, and the government revenue from 
import plate glass would after a short period be materially reduced or 
almost entirely cut off. 

The contention of the American plate-glass manufacturers that they 
are not amply protected on the two smaller bracket sizes, now dutiable 
at 8 and 10 cents per square foot, is undoubtedly true, but the extraor- 
dinary high rates on the two larger bracket sizes, now dutiable at 
22^ and 35 cents per square foot, has more than offset the inadequate 
rates of protection, and of which they have seldom been able to take 
full advantage. 

We, however, agree with the plate-glass manufacturers that the 
present bracket schedule (which dates back as far as the tariff of 1883, 
when the plate-glass industry in this country was in its infancy, and 
when polished cylinder and crown glass was extensively used and 
represented a large proportion of the importations) is now and has 
long since been an improper classification for plate glass, and it has 
created a condition which makes the comparative selling prices of 
plates in the different bracket sizes at unjust and inequitable rates, 
which under the duty we recommend would be materially corrected 
and plate glass would then be sold on a much more honest and staple 
basis. 

We recommend the establishment of an import duty on the follow- 
ing basis, to wit, plate glass from 1 to 12 square feet, 15 cents per 
square foot; over 12 square feet, 30 cents per square foot. 

This, in our judgment, will fully protect the American plate-glass 
manufacturers against any and all lower cost conditions in Europe, 
and at which rate a fair and honest competition can still be maintained 
on the high grades of plate glass used for mirror purposes, which rep- 
resent our raw material and which the American manufacturers have 
not as yet been able to produce or furnish in sufficient quantities to 
meet the demands in this country and which quality or grades of plate 
glass has during the past eight or ten years represented almost the 
entire importations from Europe. 

Furthermore, the duty we recommend at the above-mentioned 
rate would be fair and just to all interests, including the public, and 
an equitable revision of the glass schedule, which would also not inter- 
fere or effect the government revenues now being derived from import 
plate glass, as any possible reduction in volume would be offset by the 
increased rates on the now two lower bracket sizes, which in the year 
1907 represented 86 per cent of all the importations. 



7876 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

In connection with the above, and in the event the duty we recom- 
mend on polished plate glass is favorably considered, it must of neces- 
sitv carry with it a corresponding change in paragraph 102, covering 
cylinder and crown glass, polished, and paragraph 105, covering cast 
polished plate silvered, cylinder and crown glass silvered, and looking- 
glass plates, and part of paragraph 112, covering mirrors not over 144 
square inches, with paragraphs 106 and 107 left unchanged. 
Trusting this petition will receive careful consideration, we are 
Yours, respectfully, 

J. B. MASSON & Co. MIRROR WORKS, 
Per F. P. SEILER, Secretary. 

LOUISVILLE SILVERING AND BEVELING Co., 
By C. GEORGEL, Proprietor. 

BILLS MIRROR PLATE Co., 
By H. E. BILLS, Manager. 

FALLS CITY MIRROR WORKS, 
By J. L. STAIB, President. 

NATIONAL MIRROR AND SAND BLASTING Co., 
By FRED BURGE, President and Treasurer. 



W. L. KANN, FOR COMMITTEE OF PLATE GLASS MANUFAC- 
TURERS, FILES PETITIONS OF PLATE GLASS JOBBERS. 

PITTSBURG, PA., March 9, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We beg to hand you herewith the petitions of various 
prominent plate glass jobbers of the United States, which have been 
forwarded to me with the request that they should be sent to you. 

Will you kindly give them consideration and have acknowledg- 
ment made of the receipt of same to me, and advise whether or not 
same will appear as a portion of the printed record, and oblige. 
Sincerely yours, 

W. L. KANN, 
By COMMITTEE OF PLATE GLASS MANUFACTURERS. 



230 to 240 SOUTH THIRTIETH STREET, 

Philadelphia, March 5, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Because of the present discussion of a change in 
tariff on plate glass, the undersigned, being among the largest jobbers 
of plate glass in the United States, feel that you might wish to hear 
from us on the subject. 

We believe firmly in protection to American industries. A flat 
rate of tariff will in no way interfere with the transaction of our 
business nor will it place any burden unjustly on the consumer, but, 
on the other hand, \vill onable the manufacturer to supply plate glass 
in quantities and sizes as required by the country. They have 



PLATE GLASS. 7877 

always claimed that they could not furnish the small sizes, except 
at a great loss, under the Dingley tariff. 

We are familiar enough with the process of manufacture to realize 
that a flat cost is the only kind that can be figured and, therefore, a 
flat rate of duty to take care of the difference oetween cost of manu- 
facture in this country and abroad, plus a reasonable profit, should 
be the proper solution. 

Respectfully submitted. 

HIRES TURNER GLASS COMPANY, 
S. C. GILMORE, Secretary. 

Petitions similar to the above were received from the following: 
Forman, Ford & Co., Minneapolis, Minn., A. E. Clenhem, vice- 
president; Stewart Carey Glass Co., J. N. Carey, president, Indian- 
apolis, Ind. ; Campbell Glass and Paint Co., A. N. Neilson, vice- 
president; Condie-Neale Glass Co., H. D. Condie, president; West 
St. Louis Glass Co., D. J. Murnam, president; M. Kahn Glass Co., 
Milton Kahn, president; Hadley Dean Glass Co., L. G. Hadley, 
president, all of St. Louis. 



THE PITTSBURGH, PA., PLATE GLASS COMPANY FILES SUPPLE- 
MENTAL BRIEF IN ANSWER TO STATEMENTS MADE. 

PITTSBURG, PA., March 9, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We note that Semon Bache & Co. have filed another 
brief with you relative to our request for proper protection in the 
proposed bill under consideration by your committee. 

They seem to think that argument and arithmetic are all that is 
involved or necessary (quite irrespective of whether they are based 
on fact or on mere assumed knowledge of conditions). This, how- 
ever, is not a question of argument or arithmetic, but a simple ques- 
tion of facts, and we have given you nothing else. If these facts 
show ignorance on their part, it is well to bear in mind that they 
admitted when personally before your committee that they have 
never been engaged in the manufacture of plate glass and know 
nothing about it. 

The burden of their last brief seems to hinge principally on two 
matters. 

First, the German tariff, concerning w r hich Semon Bache & Co. 
offer no information or argument which in any wise weakens the 
prime fact, that the German tariff is conceded to have been one of 
the most carefully and scientifically constructed tariffs that has ever 
been enacted, and that this tariff does grant the German manufac- 
turers a flat rate of $0.1242 per square foot protection on all sizes, 
irrespective of area. The fact that some of the works in Germany 
were built by French and Belgian capitalists emphasizes the fair and 
liberal attitude of the German Government toward those engaged in 
the industry; and it also shows that their tariff has worked to the 
benefit of the country, because it compelled the St. Roch Company 
to build a works in Germany in order to hold that market. Had it 
not been for the German tariff, I take it, that the Belgian companies 



7878 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

would have manufactured this glass at home and exported it to Ger- 
many. This is just what Semon Bache & Co. would like to have the 
foreign manufacturers do with regard to the American market. They 
\\ oulTl like to have the duty put down so low that American factories 
could be thrown out of business and the American market supplied 
\\ith foreign glass, thereby increasing their Business as importers, out 
of which they have made millions. It is a significant fact that, not- 
\\ ithstanding their wealth and their arguments about the large profits 
they claim have been made by the American manufacturers, they have 
never in vested, a dollar in the industry, although they have been 
invited to do so repeatedly. The rates of duty they suggest, if applied 
to the imports of the last few years, would only have yielded a revenue 
equal to half the protection afforded by the German Government, 
and with the much higher rates of wages and cost of production in 
tlu's country than exist in Germany, we certainly ought to receive 
much higher protection under the proposed new tariff than Germany 
provides. 

Their statement that they "stand firmly upon the Republican 
platform of 1908" is manifestly insincere. The very heavy imports 
of plate glass under 5 square feet are unmistakable evidence that the 
present duty is too low and does not measure the difference in cost 
between domestic and foreign cost, let alone the promised margin of 
profit; and yet they propose a reduction of 50 per cent. It is easy 
to see where their interests as importers stand. 

The second point that seems to give them special concern is the 
fact that we have tried to make it plain to you in our last brief that 
they knew better than to lay before you arguments based upon a 
supposed selling price for the year 1900 of 30 cents per square foot. 
To justify their error, they go into an elaborate argument and calcu- 
lation covering a page and a half, which closes with the statement 
that 

We adhere to our opinion that the selling price as stated in the census of 1900 is 
correct. 

Here again it is not a question of argument and aiithmetic; it is a 
question of fact, and we stated that fact in our previous brief when 
we said that this company received for its factory product during 
the year 1900 $0.3877 per square foot, and just to show you that they 
know better and that they are trying to mislead, we quote the factory 
stock sheet and cut-size prices that were current in the year 1900: 





Stock 
sheets, per 
square foot. 


Cut sizes, 
per square 
foot. 


Sizes from 1 to 3 feet 


Cents. 
19 


Cents. 
22 


Sizes from 3 to 5 feet 


22 


26 


Sizes from 5 to 10 feet 


40 


44 


Sizes from 10 to 2ft foot 


54 


59 


Sizes from 25 to 50 feet 


58 


64 


Sizes from 50 to 100 feet 


63 


68 


Sizes from 100 to 120 feet 


65 


76 









The cut sizes were f. o. b. factory; the stock sizes were less freight, 
which would mean a deduction of from 1 to 2 cents per square foot 
on stock sheets, according to the location of the factory making ship- 
ment. 



PLATK GLASS PITTSBURG PLATE GLASS CO. 7879 

A most casual examination of these prices, even without any arith- 
metic, is enough to convince anyone ex?ept Semon Bache & Co., 
who, by reason of their long connection with the business, know it to 
be true that these prices would of necessity yield a much higher aver- 
age price than 30 cents. Of course their purpose in claiming that 
30 cents was the selling price is to sustain their erroneous contention 
that the cost of production is lower than it actually is. Inasmuch, 
therefore, as their facts and arithmetic are both wrong, the whole 
chain of argument by which they reach their conclusions is fallacious. 

As additional proof on the same subject, if it be necessary, we 
quote from their brief : 

In the first place, the thirteen million odd feet at Mr. Clause's alleged selling price 
of $0.3877 per square foot figure a total of $5,287,121. The census of 1900 gives the 
total value of the 16,883,578 square feet produced in the United States in that year 
as $5.158,598, which is considerably less than Mr. Clause's statement of the value of 
the Pittsburg Plate Glass Company's production alone. 

Inasmuch as our sales actually amounted to $5,287,362.50, this 
conclusively proves that the total value of the total American pro- 
duction taken from the census had reference to cost of production 
and not to sales. 

As to their paragraph w r ith regard to the profits of our jobbing busi- 
ness for the year 1900, which they compare with their own profits 
(without giving any figures), I wish to say that, while their concern 
has been in business for a very long period, there was an interim, of 
which the year 1900 was a part, during which they were not extensively 
engaged in the handling or plate glass as jobbers. In fact, if we are 
correctly informed, their jobbing business in plate glass during that 
year was very small. Hence a comparison of their business for that 
year is not relevant, and we venture the statement that, so far as the 
jobbers of the United States who handle American plate glass exten- 
sively are concerned, there has been no year within the last twelve 
or fifteen years when they, as a whole, have done such a profitable 
business in plate glass as was done that year. It was also a very 
profitable year for the jobbing of American window glass, which con- 
tributed to our profits three of our leading warehouses alone making 
over $150,000 in jobbing art and window glass but in which Semon 
Bache & Co. did not participate, as they have preferred to import 
and handle foreign window glass, as well as plate glass. Their atti- 
tude has always been hostile to the American industry, because on 
the whole they have found their policy immensely profitable in the 
long run. We do not think our results were at all out of line with the 
profits made proportionately by other well-managed jobbing houses 
for the same favorable period, and attach hereto, marked "Exhibit A," 
an affidavit from Messrs. Tyler & Hippach (one of several prominent 
jobbers in Chicago), showing that they made $82,269.04 that year, 
which is proportionately quite as much as our warehouses made that 
year (1900). Unfortunately, however, other years, as a rule, have 
been very much less satisfactorv. 

1 he cost given by us when before your committee in November, 
1908, covered the seven years immediately preceding, and is corrob- 
orated by the statements and brief field with you February 11, 1909, 
and signed by all the other manufacturers individually. The cost 
for 1908 could not be included because the year had not expired. 
Our cost for the year 1908 was $0.2871 per square foot, as actually 



7880 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

shown by our books. Not a penny was added or deducted in order 
that the figures might have a bearing upon the tariff question. The 
cost you will notice is a little more than 10 per cent lower than the 
average cost for the period referred to; but we had a better gas sup- 
ply than usual so much so that we were able to run our boilers 
with gas for a part of the time, for the first time in many years, and 
most Kinds of materials were lower during 1908, due to the business 
depression following the panic, than they had been during boom 
times, and also that labor being plentiful we were able to make some 
reductions in wages and to weed out inefficient workmen and replace 
them with men of greater efficiency, and the output per man was 
mu<i better than it had been any year for some time. When labor 
was scarce and insubordinate, due to the fact that every man knew 
he opuld get employment immediately should he lose his job, it was 
impossible to replace men, even if they were inefficient, or to main- 
tain such discipline as was necessary to get out a full production. 
With the return of boom times, which we trust will come with the 
creation of a satisfactory tariff, the prices of materials and wages 
will again advance and these advantages will disappear. In consid 
ering any problem of this kind a period of years, covering varying 
conditions rather than any brief interval, should be taken into con- 
sideration in order to reach an equitable conclusion. 

As to their statement "that there has been a very great increase 
in cost since the year r900" this is not a correct reference to our 
statement. We said there had been a large increase, beginning with 
(not since) the year 1900. In fact, the increase started in 1899, and 
was greater in 1900 than in any other one year during the period 
referred to. 

There is still another effort to mislead your committee in their 
arithmetic about " an additional tax from the consumer of $2,700,000." 
We have at no time stated that the production of plate glass in the 
United States was 40,000,000 feet. The consumption, however, is 
about that figure perhaps somewhat in excess of that. The imports 
(6,000,000 feet) to which they refer can not be added, because the 
total consumption under 5 square feet already includes the imports, 
and the total is considerably less than 20,000,000 feet. Furthermore, 
their conclusion would be wrong even if the consumption were 
20,000,000 feet, because, in the first place, the increase in duty would 
not be 13 cents per square foot. As a matter of fact, the average 
duty collected for the year 1907 was about 12 cents, so that the 
increase suggested' by the manufacturers would only be about 10 
cents instead of 13 cents. With an increase of 10 cents per square 
foot, as against the average duty heretofore collected, the fact would 
still remain that the manufacturer could not get his increase on all 
of the glass under 5 square feet actually consumed, because it is a 
fact which can not be controverted, and which Semon Bache & Co. 
very well know, that a very large part of this glass has always been 
sold to the consumer at prices very much below that which would 
be represented by the full addition of the duty to the selling price. 
The auty has only applied to those high grades of glass which are 
used for mirror purposes, all the other glass under 5 square feet in 
area used for other purposes having always been sold at prices that 
were very much lower, irrespective of the duty. Furthermore, their 
conclusion loses sight entirely of the fact that the proposed tariff 



PLATE GLASS GLASS MARBLES. 7881 

would make a large reduction in the duty on all sizes over 10 square 
feet, which in any event using their own kind of arithmetic, would 
largely offset the conclusion reached. 

They again allude to our "enormous expense" in "remodeling 
plants," to depreciation charges "amounting to millions" and that 
'the public shall pay" "for blunders made by the last generation 
of plate-glass manufacturers," etc. We wish again to state that our 
charges have been entirely reasonable, not exceeding 5 per cent in 
the aggregate, and that we have simply done what every manufac- 
turing business must do if it is to perpetuate itself, i. e., we have 
made those changes that have naturally grown out of experience and 
the- development of the business, such as are necessary to keep 
abreast of modern methods and improvements. If these be blunders, 
then all progress is fruitless, and tne only wise course is to wait until 
stagnation and dry rot put us out of business. If a business will not 
pay for its own natural development what would become of it? 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

PITTSBURG PLATE GLASS COMPANY, 
: Per W. L. CLAUSE, President. 



EXHIBIT A. 

MARCH 4, 1909. 

Louis A. Hippach, secretary and treasurer of Tyler & Hippach (Incorporated), an 
Illinois corporation, states that during the year 1900 the profits of said corporation 
were $82,269.04, and that these figures were taken direct from the books of the corpo- 
ration of that year. 

Louis A. HIPPACH. 
STATE OF ILLINOIS, County of Cook, ss: 

Louis A. Hippach, being duly sworn, saya that the above statement is true and 
correct. 

[SEAL.] WILLIAM CAMPBELL, 

Notary Public. 
My commission expires June 26, 1911. 



GLASS MARBLES. 

[Paragraph 112.] 

THE STROBE! & WILKEN CO., NEW YORK CITY, OBJECTS TO 
SUGGESTED INCREASE OF DUTY ON GLASS MARBLES. 

591 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, 

January 23, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WATS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Noting an application for an increase of duty on 
glass marbles, appearing in report of the Tariff Hearings of January 
5, 1909, we deem it advisable to call to your attention what percentage 
of increase is demanded. 

You will find from Exhibit A, hereto attached, that the rate of 
duty proposed by Daniel C. Ripley, president of the United States 
Glass Company, would average from 94 per cent to 273 per cent. 



7882 SCHEDULE B EAHTHS. K.MiTII KXWABE, AND GLASSWARE. 

We >\i>li further to state Unit the entire importation of glass marl>]<>- 
in tin- year 1905 amounted to 21,412; in 1906, $23,975. \Yr have 
no report as to the importations in the years 1907 and 1908, but 
know that it has fallen off. 

Glass marbles that are imported are entirely different styles than 
those made in the United States, and although we sell the imported, 
we also supply our customers with the domestic makes as well. 

To our knowledge there have been but two makers of glass marbles 
in this country, Messrs. M. F. Christensen & Son, Akron, Ohio, 
and Barberton Glass Novelty Company, Barberton, Ohio. The 
latter factory discontinued last year, but we understand intends to 
resume. 

We believe that there are as many glass marbles made here as are 
imported, and, as already mentioned, styles being entirely different, 
we see no reason why the duty should be increased, or to ask for a 
prohibitive duty such as has been proposed. 
Yours, respectfully, 

THE STROBEL & WILKEN Co., 
E. STROBEL, President. 



EXHIBIT A. 



Size. 


Weight 
per 1,000. 


Dutiable 
value per 
1.000. 


Classification. 


Old duty 
at 35 per 
cent. 


Proposed duty 


At 25 per 
cent and 12 
cents per 
pound. 


At 25 per 
cent and 6 
cents per 
pound. 


Equiva- 
lent. 


00 


Povnd. 
6 
10 
16 
24 
38 
60 
90 
130 
172 
240 
Per grots. 
38.4 
55.2 
67.2 
88.8 


$87.47 
96.21 
113. 70 
153.93 
218.85 
349.86 
472.31 
612.25 
787.19 
1,137.05 

251.90 
477.85 
524.79 
629.74 


Below 2 pounds 
per dozen. 

Weight above 2 
pounds per 
dozen. 


$30.61 
33.68 
39.79 
53.89 
76.53 
122.46 
165.31 
214.29 
275.52 
397.96 

88.16 
132.25 
183.68 
220.42 


S93.86 
144.05 
220.42 
326.48 
510.66 
807.46 
1,197.07 
1,713.05 




Percent. 
113 8 
158.8 
193.8 
212.1 
233.4 
230.8 
253.5 
273.5 
156.1 
151.7 

116.5 
94.3 
101.8 
109.6 


o 




1 




2 . 




3 




4 




a 




6 




7 


$1,228.78 
1,724.26 

293.35 
450.66 
534.40 
690.23 


8 




9 .. 




10 




11 




12 






I 



M. F. CHRISTENSEN & SON, AKRON, OHIO, ASK A SPECIFIC CLAS- 
SIFICATION AND INCREASE FOR GLASS MARBLES. 

AKRON, OHIO, February 8, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. O. 

GENTLEMEN: We respectfully submit our views in the matter of 
manufacturing glass marbles and caster balls. 

In October, 1904, we started a small factory here in Akron, Ohio, 
for the exclusive purpose of manufacturing this product. From that 
time on we have labored along, but to great disadvantage with our 
foreign competitors, it being possible to put imported glass marbles 
on our American market; for example, No. imported glass marbles 



GLASS MARBLES STAINED GLASS. 7883 

are offered to the trade in this country at $1.57 per thousand against 
our No. glass marbles, with an actual cost of manufacturing here 
of $2.80 per thousand. The principal element in our problem being 
labor, at which we also labor to great disadvantage with our foreign 
competitors in the price we are compelled to pay for it; we have, how- 
ever, maintained our unequal struggle with manufacturers from 
abroad in such a way as to keep our industry alive, but scarcely 
more; we are, however, capable of survival but of almost indefinite 
extension if, during the crucial period the principle of giving adequate 
protection to our industry during the time it is actually needed it 
applies to our case. We feel that this industry is one which fulfills 
all the conditions required for the free and generous application of 
the protective principle ; it is literally an infant industry ; the protec- 
tion which it absolutely requires is a protection against foreign poorly 
paid hand labor, and in favor of domestic high class skilled labor. 

The consumption annually of marbles and caster balls in the United 
States is very great, and an adequate duty should therefore be placed 
on all glass marbles and caster balls imported into the United States. 
In our case we are not demanding, but respectfully ask, your honor- 
able Committee on Ways and Means to consider for us a duty of $1 
per thousand, and, if possible, the retention of the present ad valorem 
duty on all glass marbles and caster balls. 

We would also ask that a new schedule in the tariff law be made to 
cover glass marbles and caster balls, if such is not upon record 
already. 

Yours, very respectfully, 

M. F. CHRISTENSEN & SON, 
Per M. F. CHRISTENSEN. 



STAINED GLASS. 

[Paragraph 112.] 

IMPORTERS REQUEST THAT STAINED GLASS FOR CHURCHES 
BE MADE DUTIABLE AT TWENTY-FIVE PER CENT. 

32 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY, 

February 4, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

House of Representatives. 

GENTLEMEN: On behalf of the importers of stained window gla^s 
and stained-glass windows, I beg to submit the following brief in 
reply to briefs filed on behalf of various manufacturers of stained- 
glass windows in this country: 

Prior to the McKinley tariff of 1890, stained-glass windows por- 
traying biblical and religious subjects imported by or for churches, 
or for presentation to churches, were imported free of duty under 
provisions in the free lists of the various tariffs for paintings imported 
for the use or for presentation to societies incorporated for religious 
purposes. 

When the McKinley tariff was formed, the manufacturers of stained 
g'ass in this country made urgent representations to Congress that 



7884 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

the stained-glass window industry was an infant industry in this 
country entitled to protection, and that if protection were accorded 
to it it could be developed and largely supply the demand in this 
country. Moved by these representations, the committee made a 
specific provision for stained-glass windows and stained window gla?s 
at a duty of 45 per cent, and expressly exempted from the paragraph 
providing for paintings presented to churches stained window glass 
and stained-glass windows. 

The paragraph providing for paintings imported by or for the use 
of churches did not contain this exception, but the Supreme Court 
held, in the case of United States v. Perry (146 U. S., 71), that in 
view of the other provisions of Congress this exception must be con- 
sidered as implied in the paragraph providing for importations for 
churches. 

From 1890 until the present time the rates of duty asked for by 
the manufacturers of stained-glass windows have been continued, 
and the prediction made by those who asked for protection has been 
verified, and the stained-glass window industry in this country has 
thrived and developed until there are now a few large houses and a 
number of smah" ones who are doing a large and prosperous business 
in this line. 

In spite of the way hi which their industry has thrived and devel- 
oped under the present duty during the past eighteen years, the manu- 
facturers are now demanding increased protection. An example of 
the moderation of their demands is furnished by the application of 
the Von Gerichten Art Glass Company, of Columbus, Ohio, whose 
application will be found in tariff hearings. They ask that there be 
substituted for the present duty a specific rate or $2 per square foot 
and 20 per cent ad valorem, with the statement that this will just 
bring up the cost of the European window in New York with that 
of the American manufacturer, allowing a reasonable profit. 

This company furnishes in its application a comparative state- 
ment of European and American cost. In this statement, under the 
number 5, they state that 165 square feet are used for the window, 
and that the total European cost is $120.50. It requires a very 
simple mathematical calculation to see that if a tax or $2 a square 
foot is put on 165 square feet it will amount to $330, and that if 20 
per cent ad valorem is assessed on a foreign cost of $120.50 it will 
amount to $24.10. Adding these two proposed duties together we 
have a duty of $354.60 proposed for a window on which the foreign 
value is $120.20, a duty of 294 per cent ad valorem. 

It is certainly a very startling proposition that the duty on any 
article where a prosperous industry has been built up in this country 
should suddenly be changed from 45 per cent ad valorem to 294 per 
cent ad valorem upon the claim that the established industry needs 
protection. 

It is a matter of common knowledge that with slight exceptions 
the use of stained-glass windows is for churches. It has been the 
policy of Congress, recognized in innumerable tariff acts, to favor the 
cause of religion by allowing the free importation of articles intended 
to be used for religious purposes. The striking out of all provisions 
for free entry as to stained-glass windows imported for churches in the 
tariff act of 1890 and continued in succeeding tariffs was a pronounced 
and radical exception to the general policy of Congress, and we respect- 



STAINED GLASS NEW YORK IMPOETEES. 7885 

fully submit that it went far enough in 1890 and that it should not 
be extended any further. 

The present tariff, while it has imposed a severe and in many 
instances very burdensome tax upon churches or upon those whose 
religious inclinations have prompted them to make gifts of beautiful 
devotional works of art to churches, has afforded the Government a 
substantial revenue. The demand of the protected manufacturers 
now is that the tariff shall be placed so high as to practically bar out 
all foreign stained-glass windows, and compel the churches, and those 
who would be disposed to enrich their edifices by gifts of an artistic 
character, to either go without this part of their church decoration or 

Eay whatever price for such articles the domestic manufacturers see 
t to charge. In other words, the cause of religion is to suffer in 
order to enrich a few manufacturers. 

We respectfully protest against the yielding to any such demand 
by Congress. 

We urgently insist that the present duty on this class of article 
should be reduced and not increased. These manufacturers have 
had eighteen years in which to put their industry on its feet. They 
have not only succeeded in putting it on its feet, but have made it a 
very strong and thriving industry. They are more than holding their 
own against foreign competition, and instead of importuning Congress 
for further protection they ought to be disposed to make concessions. 

It will be noted that these manufacturers claim that by enormously 
increasing the duty the Government would receive at least five 
tunes as much revenue as at present, besides placing the American 
establishments in a position to compete with the cheaper grades of 
Europe. How a duty of 294 per cent ad valorem would increase the 
revenues it is difficult to conceive. We can not see why it would not 
in effect prohibit foreign importations. It would undoubtedly place 
the American establishments in a position to compete not only with 
the cheaper but with any grades of stained-glass windows from 
Europe. 

The figures that are given in the application of these domestic manu- 
facturers for labor hi various countries in Europe are accompanied by 
no statement as to the authority on which they are given, and we are 
satisfied that they are very far from being correct. We submit that 
hearsay evidence on this question of wages or cost of production should 
not be accepted. It should always be borne in mind, in connection 
with these statements as to the lower wages paid to European work- 
men, that the American manufacturer requires and obtains from his 
workmen nearly twice as much work in a given number of hours as 
can be obtained from corresponding workmen in a European estab- 
lishment. 

It will be noted that none of the manufacturers applying for 
increased protection furnish any figures as to the increase of their 
business since 1890, the amount of their profits, and, if they are incor- 
porated, the dividends which they are paying on their stock. In 
short, as to all the facts that are peculiarly within their own knowledge 
they are reticent to the last degree, whereas as to those on which they 
can have no actual knowledge they are exceedingly glib. 

We respectfully submit that there is no reason why Congress should 
depart any further than it has already done from its policy of accord- 

61318 AP 09 10 



7886 SCHEDULE B BABTHS, EAKTHENWAKE, AND GLASSWARE. 

ing special privileges to religious or charitable institutions; that the 
stained-glass industry has had eighteen years of high protection to 
enable it to gain a foothold; that it has gained a very firm foothold 
and is to-day a well-established and prosperous business, and that the 
time has now come when it is entirely proper that Congress should 
withdraw from it some of the protection it has been enjoying instead 
of further extending that protection. 

It should be borne in mind that the competition between foreign 
and domestic stained glass, which is the subject of the present dispute, 
exists only as to stained-glass windows imported for churches, etc. 
As to the opalescent and ornamental glass, such as is used in private 
houses, public buildings, etc., the domestic manufacturer now enjoys 
a monopoly, and the foreign houses have not attempted and do not 
now seeK to compete with him and ask no change in the existing law. 

We therefore respectfully urge that the duty on stained-glass win- 
dows and stained window glass m paragraph 1 12 be, as to importations 
for the use of or by order of churches, reduced from 45 to 25 per cent 
ad valorem. This is the only change we request. 

W. WICKHAM SMITH, 
Counsel for Importers of Stained Window 

Glass and Stained-Glass Windows. 



MARBLE. 

[Paragraph 114.] 

THE ALABAMA MARBLE COMPANY, GANTTS QUARRY, ALA., 
URGES RETENTION OF DUTY ON MARBLE. 

GANTTS QUABRY, ALA., January 28, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WATS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The Alabama Marble Company respectfully invites 
attention to the memorial presented to your honorable committee 
under date of November 23, 1908, at Washington, D. C., by the 
majority of the concerns interested in the marble trade in the United 
States, this company being one of the signers of the said memorial. 
We strongly urge upon your honorable committee the favorable con- 
sideration of the requests contained in this memorial, all of which we 
consider very conservative and just and vital to the success of the 
marble industry in this country. We also desire to submit for con- 
sideration the following facts relative to the marble industry in the 
State of Alabama, which we believe are of sufficient importance to 
justify special consideration: 

There are in Talladega County, Ala., extensive deposits of marble, 
extending all the way from Talladega Springs, on the Coosa River, to 
the vicinity of Talladega, a distance of nearly 40 miles. The marble 
is generally white or blue, with more or less clouding and veining. 
It generally lies under the valley, at a depth of from 2 to 50 or 60 feet, 
with occasional outcroppings at intervals. There is reason to believe 
that there are several deposits of different geological ages, but a 
thorough survey of the county for marble has never been made. 
There is no question, however, that there are enormous quantities of 



MARBLE ALABAMA MARBLE CO. 7887 

this stone, sufficient, if developed, to supply a large demand for many 
generations. 

At a number of isolated points on what is believed to be one huge 
deposit quarries have been opened in years past and operated on a 
small scale by very primitive methods, for the production mainly of 
tombstones for local use. But all of these old workings have been 
abandoned except two. One of these is at Gantts Quarry, Ala., on 
property now owned by this company, and the other is near Talladega, 
owned and operated by the Talladega Marble Company. This com- 
pany is the only one attempting to operate on a really commercial 
scale at the present time. We have invested a very large sum of 
money, have installed a modern and expensive plant for quarrying 
and finishing the marble, and have built up what promises to be a 
large and flourishing business, provided the present scale of selling 
prices can be maintained. 

Alabama marble is, so far as the nature of the stone is concerned, 
of peculiarly fine and beautiful quality. But it lies deep in the 
ground and is expensive to quarry. Much of it is of low grade, due 
to the large amount of objectionable coloring matter. The low- 
grade stone is so mixed with the high grades that there is much 
waste, and the marble must be actually sawed before it can be prop- 
erly classified and graded. A single block generally yields two or 
three grades of marble, and, as is the ease with most American mar- 
bles, much of it has to be sold at or below the cost of production. 
The high-grade stone, which can be sold in competition with the high- 
priced imported marbles, is not sufficient in quantity to maintain a 
profitable business if its price is lowered or if the market for the low- 
grade stone is destroyed or seriously impaired. The high-grade 
stone can not be obtained at all without quarrying the low grade 
along with it. 

Our property is located far inland, where we do not get the benefit 
of water transportation, and as a matter of fact there are few large 
markets in this country which we can reach with as low a total freight 
rate as Italian marble. In fact the existing tariff does not do much 
more than equalize the freight rates. Our rate to New York, the 
best market in this country, is 60 cents per cubic foot; to Ohio River 
points, from 32 to 40 cents; to Washington, 46 cents; to New Orleans, 
32 cents. These are carload rates; smaller shipments take much 
higher rates. 

In Italy the marble is exposed high up on the mountain sides. 
Cracks or "heads," as they are called by the quarry men, can be 
easily located and the stone quarried so as to secure sound blocks 
with certainty. The waste is simply dumped down the mountain 
side. Moreover, the quarries having a free face, can be worked with 
powder without shattering the blocks. Our marble lies in a compact 
mass underground. The heads are tightly closed by the pressure 
and are difficult to discover until after the blocks are quarried, when 
it is generally too late, as a block with a crack in it is unsound and of 
little value. We can not blast the stone out, because marble is a 
confined mass, is liable to be shattered by the powder; not only the 
blocks that are blown out are shattered, but the force of the explosion 
causes new cracks extending into the solid mass below r , so that an 
underground quarry that has been blasted is always seriously dam- 
aged and often ruined. Consequently the blocks have to be labori- 
ously cut out with channeling machines, and it costs just as much, and 



7888 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

sometimes more, to remove the unsound material as the sound. 
Moreover, the unsound material has to be hauled away to a dump at 
considerable expense. 

The highest wages paid in the Italian quarries is about 60 cents 
per day; the lowest in our quarry is $1.25, and some men in the finish- 
ing plant get as much as $5. foremen with us get from $90 to $125 
per month. Our statement as to wages paid in Italian quarries is 
oased upon information obtained from an Italian gentleman familiar 
with conditions in those quarries. 

Italian marble has long been a standard, not only because the 
stone is of undeniably high grade, but also because the blocks are so 
uniform in quality that all the slabs or pieces from a block can be 
used together, so that the manufacturer in using them does not have 
to allow for any waste except that naturally due to sawing and 
cutting large blocks into small pieces or slabs. With the American 
marbles, especially those best suited for the interior finish of build- 
ings, like Alabama marble, the producer must stand the waste and 
expense due to the fact that pieces from one block or slab are not 
always of one grade. Hence not only is it more expensive to quarry 
the American marbles; it is also more expensive to prepare them for 
the market. 

Notwithstanding the disadvantages named above, however, the 
best grades of the American marbles can compete, at present prices, 
with the Italian, because these last grades are at least as fine, and 
often finer, than the Italian marble with which they compete. But 
if the tariff is removed or seriously reduced, the price of Italian mar- 
bles would almost certainly fall below the point at which the American 
marbles could successfully compete with them. The finer grades of 
American marble could still be sold, but the lower grades could not, 
and unless a market is found for them the quarrying for the finer 
grades alone could not be carried on at a profit. In the majority of 
commercial buildings a small difference in price will often determine 
the question in favor of a marble not quite so beautiful as its higher- 
priced competitors. Under existing conditions this enables even the 
medium-grade American marbles to find a market. But where both 
quality and price are against a marble, it has no chance at all. The 
very condition that now enables the American marbles of medium 
grade to find a market would operate in favor of the better grades of 
Italian as against the best grades of American marble if the tariff is 
removed or seriously reduced. So that the American marbles would 
probably be driven entirely out of the market if this were done. 
Those used mainly for exterior work might hold their own against 
Italian marbles, which are not durable when exposed to the weather 
in this climate. But even these American marbles would then find 
a formidable competitor in the Pentelliken marble from Greece, which 
is making itself felt in exterior work even now. 

Even as it is the American producers often find the Italian marble 
formidable on account of prices alone. This company recently bid 
on a large building in Birmingham, and was underbid by a concern in 
Cincinnati proposing Italian marble, although we figured the work 
on a very narrow margin of profit, and gave the owners the full bene- 
fit of our favorable freight rate. 

There is no question whatever that the removal or serious reduc- 
tion of the duty on marble would have a disastrous effect upon the 



MARBLE ALABAMA MARBLE CO. 7889 

marble industries of this country. Many millions of capital now 
invested in them would be wiped out; thousands of men would be 
thrown out of employment ; in many cases whole communities would 
suffer, and workingmen who have acquired homes would be com- 
pelled to give them up and seek employment elsewhere. Inciden- 
tally, a cessation of production of the cheaper grades of American 
marble would compel people of moderate and scanty means to fall 
back upon slate, limestone, sandstone, and even wooden slabs for 
marking the graves of their dead. Both granite and the imported 
marbles would be beyond their reach. 

We frankly admit that we are acting in our own interest in asking 
that the tariff on marble be retained. We do not want to lose the 
large investment which we have made nor the profitable returns 
which we hope and expect to receive in the near future if the present 
scale of prices can be maintained. We feel that we have a perfect 
right to do this, and that the question of our own success or failure 
is a sufficient justification. 

However, it is not alone a question of our self-interest that is 
involved. The deposits of marble in Alabama are so large and exten- 
sive that no one concern could possibly control them all. A number 
of concerns are only*awaiting the outcome of our venture to open new 
quarries, or else abandon all thought of Alabama marble as a specu- 
lative investment. If we succeed many others will follow in our foot- 
steps. If we fail Alabama marble is dead for another generation at 
least. If the marble industry is established on a paying basis it will 
be among the greatest and will be, by all odds, the most permanent of 
the mineral industries of the State. After the coal and iron are gone 
there will still be inexhaustible supplies of marble. The establish- 
ment of this industry means employment of thousands of men directly 
in the marble business, and a large volume of trade to the many indus- 
tries that furnish us with supplies. The value of marble is nearly all 
labor, and a very large percentage of our gross returns is immediately 
paid to the workmen in the form of wages. Once established, the 
marble industry is a thing of generations, not of years. They began 
to quarry marble at Carrara before the Christian era, and there is 
every prospect that they will continue to do so for thousands of years 
to come. So it will be in Vermont, and Georgia, and Tennessee, and 
s!abama, if the cheap labor and easier quarry conditions at Carrara 
are *iot allowed to have full effect in this country by the reduction of 
the tariff. 

The development of a successful marble industry calls for large 
capital, great faith and patience, and long-continued hard work on the 
part of those directly interested. But the community at large shares 
largely in whatever success they may achieve, without having to share 
in their trials and tribulations. We feel therefore that there is every 
justification for asking your honorable committee to continue the pro- 
tection now afforded to American marbles, not only because of the 
capital invested, but on the ground of the general good as well. 

We also feel that it is no more than just that those imported lime- 
stones which are susceptible of a high polish and are used for interior 
finish be classified as marbles, and made dutiable as such. 

Respectfully submitted. 

ALABAMA MARBLE COMPANY, 
JOHN STEPHEN SEWELL, 
Vice-President and General Manager. 



7890 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

BUILDING STONES. 

[Paragraphs 114, 117, and 118.] 

STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, 
NEW YORK, ON BEHALF OF IMPORTERS OF FRENCH STONES 
FOR BUILDING OR DECORATING PURPOSES. 

32 BROADWAY, 

New York City, February 27, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. G. 

GENTLEMEN: The importers of French stones employed in engi- 
neering works and in large buildings and public monuments have 
reason to believe that the owners of some quarries, backed by power- 
ful influences, have asked to have certain French stones, like Cha- 
rentenay, Chassignelles, Euvile, Fouronnes, Lavoux, Lignerolles, 
Mereuil, Monfort, Peuron, and Vaurion, assimilated to marble and 
therefore subjected to a duty which instead of being 21.20 francs 
per cubic meter, as at present, would be 106 francs per cubic meter. 

All these stones, however, can not, according to their nature, be 
classified as marble, but are properly limestones, not one of them 
being hard enough to take the polish of marble. 

Furthermore, their price shows the difference of the quality, since 
none of them are worth more than 140 francs per cubic meter on the 
other side, whilst the price of marble ranges from 300 francs to 
1,200 francs per cubic meter, and reaches much higher figures when 
the stone is imported in large blocks. 

There are imported also from France stones known as Abrots and 
Villars. These stones can be polished to a slight extent, but can not 
be compared to marble, as they are not susceptible of the same finish. 
They have always been commercially considered as limestones. The 
Central Society of Architects of Paris has classified them as such, and 
they are exported under such designation to Belgium, Holland, Ger- 
many, and Switzerland. They do not by any means approach the 
nature of marble as much as certain other stones known as Haute- 
ville, Basseville, 1'Echaillon, which also are imported from France, 
and which, after considerable litigation, have been finally appraised 
as limestones, as appears from Treasury Decision No. 29496, G. A. 
6856, limestone, marble, Hauteville stone, etc. The Board of General 
Appraisers, quoting from Bockmann v . United States (158 Fed. Rep., 
807, T. D. 28784), has decided that all these stones are entitled to the 
classification of limestones. 

Tt would seem, therefore, unjust, as their quality is inferior to that 
of marble, and as they can not be employed for the same expensive 
purposes as marble, that they should be assessed as such at a duty 
which would absolutely prohibit their importation, as in many cases 
it would reach 100 per cent or more. 

We trust, therefore, that your honorable body will not take heed of 
the demands of quarry owners above alluded to, which it will upon 
examination certainly consider as without any merit, and we rely 
upon its sense of equity to not increase the duty on any of the above- 
mentioned stones imported from France. 

We remain, gentlemen, very respectfully, 

THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, 
HENRY JE. GOURD, President. 



GARNET. 7891 

GARNET. 

[Paragraphs 115 and 614.] 

F. C. HOOPER, OF NORTH RIVER, N. Y., WISHES A DUTY PIACED 
ON UNMANUFACTURED GARNET USED AS- AN ABRASIVE. 

NORTH RIVER, N. Y., February 6, 1909. 
Hon. GEORGE R. MALBY, M. C., 

Washington, D. C. 

MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I am interested in securing an import 
duty on the mineral garnet which is used as an abrasive as distin- 
guished from the gem, and present herewith certain facts in relation 
thereto. 

Garnet is a very common. mineral, though seldom found of as good 
quality for abrasive purposes as in the Adirondacks. There are in 
Spain, however, very rich beds which have been washed down by the 
mountain streams, which as collected by cheap .labor, including 
women and children, without the aid of any mechanical process. 
While this garnet is of an inferior quality as compared with the 
Adirondack mineral, it can be sold in this country so much below 
our product as to result in considerable amounts of it being imported. 
While the amount imported has not as yet reached serious propor- 
tions, there are indications that such will be the case, as within the 
last two weeks I have learned of a possibility of garnet being imported 
from Japan or Korea. 

Previous to the time that we became interested in the garnet 
industry business had been carried on in this section by the farmers 
in a desultory way, by hand picking the small pockets from the rock. 
In the early nineties I spent three years in developing a mechanical 
process for the separation of the garnet from the rock, and through 
these efforts something entirely new in American industries has been 
developed. Our investments since we began operations in 1893 
amounts to a little over $200,000, and in good business seasons we 
employ from 150 to 160 persons. Our production runs from 2,000 
to 4,000 tons per year, depending on the market requirements. 

The imports for the years 1907 and 1908 as given by the New York 
custom-house are valued at $7,351 for 448 gross tons, or an 
import valuation of $16.39 per gross ton of 2,240 pounds, or $12.71 
for a net ton of 2,000 pounds. This garnet sells in this country for 
about $26 per gross ton, which is equal to a price of $23.21 per net 
ton of 2,000 pounds, which is $5 to $8 less than our cost of produc- 
tion and about $12 less than our market price of $35 per net ton 
of 2,000 pounds. 

Under the circumstances we would think that $10 per net ton 
duty would be no more than fair, as this added to the selling price 
of the Spanish garnet would be about $2 below our selling price. 

This question should be of interest to Members of Congress from 
North Carolina and Georgia, as there are deposits in that region 
similar in quality to the Spanish garnet, and I think that with the 
addition of the above duty there would be developments in this in- 
dustry in the South. 

Yours, very truly, 

NORTH RIVER GARNET COMPANY, 
F. C. HOOPER, Manager. 



7892 SCHEDULE B EARTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

GRAPHITE OR PLUMBAGO. 

[Paragraph 643.] 

THE ROSS-TACONY CRUCIBLE CO., TACONY, PA., PROTESTS 
AGAINST THE REMOVAL OF GRAPHITE OR PLUMBAGO 
FROM THE FREE LIST, 

TACONY, PHILADELPHIA, January 22, 1909. 

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Our attention has been called to the fact that a few 
parties have the matter up with you in regard to placing a duty on 
graphite, or plumbago, as it is known in the Ceylon market. After 
sending to Washington for a copy of the briefs and reading them very 
carefully we think it is only right that we should communicate with 
your committee and give our ideas hi regard to this subject. The 
idea as put forth in all of these articles shows very clearly that they 
have been written by people who know very little or nothing about 
the manufacture of crucibles. In the first place Edward O. Towne 
starts off by saying that the graphite is a metal. This is one of the 
most ludicrous things in the whole article, as you well know graphite 
is not a metal at all. It is very largely composed of carbon, which is 
used with a composition of clay in making the crucible, that will 
stand any amount of heat, in which metals are melted. The amount 
of flake graphite, which is the only grade that can be used at all in the 
manufacture of crucibles, and that in a very cautious way, is found 
in such small quantities in this country that even if a tariff was put 
on we doubt if all the mines put together would supply one crucible 
manufacturer. 

The American graphite is composed so very largely of mica that 
wherever this shows in any percentage at all it absolutely condemns 
these goods for our work. On the other hand, even though some of 
the manufacturers think they can use the American goods to an 
advantage, they are not willing and can not use them entirely. Thy 
have to depend on the Ceylon goods for the larger portion. 

Another point to consider is, the tariff asked for from 2 to 3 cents 
per pound would so affect the price of all metals that are made in 
crucibles that it really would be a very serious matter and would add 
quite an additional amount per ton to the price of the metals made 
in crucibles. 

In the article written by Mr. Chester we find, he says, the average 
cost of producing a pound of pure flake graphite varies from 3 to 5 
cents. The highest grade of Ceylon at the present time is ranging 
from 10 to 11 cents per pound, so if he has a good stock, costing 5 
cents or even 6 cents to produce, it seems to me he can make a very 
handsome profit and does not need any protection. We might say 
that for the past five or six years the average price on crucible graphite 
from the Ceylon market has been somewhere in the neighborhood of 
8 cents. 

We feel that it would be very unjust to everyone concerned to 
have any tariff at all put on the plumbago market at the present condi- 
tions. 



GRAPHITE OB PLUMBAGO. 7893 

I doubt very much if all the graphite mined in this country suitable 
for the manufacture of crucibles would supply more than 2 per cent 
of the amount needed. Therefore I trust that your committee will 
take this matter up, and if there is any other information you would 
like to have, we would be glad to furnish it. 
Yours, very truly, 

ROSS-TACONY CRUCIBLE COMPANY, 
Per HENRY A. Ross, President. 



THE JOSEPH DIXON CRUCIBLE CO., JERSEY CITY, N. J., SUBMITS 
STATEMENT RELATIVE TO GRAPHITE AND CLAY. 

JERSEY CITY, N. J., February 4, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 
DEAR SIR : Permit us please to write you very briefly concerning 

1. Graphite used in the manufacture of crucibles and other high 
heat-resisting articles; also used in the manufacture of lead pencils, 
stove polish, graphite paints, etc. 

2. Clay which is used as a binder in the manufacture of crucibles 
and other high heat-resisting articles. 

GRAPHITE. 

For convenience in the selling of graphite, and in the manufacture 
of graphite and the trade generally, graphite is divided into two 
classes known as "crystalline graphite" and "amorphous graphite." 

The graphite which comes to us from Ceylon is known as the 
"crystalline graphite," and the importation of Ceylon graphite has 
averaged for the last ten or eleven years about 14,000 or 15,000 tons, 
and of this amount about 70 per cent is used in the manufacture of 
crucibles. 

Because of its physical structure the Ceylon graphite is peculiarly 
adapted for the making of crucibles. Nowhere else in the world, so 
far as our knowledge goes, is graphite produced that is in any way 
equal, or in any way near equal, to the Ceylon graphite. 

As an illustration of what we mean by physical structure, permit us 
to call your attention to the fact that the mason invariably uses what 
is known as "sharp" inland sand in the making of his mortar, and 
would never think of using the round smooth seaside sand, which is 
quite as pure chemically speaking, but lacks the physical structure 
for the making of strong walls, and it is because of the difference in 
physical structure and not because of its difference in chemical purity 
that we crucible manufacturers find the Ceylon graphite so mucn 
superior to graphite produced anywhere else in the world, not even 
excepting the graphite produced in the United States known as "flake 
graphite." 

Graphite used in the manufacture of lead pencils is what is known 
as "amorphous graphite." A most excellent graphite of this kind is 
found in Austria, and in former years it was the Austrian graphite 
that was chiefly, if not entirely, used by the pencil manufacturers of 



7894 SCHEDULE B EABTHS, EARTHENWARE, AND GLASSWARE. 

the United States. The only other graphite mine supplying pencil 
factories is located in Sonora, Mexico, and is owned by American, 
interests. 

By the above we desire to impress upon you the fact that there is 

Eroauced in the United States no graphite at all suitable for the manu- 
icture of crucibles, or for the manufacture of lead pencils, and that 
we must look to foreign countries for our graphite, and it is for this 
reason that we ask your honorable committee to retain graphite on the 
free list, as at present. 

Parties interested in the mining of graphite in the United States, 
especially those interested in the mining of graphite in the States of 
Pennsylvania and Alabama, have petitioned your honorable body 
asking for a tariff to be placed on foreign graphite. 

We would respectfully call your attention to our letter to the Com- 
mittee on Ways and Means, dated January 7, 1909, published Janu- 
ary 13, in which we show that of all the graphite produced in the 
United States, the Dixon Company has produced 60 per cent, and has 
made no use of it in the manufacture of either crucibles or lead pencils. 
For letters from those who have sought to have duty placed on foi - 
eign graphite, we call your attention to the Ways and Means proceed- 
ings of December 7, 1908, and to a letter from the Turnbull Construc- 
tion Company, of proceedings of January 13, 1909. 

CLAY. 

What we have already said concerning graphite is equally true of 
clay which is used as a binder for crucibles. There are about one 
dozen crucible manufacturers in the United States, and one and all 
make use only of the clay imported from Germany in the manufacture 
of their crucibles that is, as a binder for the graphite. No clay has 
ever been found in the United States that crucible manufacturers can 
use in their work. 

******** 
Yours, very truly, 

GEO. E. LONG, 
Treasurer Joseph Dixon Crucible Company. 



SCHEDULE 0-METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



IKON ORE. 

[Paragraph 121.] 

THE CLEVELAND-CLIFFS IRON COMPANY, CLEVELAND, OHIO, 
SUBMITS INFORMATION RELATIVE TO IRON ORE. 

CLEVELAND, OHIO, January 16, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: In connection with the hearings on the revision of 
the tariff, I wish to present to your attention the following statement, 
showing 

First. The growth of the shipments of Lake Superior iron ore 
from the mines from 1890 to and including 1908, the last date being 
approximate as the total figures have not yet been received. 

Second. The average cost per ton of these shipments for the 
year 1908, divided, is as follows: 

(a) Cost f. o. b. cars at mine, divided into labor and supplies 
supplies including such items as taxes and insurance. 

(o) Depreciation, which means the necessary cost charged per ton 
so that when the mine is exhausted the preliminary development 
cost will have disappeared from the books. 

Third. Royalty. 

Fourth. Rail transportation from mines to vessels at upper lake 
ports. 

Fifth. Lake transportation from upper lake ports to Lake Michigan 
and Lake Erie ports. 

Sixth. Freight rates from said lower lake ports to points of con- 
sumption in the Mahoning and Shenangp Valley, Pittsburg, middle 
Pennsylvania, eastern points the other side of the Allegheny Moun- 
tains. 

These figures represent the average cost of the above items of much 
the greater portion of all the ores shipped from mines other than 
those controlled by the United States Steel Corporation during. 1908, 
and in my judgment very closely approximate what would be the 
exact figures in case every single mine had been included in the 
estimates. 

The costs of the ores shipped by the United States Steel Corpora- 
tion are not here included, as they have prepared their own figures. 
Of the total amount of ore shipped now from Lake Superior, about 
one-half is for the account of the United States Steel Corporation, 
and the other half for the account of all other producers. 

I also give you herewith the figures showing the average daily 
wages of the employees as follows: 

First. Of Lake Superior iron-ore mines, excluding salaried officials. 

Second. Of a railroad in the Lake Superior district, whose sole 

7895 



7896 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

business is the transportation of iron ore, and which I think is repre- 
sentative of all upper lake railroads engaged in that business. 

Third. Lake steamboats engaged in transporting the ore. 

You will note the tremendous development of this industry since 
1890. It is this great development, stimulated by the protective 
tariff under which the iron and steel industry of this country has 
grown that has enabled our iron and steel industry to outstrip in 
production all other countries. There is still an enormous acreage 
of undeveloped mineral territory in the Lake Superior region and 
also in other parts of the United States. This country could never 
have made its great progress in iron and steel except through the 
development of these great bodies of iron ore, and the transportation 
facilities both rail and lake coincident therewith. 

The greater portion of this iron ore is consumed at inland furnaces, 
thus necessitating a rail charge from the lower lake port in addition 
to the cost at said port. 

You will note that the average cost per ton of Lake Superior iron 
ores at such delivery points is as follows: 

At Lake Erie ports : $3.06 

At Mahoning and Shenango Valley points 3. 71 

At Pitteburg and vicinity 4. 11 

At western Pennsylvania points other than above 4. 31 

At points east of the Allegheny Mountains 4 56 

I do not have the figures before me of the cost of foreign ores at 
the eastern seaboard, but from the above figures you will note that 
any material reduction in the tariff on iron ore will increase the diffi- 
culty already existing for Lake Superior ores to compete with foreign 
ores at points east of the Allegheny Mountains, and also will affect 
Lake Superior iron ore at points west of the mountains, not perhaps 
so much from the fact that foreign iron ores themselves will go west 
of said mountains in large quantities, as from their products, such 
as pig iron and manufactured steel, thus limiting the market of our 
customers west of the mountains and decreasing their ability to buy 
ore, or forcing the selling of their products at lower figures, which 
would thus force lower selling prices for Lake Superior iron ores. 
The tendency of lower selling prices would be to make lower costs, 
which means inability to pay as high prices for labor and supplies. 

This great industry, with the mining communities, railroads, and 
vessel interests working in harmony with it, as well as the great steel 
works consuming the ore, has been built up under our present tariff 
laws. 

It seems to us that any reduction in these tariffs should be made 
with much conservatism, so as to avoid the necessity of any radical 
change of the conditions under which it is operating. 

We have been unable to get accurate figures of the cost of produc- 
ing iron ore and the daily wages prevailing in the countries already 
exporting to the United States, and which countries are ready to in- 
crease said exportation with the lowering of the tariff, such as Spain, 
Canada, Cuba, etc. Doubtless these figures will be presented to you 
from other sources or can be secured from the departments of the 
Government. 

The statement above referred to follows on the next page. 
Yours, very truly, 

WM. G. MATHER 
President Cleveland- Cliffs Iron Company. 



IRON OKK CLIROMK IKON ORE. 7897 

Shipments of Lake Superior ores, by fire-year periods, from 1890 to 1908. 

Tons. 

1 SOO 9, 00:5. 725 

1 895 10. 429, 037 

900 19. 059. 393 

(en '.} 4. 353, 456 

91 it; 3S. 522, 239 

907 42. 245. 070 

90S 25, 348, 168 

Average coat of minirig and delivering ore at Lair Erie ports. 

Cost per (on for 

Labor $0. 7512 

Supplies, i IK -1 inline taxes and insurance 3471 

IVpreciat ion 2863 

Total cost per ton on cars at mines 1. 3846 

Cost per ton for-- 

lloyalty 3309 

Transportation, rail and lake 1. 2344 

Administrative expense, commissions, etc Ki96 

Total cost per ton ai Lake Krie ports 3. 0595 

Average wages per man per day: 

All employees at mines 2. 47 

All employees, lake-ore steamboat? 2.38 

All employees i exclusive of rnanagor) on iron-ore railways L' :;i 

Average rates from Lake Erie ports to furnaces: 

Mahoning and Shenango Valley point? (15 

.Pittsburg and vicinity 1. 05 

Western Pennsylvania points, other than above 1. 25 

East of Allegheny Mountain points 1. 50 



CHROME IRON ORE. 

[Paragraph 121.] 

HON. F. E. WARREN, SENATOR, SUBMITS LETTER OF E. W. 
MERRITT, DENVER, COLO., ASKING FOR AN INCREASE OF THE 
DUTY ON CHROME ORES. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 25, 1909. 
Hon. SEREXO E. PAYNE, 

C7i airman Committee on Ways and If cans, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I inclose -herewith for the attention and consideration 
of your committee a let ter received by me from E. W. Merritt, president 
Chromium Mines Company, 70S Seventeenth street, Denver. Colo., 
relative to the desirability of placing: a tariff of 84 per ton on importa- 
tions into the United States of chrome iron ore. 
Very truly, yours, 

F. E. WARREN. 



"This royalty figure represents the average of old leases. Many leases of more 
recent years require royalties of from 75 cents to 85 cents per ton. 



7VJS SCHEDULE O METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

708 SEVENTEENTH STREET, 

Denver, Colo., February 19, 1909. 
Hon. FRANCIS E. WARREN, 

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR. Our company are the owners of a chrome iron mining 
proposition on Deer Creek in the western portion of Converse County, 
about 18 miles from Glenn Rock, Wyo. YVe find that we are unable 
to ship these ores in competition with foreign ores brought in empty 
ship bottoms as ballast. We have the only known deposit of any 
magnitude in the United States. The various engineers we have had 
inspect the property estimate the ore in sight at from 750,000 to 
1,000,000 tons. In case of a war with any other country, the supply 
would be shut off entirely from this country and it would be invalua- 
ble to have this mine developed and ready to take care of the large 
demand that would necessarily follow. 

The chrome ore is used in all armor plate, the manufacture of all 
arms including the cannon; also all tools. Chromic acid taken from 
these ores is the foundation for tanning, for making bichromate of 
potash, which is used in all telegraph and telephone batteries in fact 
is necessary for the Western Union Telegraph and Postal Telegraph 
companies. The chromic acid is also used in staying colors in all 
dyestuffs in woolen, silk, and cotton goods to make the colors fast. 
It is used in the rims of car wheels for wiring surface over the paper 
centers. So you can see that it is a very necessary and very valuable 
product. 

The ores run from $10 to $20 per ton in value. At the present 
time it is coming into this country as ordinary iron ore, which is worth 
not to exceed $2.50 or $3 per ton, and has a duty of 40 cents, I am 
told. There were about 80,OQO tons imported into this country, quite 
a large amount from Japan, about 12,000 tons from Asia Minor or 
Greece, about 8,000 tons from upper Canada, near Quebec, and the 
entire United States product was 107 tons. The freight rate in ship 
bottoms from Greece to Chester, Pa., the ore unloaded on the wharf, is 
$2.88 per ton. Our freight rate to Pittsburg is about $7 per ton at 
the present time. We are told by the railroads that they will lower 
that rate some to us if we can arrange to get the ore into Cleveland 
and Pittsburg by getting an adequate tariff on the ores, so that it will 
be possible for us to ship there in large volume. 

This is developing the resources of Wyoming, and will make a large 
business there if we can manage this tariff proposition. You have 
always taken such an interest hi everything that developed the State 
that I write you to ask if you will interest yourself hi this matter; 
take it up with Clark, Mondell, and our Colorado Members, who I am 
sure will do anything they could for us and to assist you in this matter; 
There should be a rate or not less than $4 per ton tariff. You can see 
that in case of any foreign war it would be simply invaluable, as 
everything necessary in war requires this material. 

I appreciate the fact that there will be quite a fight from the ship- 
ping interests who bring this over as ballast, and possibly from the 
steel people and the large users of this ore, as they would think it 
would raise the price some of the raw material. One of the largest 
uses of this ore, which is very refractory, is for linings of open hearths 
and blast furnaces, as it withstands a very high degree of heat, and 
they must have it. 



CHROME IRON ORE PIG IRON. 7899 

As the matter stands now, we can not ship any of the ore east of 
Chicago and make a cent profit, as they can get it from Greece or 
Japan cheaper than we can lay it down in Pittsburg. 

I will appreciate your thoughtful interest in this matter, and a 
letter stating thoroughly your views, at your convenience, as to what 
might be done in the way of a protective tariff. 
Very truly, yours, 

CHROMIUM MINES COMPANY, 
E. W. MERRITT,* President. 



PIG IRON. 

[Paragraph 122.] 

SWORN STATEMENT OF B. F. FACKENTHAL, JR., PRESIDENT 
AND GENERAL MANAGER OF THE THOMAS IRON COMPANY, 
EASTON, PA., RELATIVE TO PIG IRON. 

EASTON, PA., January 14, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The Thomas Iron Company was organized in 1854, 
and has manufactured merchant pig iron continuously down to the 
present time, a period of fifty-four years. It does not manufacture 
any other iron or steel product. The company is doubtless the oldest 
in America manufacturing merchant pig iron. It has never been 
reorganized nor had its corporate name changed. It passed success- 
fully through the panics of 1857, 1873, 1893, and 1908, and through 
several anthracite coal strikes. On at least two occasions during 
anthracite coal strikes it was compelled to blow out or bank all its 
furnaces but one. It also passed successfully through the period of 
the civil war. At the present time the company has nine stacks, four 
of which are in blast. 

From the time of its organization in 1854 it has produced from its 
own mines, or from mines controlled directly or indirectly by it, 
over 50 per cent of its iron-ore requirements. Many of its mining 
operations proved unprofitable, but others were profitable, par- 
ticularly the Richard magnetic iron-ore mine, located near Dover, 
N. J., which has been the most profitable of all its mining operations. 
Twenty-four per cent of all the ore smelted by the company during the 
fifty-four years it has been in business has been taken from that mine. 

The company has doubtless been as successful as any of its com- 
petitors manufacturing merchant pig iron in the East. The returns 
to its stockholders, however, have never been abnormal. At times 
dividends were quite small; at other times they were passed alto- 
gether; but taken as a whole, the investment has been fairly profitable. 
During my administration as president and general manager, covering 
the past sixteen years (1893 to 1908, both inclusive), the capital of 
$2,500,000 has remained exactly the same, and over that period of 
time the dividends have averaged 6J per cent per annum. The stock 
of the company is not listed, nor has it ever been used for speculative 
purposes, but is held largely by descendants of people who established 
the company fifty-four years ago. At present there are 590 stock- 



7900 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANTJFACTUKES OF. 

holders, of whom 248 are women. Some of the employees are children 
and grandchildren of the original men who aided in building the 
first furnace in 1854. 

The Thomas Iron Company's cost of manufacturing basic and foun- 
dry pig iron for the year 1907, from figures taken from the books of 
the company, amounted to $18.28. This cost includes fuel, ores, 
limestone, labor, salaries, laboratories, taxes, and other items entering 
into the cost, as well as 14 cents for maintaining our New York and 
Philadelphia sales offices, and 1 7 cents the actual cost of relining and 
repairing the furnaces during that year. The charge for relming, 
however, for that year, is 6 cents below the average cost, which has 
been 23 cents per ton. In addition to the above cost, there has been 
expended for replacements an average of 37 cents per ton on all iron 
manufactured during the past sixteen years, making the total cost of 
operation, including replacements, $18.65 per ton. The iron ore has 
been charged at its cost, without adding royalties or profits of any 
kind. We have no bonded indebtedness, and therefore no interest 
item has entered into this cost. 

The item of 37 cents for replacements does not cover an extension 
of the works or additional furnaces; in fact, there were eleven stacks 
in 1893, two of which were abandoned; and, moreover, 90 per cent 
of the amount for replacements was expended on two of the remaining 
nine stacks. 

Our sales over the entire year 1907 averaged $19.75 f. o. b. cars at 
furnace, leaving a profit on pig iron of $1.10 over and above the cost 
as herein stated. It is a fact, however, that during the year under 
review, pig iron sold at times at higher prices, but the average price 
received by the Thomas Iron Company, as shown on the books of the 
company, was $19.75 per ton. 

I am informed that the importations of foundry pig iron during 
1907 amounted to about 500,000 tons, but am not informed as to the 
price at which it was sold. I am, however, personally interested in a 
foundry company, to whose figures I have access, and learn that it 
purchased 8,535 tons of English iron during 1907, at an average cost 
of $21.20 delivered at its foundry, where the freights from tide were 
80 cents per ton. Over the same period of time our price delivered 
to that foundry was $22.50 per ton, or $1.30 above the price at which 
it purchased foreign iron. 

I am also reliably informed that one of the largest manufacturers 
of cast-iron water pipe in the North, whose works are located on 
water front, used imported English iron almost exclusively during 
1907, claiming that the price was much lower than that at which they 
could buy from merchant furnaces in this country. 

The year 1908 was a panic year, and is not herein referred to, par- 
ticularly as merchant pig iron has been sold by eastern furnaces with- 
out profit. 

I am more or less familiar with costs at other plants in the Lehigh 
and Schuylkill valleys, and, moreover, have obtained some figures of 
cost from some of the best plants in these districts, which, together 
with conditions at the Thomas Iron Company's plant, enable me to 
sav that the cost of manufacturing foundry pig-iron in eastern Penn- 
sylvania at the present tune is $16.25, based on present prices for fuel 
and labor, and on the 1908 price for Lake ore; and, in other respects, 
on the same basis as the figures for 1907 contained herein. Furnaces 



PIG IRON. 7901 

running on basic pig iron suitable for open-hearth steel should manu- 
facture iron at 75 cents less than the cost for foundry iron; in fact, 
the Thomas Iron Company's furnaces show about that difference be- 
tween the two grades, making the cost at the present time of basic 
$15.50 per ton. 

Any further advance in the selling price of iron is sure to entail an 
increase in the cost of manufacture, including an advance in labor at 
our mines, quarries, and works. During 1906 ah" wages were ad- 
vanced 10 per cent; during 1907 an additional advance of 10 per cent 
was made; during 1908 a reduction of 10 per cent was made. If a 
revision of the tariff does not handicap us in getting our business back 
on a paying basis, the wages of 1907 must be restored, and will add 
directly to the above estimated cost. 

If the tariff duty on pig iron is removed or reduced, I feel confident 
that it will eventually compel all manufacturers of merchant pig iron 
in the East to go into liquidation. 

B. F. FACKENTHAL, Jr. 
STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

County of Northampton, ss: 

B. F. Fackenthal, jr., being duly sworn, according to law, deposes 
and says that the facts set forth in the foregoing statement, so far as 
stated from his own knowledge, are true; and, so far as stated upon 
information received from others, he verily believes them to be true. 

B. F. FACKENTHAL, Jr. 

Sworn and subscribed before me January 14, 1909. 

[SEAL.] CHAS. B. BRUNNER, 

Notary Public for Pennsylvania. 

(Commission expires March 16, 1911.) 



CHARLES H. ZEHNDER, NEW YORK, FILES AFFIDAVIT SHOWING 
COST OF PRODUCING PIG IRON IN 



140 CEDAR STREET, NE\T YORK, 

January 21, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

MY DEAR SIR: I inclose you herewith an affidavit relating to the 
cost of producing pig iron and other data for the State of Virginia, 
which I would like to file with the committee. 

Yours, truly, C. H. ZEHNDER. 

STATE OF NEW YORK, county'of New York, ss: 

Charles H. Zehnder, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he has 
been personally engaged in the manufacture of pig iron in the State of 
Virginia for more than six years up to about one year ago, and since 
that time has kept in close touch with the business on account of the 
large financial interests in mineral property that he still holds in the 
States of Virginia and West Virginia dependent on the prosperity of 
the pig-iron business. 

61318 AP 09 - 11 



7902 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Affiant further says that during the last five or six years the average- 
cost of manufacturing pig iron in the State of Virginia from native 
ores of the highest character, including proper charges for deprecia- 
tion, insurance, etc., has been about $14.50 per ton. 

There was produced in Virginia during the year 1908, 314,009 tons 
of pig iron. The actual producing capacity of the State is about 
600,000 tons. This pig iron is largely marketed in the East and West. 
The actual consumption in the State is very small. Any reduction in 
the tariff from the present schedule would work a serious hardship. 
and a severe cut would almost ruin the industry in the State. Tin- 
ores are lean and getting more expensive to produce every year, as 
there is but one very large body of ore that has been developed in 
Virginia that lies in a compact body. Practically all the other bodies 
of ore are thin and scattered over wide territory. 

CHARLES H. ZEHNDER. 

Sworn and subscribed to before me this 22d day of January, 1909. 
[SEAL.] LUDWIG K. MILLER, Notary Public. 



HON. IRVING P. WANGER, M. C., SUBMITS ESTIMATE FOR MAK- 
ING PIG IRON COMPILED BY RICHARD HECKSCHER & SONS 
COMPANY, SWEDELAND, PA. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 30, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Herewith find a statement of the estimated cost of 
making pig iron for the next six months at the furnaces of the 
Richard Heckscher & Sons Company, Swedeland, Pa. (offices in the 
Manhattan Building, southeast corner Fourth and Walnut streets, 
Philadelphia, Pa.), sworn to by Mr. Herbert W. Gwyn, secretary, 
which I trust will have your best consideration. 
Yours, very respectfully, 

IRVING P. WANGER, M. C., 
Eighth District, Pennsylvania. 

PHILADELPHIA, PA., January 27, 1909. 

A fair estimate of the cost of making pig iron for the next six 
months, based upon 1908 prices for Lake Superior ores and a varying 
percentage of local and foreign ores, is as follows: 

FOUNDRY IRON. 

Estimated cost, based on using 50 per cent of lake ores at season 
1908 prices: 

Ore, cost per ton of pig iron $8. 49 

Coke," 2,600 pounds, at $3.90 per net ton delivered 5.07 

Limestone, 1,344 pounds, at 80 cents per gross ton 48 

Labor and miscellaneous charges 1. 45 

Interest 18 

Depreciation 15 

Extraordinary repairs (relining, etc.) 15 

Total... . 15.97 



a This is estimated fuel on all grades of foundry iron; as we manufacture the higher 
grades almost entirely, a fair average of fuel consumption for such grades would be 
about 2,700 pounds per ton of iron, which would increase the estimated cost of iron by 
29 cents per ton, making the total $16.26. 



PIG IRON AND COAL. 7903 

BASIC IRON. 

Estimated cost based on using 45 per cent of Lake Superior ores at 
season 1908 prices: 

Ore, cost per ton of pig iron $8. 37 

Coke, 2,300 pounds, at $3.90 per net ton delivered 4. 48 

Limestone, 1,344 pounds, at 80 cents per gross ton 48 

Labor and miscellaneous charges 1. 25 

Interest .' ]8 

Depreciation 15 

Extraordinary repairs (relining, etc.) 15 

Total 15. 06 

HERBERT W. GWYN, Secretary. 

Sworn and subscribed to before me, a notary public of Pennsylva- 
nia, this 27th day of January, A. D. 1909. 

[SEAL.] H. J. REARDON, 

Notary Public. 



PIG IRON AND COAL. 

[Paragraphs 122, 415, and 523.] 

THE ALABAMA CONSOLIDATED COAL AND IRON COMPANY, BIR- 
MINGHAM, ALA., PROTESTS AGAINST ANY ALTERATION IN 
PRESENT DUTIES ON COAL AND IRON. 

BIRMINGHAM, ALA., January 28, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The following arguments are respectfully submitted 
on behalf of the Alabama Consolidated Coal and iron Company, pro- 
ducers of purely commercial iron and coal, and located in the Bir- 
mingham, Ala., district, against any alteration in the present tariff 
rate on coal and pig iron: 

Birmingham is the chief producing center of the coal and iron 
industry of Alabama, and Alabama produces more pig iron than any 
other Southern State. Alabama can produce in normal times about 
1,800,000 tons of pig iron and 14,500,000 tons of coal. 

Its own manufactories consume approximately 55 per cent of its 
output of pig, leaving 45 per cent to be marketed elsewhere. 

This amounts, therefore, to 810,000 tons. 

Geographically and from the standpoint of consumption, Birming- 
ham is badly located, being 275 miles from tide water. 

Note the following freight rates to the principal points of con- 
sumption: 

Pittsburg $4. 90 

Chicago 4. 35 

Cincinnati 3. 25 

St. Louis 3. 75 

Philadelphia (rail and water) 4. 00 

Philadelphia (all rail) 5. 00 

New York (rail and water) 4. 25 

New York (all rail) 5. 95 

Boston (rail and water) 4. 60 

Boston (all rail) 6. 40 



7904 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

From the above figures you will note that the average freight late 
on Birmingham pig is considerably in excess of the present tariff. 

The cost of making pig iron in Birmingham in 1907, prior to the 
panic of October of that year, was $12.61 per gross ton of 2,240 
pounds, thus making the cost laid down in New York, during that 
period, $12.61 plus $4.25 equals $16.86, excluding any profit. 

The present selling price of Birmingham No. 2 is $13 f. o. b. cars, or 
$17.25 New York Harbor. 

The present selling price of Cleveland (English) pig is $12.04. This 
pig can be delivered in New York Harbor for $2 per ton freight. So 
that on the present basis Cleveland iron would cost on dock New 
York $12.04 plus $2 plus $4, equals $18.04, or a difference of only 79 
cents. 

It may be argued that the present average cost of making pig iron 
in the Birmingham district is less than $12.61, and this is quite true, 
but the lessening in cost is simply the result of panic conditions, and a 
revival of prosperity would immediately send the cost back to the 1907 
figures. 

Even at the present selling price there is no undue profit, for with 
our lean ores, requiring from 1 to 2 tons of coke per ton of iron, the 
yield to the stockholder is small. 

The truth of this statement is evidenced by the following figures: 

Cost of building one complete stack of 200 tons daily capacity $750, 000 

Cost of building 300 coke ovens and opening coal mines 300, OCO 

Cost of building coal washer 75, 000 

Cost of opening ore mines 125, 000 

Coat of opening quarry 50, 000 

Total 1,300,000 

This investment will have to be renewed once every ten years, and 
as such a furnace will produce in this period about 750,000 tons of pig, 
the product would have to make for renewal $1,300,000 and for 6 
per cent interest $780,000 total, $2,080,000, or practically $3 per 
ton so that even if the average cost of iron be $10 now, only a living 
profit is being obtained at to-day's selling figures. 

Furthermore, you will note that no allowance is made for invest- 
ment in mineral lands and depreciation thereof, it being rather 
roughly assumed that the appreciation in the value of mineral lands 
will cover this. 

It should be further stated that the pig-iron market abroad would 
welcome the least reduction in the tariff, as the above figures show 
that a very moderate reduction would allow them to use our Atlantic 
seaboard towns as a dumping ground ; and it is to these very Atlantic 
seaboard towns that we look for the consumption of a large amount 
of our surplus pig. 

Turning now to coal. If you will look at a map of the United 
States you will note that the Ohio and tributary streams provide a 
highway for the coal fields of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky, and 
partially to those of West Virginia. 

As a general proposition the coal of these States is of rather better 
grade and more cheaply mined than ours, therefore they can control 
the whole river trade all the way to New Orleans. On the Atlantic 
coast the Pocahontas field, with its 10-foot seam of the best coal in 
the world, can be mined and put on board ship at prices we can 
never hope to reach. 



PIG IRON AND COAL FERROSILICON. 7905 

This means that the Atlantic seaboard trade, from Maine to Tam- 
pico, Mexico, is controlled by the Virginia and West Virginia coals, 
and this leaves us only the restricted area immediately contiguous 
to our district. 

The truth of the foregoing was demonstrated last autumn when, 
owing to an excessive and prolonged drought, coal could not be 
boated down the Ohio. This brought about an immediate demand 
from Mississippi Valley points, and at one time this district shipped 
into New Orleans alone 3,000 tons per day. As soon as the Ohio 
reached a boating stage, however, this demand failed. 

Now, if the tariff be removed on coal, the Nova Scotia mines, situ- 
ated, as they are, on tide water, can supply the Atlantic coast, by 
direct barge and steamer, at figures which will deprive our Virginia 
and West Virginia mines, with their railroad haul to tide water, of all 
profit and cause them to further seek interior trade, thus still further 
restricting our sales area. 

From the above figures and facts, which are most conservatively 
stated, it is evident that Alabama is rather in need of an increase in 
the tariff than a decrease. 

Respectfully submitted. 

ALABAMA CONSOLIDATED COAL AND IKON Co. 
Per GUY R. JOHNSON, Vice-President. 



FERROSILICON. 

[Paragraph 122.] 

THE STJSQTJEHANNA SMELTING COMPANY, IOCKPOET, N. Y. t 
FILES SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF RELATIVE TO FERROSILICON 
AND CANADIAN COMPETITION. 

LOCKPORT, N. Y., January 25, 1909. 
THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We trust, in view of the statement submitted to you 
by the Electro Metals Company, a Canadian corporation, which pur- 
ports to contradict two statements of fact included in our brief upon 
the subject of ferrosilicon and relative to Canadian competition, that 
you will give this short reply your consideration. 

The Electro Metals Company, through Mr. Walter Gaston, has 
taken exception to two statements in our brief : 

(1) That they buy Canadian charcoal at two-thirds the price at 
which we can buy it. 

(2) That they obtain power 25 per cent cheaper than we can 
obtain it, although the power originally comes from the same power 
development. 

With regard to the first statement we apologize to Mr. Gaston and 
the Electro Metals Company. We should have said "can buy Cana- 
dian charcoal at two-thirds the price at which we can obtain it." 
The price of charcoal, f. o. b. Toronto, is $8 per 2,000 pounds, while 
the best price of charcoal at Lockport to very large consumers is 
$11.25 per 2,000 pounds, the average price ranging from $13 to $16 



7906 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

per 2,000 pounds. The purest ferrosilicon is made by using char- 
coal as a reducing agent, and we had fallen into the error that the 
Electro Metals Company would be sure to use charcoal. 

The Electro Metals Company may use no charcoal at all, or use 
imported charcoal ; in either event we are content to leave it that the 
price of charcoal in Canada is substantially two-thirds the price of 
charcoal in Lockport, N. Y. 

To pass to the second statement of fact to which the Electro Metals 
Company takes exception: "That the Canadian company obtains 
bounty-fed power 25 per cent cheaper than we can obtain it at Lock- 
port, N. Y. 

The statement that this power was 25 per cent cheaper is substan- 
tially true, as shown below. We will say at once, however, that we 
were misinformed that the cheaper Canadian power was the conse- 
quence of a bounty given to the company developing power. This 
statement was incorrect, and it is correct to state that the company 
developing the power pays royalty on all power developed to the 
Canadian government. It is, however, an undisputed fact that 
Niagara power developed on the Canadian side can be bought at 
Welland, Ontario, for $12.75, at points nearer the origin in Canada 
for $12.50, and that at no point on the American side can power of 
identical character from the same development, or any other, to the 
best of our knowledge and belief, be bought for less than $16, for 
smelting purposes. 

Lockport, owing to a variety of reasons, obtains benefit of the most 
favorable rates. These facts, it will be admitted, do constitute a 
natural advantage in favor of the Canadian industry concerned. 

We can scarcely believe that the Electro Metals Company were 
ever offered power in a possible location for this enterprise in the 
United States at a price less than $12.75 per horsepower year, 
since we ourselves, before locating our plant at Lockport, searched 
over the American side of the Niagara frontier for the most favorable 
rates. In no case were we offered a rate better than $16, and in 
most cases a considerably higher one. We feel satisfied that there is 
no point in the United States where ferrosilicon could be manufac- 
tured and marketed to better advantage than close to Niagara Falls 
on the Niagara frontier, taking freight rates and power cost both 
into consideration. On these facts we contend that our second state- 
ment was justified. 

Mr. Gaston makes many and varied statements as to European 
competition which, from their general and indefinite nature, do not 
call for reply. 

The salient fact remains that never at any time has an American 
manufacturer been able to compete, either abroad or in Canada, while 
both the European and Canadian manufacturer are to-day selling 
ferrosilicon in the States at prices which apprear to us, who have 
both knowledge and experience, to be unfair and ridiculous. 

We can not believe that lately ferrosilicon that has been made in 
the States has been sold in Canada at a profit. If ferrosilicon has 
been sold into Canada from the States at anything like present prices 
it must have been first imported from abroad, a fact that would throw 
an interesting light on European costs. 

We should be sorry for the committee to think that a brief was 
submitted by us in bad faith. Any unintentional misrepresentation 



FERROSILICON FERROALLOYS. 7907 

we are prepared to take the blame for. We frankly admit that we 
approached the Ways and -Means Committee in the interest only of 
the manufacturers of domestic electrolytic ferrosilicon. We submit, 
however, that our statement gave the committee a true idea of the 
actual position, a position which justifies our brief. 

Lastly we would remind the committee that practically the only 
other corporation interested in the domestic industry, namely, the 
Electro Metallurgical Company, of Niagara Falls, fully confirmed our 
statements in their brief presented upon the subject. 
Yours, truly, 

SUSQUEHANNA SMELTING COMPANY, 

HERBERT C. HARRISON, 

Vice-President. 



FERRO ALLOYS. 

[Paragraphs 122 and 183.] 

BROWN & GERRY, NEW YORK CITY, SUGGEST CLASSIFICATION 
FOR THE VARIOUS STEEL-HARDENING METALS. 

12 BROADWAY, 

New York, February 11, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

SIR: Speaking in behalf of the Electro-Metallurgical Company and 
Bessie Ferro-Silicon Company, the latter representing also the Ash- 
land Iron Mining Company, we beg to suggest to your honorable 
committee the language to be inserted in the paragraph of the new 
tariff corresponding to paragraph 183 of the present tariff which will 
cover the wishes of the domestic manufacturers. 

We are authorized to state by General Appraiser Fischer, who has 
had particularly under his supervision the various questions con- 
cerning the importation of ferroalloys, that the language we are 
suggesting will, in his opinion, safeguard the interests of the Govern- 
ment and the domestic interests, and that if called on by your com- 
mittee he will gladly express his approval of the same. 

The suggested changes are as follows: 

Paragraph 122. Strike out the word "ferrosilicon." 

Paragraph 183. Insert the following words: "Chromium or chromium metal, tung- 
sten, molybdenum, titanium, silicon, tantalum, ferrosilicon, ferrochrome or ferrochro- 
mium, ferrotungsten, ferromolybdenum, ferrotitanium, ferro vanadium, ferrotantalum, 
ferrophosphorus, ferroboron, and all other metals and alloys, all the foregoing crude 
or refined but unwrought, whether capable of being wrought or not, and whether 
produced in electric furnace or blast furnace or by chemical or other process, not 
otherwise specially provided for in this act, ad valorem." 

Very respectfully, 

BROWN & GERRY. 



7908 s< IIKDULE C MKTALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

BAR IRON. 

[Paragraph 123.] 

THE AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL MANUFACTURING CO. SUBMITS 
ESTIMATES OF COST OF MAKING BAR IRON. 

LEBANON, PA., U. S. A., February 4, 1909. 

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: The accompanying exhibits, numbered from A to E 
inclusive, give the actual cost east of the Allegheny Mountains and 
north of the Potomac River of making merchant refined bar iron 
(see Exhibits A and B), also a higher grade of refined bar iron (see 
Exhibit C). And also the cost of puddling pig iron and busheling 
scrap material into puddled or muck bar and scrap bar (Exhibits D 
and E), this conversion being preliminary to their use in making iron 
bars described on Exhibits A, B, and C. 

The costs given will necessarily vary slightly in the different 
localities of this large section of our country, but not greatly, as local 
advantages in one or two items are apt to be offset by disadvantages 
in something else. The cost of the tonnage labor is practically the 
same with all the mills in this section. 

While the present selling price of refined bar iron is stated at 1.45 
and 1.50 base mill, several mills are now selling at 1.40 base mill. 

These sheets may be considered as supplementary to brief on bar 
iron already filed by me with the Committee on Ways and Means. 
Very truly, yours, 

JAMES LORD, 
President American Iron and Steel Refining Co. 



EXHIBIT A. 

Cost of making merchant refined bar iron. 
FORMULA. 

50 per cent No. 1 wrought scrap, at $19.50 $9. 75 

50 per cent muck bar, at $28 14. 00 



Cost of material . 23. 75 



CONVERSION. 



Direct and tonnage labor $3. 03 

Indirect labor 1. 97 

800 pounds coal, at $2.75 98 

Incidental expenses, including fire brick, masons, sand, oil, light, repairs, 
firing boilers L 05 



7.03 

Taxes, insurance, depreciation, and replacement estimated 30 

Furnace waste, 8$ per cent on $23.75 .2.02 

9.35 



33.10 

Approximately 1.48 cents plus per pound. 
Base selling price Janiary 1, 1909, 1.50 cents per pound. 



BAB IRON AMERICAN IRON & STEEL MFG. CO. 7909 

EXHIBIT B. 
Cost of making ordinary refined iron. 

FORMULA. 

50 per cent No. 1 wrt. scrap, at $19.50 $9. 75 

50 per cent scrap bar, at $24.02 12. 01 

Cost of material 21. 76- 

Conversion, as detailed by Exhibit A 9. 35 



31.11 

Approximately $1.39 per pound. 
Base eelling price January 1, 1909, $1.45 per pound. 



EXHIBIT 0. 
Cost of making refined bar iron (without admixture of scrap material). 

FORMULA. 

Muck bar, made from pig iron $28. 00 

Conversion, as detailed by Exhibit A (except furnace waste) 7. 33 

Furnace waste, 9 per cent of $28 2. 52 

37.85 

Approximately $1.69 per pound. 
Base selling price January 1, 1909, $1.75 per pound. 



EXHIBIT D. 
Cost of muck or puddled bar. 

Tonnage and direct labor $5. 38 

Indirect labor 72 

Incidentals: Fire brick and masons; blacksmith, tools, and tcngs; rolls and 

roll turning; grinding ore and fire brick; making bottom 1. 21 

400 pounds of ore, at $5.75 1. 03 

1,900 pounds coal, at $2.75 2. 33 

Furnace waste, 5 per cent of $16.50 83 

11.50 
Cost of grey forge pig iron 16. 50 



Cost of 1 ton muck bar 28. 00 

January 1, 1909. 

EXHIBIT E. 



Cost of making busheled scrap bar. 

Direct and tonnage labor $3. 07 

Indirect labor 1. 50 

Incidentals: Fire brick and masons; blacksmith, tools, and tongs; rolls and roll 

turning; grinding fire brick 58 

Coal, 900 pounds, at $2.75 1. 11 

Furnace waste, 11 per cent of $16 1. 76 

Total cost of conversion 8. 02 ' 

Add cost of scrap material 16. 00 

Total cost of scrap bar 24. 02 

Used for rerolling into refined iron bars. 



T'.llO .- HKDULE C MKIAI.s. AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

STEEL RAILS. 

[Paragraph 130.] 

THE CAMBRIA STEEL COMPANY, OF PHILADELPHIA, PA., SUB- 
MITS ITS INCOME ACCOUNT FOR ONE YEAR. 

ARCADE BUILDING, 
Philadelphia, January 80, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We submit herewith our income account presented at 
our shareholders' annual meeting for the year 1906; also the facts 
of our rail business for the same period. Trie amount paid for labor, 
in connection with the manufacture of rails, shows the direct expend- 
iture for labor in manufacturing, or about 39 per cent. The remain- 
ing 61 per cent of the cost covers amount paid for purchased metal, 
ores, fuel, supplies, transportation, etc., of which a large proportion 
is labor. 

The principal products of the plant are steel rails, structural 
shapes (plain and fitted for buildings), steel plates, bar steel, loco- 
motive and car forgings. steel cars, and a large line of agricultural 
steel and other specialties. 

The total tonnage sold and shipped in 1906 was 789,27,5 gross 
tons. The net earnings from all the manufacturing operations of 
the company, after deduction for depreciation, were $4,347,704, or 
an average profit of $5.51 per ton. This profit includes profits on 
all the stages of manufacture which are legitimate and justifiable, 
including a large percentage of the ore and fuel which is owned 
exclusively by this company and which is figured at net cost to the 
company. In declaring the total earnings as stated, current repairs 
and maintenance of plant are included and a proper deduction has 
been made for annual depreciation. The paid-m capital of the 
company is $45,000,000 and the return is 9.67 per cent under the 
very favorable conditions prevailing in 1906. On the item of rails 
the profit was $3 per ton. The above facts have all been furnished 
to trie Department of Commerce and Labor, and if desired, the 
department can verify them. 

First. We wish to submit to the committee the fact that, while it 
may be possible for a few of the larger steel manufacturing concerns 
to stano: a reduction in the rates in the Dingley tariff, except on 
orders for Gulf and Pacific coast points, other concerns which buy 
all or nearly all of their raw materials will be driven out of business. 
Companies which control their own raw material, railroad lines, 
and lake transportation to their works have other advantages, due 
to their great aggregations of capital, and have works located at the 
various sales centers of business, all of which advantages enable them 
to manufacture and market their products at a considerably less 
cost per ton than any of their competitors, will survive. 

Second. Any material reduction in the duties on steel can only be 
met by corresponding reductions in the wages paid for producing the 
ores, coal, coke, and limestone, and for labor in the several manufac- 
turing operations. . 



STEEL RAILS THE CAMBRIA STEEL CO. 



7911 



Third. We feel sure that the committee does not wish to further 
consolidate the steel manufacture of the country in fewer hands 
than now and thus reduce competition, which will certainly be done 
by radical reductions in the steel schedule. 
Respectfully submitted 

POWELL STACKHOUSE, 
President Cambria Steel Company. 



EXHIBIT A. 
Analysis of cost of standard rails produced by Cambria Steel Company in 1906. 





Total cost 
to Cambria. 


Labor in 
mining and 
manufac- 
turing. 


All pur- 
chased met- 
als, ores, 
fuels, sup- 
plies, 
transporta- 
tion, etc. 




$4.62 


10.93 


$3 59 


Coke (113 per cent) . . . 


2.97 


1.25 


1.72 


1 /imestone (54 per cent) 


.80 


.22 


.58 




2.03 


1.41 


.62 


Pig iron produced 


13.77 


4.57 


9.20 


Vverage (including pig iron purchased) 


H.70 


4.58 


10.12 




15. 65 


4.75 


10.90 




18.68 


6.25 


12.43 


Bessemer blooms 


20.70 


7.19 


13.51 


Standard rails (mill cost) 


24.34 


'.'. 42 


14. 92 


Vclmlnlstrative and selling expenses 


.56 


.33 


.23 










Total cost 


24.90 


o9.75 


15. 15 











39 per cent. 



6 61 per cent. 



EXHIBIT B. 

To the shareholders of Cambria Steel Company: 

The board of directors submits herewith a report of the operations of your company 
for the twelve months ending December 31, 1906: 

Net earnings from operations $4, 897, 704. 03 

To which add receipts from rents, income from investments, interest on 

bank accounts, etc 510, 971. 40 



Deduct fixed charges under Cambria Iron Company lease, interest on 
term notes, and incidentals 



5, 408, 675. 43 
444, 672. 28 



Net income twelve months 4, 964, 003. 15 



Total to credit income account December 31, 1906 4, 964, 003. 15 

Which has been appropriated as follows: 

Dividend No. 10, paid August 15, 1906 $675, 000 

Dividend No. 11, paid February 15, 1907 .... 675, 000 

- $1, 350, 000. 00 

Set aside to betterment and improvement account 3, 000, 000. 00 

Set anide to general depreciation fund 550, 000. 00 



Balance carried to credit of profit and loss account. 



4, 900, 000. 00 
64, 003. 15 



7912 S(11EDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

The profit and loss account, which had a credit December 30, 1905, of . . $2, 278, 709. 87 
Has been increased by balance of income account transferred as above . . 64, 00.1 K 

2,342,713.02 

And by collection of accounts charged off in previous years. $17, 944. 37 
Reduced by bad or doubtful accounts in 1906 3,429.98 

- ' 14, &14. oJ 

Leaving balance to credit of profit and loss account, December 

31, 1906 2,357,227.41 

The assets and liabilities of your company, as shown by your general books, are as 

follows: 

ASSETS. 

Property, works, coal, ore lands, etc., subject to payment of $338,720, 
annual rental under Cambria Iron Company lease for 999 years, 

being 4 per cent on $8,468,000 Cambria Iron Company's stock $33, 090, 304. 68 

Plant additions to December 30, 1905 $7, 027, 783. 30 

Plant additions, year ending December 31, 1906 2, 289, 696. 08 

9, 317, 479. 38 

Total 42,407,784.06 

Equipment additions 728, 168..2S 

Real estate, titles in Cambria Steel Company !98, 

Sundry securities, principally stork in ore and steamship companies. . 1, 515, 

Inventory account, materials, supplies, and products 7, 983, 1. 

Special deposit $1,250,000.00 

Cash... 692.653.84 

1,942,653.84 

Accounts receivable 4, 311, 205. 64 

Bills receivable 285, 100. 19 

59, 472, 391. 95 

LIABILITIES. 

Capital stock a 45,000,000.00 

General depreciation fund 2, 650, 000. 00 

Betterment and improvement fund 7, 000, 000. 00 

Accounts payable, including dividend No. 11, $675.iK) 2, 465, 164. 54 

Profit and loss account 2, 357, 227. 41 

59,472,391.95 

The last of the $3,500,000 term notes, issued December 15, 1900, were paid on 
December 15, 1906. 



STEEL. 

E. H. GARY, CHAIRMAN OF THE UNITED STATES STEEL CORPO- 
RATION, SUBMITS INFORMATION RELATIVE TO CANADIAN 
STEEL MAKING AND BOUNTIES PAID. 

EMPIRE BUILDING, NEW YORK, 

January 27, 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Wa-shington, D. C. 

MY DEAR SIR: The following item appeared in the Journal of 
Commerce of this city on January 21: 

According to the Canadian Gazette the general manager of the Dominion Iron and 
Steel Company has stated that this company can furnish steel to the world's markets 

a The authorized capital stock named in charter is $50,000,000, of which $45,000,000 
have been issued. The remaining $5,000,000 of stock is unissued, and can only be 
issued at not less than par. 



STEEL KAILS STEEL PRODUCTS. 



7913 



at $6 per ton less than Pittsburg (which for purposes of comparison is selected as the 
cheapest producer), for the following reasons: The cost of assembling the raw materials 
at Pittsburg is at the lowest estimate, $3.25 per ton, to which must be added the cost 
of conveying the manufactured iron to the seaboard, namely, $2 per ton, while the 
cost of assembling at Sydney, which is on the seaboard, and 1,000 miles nearer the 
great markets, is given at 79 cents per ton, the difference in favor of Sydney being 
calculated at $6 per ton as stated. 

The Canadian Gazette referred to in the article is an official paper 
published in London. 

The iron and steel industry in Canada is fostered by bounties 
which operate as follows: 



m 


Year. 


On proportion 
mad^ from 
Canadian ore. 


On proportion 
made from 
foreign ore. 


'Ssr 
Pig iron 


1 1908 


Per gross ton. 
$2.352 


Per gross ton. 
91.232 


Puddles iron bars from Canadian pig iron 


/ 1908 


1.904 
1.848 


.784 


Steel, manufactured in Canada from ingredients of which not less 


\ 1909 

J1908 


1.176 
1.848 






1909 


1.176 




Rolled round wire rods, not over f inch in diameter, manufac- 
tured from steel produced in Canada from ingredients of which 
not less than 50 per cent of the weight thereof consists of pig 
iron made in Canada, when sold to wire manufacturers for use 
or when used in making wire in their own factories in Canada, 
on such wire rods made after December 31, 1906 






6.72 











In addition to the above bounties the Canadian manufacturers of 
iron and steel are protected by a duty of $2.80 per gross ton on pig 
iron and $7.84 per ton on steel rails and structural steel. 
Yours, very truly, 

E. H. GARY, 
Chairman United States Steel Corporation.* 



STEEL PRODUCTS. 

ONE OF THE EMPLOYEES AND PROFIT SHARERS OF THE UNITED 
STATES STEEL CORPORATION THINKS VARIOUS STATEMENTS 
MADE ARE MISLEADING. 

9712 AVENUE M, CHICAGO, ILL., 

January SO, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

House of Representatives. 

HONORABLE SIRS: Anent the framing of a new tariff schedule, 
there appears in La Follette's Weekly a synopsis of Mr. Carnegie's 
statement before your committee that the average profit of the 
United States Steel Corporation during the year 1907 was $15 per 
ton on every ton of iron and steel it sells. 

Mr. Carnegie is or should be too well informed on the steel busi- 
ness to admit of the above being an unintentional mistake; there- 
fore it must have been a deliberate falsehood. 



7914 >< HIM LE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

As one of the 35,000 employees who have invested their earnings 
with this corporation on its profit-sharing plan, I protest against this 
statement of the man of Homestead and indigent libraries being 
allowed to go before the people uncontradicted. 

A reference to the 1907 report of the corporation shows the net 
earnings, after deducting replacement and depreciation, as $135,000,000 
and not $150,000,000, as Mr. Carnegie is said to have stated. 

This income was derived from the sale of 10,000,000 tons of steel 
partly, not wholly, as LaFollette infers. 

A glance at page 18 of the corporation report will show an additional 
sale of 2,000,000 barrels of Portland cement, 31,000 tons of spelter, 
and 24,000 tons of sulphate of iron. 

In addition, are included the earnings of the construction depart- 
ment of the American Bridge Company. 

Another source of earnings is from freightage from its own railroads, 
and those earnings would accrue to the company if the steel plants 
were owned by independent manufacturers. 

I wish to call your attention to the fact that the corporation hud 
to mine or manufacture 60,000,000 tons of unfinished product befoiv 
it could take profit from sale of its completed product. 

On page 23 you will note that $160,825,822 was paid out in salaries 
and wages, or, as Mr. Carnegie would figure, $16 per ton as the aver- 
age cost of producing and selling. 

Does Mr. Carnegie, La Follette, and that class propose that if a 
farmer chance to operate a gristmill and bakeshop that out of the 
three businesses he is entitled only to a moderate profit on doughnuts ? 
Under that condition what becomes of the man that raises wheat to 
sell, or manufactures flour alone, or is but a baker? 

If you are to limit the Steel Corporation to a moderate profit on 
finished product, how about the independent who makes pig iron for 
sale? 

In conclusion, will say that I am for moderate reductions of the- 
tariff on all lines of industrial material and necessities, but we, who 
have invested our earnings with this company or corporation feel that 
unfair statements relating to it should not go uncontradicted. 

Likewise, even as Laocoon, we ''fear the Greeks bearing gifts," and 
suspect that Mr. Carnegie would view our losses with perfect equa- 
nimity if the corporation should be compelled to disintegrate and the 
properties fall again into his hands as holder of the first mortgage 
bonds. 

From an employee's standpoint, the corporation is one of the most 
advanced hi its aims for aiding an employee to attain a competence. 
It adopted publicity of its own accord, and in most essentials is a 
model of efficiency. 

Why the target of so much misrepresentation ? 
Sincerely, 

F. H. OSBORN. 



IRON AND STEEL SHEETS. 7915 

IRON AND STEEL SHEETS. 

[Paragraphs 131-133.] 

A COMMITTEE OF IKON AND STEEL SHEET MANUFACTURERS 
SUBMITS STATEMENT EMBODYING ITS VIEWS RELATIVE TO 
TARIFF LEGISLATION. 

STEUBENVILLE, OHIO, 

January 18, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 
GENTLEMEN: At a meeting of sheet manufacturers representing 90 

ger cent of the capacity of the United States, exclusive of the United 
tates Steel Corporation mills, held in Pittsburg on December 10 
last, the undersigned were appointed as a special committee on tariff,, 
with instructions to present to your honorable body such information 
as you may require or desire pertaining to the costs and conditions 
prevailing in this business. 

We accordingly submit herewith for your consideration such data, 
including costs of production and selling prices, as we have been able 
to procure bearing on the subject, and our reasons based thereon 
for asking that adequate protection be accorded these products in 
the new tariff measure soon to be enacted by Congress. 

BLACK SHEETS. 

Attached hereto will be found a sheet marked "Exhibit A," which 
sets fojth in detail w r hat can be regarded as the average cost of pro- 
ducing No. 24 gauge steel sheets (common or black) in the Pittsburg- 
Youngstown- Wheeling district, which has probably the lowest cost 
of production for the commodity under consideration of any point 
in the United States, and the correctness of which is duly certified 
to by parties actively engaged in the business; it is of course being 
understood that the determinations arrived at are not necessarily 
the cost of any particular plant, but are what the parties certifying 
regard as a fair average cost for the district. 

In the compilation of these costs sheet bars have been figured on 
the basis of $27.50 per gross ton delivered to point of consumption, 
this being their present selling price and representing not more than 
the average price for the last several years, the price for 1907 averaging 
about $30. In this connection it would seem well to explain that 
more than half of the companies engaged in the manufacture of sheets 
purchase their raw material, i. e., sheet bars, in the open market, hav- 
ing no facilities for making them. 

No. 24 gauge has been selected as the figuring basis for the reason 
that it is a standard one and the costs of manufacture of the other 
gauges are relative, and they are proportionately protected by the 
present tariff. 

No cost exhibit has been submitted for iron sheets, for the reason 
that very few are made, and besides, the cost of production is hi excess 
of that for steel sheets. 

It will be noted that, as shown by Exhibit A, the cost of No. 24 gauge 
black steel sheet is $47.90 per gross ton, or $2.14 per hundred pounds. 

For reasons which will be apparent to you it has been founa impos- 
sible to procure specific information as regards the detailed cost of 



7916 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

manufacture of foreign sheets, but we are informed and believe reli- 
ably so that the cost of production in England to-day for No. 24 gauge 
is about $34.25 per gross ton, or $1.52 per hundred pounds, the cost 
in both Germany and Belgium being lower. But in the absence of full 
data bearing on this point we can only judge the cost of manufacture 
by the selling price, and at the present time the English price of No. 24 
gauge at Liverpool is $1.65 per hundred pounds. 

Assuming that the cost of production is not greater than the selling 
price, and comparing with the domestic costs, we arrive at the follow- 
ing results, all based on No. 24 guage: 

NEW YORK. Per 100 pounds. 

Domestic mill cost $2. 14 

Freight 16 

- $2.30 

English selling price, Liverpool 1. 65 

Freight 10 

1.75 



Difference per 100 pounds 55 

NEW ORLEANS AND GALVE8TON. 

Domestic mill cost 2. 14 

Freight 30 

- 2.44 

English selling" price, Liverpool 1. 65 

Freight , 11 

1.76 



Difference per 100 pounds 68 

PACIFIC COAST. 

Domestic mill cost 2. 14 

Freight 95 

- 3.09 

English selling price, Liverpool 1. 65 

Freight 35 

2.00 



Difference per 100 pounds 1. 09 

The difference, as indicated by the foregoing, of 55 cents per hundred 
pounds, or practically six-tenths cent per pound between the domes- 
tic manufacturer's cost f. o. b. New York (without profit) and the 
English selling price at the same point (including presumably some 
profit) shows that any material reduction in the present rates would 
allow the latter to successfully invade this important market. 

But in considering the Pacific coast situation we find conditions 
even worse, as under the present rates it would show the advantage 
to be in favor of the foreign manufacturer, but not sufficient, per- 
haps, to justify him in establishing warehouses there and cover the 
cost of distribution, but any recession, even though slight, from 
present rates would undoubtedly serve as a stimulant which would 
result hi putting this market in his possession not only along the 
coast, but for a considerable distance inland as well. 

GALVANIZED SHEETS. 

In the manufacture of galvanized sheets, black steel sheets, such 
as are treated upon hi the preceding paragraphs of this brief, con- 
stitute the base. These black sheets after being pickled and cleaned 



IKON AM) STKKL KAILS ISAAC M. SCOTT ET AL. 7917 

are coated with spelter, the process of pickling and coating being 
very similar to that employed in the manufacture of tin plate. The 
domestic cost of manufacturing galvanized sheets above the black sheet 
or base is, including labor, spelter, etc., approximately $14.50 per ton, 
or $5.25 per ton exclusive of spelter, and the extra duty of two-tenths 
cent per pound accorded this product under the present tariff (over 
the same gauges of black sheets) was intended to cover the increased 
cost of manufacture in this country (from the base sheet to the finished 
galvanized product) over that obtaining in foreign countries, including 
difference in cost of labor, as well as the difference in cost of pickling 
and coating supplies; and from the best information we have been 
able to obtain on the subject we believe that the slight additional 
protection accorded galvanized sheets does not more than cover this 
difference in costs. 

All that has been said in that part of our brief pertaining to black 
sheets will apply with equal or greater force to the galvanized product, 
and any changes from present rates should be proportionate. 

With regard to prices, it might be cited that in 1905 there was 
formed in England a combination of manufacturers known as the 
"British Galvanized Sheet Iron Association." This association is a 
very powerful one and was formed with the view of fostering the 
English export trade in galvanized sheets, the idea being to keep the 
English home price at a point that would show a satisfactory profit to 
the manufacturer, distributing the surplus production in foreign mar- 
kets and at such prices as could be obtained; the loss, if any, in case 
it was found necessary to sell at a price below cost of production, to 
be absorbed by the members of the association pro rata. It is readily 
apparent that, while such an arrangement is simplicity itself, its 
effectiveness for disposing of tonnage produced in excess of home- 
market requirements and gaining a foothold in foreign markets is 
unquestionable. 

All things considered, it is clearly apparent that only a slight reduc- 
tion in present tariff rates would be required to enable the foreign 
manufacturer to use our markets as a dumping ground for his sur- 
plus production, thus displacing tonnage that otherwise would be 
made in this country; and to meet this situation, should it arise, it 
would be necessary for the domestic producer to effect a reduction in 
his costs, which would undoubtedly mean lower wages not only to 
the workmen employed directly in the mills, but in the production 
of materials and supplies used oy the sheet manufacturer as well. 

In order that the extent of the sheet industry may be in a manner 
measured, attention is invited to the following statistical data : 

Number of companies actively engaged in the business 25 

Number of roll trains operated 364 

Number of galvanizing pots operated 90 

Number of employees (estimated) 21, 000 

Annual pay roll (estimated) $20,000,000 

Annual production of black sheets grosp tons. . $1,350,000 

Tonnage galvanized ' do $600, 000 

The process of manufacture from ore in the ground to finished 
sheet product, in the tonnage shown above, requires the following 
raw materials: 

Sheet bars gross tons. . 1, 600, 000 

Pig iron and scrap required to produce above tonnage of bars: 

Pig iron gross tons. . 1 , 700, 000 

Scrap do 425, 000 

61318 AP 09 12 



7918 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND .MA N fFAC'ITIiKS ()K. 

Coke required in the production of above tonnage of pig iron. . .net tone. . 2, 125, 000 

Coal required in the production of above tonnage of coke do 3, 500, 000 

Limestone required in production of above tonnage of pig iron .gross tone. . 850, 000 

Ore required in the production of above tonnage of pig iron do 3, 125, 000 

Coal required throughout different stages of manufacture for steam and 

heating purposes net tons. . 3, 225, 000 

Spelter for coating do 75, 000 

Total estimated labor cost from ore in the ground to and including sheet 

bar $11,000,000 

Labor cost in finishing (as shown above) $20, 000, 000 

Total labor cost $31, 000, 000 

Estimated transportation charges on above tonnages $9, 500, 000 

As will be noted by reference to cost Exhibit "A", the most impor- 
tant item in the cost of manufacture of sheets is that of wages, and 
we believe it can be truthfully said that in no branch of the manu- 
facturing business are the workmen more intelligent and better paid, 
the average wage, including men and boys, being approximately 
$3 per day. 

Owing to the peculiar nature of the process of manufacture, a highlv 
skilled class of workmen are absolutely necessary, and in no branch 
of the steel business is the proportion of English speaking workmen 
so large as it is in that of the making of sheets. Automatic machin- 
ery to no considerable extent can be utilized, and as a matter of fact 
the improvements in the machinery employed and in the process 
of manufacture for many years past have been very slight, although 
efforts in this direction have constantly been made by the leading 
engineers of the country. 

The inability to make use of automatic machinery in the manu- 
facture of sheets has prevented an increase hi the tonnage output 
and a corresponding reduction in cost of manufacture, and there 
are no indications of any changes in this regard in the future. 

At the meeting held on December 10, referred to, it was the con- 
sensus of opinion of those present that so long as Congress would 
doubtless decide that a revision of the tariff on steel products was 
necessary, the changes should be kept within reasonable limits, and 
that any reduction in present rates in excess of from 15 per cent to 
20 per cent would result in confusion in the business necessitating 
a lower cost basis, which would undoubtedly mean lower wages to 
the workman. 

It was believed that the rates now applying on the products cov- 
ered by articles No. 131 and No. 132, metal schedule, are consistent, 
and any changes therefrom should be made proportionate. 

It is hoped that your committee may be able to see its way clear 
to recommend a reduction, if any, not greater than that suggested 
in the foregoing, thereby entitling it to the thanks of all directly or 
indirectly engaged in the industry for which we are speaking, includ- 
ing stockholders in the companies represented, as well as the work- 
men employed in the mills. 

Respectfully submitted. 

ISAAC M. SCOTT, 

Chairman. 
JONATHAN WARNER, 

W. S. HORNER, 

Committee. 



IRON AND STEEL BAILS ISAAC M. SCOTT ET AL. 7919 

EXHIBIT A. 

Cott of producing No. 94 gauge black steel sheets. 

Cost per ton. 

Sheet bare, at $27.50 gross ton, 2,531 pounds (1 .13 per cent) $31. 07 

Credit: 

Sheets (2,240 pounds) ] 

Scrap (274 pounds) } 1. 67 

Waste (17 pounds) J 

Net cost of material 29. 40 

Cost per ton. 

Other 
Labor, charges. 

Rolls $0.40 

Coal for heating and annealing 87 

Superintendent, foreman, and clerks $0. 04 

Toimage labor 8. 46 

Day hands (regular) 1. 66 

Extra day hands 23 

Unloading sheet bars 04 

Shearing sheet bars 11 

Weighing and delivering sheet bars 12 

Unloading coal and removing ashes 03 

Extra fireman for heating furnaces 03 

Engineers and assistants 09 

Roll turning and polishing 06 

Changing and handling rolls 04 

Weighing and handling finished product 23 

Scale and cinder labor 04 

Crane operators 13 

Scrap boys 12 

Loading shearings and bar ends 02 

Bundling and stenciling 04 . 

Warehouse and shipping labor 39 

Reshearing 07 

Total producing labor 11. 95 

Labor in repairs .10 

Labor in maintenance 01 

Material in repairs 17 

Material in maintenance 15 

Hot and cold neck grease 12 

All other lubricants .04 

Brasses 05 

General works expense 70 

Steam 16 1.09 

Water .^^- - * .01 

Electric light and power 04 

Stable expense 02 

General plant depreciation 1. 00 

General expense (selling, taxes, insurance, interest, discounts, 
etc . ) : 1. 62 



12.99 5.51 
18.50 



Total cost of 1 gross ton (2,240 pounds) No. 24 gauge black sheets 47. 90 

Cost of 100 pounds No. 24 gauge black sheets 2. 14 



7920 SCHEDULE C METALS, AXD A I \ NT1 \< 1C ItKS OF. 

We hereby certify that in our judgment the foregoing fairly exhibits 
the average cost of manufacture of No. 24 gauge black steel sheets in 
the Pittsburg-Youngstown- Wheeling district. 

LA BELLE IRON WORKS, 

ISAAC M. SCOTT, President. 

THE EMPIRE IRON AND STEEL COMPANY, 

JONATHAN WARNER, President. 

THE YOUNGSTOWN SHEET AND TUBE COMPANY 

J. A. CAMPBELL, President. 



TIN PLATE. 

[Paragraph 134.] 

INDEPENDENT TIN-PLATE MANUFACTURERS FILE A SUPPLE- 
MENTAL BRIEF RELATIVE TO TIN-PLATE INDUSTRY. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 15, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 
DEAR SIR: 

Paragraph 134, TIN PLATES, TERNE PLATES, AND TAGGERS' TIN. 
(Verbal presentation November 25, 1908, by William U. Follansbee.) 

Present duty - - 1-5 cents per pound. 

Recommended reduction 20 per cent 3 cents per pound . 

Suggested new duty 1. 2 cents per pound. 

This brief represents the independent manufacturers, as follows: 
Number companies, 12; aggregate capital, $10,000,000; total mills, 
103; capacity, tons, 300,000; capacity, boxes, 6,000,000; total em- 
ployees, 7,000; annual pay rolls, $5,000,000. 

The entire tin-plate industry of this country employs direct about 
20,000 hands and produces about 600,000 tons, or 12^,000,000 boxes, 
valued at $43,000,000, which requires 

1,400,000 tons ore, 850,000 tons coke, 400,000 tons limestone, 750,000 tons 

pig iron, 700,000 tons steel; total labor including transportation $8, 000, 000 

600,000 tons tin plate; total labor, including transportation 13, 000, 000 

Total wages per annum paid American workmen dependent upon 
the tin-plate industry, over 60 per cent of which, as shown, is 
paid direct in making the tin plate alone 21, 000, 000 

The suggested duty of 1.2 cents per pound is absolutely necessary 
to continue the tin-plate industry, fairly protect labor, and permit a 
reasonable return upon the capital invested. This is required because 
of (I) lower foreign labor; (II) lower cost foreign raw materials; 
(III) smaller capital foreign investment; (IV) freight costs from 
mills to consuming points. 

These items are shown in detail, as follows: 



TIN PLATE VVM. U. FOLLANSBEE ET AL. 



7921 



I. LOWER FOREIGN LABOR. 

Standard of comparison. Skilled labor in United States: Wage 
scales of Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers 
and Tinplate Workers' International Protective Association of 
America. 

Skilled labor in Wales: Wage scales of Tin Plate Section Dock, 
Wharf, lliverside and General Workers' Union of Great Britain and 
Ireland. 

General labor in United States : As actually paid by a most modern, 
well-equipped mill in the Pittsburg district taken fi ^rri the pay rolls 
for the entire year 1907. 

General labor in Wales: Estimated at one-half the rates pa : d in 
United States. (Common labor in Wales is unquestionably less 
than the rate shown by this estimate.) 





Per gross ton. 


United 
States. 


Wales. 


Hot rolling . .... 


$9.76 
.425 
.485 
.87 
525 
3.325 
.375 
1 Xt& 


$4.555 
.305 
.275 
.666 
.20 
1.66 
.278 
1.245 
1. 245 
.466 
.415 
.20 
1.22 




Pickling 




Cold rolling 


General mill 


White pickling 




Washing 


1.555 
.88 
.51- 
.4Co 
2.44 


Rising . .. 


Assorting 


Boxing 


General tin house 




22.95 


12.73 



$22.95 minus $12.73 equals $10.22 per 2,240 pounds, equals 45.6 cents per 100 pounds. 
II. LOWER COST FOREIGN RAW MATERIAL. 

Steel bars from which tin plate is rolled, present market prices as 
shown by trade quotations : 

Cost at mills in United States $27. 50 

Cost at mills in Wales 21.50 



Difference per 2,000 pounds finished tin plate 6. 00 

III. SMALLER CAPITAL FOREIGN INVESTMENT. 

The cost of plant in the United States is just about 50 per cent 
greater. Cost of labor, as shown, nearly double. Raw material 
charges nearly 30 per cent higher. Interest charges about double. 

(1) To produce 25,000 tons per annum requires capital in- 
vestment United States. Wales. 

In plant $500, 000 $333, 333 

In labor, raw and finished material, accounts receivable, 
etc 500, 000 



1,000,000 
583, 333 



250,000 
583, 333 



Greater in United States 416, 667 at 6#= 25, 000 

Equivalent to per ton output $1=5 cents per 100 Ibs. 

o Equals 30 cents per 100 pounds. 






7922 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



United States. Wales. 

(2) Annual chareee repairs, upkeep of plant and depreci- 

V ation .......7. $50,000 $25,000 

Greater in United States. . .$25,000=per ton output $1=5 centa per 100 Ibs. 

IV. FREIGHT COSTS FROM MILLS TO CONSUMING POINTS. 

Fully two-thirds of the consumption of tin plate in the United 
States is at the seaboard, New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore, 
New Orleans, San Francisco, etc. 

Freight from mills in Pittsburg district at shipping weight of 106 
pounds, including package as well as contents, as required by the rail- 
roads. 

To New York at freight rate of 18 centa equals 19 cents per 100 Ibs. 
To New Orleans at freight rate of 34 cents equals 34 cents per 100 Ibs. 
To San Francisco at freight rate of 66.2 cents equals 70 cents per 100 Ibs. 

Average 41 cents per 100 Ibs. 

Freight from mills in Wales located at seaports at common rate 
of 9 shillings 6 pence per 2,240 pounds of net contents, weight of 
package not included as permitted by steamship lines to New York, 
equals 10 cents per 100 pounds. 

A large portion of the tin-plate consumption is seasonable and 
in regular sizes for which the requirements can be anticipated by 
many months, while the size and character of boxes of tin plate 
make it particularly desirable for ballast, thus permitting as low- 
water freight cost from Wales to New Orleans and San Francisco 
as to New York, accordingly the freight item from mills to consuming 
point is very important and may show as high as 60 cents per 100 
pounds differential in favor of Wales. With any spirit of fairness 
to American mills it would appear this factor should not be con- 
sidered at any less than the average from American mills to seaboard 
points, as shown above, of 41 cents per 100 pounds. 



RECAPITULATION. 



I. Lower foreign labor 45.6 cents per 100 pounds 

II. Lower cost foreign raw materials 30 centa per 100 pounds 

III. Smaller capital foreign investment 10 centa per 100 pounds 

IV. Freight costs from mills to consuming points, average. 41 cents per 100 pounds 

$1.266 per 100 pounds 
Equivalent to 1.27 centa per pound. 

The suggested new duty of 1.2 cents per pound is accordingly 
only fairly protective and by no means prohibitive. 

The establishment of the American tin-plate industry under a 
reasonable tariff most emphatically has not increased the cost to the 
domestic consumer, but on the contrary has unquestionably reduced 
the price, as shown below: 



Welsh tin-plate duty added. 



American tin plate. 



18?2-1878. 



187V 18 I 



1904-1908. 



Duty 15 per cent ad valorem. 

Average price f7.3ft 



1 cent per pound ... . 1.5 cents per ixxmd. 
$4.81 SL4S 



TIN PLATE TOOL STEEL. 7923 

The productive capacity of American mills considerably exceeds 
the consumption of the tin plate, showing frequent shut downs and 
keen competition. 

The request of the master sheet-metal workers association, Syra- 
cuse, N. Y., for free charcoal iron tin plate for roofing purposes 
(Tariff Hearings, first print No. 46, page 6801), while possibly well 
intended, is not tenable: 

1 . As it is ordinarily wholly impossible to distinguish charcoal iron 
tin plate from other qualities it would encourage deception and 
evasion of the tariff. 

2. United States consular reports show no roofing plates are made 
in England or Wales from charcoal iron. 

3. Several American manufacturers are producing charcoal iron 
tin plate and the industry would be destroyed. 

4. Tin plate for roofing purposes is being produced regularly by 
American mills of a quality better than any other ^nation at any time. 
This product can be secured under guarantees of wearing quality 
never possible from the Welsh makers. 

CONCLUSION. 

The American tin-plate industry is the youngest in the iron and 
steel line. It has only been established by much travail. It has 
been exceptionally adversely treated by former tariffs. It is the 
item by far most greatly influenced by labor and the peculiarity of 
greatest consumption at seaboard points. Although begun only 
seventeen years ago under the McKinley tariff of 2.2 cents per pound 
the suggested new duty of 1.2 cents shows a reduction of 45 per cent. 
Any lower duty would entail great hardships upon American labor 
and capital and tend to cripple the industry. 
Respectfully submitted. 

Win. U. Follansbee, of Follansbee Brothers Co., mills at 
Follansbee, W. Va.; Chas. E. Pope, of Pope Tin Plate 
Co., mills at Steubenville, Ohio; E. T. Wier, of Phil- 
lips Sheet & Tin Plate Co., mills at Clarksburg, 
W. Va.; E. R.Crawford, of McKeesport Tin Plate 
Co., mills at McKeesport, Pa. Committee. 



TOOL STEEL. 

[Paragraph 135.] 

CHARLES P. SEARLE, OF BOSTON, MASS., THINKS THAT THE 
REQUEST FOR AN INCREASE OF DUTY ON HIGH-SPEED 
TOOL STEEL SHOULD BE DISREGARDED. 

50 CONGRESS STREET, BOSTON, 

- January 19, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR MR. PAYNE: I have at hand a catalogue of the Crucible Steel 
Company of America in German, issued by the Hamburg agency, and 
I desire to draw attention especially to the statements made in pages 
6, 7, 8, 9, 12, and 27 thereof. The catalogue in substance states that 



7924 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES <>F. 

the Crucible Steel Company of America manufactures various kinds 
of steel mentioned in the catalogue, especially drawing attention to 
the fact that the high-speed tool steel manufactured by the Crucible 
Steel Company of America is the best high-speed tool steel in the 
market, and states on page 7 that the Americans have gone ahead in 
the manufacture of high-speed tool steel and have succeeded in inter- 
esting capitalists in the same, and that the question of simplifying 
the production and the advancement of the quality have been solved, 
and that there has been a great improvement in the quality of high- 
speed steel, and that the Crucible Steel Company of America has made 
a specialty of producing the highest class of high-speed tool steel and 
thinks that the experiments that have been made by the Americans 
have resulted in giving to the trade a steel of the very highest quality. 
This steel is sold in Germany in competition with the steel made by the 
German manufacturers and shows most conclusively that the claim of 
the Crucible Steel Company of America that duties should be ad- 
vanced upon high-speed tool steel are entirely unfounded and demon- 
strates beyond any question that no protection whatever is needed 
upon any classes of steel mentioned in the catalogue, and we suggest 
that the highest rate to be imposed in the new tariff law upon any 
steel of any value be 3 cents per pound; indeed, no protection 
whatever is necessary except for a matter of revenue and, if the 
Government is to derive an}' revenue at all for steel there must be 
some reduction from the present rates of duty; if not, within five 
years none of the various classes of steel mentioned in the catalogue 
of the Crucible Steel Company of America can be imported into this 
country. 

Very respectfully submitted. 

CHARLES P. SEARLE. 



THE CRUCIBLE STEEL COMPANY OF AMERICA, PITTSBURG, 
PA., SUBMITS STATEMENT RELATIVE TO CRUCIBLE STEEL 
AND HIGH-SPEED TOOL STEEL. 

PITTSBURG, PA., January 26, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman of Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I desire to present as briefly as possible the wishes of 
our company in regard to the new proposed tariff, and will begin by 
stating that the principal grades manufactured by us are covered by 
paragraph 135 of the Dingley tariff bill, as follows: 

Steel ingots, cogged ingots, blooms, and slabs, by whatever process made; die 
blocks or blanks; billets and bars and tapered or beveled bars; mill shafting; pressed, 
sheared, or stamped shapes; saw plates, wholly or partially manufactured; hammer 
molds or swaged steel; gun-barrel molds not m bars; alloys used as substitutes for 
ateel in the manufacture of tools; all descriptions and shapes of dry sand, loam, or 
iron-molded steel castings; sheets and plates and steel in all forms and shapes not 
specially provided for in this act, all of the above valued at one cent per pound or 
less, three-tenths of one cent per pound; valued above one cent and not above one 
and four-tenths cents per pound, four-tenths of one cent per pound; valued above 
one and four-tenths cents and not above one and eight-tenths cents per pound, six- 
tenths of one cent per pound; valued above one and eight-tenths cents and not above 
two and two-tenths cents per pound, seven-tenths of one cent per pound; valued above 
two and two-tenths cents and not above three cente per pound, nine-tenths of one 



TOOL STEEL. 7925 

cent per pound; valued above three cents per pound and not above four cents per 
pound, one and two-tenths cents per pound; valued above four cents and not above 
seven cents per pound, one and three-tenths cents per pound; valued above seven 
cents and not above ten cents per pound, two cents per pound; valued above ten 
cents and not above thirteen cents per pound, two ana four-tenths cents per pound; 
valued above thirteen cents and not above sixteen cents per pound, two and eight- 
tenths cents per pound; valued above sixteen cents per pound, four and seven-tenths 
cents per pound. 

The volume of the business is not very large and amounts to 
perhaps 300,000 or 400,000 tons a year. It is a class of steel that is 
higher in price and superior in quality to the ordinary steel called 
" bar steel." Most of it is crucible and refined high-grade, open-hearth 
steel. The present duty permits of large importations and is not 
sufficiently protective. Makers in foreign countries sell to this 
country at lower prices than they sell to their home consumers and 
use this country very often as a dumping ground. Our industry in 
this way has been made to suffer for years, and the English and Ger- 
man manufacturers do quite a large business in the United States, 
selling very often at prices which we can not meet. 

The belief that a reduction in rates is inevitable was expressed by 
Mr. William G. Park, the late chairman of this company, when he 
appeared before the Committee on Ways and Means and asked to 
have it made as light as possible, say 10 per cent off existing duties. 
We also desire to nave a duty placed upon high-speed steel, a new 
article of manufacture, for which there is no protection in the Dingley 
tariff bill. We propose the following scale, and name figures which 
we think would cover this description of steel: 

Steel selling at 20 cents per pound and not over 25 cents per pound, 
7 cents per pound; above 25 cents and not over 30 cents per pound, 10 
cents per pound; above 30 cents and not over 36 cents per pound, 15 
cents per pound; over 36 cents per pound, 25 cents per pound. 

The article largely used in the manufacture of this grade of steel 
is metallic tungsten, which sells at about 75 cents per pound, and 
this high grade of steel has no duty on it other than the 4.7 cents per 
pound which is now exacted on all steel valued above 16 cents per 
pound. 

The above expresses the views of all the other manufacturers with 
whom I have talked regarding the grades of steel manufactured by 
them, and I believe would be universally satisfactory. 
Very truly, yours, 

CRUCIBLE STEEL COMPANY OF AMERICA, 
FRANK B. SMITH, President. 



COLUMBIA TOOI STEEL CO., CHICAGO HEIGHTS, ILL., THINKS 
DUTY ON HIGH-GRADE STEEL SHOULD BE INCREASED. 

CHICAGO HEIGHTS, ILL., February 26, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Regarding proposed change in paragraph 135 of the 
steel schedule referred to in statement of B. M. Jones & Co., Hough- 
ton & Richards, and Edgar T. Ward & Sons, Boston, Mass. Inas- 



7926 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

much as I am quoted in this article, I feel justified in asking your 
consideration of the following points: 

In the first place the article referred to is contradictory. The 
article states that if the duties are increased American mechanics 
will be compelled to use inferior tools, intimating, of course, that 
the foreign product is a better quality than maufactured in this 
country. 

Then they quote my article and affirm my statement that Euro- 
pean steels can be duplicated or excelled in this country by half a 
do/en tool-steel makers and sold at a lower price. In explanation 
of this peculiar condition, you will understand that up to within 
the last sixty-five or seventy years there was no tool steel whatever 
manufactured in the United States and prior to that time the material 
was supplied almost entirely from England. The result was that 
the English steels built up a prestige the effects of which are still 
apparent, although conditions have changed, and there is no question 
but that the American steel maker to-day leads the world. 

If it were possible for all tool steel entering the United States to be 
classified according to its quality as shown by analysis, there would 
be no need of a protective tariff. The traditions built up prior to the 
manufacture of tool steel in America still have such a strong hold 
among certain classes that when a standard European make of steel 
fails to give results, the workman invariably will take the blame on 
himself for not giving it the proper handling, whereas if a failure 
occurs with American steel, it is always the steel that is at fault. 

A recerit analysis of one of the most widely sold imported steels, and 
which sells at a price of 15 cents or 16 cents per pound showed phos- 
phorus, 0.025, and sulphur, 0.024. Any American tool-steel maker 
will furnish a steel as low or lower in these impurities for not to 
exceed 8 cents per pound. 

Another analysis of an European steel recently exploited in this 
country shows phosphorus, 0.03, sulphur, 0.018, with 0.50 tungsten. 
This steel is also sold at 15 cents or 16 cents per pound and could be 
reproduced at not over 9 cents per pound. 

There are any number of manufacturing concerns in this country 
who will bear witness to the fact that certain wily Frenchmen invaded 
the country a few years ago and sold any amount of a supposedly 
miraculous tool steel which was said to be manufactured from rare 
ores controlled by the French Government, the price being between 
40 cents and 50 cents a pound. Those who were unfortunate enough 
to buy the material found that it was almost worthless and of a 
quality that could be duplicated in this country for 5 cents or 6 cents 
per pound. 

Tnis case is an extreme illustration of the credulity of some Amer- 
ican tool steel buyers and their curious confidence in anything manu- 
factured on the other side of the ocean. 

If my statement quoted by parties referred to and affirmed by 
them is correct, a prohibitive duty would serve as protection to the 
American tool-steel buyer and would develop proper appreciation 
of American-made goods. 

If it were possible to regulate the quality of imported tool steel 
by laws similar to the pure-food laws, and every purchaser had a 
ready means of knowing the qualitv of the material, as shown by 
analysis, then my statement that the American manufacturers can 
duplicate foreign-made steels at a lower price -would be accepted 



TOOL STEEL WIRE. 7927 

universally, and the business would remain in this country, tariff or 
no tariff. 

This would be manifestly impossible. In addition to which, the 
tool-steel consumer has no facilities for making chemical analysis. 
In fact, in most cases would not understand what a chemical analysis 
indicated. It is difficult to judge the quality of tool steel with a sin- 
gle test, as an inferior quality of steel may give very good service the 
first time it is hardened, but deteriorates much more rapidly with 
successive hardenings than a better quality. 

It is therefore our contention that a duty should be placed on all 
foreign tool steels sufficiently high to protect the American maker 
against unfair competition by inferior grades, and also to protect the 
buyer and direct his attention to the superior quality of American- 
made tool steels. 

Very truly, yours, COLUMBIA TOOL STEEL COMPANY, 

C. F. CLARAGE, President. 



THE CRUCIBLE STEEL COMPANY, PITTSBURG, PA., WRITES AN 
EXPLANATORY NOTE RELATIVE TO THE SUGGESTED SCHEDULE 
FOR HIGH-SPEED STEEL. 

PITTSBURG, PA., March 3, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Referring to the letter of our president, Frank B 
Smith, dated January 26, 1909, particularly in regard to high-speed 
steel, would say that when the manufacturers came to prepare and 
print their suggestions as to phraseology and rates in paragraph 135, 
they made the following change: ^ Valued above 36 cents and not 
above 42 cents per pound, 20 cents per pound; valued above 42 
cents per pound, 45 per cent ad valorem." 

You will notice that this differs from Mr. Smith's suggestion in 
that it reduces the duty on steel valued from 36 cents to 42 cents 
per pound 5 cents per pound, and makes the duty on steel above 
42 cents an ad valorem duty instead of specific. 

Mr. Smith, who is now ill, desires this letter to be an explanation 
of the change and a supplement to his letter of January 26, so that 
it will be consistent with the printed suggestions. 

Trusting you will file this with his original letter, we remain, 
Yours, very truly, 

JNO. A. SUTTON, 

Second Vice-President. 



WIRE. 

[Paragraph 137.] 

THE BRODERICK & BASCOM ROPE COMPANY, ST. LOUIS, MO., 
FILES INFORMATION RELATIVE TO FOREIGN WAGES IN THE 
WIRE MAKING INDUSTRY. 

ST. Louis, Mo., February 1, 1909 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Referring to your favor of January 25 in reply to 
ours of January 21, we beg to submit herewith a statement of com- 



7928 S.III.IM-I.K C MKTALS. A X I MANUFACTUKKS OF. 

parative costs of manufacture of wire in the United States and Eng- 
land furnished us by an experienced wire manufacturer of many 
years' experience both in England and in the United States, he having 
been associated for many years with Fred. Smith & Co., of Halifax, 
England, whose letter we submitted with our amended brief, dated 
January 13, 1909. We consider the figures as reliable as it is possible 
to obtain and believe they will afford the committee an opportunity 
to form a fair idea of the difference in cost of production here and 
abroad. 

We also desire to quote from a letter received from another manu- 
facturer in England, viz, Wm. Jas. Glover & Co., of St. Helens, 
Lancashire, as follows: 

Yours of January 4 to hand. It ia difficult to answer your question in crisp manner, 
as much depends upon the system of working. We have our own system, which 
reduces the wire-drawing wages very materially, from 50 per cent to 60 per cent, as 
compared with earlier methods, but that is not a greatly reduced percentage on the 
total value, including material. I will try to tell you what you ask. 

The cost in this -country for a trades-union wire-drawer would work out at, per week 
of fifty-four hours, something like the following when on piecework rates, i. e., at per 
hundredweight for the work done: 

Shillings 
per week. 

Drawing mild wire (Swedish) 30 

Drawing hard wire (crucible) 45-55 

Drawing hard plow steel wire 50-60 

The latter is higher in cost per hundredweight, very considerably, but less work 
can be done, hence the slight difference per week. 

The cost per ton for drawing from No. 5 rod to No. 10 gauge in mild steel may be 
anything down to 10s. per ton (bare wages), and for hard cteel, say, 30s. per ton. for 
plow uteel, say. 30 to 35s. per ton, according to temper and work turned off. The 
increase for English size is proportionate down to 20-gauge, 0.036 inch, which costs 
approximately: 



Mild steel (per hundredweight): s. d. 

Gauge No. 10 6 

Gauge No. 11 7 

Gauge No. 12 8 

Gauge No. 13 10 

Gauge No. 14 11 

Gauge No. 15 1 1 

Gauge No. 16 1 3 

Gauge No. 17 1 7 

Gauge No. 18 2 

Gauge No. 19 2 6 

Gauge No. 20 , 3 6 



Hard steel (per hundredweight): . d. 

Gauge No. 10 1 

Gauge No. 11 1 2 

Gauge No. 12 1 4 

Gauge No. 13 1 6 

Gauge No. 14 1 8 

Gauge No. 15 1 10 

Gauge No. 16 2 1 

Gauge No. 17 2 5 

Gauge No. 18 3 

Gauge No. 19 4 

Gauge No. 20 5 6 



Plow steel, 15 per cent extra. 

Cleaners and annealers average 30e. per week and laboring hands anything from 20s. 
per week and upward. 

I do not see how this will help you, as the American rates of pay may be very much 
higher per man per week on hard patent and plow steel and less on the soft wire. 

Everything depends on the system of working. We have wire-drawing machines 
for high-strain thick wire now, such as are not operated anywhere else in this country, 
but we can not expose our costs to outsiders. We gain in time saved, which means 
less standing charges and work charges per hundredweight. 

We have no reliable data of the wages in the United States on wire drawing, either 
per ton or per hour, except that some wire-drawers get as much on high-strain wire as 
$50 to $60 per week. This conveys nothing more than saying it is double the money 
they could earn in an ordinary wire mill here. The wire-drawer drawing big money 
on wire blocks, however, is now disappearing and more economical methods have 
taken their place. The American drawing machines make it very difficult to compete 
with in high-strain wire, and in soft wire it is quite impossible, even without duty, 
to Rend wire into the United States. 

The cost of drawing soft wire in the United States from No. 14 to No. 26 will be 
nominal, as it can be drawn on continuous wire-drawing machines at very low cost, 
the finer sizes especially. 



WIIU-: --BRODERICK & BASCOM BOPE CO. 7929 

With reference to that part of the letter which speaks of American 
wire drawers receiving as nigh as $50 and $60 per week, we are confi 
dent that, if any such wages are paid, it is only for the very fine sizes 
of high-grade music quality wire, i. e., size No. 30 and finer. Still, 
if such wages are paid in this country, even for these very fine sizes 
of high-grade wire, it may be the grounds for a broad assertion on the 
part of certain manufacturers in advocating a continuance of exces- 
sively high rates of duty on wire. 

These fine sizes of high-grade music quality wire are sold at the 
highest price, and comparatively only a small amount of same is 
ever used in the manufacture of wire rope. 

As a matter of fact, there is comparatively only a very small 
amount of wire imported, valued at over 6 cents per pound in Europe. 
We do not think the total amount of such wire will exceed 10 tons 
per annum, and the finer sizes of high-grade music quality wire (say 
No. 30 and finer) would all be included in this class. On this class of 
wire, valued at 6 cents per pound or over, we recommended in our 
original brief of November 25, 1908, a duty of 30 per cent ad valorem, 
but if manufacturers of this wire in the United States desire further 
protection on same, we have no objection, for, as stated above, but 
little rope wire would be included in this class. 

Our purpose has been to aid your committee in the collection of 
reliable data, and with that in view we have exerted every effort to 
secure all the information possible; and we are therefore inclosing 
another letter just received from Andrew Rathbone, of Warrington, 
England (Exhibit A) , whose previous communication was sent you 
with our amended brief. 

We would like to have all these original letters returned to us for 
our file when they have answered the purpose and requirements of 
the committee. 

If desired, we will submit the original letter of Wm. Jas. Glover & 
Co., from which we have quoted herein; but the balance of their letter 
merely refers to other matters and is foreign to this subject. 

The foregoing is respectfully submitted, and if we can be of further 
service to the committee, we trust to receive your command. 
Respectfully, 

H. J. BAILEY, 
ForBRODERicK & BASCOM ROPE Co. 



EXHIBIT A. 

21 VILLARS STREET, WARRINGTON, ENGLAND, 

January 20, 1909. 
Messrs. BRODERICK & BASCOM ROPE Co., 

St. Louis, Mo. 

DEAR SIRS : Replying to yours of the 31st ultimo, I have pleasure in 
supplying you with the information you require. We pay the cleaners 
equivalent to 30 -cents per ton, and the annealers we pay the first 
hand equivalent to 10 cents per hour, whilst his assistant, of whom 
there are two, for an output of about 50 gross tons per week we pay an 
equivalent to 8 cents per hour. A tempering furnace capable of 
making an output of 50 tons per week will have to work night and day. 



7930 -' HBDULE C METALS, AND MANll At TTKES OF. 

Therefore two shifts would be required, and as it takes three persons 
to each shift, there are six, two of whom are responsible, that is, one 
to each shift, and to whom we pay an equivalent of 12 cents per hour 
each, and to the assistant, one of whom on each turn is at the swifts, 
who is paid at the rate of 9$ cents per hour, and the other, a youth, 
works the blocks and is paid at the rate of 7 cents per hour. The 
frames contain 20 blocks, and one frame for the output above men- 
tioned is sufficient. That is, 20 swifts or rests, one furnace, and one 
frame of 20 blocks, with one responsible man to manage the furnace. 
One man at the swifts and one youth at the blocks. We pay the 
wire-drawers according to the following list: 



Size. 


1-hole. 


2-hole. 


3-hole. 


4-hole. 


5-hole. 


6-hole. 


10 


Cents. 
8 


Cent*. 
11 


Cents. 
19 


Cents. 
23 


Cents. 
26 


Cents. 
30 


11 


1 


ii} 


20 


24 


27 


:u 


12 


9 


14} 




25 


28 


32} 


13 


10 


10 


21} 


27} 


311 


35 


14 


11} 


17J 




33 


37 


40} 


55 


i4J 


19} 


30 


35 


40} 


M] 


10 


17 


23 


33} 


37 


46 


52 


17 


23 




37 


42} 


52 


58 


18 


25J 


34} 


42} 


46} 


57} 


64 


19 


33 


4(u 


53} 


59 


09 


80 


20 


40 


51. 


62} 


81} 


92i 


104 


21 




84 


102 


112 


132 


150 

















For gauges below No. 21 we pay on a different list, and take the 
wire in No. 16, so that it is irrespective of the number of holes, for 
we pay an equivalent to 

No 22 23 24 25 28 

$ 2 2} 3 4 5 

All these prices are paid on a hundredweight of 112 pounds. 
I trust you will find the above what you require, and am. 
Yours, faithfully, 

ANDREW RATHBONE. 

Copies of actual time notes, showing wages paid in an American 
mill about the date given, viz, June, 1904. 

United States of America vrire-drawers' wages. 
[Price list for drawing tempered cast-steel rope wire to 230,000 pounds per sqare inch per 100 pounds.] 



Size. 


1-hole. 


2-hole. 


3-hole. 


4-hole. 


5-hole. 




Cents. 
5) 


Cents. 
6) 


Cents. 
8 


Cents. 
9 


Cents. 
10} 




6 


7 


10 


IM 


r'j 




71 


D 




12} 


144 




8 


9 


m 


14 


16 




9 


10 




16 


18 




10 


11 


144 


18 


20? 




10) 


114 


16 




23i 




114 


134 


18 


24 


28 




124 


16 




29 


314 




14} 


19 






36 




16} 


20 




31}/ 


404 




224 


29 


314 




45 




27 


34 


36 




54 






40 


45 


54 


63 




36 


45 


584 


72 


81 




45 


54 


674 


81 


90 




56 


68 


85 


100 


110 






76 


100 


120 


130 



WIBE BRODERICK & BASCOM ROPE CO. 



7931 



Getting up No. 19 hard steel. 

{100 tons per square inch from No. 5 rods.] 

AMERICAN PROCESS. 





Output in ten hours. 


Rate per 
100 
pounds. 


Total. 


2 hole, 
1 man, 
3 hole, 
1 man, 
4 hole, 
1 man 


9 


} 

1 


Cwts. 
53 

17 
8 


qrs. 

2 

3 
3 


Ibs. 
8 

12 
20 


*. d. 
3 

8 
1 8 


L. 







t. 
15 
13 
16 


d. 


4 

8 


two 20-inch blocks 


14 


three 22-inch blocks 


19 


and boy 8-16 inch blocks 




2 


5 





Cost per ton, 2 18s. 4d. 
ENGLISH PROCESS. 




Output in ten hours. 


Rate per 
hundred- 
weight. 


Total. 


1 hole, 
1 man, 
3 hole, 
1 man, 
4 hole, 
2men, 


7 


1 
} 


Cuts. 
35 

11 
3 


qrs. 



1 


tos. 



10 


*. d. 
2J 

8J 
2 7J 


L. 






. 
7 

8 
8 


d. 
3 



9 


1 block 


12 


1 block -. 


19 


3-18 inch blocks 




'1 


4 






Cost per ton, 3 11s. 3d. 



A. JOHNSON. 



Date. 


1 hole 6. 


2 hole 9J. 


Date. 


1 hole 6. 


2 hole 9J. 


May 16 


Pounds. 
7,205 


Pounds. 
3,360 


May 25 


Pounds. 
8 <) 65 


Pounds. 
3 120 


May 17 


15,850 




i May 26 


6 575 


3 955 


May 18 


10,750 


2,150 


May 27 


10 210 


3 405 


May 19 


13,430 


690 


May 28 


13 880 




May 20 


14, 795 


1,245 


May 30 


14 665 




May 21 


4,655 


2,715 


May 31 


13 130 




May 23 


14 815 










May 24 


3,820 


6,520 


Total 


152,045 


>7 j(j9 















Fourteen days: 

1 hole 6, 152,045 pounds, at 1 J cents $26. 60. 78 " 

2 hole 9, 27,160 pounds, at 2| cents 7. 46. 90 

Two hours day work, at 20 cents 40 

34.47. 68=7 3s. 8d. 

Equivalent English pay on above work, 13 10s. 3d. 

1 hole 6 takes in all larger sizes. Some of this wire would be 00 or anything between 
that and No. 6. 
Total, 8 wire drawers worked the 29 wire blocks. 



7932 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



Getting up No. 19 hard steel Continued. 
A. FREDERICKSON. 



I'.'- 


2 hole 10]. 


1 hole 8. 


Date. 


2 hole 10}. 


1 hole 8. 


\I-IV It. 


Pound*. 
8,555 


Pound*. 


May 25... 


Pound*. 
8,270 


Pound*. 


Ifav 17 


8 535 




May 20 


8,425 




VI ,v IB 


9 330 




May 27 


9,785 




Mav 1Q 


8 080 




May 28 


8,790 




\| ., v >, i 


8 680 




May 30 


8,500 




Mav21 


5,770 




Mav 31 


9,485 


2,160 


May 23 

M i' '1 


(i. 410 
8,400 


:::::::::::. 


Total 


117,015 


2,160 















Fourteen days: 

1 hole 8," 2,160 pounds, at 2 cents fO.43.20 

2 hole 10J, 117,015 pounds, at 3$ cents 38.02.98 



Equivalent English pay on above work, 17 11s. 5d. 

All from rod. 

Total, 8 wire-drawers worked the 29 wire blocks. 

C. MURDOCK. 



38.46. 18=8 4s. Id. 



Date. 


2 hole 9J. 


1 hole 8. 


Date. 


2 hole 91. 


1 hole 8. 


May 16 


Pounds. 
5,410 




May 25... 


Pound*. 
5,920 




May 17 




Out, sick. 


May26 


7,090 




May 18 




Out, sick. 


Mav 27 


8,010 




Mav 19 


5.895 




Mrty 28 


7,775 




Hay 20 


6 460 




May 30 


7,785 




Mav 21 


5,605 




May 31 


9,005 




Mav 23 


5 745 










May24 


6,745 




Total -. 


81,445 

















Fourteen days: 

2 hole 9$, 81,445 pounds, at2|cents 

Equivalent English pay on above work, 10 12s. 

All from rod. 

Total, 8 wire-drawers worked the 29 wire blocks. 

E. BENSON. 



$22. 39. 73=4 13s. 2d. 



Date. 


1 hole 8. 


2 hole 10}. 


3 bole 12. 


4 hole 14. 


May 16... 


Pounds. 


Pound*. 


Pounds. 
6,060 


Pounds. 


May 17 






7,625 




May 18 






6,960 




May 19 






5,670 




May 20 




1,935 


1 820 


2 250 


May 21 




1,370 




2 f, 65 


H"T 




2 050 




2 X-0 


May 24 






5 245 


1 010 


May 25 






5,870 




May 26 




1 825 


1 350 


235 


May 27 




2 085 




3 3JO 


May 28 




2 330 




2 8*0 


Mav 30 




1 795 




3 35 


May 31 


1 01.1 


1 980 




2 9^5 








: 




Total 


1 015 


15 370 


40 620 


23 010 













Fourteen days: 

1 hole 8, 1,015 pounds, at 2 cents $0. 20. 30 

2 hole 10|, 15,370 pounds, at 3$ cents 4. 99. 52 

3hole^2, 40,620 pounds, at 4$ cents 18.27.90 

4 hole i4, 23,010 pounds, at 9 cents 20.70.90 



Equivalent English pay on above work, 20 15s. 

All from rod. 

Total, 8 wire-drawers worked the 29 wire blocks. 



44. 18. 62=9 4s. Id. 



WIRE BKODERICK & BASCOM HOPE CO. 



7933 



Getting up No. 19 hard steel Continued. 
A. RASMUSSEN. 



Date. 


1 hole 8. 


3 hole 12. 


2 hole 10}. 


Barbing No. 9 
wire. 


May 16 


Pounds. 


Pounds. 
6,990 


Pounds. 


Pounds. 


May 17 




7,305 






May 18 




6,590 






May 19 




6,310 






May 20 




6,920 






May 21 




5,160 






May 23 




5,615 






May 24 .... 




4,710 




8,115 


May 25 




1,485 


6,370 


2,545 


May 6 




7,185 




1,620 


May 27 




6,160 






May 28 




6,170 






Mav 30 




6,875 






Mav 31 


1,120 


6,770 


875 














Total 


1,120 


84,255 


7,245 


12,280 













Fourteen days: 

1 hole 8, 1,120 pounds, at 2 cents 

Barbing 9, 12,280 pounds, at 2f cents 

2 hole lOf, 7,245 pounds, at 3} cents . 

3 hole 12, 84,255 pounds, at 4J cents . 



Equivalent English pay on above work, <23 2s. 6d. 

All from rod. 

Total, 8 wire-drawers worked the 29 wire blocks. 

A. ERICKSON. 



$0. 22. 40 

3.37.70 

2. 35. 46 
37.91.47 

43.87.03=92s. 9d. 



Date. 


1 hole 13. 


2 hole 15. 


Date. 


1 hole 13. 


2 hole 15. 


May 16 


Pounds. 
5,465 


Pounds. 
1,980 


May 25... 


Pound*. 

5,985 


Pounds. 
2,065 


May 17 


5,775 


2,050 


May 26 


5,980 


2,070 


May 18 


5,725 


1,835 


May 27 


5,985 


1,995 


May 19 


5,445 


2,135 


May 28 


5,545 


1,870 


May 9 


5,510 


2,270 


May 30 


6,510 


2,025 


May 21 


5 015 


1,665 


May 31 


5,845 


1,835 


May 23 


4 080 


1 885 








May 24 


6^100 


1,895 


Total 


78,965 


27,575 















Fourteen days: 

1 hole 13, 78,965 pounds, at 3 cents. 

2 hole 15, 27,575 pounds, at 6 cents. 



Equivalent English pay on above work 

This man takes the 12 hard and draws 2 hole 15. 
Total, 8 wire drawers worked the 29 wire blocks. 

61318 AP 09 13 



$23.68.95 
16.54.50 

40.23.45=8 7s. 8d. 
1813s v 7d 



7934 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

MUSIC WIRE. 

[Paragraph 137.] 

HON BENJAMIN F. HOWELL, M. C., FILES LETTER OF THE 
WEBB WIRE WORKS, NEW BRUNSWICK, N. J 

NEW BRUNSWICK, N. J., February 2, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO PAYNE, 

Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Referring to section No. 137 of the Dingley tariff of 
1897, which fixes the duty on music wire at 45 per cent ad valorem, 
we respectfully submit the following for your consideration : 

Before starting our mill we found, upon investigation, that although 
much music wire was manufactured in this country, large quantities 
of the higher-grade wire were imported. We believed that there was 
here a market not covered by the larger mills. It was to supply this 
market and furnish the highest quality of music wire in direct competi- 
tion with foreign makers that this company was incorporated in March, 
1906. We are an independent concern. Our mill was therefore 
organized and equipped especially with the idea of producing a wire 
of the highest quality. Working along this line, it has been a matter 
of much effort and expense to develop and tram labor sufficiently 
skillful to produce a music wire that would compete with the imported 
brands. Furthermore, it would be impossible to reduce this labor 
expense if our quality is to be maintained. We are now marketing 
our wire in active competition with the imported brands, but we find 
under the present tariff schedule that this competition, especially 
with the German makes, is so acute that any reduction in the present 
tariff would enable foreign makers to drive us out of this field. 

In our own mill we have proved it to be erroneous to state, as 
have some importers, that American manufacturers can not and do 
not produce a music wire equal in all respects to the foreign-made 
article. But we have found it tobe true that music wire of equal quality 
can not be made as cheaply here as abroad, owing to the largely 
increased labor expense, the main item hi the production of this 
article. Unless a reduction in the present tariff shall compel us 
and similar concerns to abandon the manufacture of such a wire, 
they and we will continue to give occupation to a class of highly 
skilled laborers and help in maintaining the high industrial standard 
of our country. We wish in this connection to draw to your atten- 
tion that the process of the manufacture of music wire consists of a 
series of small operations requiring individual handling which makes 
it impossible to employ to any large extent labor-saving devices, as 
can be done in other tranches of the steel industry. A comparison 
of prices of music wire without a comparison of quality and size is 
misleading. 

In conclusion, we would state that the present tariff is not pro- 
hibitive. This is clearly shown by the continued large importation 
of music wire, figures for which we are unable to obtain, as there is 
no special classification of this article. We may further add that the 
growth and pronounced prosperity of the piano industry in recent 
years may be regarded as a demonstration that the tariff has worked 



MUSIC WIRE BOLTS, NUTS, WASHERS, AND RIVETS. 7935 

no hardship to the piano manufacturers, the chief users of this high- 
grade music wire. 

Yours, respectfully, 

THE WEBB WIRE WORKS. 



BOLTS, NUTS, WASHERS, AND RIVETS. 

[Paragraphs 145, 163, and 167.] 

A COMMITTEE REPRESENTING THE MANUFACTURERS OF BOLTS, 
NUTS, WASHERS, AND RIVETS RECOMMENDS A NEW CLASSI- 
FICATION FOR THESE ARTICLES. 

LEBANON, PA., U. S. A., January 22, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, M. C., 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: In transmitting the inclosed brief on bolts, nuts, 
washers, and rivets I feel it proper to state the business and location 
of each of the committee named by the manufacturers' meeting: 
C. W. Scofield is of the Lake Erie Iron Company, Cleveland, Ohio; 
Charles J. Graham, of Graham Nut Company, Pittsburg, Pa. ; Clem- 
ent R. Hoopes, of Hoopes & Townsend, Philadelphia, Pa.; W. F. 
McKenzie, of Upson Nut Company, Cleveland, Ohio; James Lord, 
of American Iron and Steel Manufacturing Company, Lebanon, Pa. 
One member of the committee, W. S. Comly, did not sign, as he 
had no authority from his company to do so, although he expressed 
no objection to the brief. 

Three of the committee were selected from east of the Aileghenies, 
three from west of them. 

Yours, truly, JAMES LORD, President. 



LEBANON, PA., U. S. A., January 8, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: A meeting of bolt, nut, and rivet manufacturers was 
held at Pittsburg, Pa., December 15 and 16, to consider the question 
of tariff revision on above items. A committee of six was appointed 
to secure the views of the manufacturers, to edit them, and present 
them to your committee. 

In the performance of this duty we recommend that the above 
items be included in one paragraph, as they are allied lines, and to 
a great extent made by bolt, nut, and rivet manufacturers. 

We would state that "finished hinges and hinge blanks" (in para- 
graph 145), and "horse, mule, and ox shoes" (in paragraph 163), 
have no connection with our industry. Spikes are made to some 
extent by the above manufacturers, but more largely as a separate 
industry ; therefore we will not make any suggestions about them. 



7936 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

We feel that the items named at the head of this brief namely, 
bolts, nuts, washers, and rivets can be properly classed together 
and bear one rate of duty. 

We think that the Dingley tariff is not equitable in its treatment 
of these items, varying the rate from 1 cent to 2 cents per pound; we 
feel that one rate should apply to all of them. 

And it is further inequitable in that it applies the same rate to 
nuts of all sizes and varieties, whether they cost 2 cents or 60 cents 
per pound the same criticism applying to bolts, though to a less 
degree. In explanation of this statement, the word "nuts" includes 
finished case-hardened nuts; the material in these costs from li to 
2 cents per pound, while the labor cost in some diameters is 58 or 60 
cents per pound. 

And with regard to bolts, small sizes, as 1 by 1, will cost approxi- 
mately 10 cents per pound, while larger sizes, say by 15, cost 
approximately 1.9 cents per pound. 

To overcome this injustice of classification we recommend that 
there be an ad valorem as well as specific duty. 

In making the recommendation we are not unmindful of the fact 
that the difference in diameters, standards, sizes, and threads of items 
in question, and the small units of sale, make America, under present 
conditions, a difficult field for European competition. But we have a 
neighbor north of us, whose standards and methods are the same as our 
own who has a number of bolt and nut works, with a product greater 
than can be used in the Dominion of Canada wiiose rates of freight 
to the centers of purchase differ but little from our own. They have 
so protected the items in discussion as to preserve the market entirely 
to their own manufacturers, although previous to the adoption of this 
policy it was a profitable field for our products. 

Mexico has also adopted a much higher tariff on our goods for the 
stated purpose of protecting the bolt and nut works now built and 
projected in that country. 

Under these conditions we recommend that practically the same 
tariff schedule be applied to these items as is now charged by the Cana- 
dian tariff; namely, 75 cents per 100 pounds specific and 25 per cent 
ad valorem. 

This will be a great reduction from present schedule on the bolts of 
greatest tonnage, and a much greater reduction on rivets. On bolts 
of small diameters, and on nuts and washers it would be an advance, 
due to the ad valorem. But we recommend it because we believe it 
to be more equitable, and for the purpose of correcting what we think 
was erroneous in the Dingley tariff. 

We sought the views of 34 manufacturers, representing in our judg- 
ment 95 per cent of the country's output of bolts, nuts, and rivets, 
though a much smaller per cent of washers. Of the 30 replies, 29 
agree unreservedly to the views herein expressed. One party replies 
that they will state their views later. 

In regard to the presentation of cost sheets of production in this 
country, this business is one of such detail that the estimate book of 
one manufacturer is larger than Webster's Dictionary. 

And in regard to securing foreign costs, we have tried in vain to 
secure them. Even if we. had them it would not be possible to take 
the piecework prices of different countries working on different 



BOLTS, NUTS, WASHERS, AND RIVETS CARD CLOTHING. 7937 

standards, as to heads, threads, sizes, shapes, and diameters, and 
make an intelligent comparison with the costs of this country. 

We are, therefore, compelled to omit the comparative statement 
of costs. 

Very truly, yours, C. W. SCOFIELD 

CHAS. J. GRAHAM 
CLEMENT R. HOOPES. 
W. F. MCKENZIE 
JAMES LORD. 



CARD CLOTHING. 

[Paragraph 146.] 

SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT FILED BY SEARLE & PILLSBURY, 
BOSTON, FOR IMPORTERS OF CARD CLOTHING. 

50 CONGRESS STREET, 

Boston, January 19, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : The American manufacturers state that card clothing 
does not enter in general consumption. This is not really the case, 
as every kind of textile mill in America, including woolen, cotton, 
silk, etc., use this production, and it is largely bought by the machine 
makers in America, and the excessive duty on this product is a serious 
tax on their business, and just in the same way every cotton and 
woolen mill buys this clothing as one of the necessary supplies, and 
the duty compels them to pay a large extra sum every year for card 
clothing, and so is a handicap to all the users in cheap production and 
prevents them from producing for export. We calculate that the 
users of card clothing in America have to pay fully $600,000 per 
annum more for their card clothing than they would do if the duty 
was abolished. 

We think the statement that $1,200,000 capital is employed to 
produce the same amount of card clothing is very much exaggerated. 

Wages. Great stress is laid on the difference in wages paid between 
the foreign and American labor. The following facts speak for 
themselves : 

1. There is employed in this manufacture a comparatively small 
number of skilled operatives These are what are termed the " machine 
tenters," and we find that in America these men are paid a weekly wage 
of $20 to $22.50 for fifty-eight to sixty hours (say, 36 cents per hour 
for fifty-nine hours per week), and this same class of labor in England 
is $11 for fifty-four nours (say, 20 cents per hour, or 30 cents per hour 
for the same number of machines), and in America each one of these 
skilled laborers runs or works an average of 15 machines each as 
against English mills where they only run 10 machines each, so that, 
as a matter of fact, the difference in skilled labor is not even double, 
and not 150 per cent as stated in their petition. 

In order to show in a concrete manner the result of this question 
of cost of labor, we will take the case of Messrs. Ashworth Brothers, 
of Fall River, who are by far the largest producers of cotton card 



7938 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

clothing in America. Their production is generally reckoned as so 
many sets of clothing, and the selling price in America of one of 
these sets is about $100 per set made in C. W. C. foundation of cloth. 
There is on each of these sets a duty and freight equal to $43.50; that 
is, every consumer of foreign card clothing has to pay $43.50 more 
than he would have to do if no duty. Of course, tne production of 
the American makers as regards selling price is regulated by this, 
so that the consumer has to pay this duty not only on imported 
card clothing, but also on American made. To show how this duty 
bears on the cost of labor in the production of each set, we find in a 
well-managed card manufactory in England the total cost for labor 
is $7 per set, so taking a liberal view of the matter the American 
maker will produce one of these sets for $14 for total cost of 
labor, so that seeing that the duty on each set is $43.50 they are pro- 
tected to the exterit of three times the total cost of labor; that is, 
they have all their labor free ($43.50 $14 = $29.50) and $29.50 fur- 
ther protection. As regards the duties on raw materials, it should 
be stated that the American makers produce their own cloth and wire, 
and consequently the actual duty on these materials do not operate, 
and as they are manufactured in America the extra cost or these 
cloths and wire will not be much greater than in England, and seeing 
tha,t they are protected as shown above to the extent of entire free 
labor and $29.50 toward other expenses and cost of materials. As 
regards the other materials used, namely, wire, the total cost at 
0.1463 per pound, as given by them, the cost of the wire would (tak- 
ing 100 pounds to a set) amount to $14.63 per set for wire, so that to 
sum up the position it amounts to this: 

That the duty and freight being protection to the American maker of card 
clothing, per set of clothing amounts to $43. 50 

Cost of all labor for making an entire set in America on a very liberal basis, is 14. 00 

This is allowing for rather more than double English wages. 

Total cost of all wire used in a set of card clothing, as it takes 100 pounds to pro- 
duce a set, and its value is according to their own figures 0.1463 per pound, 
equals 14. 63 

The only other material used in the production of a set of card clothing is the 
cloth foundation, and this they produce themselves in America, and can not 
possibly cost more, taking 10 square yards to the set, at $2 per square yard, 
amounts to $20 per set 20.00 

48.63 

So that the American maker is protected to the extent of $43.50 
per set, and yet the total cost of labor and all materials, wire, and 
cloth only amounts to $48.63, so that if the duty had been $5 more 
they would have been protected to the extent of all cost of labor and 
all materials, the selling price being $100, and the foreigner has to pay 
duty and freight, $43.50, leaving $56.50, so that the foreigner has to 
be content with only $56.50, whereas the American maker gets $100. 
Surely this is protection with a vengeance, and this duty ought really 
to be reduced by 50 per cent at the least. 

In this industry in America the number of skilled laborers is very 
few, taking for instance the machine tenders, who are practically the 
only specially skilled men; all the firms in America put together have 
not more than 60 to 65 such men, as is proved by their statement that 
there are 1,039 machines, and, as one man runs 15 to 20 machines 
each, it is conclusive when we state 65 men we are within the mark. 
It is well within the mark to say that nearly all the other employees 



CAKD CLOTHING. 7939 

used in the actual production are either unskilled men or women, 
whose wages are of course much less than the skilled men. We should 
think that all the workers employed in this industry in America do 
not total more than 250 people, and yet the consumer has to pay an 
annual penalty for the sole benefit of some half dozen employers or 
capitalists and these 250 employees. We calculate, as before stated, 
this annual penalty amounts to no less than $600,000. Better to 
pension all the lot tnan go on paying tlu's, let alone to consider increas- 
ing it. 

We have based the foregoing figures at $100 per set as the selling 
price by the American makers, and this we think is correct, as they 
themselves value the total production at $1,200,000 for 934,338 
square feet, being equal to $1.28 per square foot, and, as there are 92.3 
square feet in a set, it really works out at 92. 3 X $1.28 = $118 as the 
average selling price, whereas we have only called it $100, so that the 
American makers have an enormous margin of profit. 

Referring to the decision of the courts to admit card clothing with 
the new machinery for which it is intended at the same rate of duty 
as the machinery, we must say that this appears to us to be perfectly 
just and right, as the carding engine is not a complete machine with- 
out the card clothing. We consider that this principle might be ex- 
tended with great advantage to the cotton spinning and woolen and 
machine making industries of the United States, and that it would 
be only fair to those industries to admit all card clothing at the same 
rate of duty as machinery. 

SEARLE & PILLSBURY, 

Attorneys for Importers. 

AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS OF CARD CLOTHING FILE SUP- 
PLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR REQUEST FOR 
INCREASED PROTECTION. 

NORTH ANDOVER, MASS., 

February 12, 1909. 
The WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

'Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN : In reply to a request of Searle & Pillsbury, attorneys 
for Importer Evan Arthur Leigh, Boston, Mass., of December 29, 
1908, for ad valorem duty and new classification on card clothing, 
we respectfully submit the following: 

First. Let it be clearly understood that Mr. Evan Arthur Leigh 
is an importer of textile machinery and an agent of one of the largest 
card clothing manufacturers in England, and most of the statements 
made by his attorneys are misleading and not true. 

If Mr. Leigh or his attorneys were practical manufacturers and 
acquainted with the manufacture of card clothing in this country, 
they certainly would not have made the misleading statement in 
their brief as to the "antiquated methods and machinery used by 
the American manufacturers, and the inferior quality of their goods." 
The card clothing factories in this country are fitted up with the 
very best machinery that is possible to obtain, and the quality of 
goods is equal in every respect to that of other countries. It cer- 
tainly would seem strange that two-thirds of the domestic consumers 
of card clothing would accept that " inferior" quality of American 



7940 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

make while they have an opportunity to get the imported clothing 
at a lower price. 

As stated by the attorneys of Evan Arthur Leigh, card clothing has 
been specifically provided for in the tariff acts for over twenty-five 
years. 

This article is manufactured from so very many different mate- 
rials that an ad valorem rate would be confusing and verv unsatis- 
factory, and for these reasons Congress has in the past wisely pro- 
vided a specific rate. 

The petitioner claims that if card clothing was not specifically pro- 
vided for in the tariff it would be dutiable under paragraph 193 under 
the present act, as articles or wares, hi whole or in part of metal, at 45 
per cent ad valorem. 

Under no circumstances could card clothing be classified as an 
article manufactured of metal, as the wire which forms the metal 
part is in no case, with the possible exception of bronze or brass-wire 
clothing, the component material of chief value. 

In the manufacture of card clothing, the wire is inserted into the 
various foundations, as explained in our brief. 

These foundations are the component material of chief value, and 
as they are subject to different rates of duty under which the articles 
may be properly classified, ranging from 45 per cent to 160 per cent, 
the classification of card clothing under metal ware at 45 per cent 
ad valorem would be very unjust to American card clothing manu- 
facturers, as they are compelled to pay these high rates of duty on 
the foundations, especially when the same are made in part of wool. 

It is not a fact, as stated by the attorneys for Mr. Leigh, that the 
American manufacturers undersell the importers, as the latter are 
constantly selling card clothing at a price that is below the cost that 
it can be produced in this country, and if desired we will furnish 
proofs to tnat effect. 

The foreign manufacturers are selling their products in the markets 
of the world, while the American manufacturer, on account of the 
high-priced labor and materials, can not compete, and must depend 
entirely on the home markets 

There is certainlv a need of a provision in the new tariff act for 
unattached card clothing imported with carding machinery. 

It is well known and can be proven that a large number of carding 
machines, particularly woolen and worsted cards, have been imported 
prior to December 12, 1906, without card clothing. These cards in 
many instances have been clothed with clothing made by American 
manufacturers, or the clothing has been imported separately, and 
was dutiable at the regular specific rate of 45 cents per square foot. 
If an ad valorem rate is applied to the unattached clothing imported 
with machinery, the Government is certainly losing revenue and the 
American card makers have no chance whatever to compete on cloth- 
ing for new carding machinery made abroad. 

The statement made relative to the 55 cents is wrong, as they 
apply the rate of 55 cents per square foot to the lowest priced clothing. 
We asked for a 55-cent rate on the high-priced clothing and special- 
ties. 

As to the statement made in regard to the number of persons 
employed in the card clothing industry, Mr. Leigh's attorneys have 
again shown that they are not familiar with the conditions of this 



CARD CLOTHING CUTLERY. 7941 

industry in the United States. There are at the present time about 
400 persons employed in the card clothing shops and this does not 
include the large number of persons employed in the factories that 
make the wire, rubber, cottons, woolens, felts, leather, etc., used 
exclusively as the materials in the manufacture of card clothing. 

As fully explained hi our brief, the card clothing industry of this 
country needs increased protection, and the manufacturers only 
asked for such duties as will equal the difference between the cost 
of production at home and abroad, or, in lieu of increasing the pres- 
ent rates on the manufactured product, that such a reduction be 
made on the materials from w r hich card clothing is made as will 
enable the domestic manufacturers to compete successfully with 
foreign makers. 

In conclusion, we wish to urge the committee most earnestly to 
consider our request that card clothing be specially provided for 
and pay a specinc rate duty as specified in our brief. 
Respectfully submitted. 

By George L. Hamilton, North Andover, Mass., for 
Howard Bros. Manufacturing Co., Worcester, Mass.; 
Beckwith Card Co., Stafford Springs, Conn.; Amer- 
ican Card Clothing Co., Worcester, Mass.; Benjamin 
Booth & Co., Philadelphia, Pa.; Davis & Furber 
Machine Co., North Andover, Mass.; Amsterdam 
Card Clothing Co., Amsterdam, N. Y. ; Leicester 
Card Clothing Co., Leicester, Mass. ; Methuen Napper 
Co., Methuen, Mass.; Ashworth Brothers, Fall River, 
Mass. 



CUTLERY. 

[Paragraphs 153-155.] 

HENRY I. WHEATLEY, OF WASHINGTON, D. C., REPRESENTING 
AMERICAN SHEAR MANUFACTURERS, ASKS FOR AN INCREASE 
OF THE DUTY ON SHEARS. 

BOND BUILDING, 

Washington, D. C., February 18, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: In requesting a raise in the schedules relating to 
scissors and shears, or parts thereof, the undersigned, representing 
practically all the manufacturers of American scissors and shears, 
respectfully submits the following facts for your consideration: 

That the scissor and shear industry of the United States is con- 
trolled by no "trust," combination, or agreement. 

That there are in existence and operation at the present time about 
twelve factories (located in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, 
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan) engaged in the manufac- 
ture of scissors and shears, each absolutely distinct from all others 
and in active competition to each other. 

That the average proportion of labor to cost on imported scissors 
and shears is about 40 per cent. The actual proportion of labor to 
cost of American scissors and shears is practically 80 per cent. 



7942 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

That it is known that operatives' wages are two to three times 
greater in this country than in Germany or England. 

That the American manufacturers of high-grade cutlery are con- 
lined strictly to the manufacture of one class of scissors and shears, 
viz, a lai^l steel shear upon a malleable-iron or forged-steel base. 

That at present there are no solid-steel scissors or shears under 6 
inches manufactured in this country, and none of the larger sizes 
excepting a few surgeons' and dentists' instruments. 

That it is impossible under the existing tariff for manufacturers in 
this country to compete with the solid steel shears and scissors manu- 
factured in Germany. 

That with a tariff on scissors and shears, as will be proposed, a new 
industry would be created in this country, viz, the manufacturing of 
high-grade steel scissors and shears, something which, as before stated, 
1ms never been done and it is impossible at present to do, at a profit, 
owing to the difference in the cost of labor. 

That with an increase in the duty as proposed there would be no in- 
crease in the price of shears to the consumer. At the present time 
the so-called American steel shears are only finished in this country, 
the blanks coming in under the lowest or next to the lowest schedule. 
These shears, when finished by American manufacturers, cost in the 
neighborhood of $6 per dozen against an import valuation of the 
finished product from Germany of $3.50 per dozen. 

That notwithstanding we would make a much better shear in this 
country, and one which could be sold at the regular retail rate which 
now prevails for German goods, if we had a higher duty, German 
goods, now imported under the $3.50 schedule, sell at retail for $1.25 
to $1.50 per pair against American finished goods of the same quality, 
which retail for $1 and $1.25. The retailer finds it to bis advantage 
to favor the belief, commonly held, that an imported shear is superior 
and costs more and should sell for more. By fostering this fallacy he 
sells the foreign goods at a much larger profit than he can obtain on 
home products. 

While the actual wage of a German mechanic is apparently two- 
thirds of that paid in this country, the difference is really greater. 
In Germany the work is done entirely by contract and not in a factory. 
The workman takes to his home the rough material and with the aid 
of the family the product is finished. The wages earned are credited 
to the man and average $10 per week not for the man's work but for 
the work of himself and family. In this country the same man 
would average $3 per day for his own work done in the factory. 

With a protective tariff these goods can be made in this country 
and sold here at a price no higher than the imported article is selling 
nowj and still leave a margin of profit, to the retailer, of 100 per cent. 

We would respectfully suggest the following schedule be substituted 
for that now in force. We believe a greater number of classifications 
necessary in order to protect the manufacturer in this country as 
much as possible from undervaluation and further believe a specific 
duty will also tend to prevent that prevalent practice so injurious 
to American manufacturers. 

Scissors and shears and blades for same, finished or unfinished, 
valued at not more than 50 cents per dozen, 50 cents per dozen; val- 
ued at more than 50 cents and not more than SI per dozen, $1 per 
dozen; valued at more than $1.50 and not more than $2 per dozen, 



CUTLERY. 7943 

$2 per dozen; valued at more than $2 per dozen and not more than 
$2.50 per dozen, S2.50 per dozen; valued at more than $2.50 per dozen, 
$2.50 per dozen and 25 per cent ad valorem. 

We claim that this increase in tariff would not affect the price of 
shears and scissors to the consumer, but would create an entirely new 
industry in this country, one which would ultimately mean the em- 
ployment of more than a thousand men with a product considerably 
more than a million dollars. 

We believe that our shear manufacturers are as progressive as any 
other Americans and it stands to reason that we would manufacture 
these goods if we could. That we do not is proof that under existing 
conditions we can not. 

Respectfully submitted. 

HARRY L. WHEATLEY, 
Representing American Shear Manufacturers. 



NEW YORK CITY IMPORTERS OF CUTLERY SUBMIT A BRIEF 
TENDING TO SHOW THE ADVANTAGES OF AN AD VALOREM 
RATE ON KNIVES AND SHEARS. 

31 NASSAU STREET, 
New York City, February 18, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Paragraph 153 provides a method of combination 
duties on penknives and pocketknives and fixes an arbitrary divi- 
sion based on the value of the article, and the same is true as to razors 
and scissors. 

"The total importation of cutlery under paragraphs 153, 154, and 
155 were valued at $2,232,174.89, yielding a revenue of $1,437,855.69 
and the average ad valorem rate was 64.42 per cent." 

It is understood by the undersigned that your committee desires 
to recommend such rates of duty as will (1) provide adequate reve- 
nue, (2) be a protection to the domestic manufacturer and laborer, 
and (3) bring a good commercial article within reach of the con- 
sumer. 

We believe that the present system of combination duties, based 
on an artificial, arbitrary price division, is unscientific and unwieldy 
in the lines of merchandise classified under sections 153 and 155. We 
therefore present for your consideration the placing of a straight ad 
valorem duty on each line of goods. Twelve years of the present 
tariff law's operation would seem sufficient to enable the fixing of an 
average ad valorem rate, which your committee can recommend, and 
thereby provide the revenue, protect the laborer and manufacturer, 
and yet not place the article beyond the consumer's reach. 

A straight ad valorem duty will make the classification of invoices 
simpler and easier, the amount of duty can be ascertained more 
easily and will in every way conduce to betterment in the actual 
work of the custom officials. 

Again, such a rate will have the effect of settling grades and better- 
ing the product. The foreign manufacturer now makes his goods to 
meet the divisions arbitrarily established under the law; in other 
words, he causes certain goods to be worked under the limit price in 



7944 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

its class. If there be no class, then the buyer would be the gainer as 
well as the Government. The former would get a better article, the 
latter more duty. An article costing $1.60 can, by omitting certain 
operations trifling in cost, be reduced to the $1.50. This is, of course, 
especially true of the higher-priced articles in these various lines. 
From these figures it can be seen that specific duties are unjust and 
unfair, as they put a widely differing range of duties on goods in the 
same class, whether it be knives, razors, or shears. Take a knife 
valued at $3.25 per dozen- 
Specific duty 20 cents per piece $2.40 

Ad valorem 40 per cent. . 1. SO 



Total. 



6.95 



making 114 per cent duty. If the maker can reduce this value to $3 
per dozen, tlie duty paid is but $2.40, or 80 per cent ad valorem. 
The difference in this rate of duty paid is caused by the effect of the 
specific duty on the percentage and the actual duty paid on the 
article imported. 

To-day there is every incentive to cheapen a grade or with dishonest 
men to undervalue. In the latter case the honest competitor can not 
do business and the Government loses the duty and in the former the 
consumer receives an inferior article. It is respectfully submitted 
that a straight ad valorem schedule will give less chance of or cause 
for undervaluation. 


Pocket knives under section 15S. 

No. 1. Valued not more than 40 cents per dozen, 40 per cent ad valorem. 

No. 2. Valued more than 40 cents and not more than 50 cents per dozen, 1 cent 
per piece and 40 per cent ad valorem. 

No. 3. Valued more than 50 cents and not more than $1.25 per dozen, 5 cents per 
piece and 40 per cent ad valorem. 

No. 4. Valued more that $1.25 and not more than $3 per dozen, 10 cents per piece 
and 40 per cent ad valorem. 

No. 5. Valued more than $3 per dozen, 20 cents per piece and 40 per cent ad 
valorem. 

The importation of pocket knives for 1907, arranged under their 
classifications, was as follows: 





Amount 
imported. 


Duty 
collected. 


Average 
ad valorem 
rate. 


No. 1 ... 


$lfi5 419 00 


$66 160.00 


Per cent. 


No. 2 


153 76C. 20 


99.877.91 


64.95 


No. 3 


288 9 9 4 08 


269 359 98 


93.23 


No. 4 


242, 636. 47 


220, 799. 79 


91.00 


No.5 


157 051 62 


132 179 25 


84.16 











So that there were imported pocketknives paying duty under 
this section, $1,007,697.39, paying the Government $788,376.93 
duty, and the average rate of duty paid ad valorem was 78.33 per 
cent. 

If an ad valorem duty be imposed, the revenues received there- 
under will yield, we believe as much or more revenue as is at present 



CUTLERY GEORGE WOSTENHOLM & SON ET AL. 



7945 



obtained. The cost of assessing duty will be lowered and the do- 
mestic industry not alone survive, but continue to flourish. 

It can not be denied that the skilled worker in the United States 
receives more pay than his fellow abroad. .It is respectfully sub- 
mitted that this difference is not so gr<?at in those grades of goods 
higher in price. Yet from the foregoing table it will be seen, that 
in the grades in which the importations were largest, the protection 
given ranges from 93.23 per cent to 91 per cent. 

It may safely be said that the only lines where the foreign product 
enters into competition with the American, is in the line costing 
$1.25 per dozen and upward to $4 per dozen. Beyond the $4 figure 
the domestic production is small and the competition therefore 
trifling. 

The domestic production is considerably over $3,000,000, while 
the importation (cost price) is about $1,100,000. The domestic 
industry in this line during the last twelve years shows a steady 
increase. Comparisons as to labor costs are misleading and give no 
true idea in any way. It must be remembered that in the material 
cost of a pocketknife the steel is but a very small item wheresoever 
the pocketknife be made. The domestic manufacturer makes a 
profit which enables hipi to call himself prosperous and to employ 
nis workman at a wage claimed to be three times larger than the 
German and twice that of the British workman. Whatever be the 
labor cost, it remains true that the domestic manufacturers are 
increasing in numbers as well as output. 

Razors and razor blades under section 153. 

Razors have three standards: 

No. 1. Valued at less than $1.50 per dozen, 50 cents per dozen and 15 per cent ad 
valorem. 

No. 2. Valued at $1.50 and less than $3 pay a duty of $1 and 15 per cent ad valorem. 

No. 3. Valued at more than $3 per dozen, pay a duty of $1.75 per dozen and 20 per 
cent ad valorem. 





Amount 
imported. 


Duty col- 
lected. 


Average 
ad valorem 
rate. 


No. 1 


$141,607.47 


$79,904.00 


Percent. 
56.43 


No. 2. . . 


296,315.25 


162,534.65 


54.85 


No. 3 


95,9Sl. 16 


54,224.55 


56.49 










Total 


533,903.88 


296,663.20 













It will be found that the average rate of duty is 55.53 per cent on 
all grades. 

According to the statement presented to your committee, there are 
but 5 factories in the United States making razors. This, of course, 
does not include what may be called a specialty, the safety razor. 
It would seem that there about 400 men employed in the industry, 
and that the product is about $400,000 a year in value. 

The manufacturing of razors to-day, and especially in the United 
States, is largely machine work, which can be turned out as cheaply 
in the United States as in any other country. 



7946 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



Scissors and shears under section 15S. 

They are divided into three classes: 

No. 1. Up to 50 cents per dozen pay a duty of 15 per cent ad valorem. 

No! 2. Valued between 50 cents and $1.75 per dozen pay a duty of 50 cents per 
dozen and 15 per cent ad valorem. 

No. 3. Valued at more than $1.75 per dozen pay a duty of 75 cents per dozen and 
25 per cent ad valorem. 





Amount Im- 
ported. 


Duty col- 
lected. 


Average ad 
valorem 
rate. 


Jfo 1 


$50,196.50 


$26.208.45 


Per cent. 
52.21 


No 2 


243, 828. 94 


141,147.13 


57.89 


jjo 3 


188,326.01 


86,581.21 


46.00 










Total 


482,351.45 


253,936.79 













The average ad valorem rate is 52.86 per cent. 

The ad valorem duty on this item would help materially to place in 
the hands of the consumer a better article than can be obtained at the 
present day. It should be kept in mind, as will be seen from the table, 
that the average rate of duty is a great deal higher on a percentage 
basis than at first sight an inspection of the table would suggest. 

Scissors are an absolute necessity in every family. It is an article 
that is used by everyone, and, consistently with all the propositions of 
duty to the Government, the consumer should have a fair chance to 
get the best article obtainable for the money. The manufacturing 
of scissors is to a great extent confined to Germany. The American 
manufacturer, it is true, in the cheaper grades of cast scissors or 
malleable-iron shears or in the better grades of what is known in the 
trade as trimmers and shears is controlling the market here; and, going 
further, they are even exporting them to Germany and England. 

TABLE CUTLERY. 

The cutlery clause (section 155) also fixes a combination duty, 
except the omnibus clause, which provides for 45 per cent ad valorem. 

The importation of table cutlery under section 155 was of the 
value of $174,835.44, paying duties amounting to $87,187.26, the 
equivalent ad valorem rate being 49.87 per cent. 

It appears that the committee of the table cutlery manufacturers 
which appeared before the Ways and Means Committee voluntarily 
suggested a reduction in the tariff. The present average rate is about 
49.36 per cent, and it appears to your petitioners here that a straight 
ad valorem duty should be imposed which will meet the wishes of the 
American manufacturers of table cutlery, furnish them with adequate 
protection, and give the Government its revenue. 

Respectfully submitted. 

GEO. WOSTENHOLM & SON, 

J. A. HENCKELS. 
VOM CLEFF & Co. 

A. L. SlLBERSTEIN. 

GRAEF & SCHMIDT. 

S. R. DROESCHER. 

F. A. KOCH & Co. 

WESTER BROS. 

KRUSIUS BROS. 

SCHMACHTENBERG BROS. 

MAX KLAAS. 

MONTAGUE LESSLER, Counsel. 



RAZORS. 7947 

RAZORS. 

[Paragraph 153.] 

THE J. R. TORREY RAZOR COMPANY, WORCESTER, MASS., CLAIMS 
THAT FOREIGN WAGES OF RAZOR MAKERS ARE LESS THAN 
HALF THE WAGES PAID IN THIS COUNTRY. 

WORCESTER, MASS., February 25, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Since mailing our statement of November 24, 1908, we 
have investigated further mto the importation and tariff on razors, 
the differences of wages paid our workmen and wages paid abroad. 

From reliable information we find that the foreign workmen get 
less than one-half the wages that are paid for the same class of work hi 
this country. The United States government reports show that there 
were imported for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1907, over 255,000. 
dozen razors and razor blades, of which quantity 117,000 dozen were 
entered at the low average price of $1.21 per dozen and about 118,000 
dozen at average price of $2.51 per dozen. The fact that this large 
quantity of razors was imported at these very low prices shows that 
wages must be extremely low abroad and bears out our statement that 
American manufacturers of razors are paying double the wages paid 
by foreign manufacturers for same class of work. 

In view of this large importation of low-priced razors, we respect- 
fully ask that the tariff on the two lower classes of razors be amended 
to read as per schedule attached to this letter. 

We submit that these slight changes will make no difference what- 
ever in the price of razors to the user, as it is well known that there is a 
large margin of profit between the importer, jobber, retailer, and user. 
We submit that the quality of American-made razors is fully equal, if 
not superior, to the quality of razors made abroad, and that with 
adequate protection this country can easily produce its entire supply 
of razors, and at the same time prices to the user will be no higher, 
and with the sharp home competition which now exists will con- 
stantly grow less. 

Yours, very truly, J. R. TORREY RAZOR Co., 

J. R. TORREY, Treasurer. 



EXHIBIT A. 

Razors and razor blades, finished or unfinished, valued at less than one dollar and 
fifty cents per dozen, seventy-five cents per dozen and fifteen per centum ad valorem; 
valued at one dollar and fifty cents per dozen and less than three dollars per dozen, 
one dollar and twenty-five cents per dozen and fifteen per centum ad valorem; valued 
at three dollars per dozen or more, one dollar and seventy-five cents per dozen and 
twenty per centum ad valorem. 



7948 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

FILES. 

[Paragraph 156.] 

SAMUEL M. NICHOLSON, OF PROVIDENCE, R.I., FILES SUPPLE- 
MENTAL BRIEF RELATIVE TO THE FILE INDUSTRY. 

PROVIDENCE, R. I., Janaury 21, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: 

Owing to the fact that I was not advised, and therefore could not 
be adequately prepared, for the particular line of inquiry your hon- 
orable body intended pursuing at the hearing of January 15, 1909, 
regarding the file industry, ana believing that the testimony there 
deduced is not as convincing as the actual facts warrant of the con- 
tentions set forth in my brief, now on file, I beg leave to file the 
following supplemental brief and ask for it your most earnest 
consideration: 

First. Permit me for your fuller information to call your atten- 
.tion to the importations of files and rasps since 1893, as set forth in 
Exhibit A, attached hereto. 

Second. A list of the most prominent machine makers of files and 
rasps in the United States is also hereto attached and marked 
"Exhibit B," with no one of whom has any of the representatives of 
the Nicholson File Company, to my knowledge, in any way had any 
communication regarding the question of tariff. Neither has this 
company any trade agreements with any of them relative either to 
domestic or foreign business other than that entered into November 
1, 1899, when a uniform selling list was adopted, which in no wise 
governs or affects discounts or net selling prices. No concerted 
action has ever been taken in fixing discounts from this list or terms 
of sale, all of which each manufacturer establishes independently for 
himself. Those marked with an asterisk are known to seek foreign 
fields and to market abroad a portion of their product direct. It 
should not be difficult to ascertain from any of these makers whether 
or no the present profit on their net investment is, in your opinion, of 
a reasonable or unreasonable amount. 

Third. Although the manufacturers marked with an asterisk are 
known to do an export business, they depend to such an extent upon 
the New York export commission nouses that they may not be in 
possession of reliable or comprehensive information regarding the 
standing of foreign competition and its ability to produce cheaply 
and in large quantities, and hence may not be able to accurately 
judge of the effect upon the capital and labor similarly employed 
in this country were tariff reductions to open the door to domestic 
competition. 

Fourth. As indicative of the trend of foreign conditions affecting 
the demand for American-made files, I beg to call your attention to 
data gathered from our correspondence, which, with brief explana- 
tory detail, are set forth in Exhibit C, relating to Japanese conditions ; 
Exhibit D, relating to English conditions ; Exhibit E, relating to Ger- 
man conditions; all of which are hereto attached. 

Somewhat similar evidence could be furnished, if desired, regard- 
ing France, Austria, and Sweden, and it seems to hinge only upon 
the question of opportunity when this country will become the com- 



FILES SAMUEL M. NICHOLSON. 7949 

mon "dumping" ground for the surplus foreign product, and to an 
extent and cost disheartening to contemplate for the American 
producer. 

Fifth. In further explanation of certain portions of the testimony 
submitted at the hearing of the 15th instant permit me to say that, 
while the volume of file and rasp imports into this country aver- 
ages less than 2 per cent of this country's output, is it not a fact that 
or the many hundreds of iron and steel products regularly carried in 
stock by the ordinary hardware merchant, not more than 5 per cent 
of them show any importations whatever into America, and of this 
small percentage the total amount imported does not exceed 1 per 
cent of this country's output? Such is the fact, I am very well ad- 
vised, and applies in nearly the same percentage to many other lines 
besides hardware. 

Referring to the testimony of the relative wage scales in this coun- 
try and Canada, it should, of course, be borne in mind that a fair 
comparison of the two scales should of necessity be upon equal bases 
of size, output, and character of equipment. In other words, with 
a factory of equal size and similarly equipped as is our factory at 
Port Hope, Canada, but located in the United States, the cost of 
manufacture here would be greater than that in Canada. 

The point was raised by one of the committee that the German 
tariff appeared to be less on the small sizes than on the large sizes of 
files, and no satisfactory explanation could be given by the witness. 
It appears, however, that their tariff is based on 100 kilos., \\hich 
being converted into the different weights per dozen in pounds, 
shows the following actual duty on one of the common shapes of files 
as an example, and demonstrates that German protection is graded 
according to the size and value of files, as in America. 



Kind. 


Weight per dozen. 


Duty per 
dozen. 




2 pounds 5 ounces 


Cents. 
10 


12-inch hand ; 


14 pounds 4 ounces 


39 




43 pounds 10 ounces 


- 47 









In conclusion, permit me to call your attention once more to the 
matter of net profit yielded this company upon its 1908 business, 
which, better than anything els^, would seem to gauge the entire 
question. As stated at the hearing, our total dividends paid for the 
.year aggregated 10 per cent upon the capital, while net profit upon the 
net investment figured a little under 10 per cent. These figures 
should conclusively show that notwithstanding the argument to the 
contrary by one member of your honorable body at the time of the 
hearing on the 15th instant, it w^ould be hardly possible to make any 
reduction in tariff rates without a corresponding reduction in profit, 
unless the resulting difference is compensated for in cost schedules. 

Respectfully submitted. 

NICHOLSON FILE COMPANY, 
SAML. M. NICHOLSON, President. 

61318 Ai 



7950 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

EXHIBIT A. 

Imports of files, file blanks, rasps, and floats (dutiable). 

Value. 

1893 $76,356 

1894 36,800 

1895 65, 594 

1896 64,226 

1897 47,407 

1898 35,344 

1899 42, 760 

1900 59,707 

1901 59,779 

1902 72,293 

1903 82,485 

1904 67,812 

1905 87,292 

1906 59,708 

1907 86,652 



EXHIBIT B. 

List of the most prominent machine makers of files and rasps in the United States. 
[Those marked * known to do an export business.] 

*H. Disston & Sons, (Incorporated), Philadelphia, Pa. 

*McCaffrey File Company, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Liveright Brothers, Philadelphia, Pa. 

*Heller Brothers, Newark, N. J. 

Madden File Company, Middletown, N. Y. 

Simonds File Company, Fitchburg, Mass. 

F. Westfahl & Co., Milwaukee, Wis. 

A. Bickhaus & Co., Quincy, 111. 

Carver File Company, Philadelphia, Pa. 

American Swiss File and Tool Company, Elizabeth, N. J. 

Rex File Company, Newcomerstown, Ohio. 

Colonial File Company, Boston, Neponset, Mass. 

Troy File Works, Troy, N. Y. 

Chicago File and Rasp Company, Chicago, 111. 

Stokes Brothers Manufacturing Company, Freehold, N. J. 

McClellan File Company, Cleveland, Ohio. 

Haya File Company, Detroit, Mich. 



EXHIBIT C. 

FILE BUSINESS IN JAPAN. 

About seven or eight years ago the duty on files imported into Japan was 5 per cent 
ad valorem. This has been increased from time to time until it is now 20 per cent ad 
valorem. Under these changed conditions the manufacture of files in Japan has 
increased very largely, and whereas a few years ago there were only a few very small 
shops in that country making files there are now several shops of considerable size 
engaged in this industry, employing from 100 to 500 hands each. 

With the extremely low wages prevailing in Japan, files can be made in that country 
at such a cost that it is becoming practically impossible for us to compete for business 
there. 

In the year 1906 our sales to Japan amounted to about $60,000 net; in the year 1907 
they were just over $10,000 net; and in the year 1908 they were less than $1,200 net. 

We therefore ask you to consider the following: 

First. The Japanese manufacturers' home market is limited. 

Second. Their capacity to produce is already large and is constantly increasing. 

Finally: What can we naturally expect them to do with their surplus production 
when their other products are found in all markets of the world? 



FILES SAMUEL M. NICHOLSON. 7951 

Oue of our representatives has been in Japan within the last four months, and we 
give you below data from his letters, describing conditions in that country in regard 
to the file business: 

H. (who has been our largest customer in Japan) held in September, 1908, a stock 
of our files amounting to 8,706 dozen; he is desperately anxious to get rid of this stock 
and is willing to stand a heavy loss in order to do so, but finds great difficulty because 
Japanese file manufacturers are now quoting prices so much under his cost. 

C. & Co. (one of our leading customers in Japan) held in September, 1908, a stock 
of 3,468 dozen, and want to clean out this stock and not carry American files any 
longer, because they can not make a profit on them. 

S. K. (who is a Japanese dealer in hardware and has been known for many years as 
one of the largest dealers in American files) has sold his entire stock of our files at a 
very low price and has dropped altogether the business of dealing in American files. 

C. & J. Tdg. Co. told our salesman that they are importing large quantities of file 
steel rolled into bars of exact dimensions for fil^s of all sizes, on which duty is only 
7^ per cent as against 20 per cent on finished files. 

In his last letter from Japan our salesman writes: "I have been unable during my 
entire present trip to accomplish anything here; all attempts on my part to sell files 
have been fruitless. I do not think that we may expect from Japan in future business 
of any material amount." 



EXHIBIT D. 

FILE BUSINESS IN GREAT BRITAIN. 

About ten years ago we found in our efforts to sell files in England and Scotland 
that no price was quoted by English file makers lower than about 65 and 5 per cent 
from the Sheffield list. In the last five years, and especially in the last two years, 

freat change* have taken place in the manufacture of files in England. Many makers 
ave largely discontinued the old methods of hand cutting of files, and have put in 
thoroughly modern machinery. Some of the largest and most powerful concern? in 
Sheffield have put in thoroughly up-to-date plants, and the results are to-day that they 
have very largely reduced their cost of manufacture, and we frequently find that 
they are quoting prices that we can not meet. It must.be borne in mind that in 
addition to having the advantage of these new and up-to-date plants Sheffield makers 
have the great advantage of very much lower wages than those prevailing in this 
country. Our business in Great Britain is, therefore, falling off; and we frequently 
find that Sheffield makers are underquoting us in other parts of the world. The 
following situation, therefore, is evident: 

1. Sheffield makers formerly held practically the entire file trade of the world. 

2. They have lost a considerable part of their trade to American, German, and 
other competitors. 

3. They have now revolutionized and thoroughly modernized their plants and 
methods of manufacture. 

4. They are even now making strong and successful efforts to recover the trade 
that they have lost in various quarters. 

5. If the tariff on files in this country is reduced and they are thereby given an 
opportunity to compete for the file trade of the greatest file-using country of the 
world, what effect may be expected on the business of file manufacturers in this 
country who have to pay very much higher wciges? 

Extracts from letters from our direct representative in Great Britain. 

January 2, 1909: We emphatically state it as our opinion that Sheffield prices will 
not be raised from their present level. Such a movement back has no precedent in 
this market, and their present prices are too general to admit of same. The following 
firms have quoted these low prices and even a greater discount for two years past, 
some of which period included good times. (Here follows a list of 12 of the largest ana 
best known file-making concerns in Sheffield.) 

English file situation. 

November 14, 1908: This country having held until a generation or so ago the file 
trade of the world is bound to be a hotbed of difficult situations. Any concern with 
any mercantile ability engaged in the file trade is able to do something in this country 
of vast buying capacity. Some Sheffield makers are satisfied to make their prices only 
low enough to enable them to retain the bulk of their connection, and these are the ones 
that quote freely these low prices. On the other hand, there are powerful concerns 



7952 S( III IM'LE C METALS, AM> M.\ X I' I A< TTRES OF. 

like II. II. & Co. who take in hand file making as practically a new branch of their 
business, lay down a plant that is recognized by all Sheffield file manufacturers as 
being a model, and become a new factor in the trade. They realize that thev have no 
established brand and reputation to rely upon, and that their opportunity lie- in pro- 
ducing files at a very low cost consistent with fairly good qrality; consequently they 
must do better than the existing firms of reputation, and they quote 10 per cent or 
more below those figures. Such concerns as these probably have very little forei* n 
trade, and it may be some little time before you feel their con p 'tit ion in your other 
export markets. At the present time their attention is concentrated on trade in Gr< at 
Britain. In addition to concerns like this, there are a number of small makers who 
quote similar prices and sometimes better. 

Extract from letter from our direct representative in South America, dated Valparaiso, 

December 20, 1908. 

I have to advise vou that at the present time there is in Valparaiso a big competition 
in our line, but it is not with Disston's files but with English files, which are pushed 
very hard and offered at better discounts than ours. 



EXHIBIT E. 

FILE BUSINESS IN GERMANY. . 

For some years we have been doing business in Germany, but in the last year or 
two it has been a decreasing business and is limited practically to certain files for a 
special use for which our goods have acquired a reputation in Germany, and under 
present conditions we can not hope to long retain this. 

It is significant that in kinds of files for other uses we can not do business there, 
and the kinds in which our business consists constitute a very small percentage < f 
the total file consumption of Germany. In all these kinds in which we fail to secure 
trade German makers supply files of a quality satisfactory to consumers at consid- 
erably lower prices than we can supply them, and this in spite of the fact that the 
duty on files in Germany is a very low one. 

The competition from German makers is illustrated by -the following extracts from 
a letter just received from our direct salesman, dated Shanghai, December 19, 1908. 
This relates to business in the Philippine Islands: 

"S. & Z., Manila. It is interesting to learn that they have registered their brand 
in America. As a matter of fact, practically all of the files of this brand, which they 
import from Germany, are 10, 12, 14, and 16 inch flats and half rounds, and they sell 
them to Chinese dealers at prices 25 per cent to 33^ per cent below the equivalent of 
70 percent off the Sterling list (70 per cent is the price which we allow to importers in 
Manila.) In view of the big difference in price, it is apparent that we can not get 
their trade in large files." 

S. & Z. are one of the largest importers of files in the Philippine Islands. 

This indicates the great strength of the competition which we are now getting from 
German makers in markets where both our files and German files have to pay the 
same duty. This is true, not only of the Philippine Islands, but of markets in South 
America, various countries of Europe, and elsewhere. It also indicates what might 
be expected from German competition in this country if the duty on files, clauses 3 
and 4, now existing under our present tariff, should be reduced and they could use 
this country as a dumping ground. 



W. H. JOHNSON, VALLEY FALLS, R. I., SUBMITS STATEMENT 
RELATIVE TO THE FILE AND CUTLERY BUSINESS. 

VALLEY FALLS, R. I., January 27, 1909. 
CHAIRMAN OF WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: My attention has been called to printed report con- 
tained in Iron Age publication of the file-manufacturing industry, as 
represented by Mr. Nicholson, of Providence, R. I., and 1 inclose a 
printed slip taken from a Providence newspaper, giving market quo- 
tations of stocks, which includes that of the Nicholson File Company. 



FILES. 7953 

Many of our New England industries are earning large dividends 
upon watered stock. They, the manufacturers, have acquired mo- 
nopolies of their products by the aid of the tariff, and thus increased 
the price and lowered the quality of their products. The imported 
files that came into our markets previous to the period of our civil 
war were far superior to the Nicholson article, ana I think sold for a 
less price. 

Another class of manufacturers who have sadly abused the favors 
that the tariff afforded are the cutlery producers. Not only have they 
increased the selling price, but have well-nigh destroyed the useful- 
ness of their goods by lowering the quality of the steel used in proc- 
ess of manufacturing their goods. 

I have been engaged in the business of retailing hardware for 
twenty years, and I wish to state to your honorable committee that 
the two evils mentioned in this communication have been very 
apparent to all people who have had a direct interest in this matter. 
I have reference to the exorbitant high prices and the lowering of 
the quality of material used. 

The advance of price for some lines of builders' hardware has been 
70 per cent, with but a fraction of that advance in cost to manu- 
facture. 

Where the manufacturers have not pooled their business in a 
trust formation they have combined upon an agreed selling price, 
and then fixed the selling price for jobbers to retailers in a very 
arbitrary manner, leaving the retailer to contend with high prices 
and merciless competition. 

Very respectfully, yours, 

W. H. JOHNSON. 



PROVIDENCE STOCKS. 



Following are the official quotations from the Providence Stock Exchange, Janu- 
ary 26: 

Nicholson File, par, $100; asked, $220. 



SAMUEL E. CARVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA., WRITES RELATIVE TO 
THE FILE INDUSTRY AND LABOR COST. 

PHILADELPHIA, PA., January 27, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. 

GENTLEMEN: Respecting file tariff: Having read testimony of Mr. 
Samuel T. Nicholson, of Nicholson File Company, I would be pleased 
to add my testimony, having had thirty-two years' experience in file 
manufacturing in the'United States. 

In 1876 most of the files made in the United States were handmade 
throughout, and we sold on English list as now used in Europe and 
demanded by exporters to-day from American manufacturers ex- 
porting. In 1881 the file manufacturers of America adopted their price 
list, and the same association of manufacturers revised their price list 
in 1885 and 1897, and that> list is still used. Many of the large file 
manufacturers were absorbed by the Nicholson File Company soon 
after the 1897 list was adopted, and their meetings ceased. Inde- 
pendent file manufacturers altogether do not make over 1,000,000 



7954 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

dozen files in one year, say, 1908, and there were not over 4,000,000 
dozen made in the United States during 1908. The Nicholson File 
Company make 85 per cent of all made in the United States. 

Labor here for boys of 16 years is $5 to $7 weekly; men running 
machines. $2 to $3 daily. Germany pays same labor less than 50 per 
cent of above; England pays a little over 50 per cent of American 
prices for same labor. Labor is 33 J per cent of cost of production; 
steel, 33 J per cent of cost of production; management and profit, 33 J 
per cent of cost of production. Price for crucible steel files to job- 
bers, Government, and railroads is 75, 10, and 5 per cent from 
American price list; and for open-hearth steel files 80, 10, 10, and 5 per 
cent to same purchasers. Cheap labor is put upon cheap files 
throughout. The American price list is at least 20 per cent higher 
than the English list. The English price ranges from 50 to 70 per 
cent from English list, according to kin J. of steel used in files (crucible 
or open-hearth). I have the various lists adopted; if you so desire, 
I will forward them to you. 

Yours, truly, SAMUEL E. CARVER. 



ENAMELED WARE. 

[Paragraph 159.] 

THOMAS K. NIEDRINGHAUS, NEW YORK CITY, REPRESENTING 
ENAMELED-WARE INDUSTRY, ASKS AN INCREASE OF DUTY. 

NEW YORK, February 10, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: On November 21 last we filed with your committee 
a short brief relative to the needs of our industry. We now beg to 
present an amplification of our proposition, in order to justify our 
petition for a small increase in the duty on imported enameled w r are. 

Briefly, the facts set forth in our original paper were : First, that ours 
is an industry employing upward of 15,000 work people; second, that 
about $20,000,000 is invested in our several plants, manufacturing 
various metal products, scattered through 10 States; third, that 
under the present tariff act an anomaly exists, in that the steel shapes, 
the base of enameled ware (duty 45 per cent), pays on importations 
5 per cent more duty than is levied on the finished product, upon 
which over 15 per cent additional labor cost is expended; fourth, mat 
under the administration of the customs, by gross and persistent 
undervaluations, the intent of Congress has been nullified to the advan- 
tage of certain importers of the ware; fifth, that by the operation of 
the so-called "German treaty" greatly diminished ex^rt values are 
being taken instead of mark'et values; sixth, that false packing and 
invoicing of the foreign goods has proved a serious handicap to us as 
American manufacturers in our efforts to compete with the imported 
goods, and, seventh, that the volume of imports since 1895 has 
increased nearly 3,700 per cent. 

We respectfully invite your attention to the communication of 
Messrs. Stransky & Co., Rotsohild. Me; :vr &. Co., The Standard Eiiam- 



ENAMELED WAKE THOMAS K. NIEDKINGHAUS. 7955 

elware Company, and Markt & Co. (Limited), dated December 4, 
1908, addressed to your committee. These gentlemen are importers 
who not only deny the correctness of our claims but ask that the 
present rate of duty (40 per cent) be reduced to 30 per cent. 

While heutating to make this presentation controversial, we are 
constrainc d to briefly point out inaccuracies in the contentions of 
the signers of that paper. Our justification lies in enabling your 
committee to draw a fair conclusion whon both sides are presented. 
The importers allege that we are a "trust." This is not only untrue 
but is very misleading. 

The whole enameled ware industry embraces 30 separate and dis- 
tinct manufacturing companies, making and selling their product in 
open and sharp competition, 14 of whom have, for tariff-revision 
purposes only, designated the undersigned to act as their chairman 
to present their common views to you. We are ready to supply 
their names if you so desire. The balance of the United States.manu- 
facturers, 16 in number, are located in New York, Ohio, Illinois, 
Wisconsin, and West Virginia, all actively and independently seeking 
trade, so that the allegation that a trust exists is shattered. 

To our assertion that the present rate of duty is anomalous, wherein 
the metal shapes pay 5 per cent more duty than the completed ware, 
our friends, the importers, say this "is a specious argument, but not 
an accurate one;" such a statement is merely words, whereas Treasury 
facts amply support our contention. 

Messrs. Stransky et al. attempt to answer our claim of gross under- 
valuation by the importers of enameled ware by saying that such 
"insinuations * * * are absolutely without foundation, as is 
shown by official reports;" they admit, however, two cases of under- 
valuation of something like 12 to 15 per cent occurring during the 
last year, but even then they would have it appear such cases did 
not involve themselves; in other words, they were not the under- 
valuers. Let us see what the facts are : 

Since filing our brief the undersigned addressed the Secretary of 
the Treasury in reference to this matter of undervaluation and the 
numerous reports which have been made by confidential officers on 
this subject as well as to efforts made to check misrepresentation 
respecting values, which evoked the following reply : 

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, 
OFFICE OP THE SECRETARY, 

Washington, January 2, 1909. 
Mr. T. K. NEIDRINGHAUS, 

National Enameling and Stamping Company, 

St. Louis, Mo. 

SIR: The department has received your letter of the 28th ultimo concerning impor- 
tations of enameled ware. In reply to your inquiry you are informed that during the 
years 1902, 1903, and 1904 there were numerous advances made on such ware on 
information furnished by confidential officers stationed abroad, which advances 
were, as a rule, sustained on reappraisement. Since the year last named there have 
been occasional advances, some of which have been confirmed and in other instances 
the entered values sustained. The information as to values, etc., obtained by officers 
stationed abroad has been promptly furnished to appraising officers for their official 
action in the assessment of duty on all imported merchandise. 
Respectfully, 

J. B. REYNOLDS, 

Acting Secretary. 



7956 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Wo regret that the reply of Mr. Reynolds was incomplete, for, in 
its brevity, important facts were omitted. The letter, however, 
speaks of the undervaluations goin back into the period of 1 902 and 
the advances which were sustained. Perhaps a little of the missing 
data may properly be set forth by us: 

Undervaluations of enameled ware grew active at the port of New 
York during the latter part of tjie fiscal year of 1902, so that in 1903 
and 1904 only about $50,942 and $20,000, respectively, were collected 
by the Treasury Department in increased duties and penalties in cor- 
recting the same. Nineteen hundred and five yielded about $15,000, 
1906 and 1907 about $6,000 each, while in 1908 the results were less 
productive, because the appraising officers had become wearied by the 
frequent reversal of their action hi advancing values to make "market 
values" by the Board of General Appraisers, who, after the "German 
treaty" agitation deemed it inexpedient to sustain the appraisers. 
Values for duties since 1905 have been steadily declining. No less 
than four elaborate investigations were made abroad by the confi- 
dential officers of the Treasury Department, and undervaluations, 
varying from 15 to 40 per cent, were proven, with advices of a foreign 
operating syndicate. 

That the customs officers and the Board of Appraisers at New 
York were kept busy on these undervaluations is attested by the 
number of cases which came before the latter for action, many involv- 
ing, as the records show, some of the signers of the importers' memo- 
rial to your committee. * 

Since 1899 the services of the Board of Appraisers have been in- 
yoked 145 times re enameled-ware undervaluations, 84 times sustain- 
ing advances and in 61 instances affirming entered values. In the 
latter cases it appears that the Board of three General Appraisers each 
time reversed the action of the appraiser and the single general 
appraiser. 

Importers have persistently claimed that the goods were made 
solely for export to the United States, hence had no open value in 
the foreign market. It is true that some foreign manufacturers 
have made and shipped certain so-called " American shapes," often 
not completely finished, the object being obvious. 

As to high-grade goods being ultimately ruled as "seconds" and 
"thirds" (in quality), customs records can attest the accuracy of this 
statement showing how the appraising officers have been reversed. 
Another farce has been enacted in the importation of alleged "auction 
ware." which went into stock and was not, immediately after arrival, 
knocked down to the highest bidder. 

Custom-house and Treasury Department files, if scanned, will 
show that the goods of one of the signers of the importers' brief have 
figured conspicuously hi reappraisements at New York and other 
ports. When values were being steadily advanced at New York, 
the said importer, in order- to avoid increased duties and penalties, 
has diverted his importations from New York to other ports of 
entry, hi order to escape assessment of full duty. At southern and 
Gulf ports the merchandise hi many cases easily slipped through at 
undervalued prices, thence on to the interior for distribution and 
consumption. 

We are quite willing to concede the truth of one assertion of the 
importers, i. e., "* * * that the imported goods [enameled ware] 



ENAMELED WARE THOMAS K. NIEDRINGHAUS. 7957 

have come in under the full glare of the lime light." May we ask 
why was the "lime light" necessary when the merchandise was under 
the customs inspection? In view of the above facts, what becomes 
of their statement that "tne charges of undervaluation against us 
are proven to be absolutely without foundation?" 

In relation to the "German treaty" and these importers' connec- 
tion therewith: 

In their brief they say that "export prices for enameled ware are 
higher than the ordinary market value in that country." They 
admit that "this is rather an unusual circumstance," and rely upon 
a certain general appraiser to substantiate such a statement. We 
ask, what worth, then, has the "German treaty" to our importing 
friends, and what are the facts possessed by their informant? 

The truth is, under said treaty, chamber of commerce certificates 
of export prices, lower than market values, were and are designed to 
facilitate the passing of imported goods, so as to minimize the duties 
to be collected. It has been found that shippers are often members 
of the said chambers of commerce and naturally favor their con- 
signees. 

The exporter, under instructions from his American consignee, 
claims, before the United States consul, that the goods he is shipping 
are for American market only and have no open-market price abroad ; 
hence the export price is the certified price by the chamber of com- 
merce. The shipper's statement is not made under oath. When the 
goods arrive in the United States and are entered, the invoice and 

certificate" attached are accepted and the goods so passed "under 
orders," although the customs examiners know that the values are 
too low, but their views are overruled. 

It is within the knowledge of the Departments of State and Treas- 
ury that Mr. Stransky appealed to the German foreign office for 
assistance against the efforts which the United States appraising 
officers were making to correct his invoice values, which were being 
continually advanced. He claimed, as stated in the public prints, 
that he was being pursued by the customs officers. The results were 
the German foreign office invoked our minister, and the German 
minister in Washington solicited the Department of State and, later, 
the Treasury Department to deal less severely with Stransky's 
importations. 

We are glad to note that the importers admit that a certain general 
appraiser visited Germany and ' 'investigated conditions of the busi- 
ness there." Thev do not, however, state as to how the official in 
question successfully uncovered the false packing of some 15 or more 
cases of enameled ware, then cased, ready for shipment to New York, 
which, though invoiced as "seconds," were in fact first-class goods 
and which, later, as the reappraising officer, he advanced to full 
values, imposing penalties. 

As to the imports of enameled ware into the United States, the 
importers would have you believe that the quantities are trifling and 
have no appreciable effect on the American-made goods offered in our 
markets. The below table shows the growth of imports since 1895 
and the ad valorem rates of duty collected under the last two tariff 
acts. 



7958 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFA< I I III S OF. 



Sheet*, plaUs, wares, or articles of iron, steel, or other metal. (Acts of 1894 and 1897.) 
[No. 2201. Enameled or glazed with vitreous glasses under general tarifl.] 



Fiscal year ended June 30 


Rate of 
duty. 


Value. 


Duty 
collected. 


Average 
a<l valo- 
rem rate 
of duty. 


1885 


Per cent. 
35 


$23,885.00 


$8, 359. 75 


Per cent. 
35 


189o 


35 


30,929.50 


10, 825. 33 


35 


1897 


35 


57, 580. 78 


20, 153. 27 


35 


1898 


f 35 


4,309.00 


1, 508. 15 


35 


1809 


\ 40 
40 


52,225.22 


20,800.09 


40 


1900 


40 


125,304.18 


50,121.66 


40 


1901 


40 


252, 142. 33 


100,856.93 


40 


1902 


40 


463,553.00 


185,421.20 


40 


1903 


40 


766,413.50 


306,565.40 


40 


1904 


40 


670, 059. 97 


268,023.99 


40 


1905 1 


40 


721,509.00 


288,603.60 


40 


1906 


40 


901, 845. 22 


360, 738. 10 


40 


1907 


40 


907,268.87 


362, 907. 54 


40 













Increase since 1895, 3,700 per cent. 

In their brief the importers say: "The cost of producing most of the 
enameled ware made in the United States is less than it is abroad." 
And while "labor may receive twice as much per hour in this country, 
it produces twice as much per hour * * * there is little or no 
difference in favor of their cheapness abroad." "As a result, certain 
goods from abroad have undoubtedly been brought in which com- 
pete with the domestic goods, but the competition is, after all, 
extremely limited." In their closing they wonder that we should 
be concerned in the importations into this country, coming, as they 
say, from "such a small competitor." 

According to Doctor Wupperman's "Die Industrie Enamirter 
Blechgeshirre .in Deutchland," published in 1907 by G. Braunscheu, 
Karlsruhe, Baden, Germany, reference is made to fourteen enameled 
ware works, with 92,321,000 marks aggregate capital, equal to 
$8,297,834. 

All foreign countries, except Great Britain, have protective tariffs 
on enameled ware. 

Austria-Hungary assesses an equivalent ad valorem rate of duty of 
about 61 per cent, Sweden 78 per cent, France 34 per cent, Russia 84 
per cent, Italy 34 per cent, Spain 32 per cent, and Germany 11 per 
cent, the latter being a "conventional duty." The fact must not be 
overlooked that in the foreign countries named the import duty is 
levied upon the weight, i. e., so much per 100 kilograms, not on the 
value, and, as the Europeans use lighter metal sheets for the base of 
their ware, they get more pieces per 100 kilograms, consequently, com- 
paring ware for ware, the foreign ad valorem duty must be appreciably 
in excess of the rates above given. 

The United States rate of duty on enameled ware (40 per cent) is 
less than is imposed by Austria-Hungary and Sweden, countries of our 
greatest competition and where cheapest labor prevails. The eminent 
Doctor Wupperman (p. 52) laments the fact of lower wages in Austria- 
Hungary than in Germany. He states that the German manufac- 
turers have been obliged to sell cheap, and in the last fifteen years they 
have been running at little profit. 

The wages pair.1 in Germany, per Doctor Wupperman (p. 21), are: 
In Silesia, 24 cents to 32 cents per day; in Saxony, 50 cents per day; 



ENAMELED WARE THOMAS K. XIEDRINGHAUS. 7959 

and in other parts of Germany, 57 to 62 cents to women. Paid to 
men in Germany (northwestern part), 62 cents to SI. 50; in Saxony, 
50 cents to SI ; and these rates are 10 to 20 per cent higher than they 
were fifteen years ago. 

Wages in the United States average for men S2.25 per day, and to 
women $1.50. 

Wages paid in an illustrative American enameled ware works, and 
those ruling in Germany, when compared, show the following: 



Wages per week. 
Employment. 



Germany. 'St. Louis, Mo. 



Picklers $4.00 $10. 50-$12. 00 

Annealers 3.00 11.00- 12.00 

Men -. I 5.50 (a) 

Dippers, girls j 2.00 6.00- 7.00 



Burners. 
Burners, helpers. 



5.00 611.00- 15.00 
3.00 L 



None. 6 Includes helpers. 

The St. Louis wage rates being "unionized" are somewhat higher 
than prevail in many of the nonunion works in this industry. 

The importers erroneously claim that the cost of producing enam- 
eled ware in this country is less than abroad; while they allow that 
United States labor receives twice as much per hour, they are very 
wide of truth in saying that the American labor is twice as productive. 

The American labor cost is more than three times greater than in 
Europe, and in regard to efficiency, the foreign worker (from early 
youth trained in the trade, with longer working hours and under 
the stimulus that he will lose his job if slothful) turns out goods in 
quality and quantity equal to our most skilled and expensively 
trained work people. 

WTien the imported goods reach the United States they are fa- 
vored by a differential freight rate to interior points, being less than 
charged on American-made goods. This is especially true as to 
foreign goods entered at Gulf ports. For instance: New Orleans to 
St. Louis on imported ware averages over 30 per cent less than on 
domestic, and from Galveston to St. Louis some 40 per cent less. 

It is known that in order to stimulate exportations from Germany 
and Austria certain taxes and dues are remitted and special transpor- 
tation rates are given on export goods to the seaboard. 

Some years ago American enameled ware was shipped to Germany, 
but legislation and restrictions and, later, cheaper foreign production 
made exports impossible, and now Germany, Austria and Sweden 
are dumping their product into this country at such prices that if 
an adequately protective duty is not assessed to compensate for the 
difference in the labor cost we must cease manufacturing and our 
15,000 work people will be compelled to seek other employment. 

We feel that we are within bounds when we state that the present 
rate of duty of 40 per cent is inadequate, owing to the below reasons: 

Fifty per cent less foreign labor cost; one-third less foreign cost of 
materials; preferential foreign railroad freight rates, factory to sea- 
board; remission of certain taxes to stimulate exports; very low 
ocean freights to the United States; undervaluations and false grad- 



7960 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFA* I I'KKS OF. 

ing of quantities; differential freights to interior; hence the present 
duty of 40 per cent, in application, is reduced nearly one-half. 

Consul-General Richard Guenther, at Frankfort, Germany (see 
Consular and Trade Report No. 3399, February 5, 1909), advises of 
the formation of an industrial combination for con-trolling production 
and prices by manufacturers of enameled ware. Against all of these 
conditions we can not prevail, and, therefore, we beg respectfully to 
ask that paragraph 159, Schedule C, be amended to read: 

Sheet, plates, wares, or articles of iron, steel, or other metal, enameled or glazed 
with vitreous glasses, forty-five per centum ad valorem. 

We will subsequently submit data, recost of production in this 
country and abroad, with other important facts which are now being 
collated. 

Respectfully, THOS. K. NIEDRINGHAUS, 

Chairman Committee representing the 
Enameled Ware Industry of the United States. 

ENGRAVERS' ARTICLES. 

[Paragraphs 166 and 193.] 

THE FRIENDLY SOCIETY OF ENGRAVERS RECOMMENDS A SPE- 
CIFIC CLASSIFICATION FOR COPPER ROLLERS, ZINC PLATES, 
STEEL DIES, AND STEEL MILLS. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 6, 1909. 
CHAIRMAN WAYS AND A!EANS COMMITTEE, 
House of Representatives , Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: The Friendly Society of Engravers, having a member- 
ship of 347 active and 44 honorary members, respectfully request that 
in revising the present tariff schedule that a specific duty be placed 
on the following articles: Copper rollers, 12 to 66 inches long and used 
for the purpose of printing ribbons, calicoes, silks, oilcloths, and all 
kinds of cloths of cotton, silk, and other materials. Zinc plates, en- 
graved, from which plates are traced and transferred through the use 
of the pantograph machine, the pattern or figures contained thereon, 
to a copper roller or copper rollers, as the pattern or design may call 
for, each color requiring a separate roller. The number of colors to a 
pattern are from 1 to 12. Steel dies used in the raising or making of 
steel mills. In making a steel die the pattern is first given to what is 
called a "sketch maker," whp makes a working sketch of it; it is then 
given to a steel engraver, or die cutter, who cuts the pattern into a 
steel die; the die is then hardened, after which process it is then given 
to a clamper (also an engraver), who presses the die into a soft piece 
of steel called a "mill," which when finished has raised upon its surface 
the same pattern that was cut into the steel die. The mill is then 
hardened, and through it the same pattern is transferred to a copper 
roller, and is then ready for the printer to reproduce the pattern on 
cloth or cloths for which it has been engraved. 

We therefore ask you to place a specific duty on the following 
articles : 

Copper rollers, 12 to 66 inches long, per roller $15 

Engraved zinc plates, to be used in pantograph machines, per plate 10 

Steel dies, used in raising mills, per die 15 

Steel mills, used for engraving copper rollers, per mill 10 



ENGRAVERS' ARTICLES SAWS. 7961 

. There are at the present time in the United States 495 engravers 
to calico printers; 44 of those are oh the honorary list mainly on ac- 
count of being forced into other labor or business to obtain employ- 
ment through lack of work. Forty-nine engravers are at present on 
our unemployed list, ready and anxious to accept a situation, and 
there are 104 engravers to calico printers who are not members of this 
society. The percentage of nonmembers who are out of work we are 
unable to say. The scale of wages paid to engravers to calico printers 
in the United States will average $25 per week. 1 he scale of wages 
paid in England and Scotland, to the best of our knowledge, will aver- 
age 30 shillings, or about $7.50 per week. 

We believe in justice to ourselves as American citizens and for the 
protection of the American youth, who is willing and has willingly 
and faithfully served a seven years' apprenticeship, is entitled to and 
should be given all just and honorable encouragement for which our 
Government is noted. 

Very respectfully, 

THE FRIENDLY SOCIETY OF ENGRAVERS, 

M. J. SULLIVAN, 

Agent, 105 Crawford Street, Lowell, Mass. 



SAWS. 

[Paragraph 168.] 

E. C. ATKINS & CO., INDIANAPOLIS, IND., SUBMIT INFORMATION 
RELATIVE TO FOREIGN WAGES IN SAW INDUSTRY. 

INDIANAPOLIS, IND., January 30, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

MY DEAR SIR: At the time we wrote your committee in reference 
-to the manufacture of saws we were not in possession of information 
which we have since been able to secure. This information is with 
reference to the cost of manufacturing goods in our line in France and 
Germany. The difference in cost of manufacture is noted by the 
difference in wages paid in the United States and foreign countries. 
In a saw factory there are many different classes of workmen em- 
ployed. It is necessary to have a large proportion of the workmen 
come under the head o skilled mechanics. 

Saw smiths in the United States receive not less than 33J cents 
per hour, as a minimum required by their union. From 33 J cents 
per hour their wages A'ary up as high as 70 cents per hour. The 
average wages of saw smiths in our employ would be 47 cents per 
heur. 

The same saw smiths in France receive 1 franc per hour; in Germany 
4 marks per day for foremen and 3 marks per day for ordinary help. 

Saw filers in the United States receive from 30 to 35 cents per hour; 
in France, 80 to 90 centimes per hour; Germany, 3 marks per day. 

Saw toothers in the United States receive from 25 to 35 cents per 
hour; in France, from 70 to 75 centimes per hour; Germany, 3 marks 
per day. 



7962 St III :in -1.K O Ml IALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Machinists in the United States in our particular district receive 
a minimum of 32 ^ cents per hour, as required by their unions. These 
same men in France receive 90 centimes per hour. 

Common laborers in the United States in factory work receive 
from 15 to 20 cents per hour, while the same class of labor in France 
receives not to exceed 5 francs per day. 

The per day wages mentioned above means a day of ten hours in 
every case. 

This information is correct and is received at first hand from a 
representative of our firm who has just returned from a visit in 
France and Germany, where he took particular pains to find out 
exactly this information. 

If it is too late to file further briefs before vour committee, would 
it not be possible for you to attach this information to our other 
communications with reference to this same subject? 
Very truly, yours, 

E. C. ATKINS & Co. 



'LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS. 

[Paragraph 182.] 

BRIEF SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF A COMMITTEE OF INDE- 
PENDENT MANUFACTURERS OF LEAD PRODUCTS, NEW YORK 
CITY, RELATIVE TO LEAD DUTIES. 

NEW YORK CITY, January 22, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

SIR: For some not clearly apparent reason the customs tariff 
laws of the United States, at least since 1872, have imposed a rela- 
tively heavier duty upon pig lead than upon any other analogous 
crude material. The act of 1872 made tne duty on this metal 2 
cents per pound, while the duty on pig iron was $7 per ton and on 
copper 5 cents per pound. The act of 1883 reduced the rate on iron 
to $6 per ton and on copper to 4 cents per pound, and the law of 
1890 made further reductions to 1} cents on copper without changing 
lead or iron. Under the Wilson bill of August 28, 1894, the duty 
on lead was reduced to 1 cent, on iron to $4 per ton, and copper was 
put on the free list. When the law of 1897 was under consideration 
in Congress, the "silver States" became an energetic factor in the 
arrangement of duties, and as lead was an important constituent 
of most of the silver-bearing ores, a demand for a higher rate of duty 
on this metal was acceded to and a rate of 2J cents was imposed. 

The ad valorem equivalent of the duty on iron has never exceeded 
50 per cent and since 1894 has been less than 25 per cent, while the 
duty on copper, which averaged equal to 35 per cent from 1873 to 
1883, was only 9.30 per cent under the act or 1890, and was wiped 
out by the act of 1894. The duty on lead, meanwhile, has never 
averaged below 61 per cent, except under the Wilson bill, from 1894 
to 1897, when it averaged 50 per cent. The duty imposed by the 
Dindey law was, at the time of its enactment, equal to 123 per cent 
of the price in Europe, and it has averaged over 67 per cent during 
the eleven years, the law has been in force. 



LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGER ET AL. 7963 

The position of the metals as products of three separate industries, 
as well as their respective relations to other industries of which 
they constitute the raw materials, do not differ in any respect so 
widely as to justify the inequalities of the duties. 

Statistics of the lead industry clearly indicate that at no period in 
the last thirty-two years has an increase of duties been necessary for 
its development, nor has that development, even under the stimulus 
of the excessive protection afforded by the act of 1897, been allowed 
to exceed largely the consumptive requirements of the country. 
There have been periods in the last eight years when a surplus 
domestic product of some magnitude was exported at from 30 to 40 
per cent below the price charged the domestic consumer. Latterly, 
however, the control of production has passed so completely into the 
hands of the smelting interests that production is so far regulated as 
to prevent any considerable surplus over the consumptive require- 
ments of the country, this being a more effective means of maintain- 
ing prices than the exportation of a surplus which might tend to 
break prices in the foreign markets. 

Indeed, it would appear that the latter contingency is carefully 
guarded against, and tnat the product of Mexican ores, smelted and 
refined in bond in the United States and exported direct from the 
refinery, is not allowed to go out in sufficient quantities to produce a 
surplus abroad, and a steadily advancing price there during the past 
three or four years has undoubtedly been effected by the support 
given to that market by those wno controlled the supply from 
America. 

Prior to 1862 there was no provision for lead ores in the tariff, but 
the law enacted that year made them dutiable on the basis of 1 cent 
on the lead in the ore, while the duty on pig lead was fixed at 2 
cents, and there was no change in these rates until 1883, when the 
duty on lead ore was made l| cents, though silver ores containing 
lead were admitted free. The law of 1890, however, extended the 
duty of 1J cents to the lead content of all ores. 

Under the several tariff laws in force since 1873 the average yearly 
production for the period covered by each law was as follows: 

Act of 1872, ten years, average 83,186 tons. 

Act of 1883, eight years, average 142,580 tons; average increase, 
59,395 tons. 

Act of 1890, four years, average 169,882 tons; average increase, 
27,302 tons. 

Act of 1894, three years, average 190,000 tons; average increase, 
21,118 tons. 

Act of 1897, ten years, average 285,000 tons; average increase, 
95,000 tons. 

Statistics of consumption prior to 1890 are not available, but 
from that date forward they are shown by the accompanying table 
to correspond closely to the sum of the supplies from all sources. 
That there was a similar correspondence between 1873 and 1890 is 
indicated by the records of stocks for the several years of that period, 
which show that there were no important accumulations at any time. 
From 1890 forward the figures are from official records, and in that 
period it will be noted that, with exceptional years, the production 
followed very closely the variations in the consumptive require- 
ments of the country. In 1895, under the reduced duty, the in- 



7964 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

creased consumption shown was provided for by an increase of 
imports, while in 1902 the apparent increase in consumption was met 
by no visible increase either of production or importation, and was 
really not an actual consumption, but rather a transfer of surplus 
stoc&s at reduced prices from the smelters to the consumers. That 
the heavy imports of 1895 were to some extent speculative and did 
not represent so large an increase of consumption, is probably also true, 
as stocks at the beginning of the year were notably light, and foreign 
prices during a portion of the year were at a point which encouraged 
importations at the prevailing rate of duty at a parity with the cost 
of domestic lead. The domestic price was held so high during those 
years that importations of pig lead were permitted by those in con- 
trol of the situation to meet the excess of consumptive demand over 
the domestic supply. In a general way, however, the increased con- 
sumption has corresponded to the industrial growth of the country, 
although for ten years or more prior to 1908, the use of lead in elec- 
trical equipments has made a consumptive demand largely in excess 
of what would have resulted from the expansion of what had pre- 
viously been the normal outlets for the metal. 

In the briefs submitted on behalf of the miners it is contended 
that 4 cents is the minimum price for pig lead at which they can 
operate profitably. It appears, however, from the same testimony, 
that the necessity for a 4-cent price for pig lead in New York is 
due to the exactions of the smelters, rather than to the cost of mining, 
and that these exactions constitute an unwarranted tax upon the 
consumer. For illustration: It is stated that the miner contributes 
an allowance of 10 per centum for wastage in smelting, whereas the 
real loss is admittedly not over 2 per centum, leaving a clear gain to 
the smelter of 32 cents per 100 pounds on lead at 4 cents per pound. 
Then, too, a freight charge of $1.25 per hundred pounds is deducted. 
Assuming that all of the lead smelted had to bear the cost of trans- 
portation to New York, this charge could not be justified by the actual 
cost of transportation, but with a large share of the distribution to 
western points, it is perfectlv evident that no such average is war- 
ranted, nor is the arbitrary allowance made by the smelters for other 
than New York deliveries sufficient to offset the extravagant charge 
which they make to the miner. The smelting charge of $8 per ton 
of ore, as stated in the testimony referred to, is, we believe, largely 
fictitious, as most of the ore is furnished in the form of concentrates, 
and instead of the $8 being chargeable against an 8 per cent ore, 
which would be 5 cents per pound on the lead content of such ore, 
it is really chargeable against a ton of concentrates in which the per- 
centage of lead is much higher. 

The Mineral Resources of the United States (p. 312), issue of 1883, 
states in relation to costs of production of lead in Missouri:' "It is 
believed that the majority of the large producers are capable of 
laying their lead down at St. Louis at a cost varying between 3 and 3 
cents per pound." 

An analysis of all deduction made by the smelters from the New 
York price in their contracts with the miner shows an excessive 
profit to the smelte^, and indicates clearly that under reasonable 
charges for smelting and transportation the miner would be as \vcll 
off at 3J cents as he now is at 4 cents. Reference to the accom- 
panying table shows that in only eight out of thirty-five years 



LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGER ET AL. 7965 

would a difference of 1 cent over London have resulted in a price 
below 3$ cents at New York, while in twenty-one years it would 
have given a price of 3J cents or higher, and in sixteen years over 
4 cents. That a reduction of the price below 4 cents would prove 
so disastrous to the mining industry as is pictured is not a reason- 
able conclusion from the statistics of prices and production ap- 
pended hereto. In 1893, which was a year of business depression, 
the price of lead fell to 3.73 cents New York, and the production 
was reduced to 163,982 tons, although there was a consumption 
of 197,000 tons, the deficiency being made up by importations. 
For the five years following, which included the period of the 
Wilson bill, the price averaged 3.17 cents, but the production in- 
creased from 162,686 tons in 1894 to 222,000 tons in 1898, a larger 
tonnage increase than had ever before occurred in any like period, 
and one which had been but slightly exceeded in any five-year 
period since, although conditions both as to price and consump- 
tive requirements have all been more favorable. 

Mineral Resources of the United States, 1883 (p. 311), recites: 
"The sharp competition between the smelters hi Leadville, in Pueblo, 
and in Denver keeps prices for ores high." These circumstances 
all contribute to a heavy production. "High ores" benefit the miner. 
"Heavy production" benefits the consumer. 

The immediate effect of the increased duty under the law of 
1897 was an effort to consolidate the smelting interests, and this 
so far succeeded that the American Smelting and Refining Com- 
pany was incorporated on April 4, 1899, with a capital of $65,000,000, 
of which $54,800,000 was issued, and thirteen properties were 
acquired, representing a very large proportion of the silver and 
lead smelting interests of tne United States. That this consoli- 
dation was not forced by the unprofitable character of the busi- 
ness is evident from the fact that the prospectus of this com- 
pany stated that the net earnings of the properties it had acquired 
amounted to $3,100,000 in 1898, when the price of lead was the 
same as it had been in 1897. Still greater earnings were promised 
as the result of the economies of consolidation, and these were so 
far realized from this source and from advanced prices that during 
its first fiscal year the company made $3,524,960. During its sec- 
ond year the capital was increased to $100,000,000 for the pur- 
pose of acquiring additional mining and smelting properties, and 
the profits increased to $6,585,103, including those of the acquired 
properties for the full period. For the following fiscal years the 
Company's profits were as follows: 

Year ended April 30, 1902 $7,038,681 

Year ended April 30, 1903 7, 576, 786 

Year ended April 30, 1904 7, 905, 573 

Year ended April 30, 1905 8, 898, 811 

Year ended April 30, 1906 8, 774, 055 

Year ^nded April 30, 1907 9, 914, 253 

Year ended April 30, 1908 7, 633, 286 

The capital of the company is equally divided between preferred 
and common stock, and the value of the properties, aside from good 
will and other intangible assets, is estimated to be possibly two-thirds 
of the capitalization, while the net profits since the second year of its 
existence have exceeded 7 per cent annually upon the par value of the 

61318 AP 09 15 



79G6 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

entire issue of stocks. Concerning its relation to the mining and 
smelting industry, Mr. Daniel Guggenheim, president of the American 
Smelting and Refining Company, issued the following statement on 
December 18, 1908, which was published in all the leading New York 
newspapers: 

As regards the lead smelting business of the American Smelting and Refining Com- 
pany: Fully 90 per cent of all the lead ores of the United States and in the Republic of 
Mexico are now controlled by ownership of mines and by long-time contracts. These 
ores are either controlled by the American Smelting and Refining Company or by its 
present competitors. And I wish to state further that the earnings of the smelting 
company at the present time, as well as of the securities company, are considerably in 
excess of the dividends that are being paid. 

How far this 90 per cent control is vested directly in the American 
Smelting and Refining Company it is impossible to state, for the 
reason that its relations to those concerns that are nominally its com- 
petitors are probably known to no one outside of its own directors. 
If the history of the industry for the past ten years may be accepted as 
a criterion of its future, there is every reason to fear tnat its "present 
competitors," whatever their number, are likely at any moment to 
pass under its domination if not ownership. 

This practical control of the mining and smelting industry is now 
vested in less than a score of men, who having thus acquired complete 
domination of the sources of supply, have already extended their 
influence into the industrial fields where its product of metal is chiefly 
converted into the commodities of consumption. In 1903 the Ameri- 
can Smelting and Refining Company interests formed the- United 
Lead Company with a capital of $25,000,000, by the amalgamation of 
some thirty concerns manufacturing white lead, sheet lead, shot, lead 
pipe, and other plumbing materials, through which it sought to com- 
plete a monopoly of the production and distribution of this metal. 
Its subsequent transfer of the United Lead Company to the National 
Lead Company is not assumed to have lessened its control of the 
situation, if, indeed, it has not strengthened it, as may reasonably 
be inferred from its representation on the board of directors of both 
these corporations, and through them its control of the competing 
interests represented in the Hoyt Metal Company and the Magnus 
Metal Company. 

The formation of the United Lead Company was helped by the 
danger that concerns which did not participate in this consolidation 
would have their supplies of lead cut off, and the fear which this 
danger, whether anticipated or openly threatened, was intended to 
inspire in those whose participation was solicited. 

Besides its wide ownership in these distinct although related 
industries, its power over competitors is augmented by the relation 
which it bears to the transportation companies. It is possible that 
the enormous extent of its shipments would be regarded as justif ying 
this relationship, but its effect is none the less said to have been 
seriously felt especially at the mining and smelting centers, where 
competition has been gradually but effectually checked during the 
past five years. 

Imports of pig lead are possible only under conditions which 
involve the depression of all foreign markets without a corresponding 
depression here, and a study of the statistics given herein show that 
like influences affecting the value of lead have in the past operated 
simultaneously in the markets of the United States and Europe. 



LEAD AND LEAD PKODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGER ET AL. 7967 

When they are permitted to operate naturally the American miner 
has no reasonable ground for asking that their operation be stayed, 
and the American consumer has every reasonable ground for asking 
that it be not interfered with. With the smelting interests organized 
as they are at present in this country, the admission of lead from 
foreign ores into consumption here is only possible through the 
channel which these ores afford, and the competition from foreign pig 
lead is out of the question except on a basis with which lead made 
from foreign ores in an American smelter could not compete. That 
basis could not now exist even were the duty on pig lead the same as 
on lead in the ore, as is proven by the fact that the United States 
exports largely every year of pig lead made from Mexican or British 
Columbian ore* smelted here in bond and sold in the European mar- 
kets at the prices prevailing there, less the cost of transportation. 

It is admitted, we believe, that nowhere else in the world is smelt- 
ing done at less actual cost than in this country, and under the oper- 
ation of the present law the smelter is given a bonus of from 7 to 8 
per cent on all the lead smelted from foreign ores, by being permitted 
to export 90 per cent in full settlement of his bonded importation, 
the 10 per cent remaining being an allowance for wastage. As the 
actual wastage is but 2 to 3 per cent, the balance of 7 to 8 per cent 
is thrown into domestic consumption by him without the payment 
of any duty, an annual average of 7,000 to 8,000 tons. Moreover, 
the western smelter has a good measure of protection on his pig 
lead made from imported ores in competition with imported pig, in 
the difference between the cost of transportation on his product from 
the smelter to eastern markets and on the foreign material landed 
at Atlantic ports for shipment to the West. The freight rate on pig 
lead, St. Louis to New York, is 15 cents per 100 pounds, and from 
New York to St. Louis, 29 cents per 100. So far at least as the chief 
consuming points west of the Alleghenies are concerned, the western 
smelter has a protection of from one-eighth to one-fourth cent per 
pound in the cost of transporting imported pig lead from the coast 
to the interior. Besides this he has the additional bonus of 7 per 
cent in the wastage allowance to which reference has been made, and 
this on a 3^-cent market would be equivalent to about one-fourth of 
a cent per pound. It must be borne in mind this wastage is entered 
duty free, and as it is exacted from the foreign shipper of ore, the 
same as it is from the domestic miner, it is, so far as the duty is con- 
cerned, a discrimination against the domestic miner. As a matter 
of fact, under the operation of the present law, the miner is only 
protected by a duty of $1.35, that being the amount which the 
smelter would actually pay on 100 pounds of lead contents of foreign 
ores entered by him for consumption. 

In his testimony before your committee, on December 16, 1908 r 
Mr. Edward Brush, vice-president of the American Smelting and 
Kefining Company, is reported to have said that 

The duty on bullion can stand a reduction of half a cent a pound, while pig lead 
can dispense with an unnecessary three-eighths of a cent now accorded it. But 
these reductions mark the lowest limits that the industry to-day can stand. 

We believe, however, that there is no necessity, existing or likely 
to occur, for any protection to the smelting interests in excess of 
the duty on lead in the ore, and our recommendation will be that 
they be made the same. 



7968 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

We do not believe that a material reduction in the present duty 
would result in largely increased importations, except on the rare 
occasions when domestic consumption exceeded the productive capac- 
ity of those mines which should be regarded as available sources by 
reason of their producing costs bearing some reasonable ratio to the 
costs of production in other producing countries. It is manifestly 
unfair to the American consumer that the cost of lead to him should 
be predicated upon the exceptionally high cost of production in the 
most unfavorably situated mines, or those operated with the least 
economy, especially when those mines do not represent a large pro- 
portion of the domestic supply. The known cost of mining in the 
most productive mines indicates that they are capable of furnishing 
an abundant supply for all normal domestic consumptive require- 
ments at a price competing with any cost at which foreign lead could 
be laid down here under a duty of 1 cent per pound. The effect of 
such a reduction would be, however, to bring the foreign and domestic 
markets to a close parity and render the domestic consumer in some 
measure independent of the interests that now control the supply of 
metallic lead. 

In view of the facts stated in this brief, and all that has been brought 
out in the testimony bearing upon this subject in the hearings before 
your committee, we respectfully urge, on behalf of the independent 
producers, as well as of the consumers of lead products, the following 
amendments to the present tariff law: 

1. That paragraph 181 of the present law shall be repealed and that the new law 
shall contain no provision for sampling ores, but shall leave to the Treasury Department 
the making of such regulations as shall safeguard the Government, but at the same 
time shall not, as does the present law, absolutely preclude the possibility of a small 
smelter bringing in lead ore. The Treasury Department can thus be held by appeal 
to the courts, if necessary, to make such regulations as will not put undue expense 
upon the small smelter for sampling, but will make the Government assume the cost of 
the sampling, as it does in the case of every other imported article. 

2. That provision be made that on the export of pig lead, bullion or manufactured 
lead, an allowance of 2 per cent be made for wastage in refining and manufacturing. 
In other words, lead smelted in bond is not to receive back 99 per cent of duty paid 
on the export of 90 per cent of the lead contents as shown by test, but in place thereof 
upon the export of 98 per cent of the lead contents as shown by the custom-house entry. 

3. That paragraphs No. 181 and No. 182 read as follows: Lead dross, lead bullion or 
base bullion, lead in pigs or bars, old refuse lead run into- blocks or bars ; old scrap 
lead fit only to be remanufactured, lead in any form not specifically provided for in 
this act, and the lead contents contained in lead-bearing ores of all kinds; all the 
foregoing at cent per pound; lead in sheets, pipe, shot, traps, braziers lead, and 
lead wire, cent per pound. 

We have named no rate of duty in the preceding paragraph for the reason that 
while we regard a duty of 1 cent per pound the maximum that even the statements 
of mining interests which have appeared before your committee could justify, we 
still believe and strongly urge that any rate above one-half cent per pound will not 
be productive of large revenues. At the same time we are of the opinion that a re- 
duction even to 1 cent per pound would check the absolute control of the market 
by any single interest, and prevent the fixing of fictitious values upon pig lead as 
was done by the smelters in 1906. 

4. Manufactures of lead other than those in clause 182 of the Dingley bill should 
also bear a proportionate reduction to that made on pig lead. 

We are appending to this brief a schedule of the changes in price 
made by the American Smelting and Refining Company for the years 
they have been practically in control of the market, which control was 
officially recognized by the Government in the report of the United 
States Geological Survey as early as the year 1 904. 

A perusal of these prices wDl distinctly show that the changes 
could not have possibly been dictated solely by the law of supply and 



LEAD AND LEAD PKODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGEK ET AL. 7969 

demand. The admission that many long-period contracts with miners 
have been based upon pig lead at 4 cents at New York is clear evidence 
that this was considered at least a fair price by the miners; and the 
fact that since these contracts were made, at no time until the panic 
of 1907 was upon us, was pig lead as low as 4 cents per pound, dem- 
onstrates that the benefits accruing under the tariff of 1897 were not 
enjoyed by the miners, but rather by the smelters, who certainly by 
their own evidence have established the fact that they need no pro- 
tection. 

Further proof of this is seen in the fact that with the exception of 
manufacturing companies closely affiliated with the smelting interests, 
it has been impossible to buy imported lead for the purpose of man- 
ufacturing for export, except such lead as bore 2J cents per pound 
duty, for the reason that during most of this time lead made from for- 
eign ore, plus the duty of 1J cents would have netted less than the 
price of domestic pig lead. 

REFINING OF FOREIGN LEAD IN BOND. 

Under the tariff of August 28, 1894, the allowance for loss in wast- 
age through smelting of foreign ores or base bullion in bond was 
fixed at 2 per cent. The allowance under existing tariff law is 10 
per cent for loss in wastage through smelting of foreign ores in bond; 
this we contend is excessive. We submit an authority on this subject, 
the official records of the United States Government, and quote from 
the Advance Chapter from Mineral Resources of the United States 
Calendar Year 1907, published by the Department of the Interior, 
United States Geological Survey, as follows. (See p. 1.) 

Lastly there is not taken into account in these totals the loss in smelting ranging 
from 2 per cent in the case of the better ordered smelters to 5 per cent or more in the 
smaller soft lead smelters. 

We quote again from Mineral Resources, published by the Depart- 
ment of the Interior, United States Geological Survey (issue of 1902), 
page 208: 

In the beginning it was possible to arrive at the net American production by deduct- 
ing from the total pig-lead production of the works, the lead contents of the foreign base 
bullion and ores. The commercial statistics and the domestic-production statistics 
were identical. Later on the supply to the home markets included besides the product 
of our own mines, varying quantities of "exempt" lead, being a certain tonnage of lead 
obtained from foreign material which did not pay a duty. 

We reproduce the figures of the United States Geological Survey 
showing the production of refined lead in the United States from 
foreign ores and bullion during the years prior to the law of 1894. 
During the term of that law, 1894, 1895, 1896, and 1897, showing that 
the product of lead smelted hi bond from such foreign ores and base 
bullion increased during the period from 59,739 tons in 1894 to 83,671 
in 1897. 

Any allowance for a smelting loss exceeding 2 per cent is 
therefore either equivalent to a payment of a bounty to foreign pro- 
ducers of lead ore smelted in this country, or to a bonus given to the 
smelting companies and amounting to the current rate of duty upon 
such foreign lead ores upon such excess over said 2 per cent 
allowance. 

The Wilson tariff went into effect August 28, 1894. The following 
table shows the production of refined lead in the United States from 
foreign ores and base bullion for the period of three years prior to 



7970 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

August 28, 1894, when the Wilson bill became effective and for the 
years from 1894 to 1897 while the Wilson bill was in force, and for the 
years 1897 to 1900 after the repeal thereof and the enactment of the 
present tariff law. 

The figures are found in Mineral Resources of United States, issue 
of 1902, page 208. 

PRODUCTION OF REFINED LEAD IN UNITED STATES. 

[From foreign ores and base bullion.] 

Short tons. 

1891 23,852 

1892 39,957 

1893 - 65,351 

1894 59,739 

1895 76,738 

1896 77,738 

1897 83,671 

1898 99,945 

1899 95,926 

EXPORTS OF DOMESTIC LEAD. 

Mineral Resources of the United States, issue of 1883, in review- 
ing the lead market of 1878, states (p. 317): "The effort proved" 
(to hold the price at 4 cents, New York) "a complete failure, and 
lead fell steadily until 3J cents was reached in June. The falling 
off in the production of Utah and the shipment of surplus supplies 
of Nevada lead to China began to strengthen the position somewhat." 

Mineral Resources of the United States, issue of 1897 (p. 240), 
states : 

The bureau also reports exports of 8,180 short tons of domestic lead, and notes a 
decline in stocks of foreign lead in warehouse from 9,865 tons on January 1, 1896, to 
4,124 tons on January 1, 1897. 

The report of the lead industry in the United States contained in 
Mineral Industries of the United States, published by the Department 
of the Interior, United States Geological Survey, 1883, contains these 
words (p. 306) : 

For a long period the output of the mines of Missouri and of the upper Mississippi 
region constituted the bulk of the make of our country, and during the period between 
1840 and 1848 it became so heavy that considerable quantities of the metal were ex- 
ported, the maximum being reached in 1844, when 8,223 tons went abroad. 

In conclusion, we submit that neither the mining of lead nor the 
smelting and refining thereof are infant industries in any sense of 
the term; that the present duty on lead is prohibitive, and brings 
no adequate revenue to the Government, but has produced a practi- 
cal monopoly benefiting very few interests and imposing an unjust 
and burdensome tax upon every class of consumers. 

It is not alone the burden imposed upon the consumer by the ex- 
travagant profits of these interests from which relief is sought, but 
equally the financial power with which such profits endow those in 
control, and the monopoly of a vast industry which is being rapidly 
acquired through the misapplied "benefits" of a prohibitory tariff . 
All of which is respectfully submitted. 

MILTON L. LISSBERGER, 

Cfiairman. 
Dr. J. T. DURYEA. 
E. C. MILLER. 
J. M. PETERS. 



LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGEE ET AL. 7971 

EXHIBIT A. 
Production and imports of lead. 



Year. 


United 
States pro- 
duction- 
United 
States 
Geological 
Survey 
(tons). 


Import for 
consump- 
tion ore, 
dross, and 
Pig- 


United 
States 
consump- 
tion. 


Price 
New York 
(cents per 
pound). 


Price 
London 
(cents per 
pound). 


Differ- 
ence. 


United 
States 
duty. 


1873 


42,540 


36,212 




632 


500 


132 


200 


1874 


52,080 


23,102 




601 


477 


124 


200 


1875 


59,640 


16,392 




585 


488 


97 


200 


1876 


64,070 


7,lt>5 




613 


466 


147 


200 


1877 


81,900 


7,292 




549 


445 


104 


200 


1878 -. 


91,050 


3,358 




361 


362 




200 


1879 


92,780 


608 




414 


309 


105 


200 


1880 


97,825 


3,302 




504 


353 


151 


200 


1881 . . . 


117,085 


2,164 




481 


324 


157 


200 


1882 


132,890 


3,050 




491 


311 


180 


200 


1883 


143, 957 


2,319 




432 


280 


152 


200 


1884 


139, 897 


1,536 




374 


241 


133 


200 


1885 


129,412 


2,933 




395 


249 


146 


200 


1886 


130.629 


9,149 




463 


287 


176 


200 


1887 


145, 700 


3,935 




450 


278 


172 


200 


1888 


151,919 


1,335 




442 


302 


140 


200 


1889 . . 


156,396 


1,550 




393 


283 


110 


200 


1890 


143, 630 


15, 210 


170,305 


448 


291 


157 


200 


1891 


178,554 


22,042 


200,026 


435 


270 


165 


200 


1892 


173,305 


27,920 


210,900 


409. 


228 


181 


200 


1893 


163,982 


26,224 


197, 079 


373 


216 


157 


200 


1894o 


162,686 


36.045 


192,371 


329 


207 


122 


200-100 


1895fl 


170,000 


77,310 


241,044 


323 


230 


93 


100 


18960 


188,000 


24,190 


213,901 


298 


244 


54 


100 


1897o . . 


212,000 


23,545 


219, 248 


358 


224 


134 


100-2125 


1898 


222,000 


8,461 


227,452 


378 


284 


94 


2125 




210,000 


5,150 


226,315 


447 


327 


120 


2125 


1900... 


270.824 


6,942 


269,302 


437 


377 


60 


2125 


1901 


270,700 


6,964 


274 020 


403 


275 


128 


2125 


1902 


270,000 


13, 472 


335,485 


407 


244 


163 


2125 


1903 


280,000 


25 063 


304 483 


424 


254 


170 


2125 


1904 


307,000 


18, 167 


223,766 


436 


262 


174 


2125 


1905 


322,000 


39,000 


361,000 


471 


301 


170 


2125 


1906 


347,000 


35,000 


382,000 


566 


395 


171 


2125 


1907 


357 000 


28 000 


385 000 


532 


413 


119 


2125 



















o Wilson tarifl production (notwithstanding 1 cent duty and average selling price in New York of 3.27 
cents per pound) increased from 162,686 tons to 212,000 tons annually, or 33 per cent. 

Lead, in tons of 2, 40 pounds Imports into United States from different countries. 



Year. 


Europe. 


British 
North 
America. 


Mexico. 


Sundries. 


Exports in 
bond. 


1895... 


20,000 


6,500 


70,000 




18,632 


1896 


1,174 


10,968 


58,001 


781 


45,254 


1897 


1,280 


16,750 


61,639 


94 


52,846 


1898 


141 


16, 441 


65 218 


149 


76 355 


1899 


200 


9,000 


76,000 


500 


66,720 


1900 


404 


15,190 


79,841 


2,295 


91,856 


1901 


487 


23,748 


73,005 


3,782 


85, 721 


1902 


1.350 


8,094 


82,005 


2,375 


67,287 


1903... 


1,520 


8,300 


83,019 


1,533 


65,972 


1904 


572 


7,842 


89 903 


283 


75,448 


1905 


1,789 


8,974 


76,275 


635 


53,159 


1906... 


8,060 


8,514 


56,491 


185 


41, 597 


1907 


5,055 


4,311 


62,164 


534 


46,996 















In 1894 the total importation was 38,000 tons, and the total exports 26,809. 
In 1905 the importation was very heavy, while the exports were small. 



7972 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

EXHIBIT B. 
SMELTING COMPANY'S PRICES. 

The prices for common lead at New York, as made by the American Smelting and 
Refining Company, and as compared with London prices on even dates, are as follows: 






Amount. 


Price of 
Imported 
lead c. 1. 1.. 
N. Y., in 
pounds per 
ton. 


Cost 
penal 
duty of 
2 cents 
per 
pound. 


January 2 the price was 


1900. 


4.75 
4.45 
4.30 
4.05 
3.87} 
3.75 
4.12} 
4.25 


. d. 
16 5 
17 2 6 
17 3 9 
17 2 6 
17 3 9 
17 5 
17 10 
17 10 


5.62} 
5.84} 
5.86 
5.84} 
5.86 
5.87} 
5.92} 
5.92 






May 10 price reduced to. . ...... 








June 5 price reduced to......... 




June 13 price reduced to 




June 25 price advanced to. . .... 




Jane 26 price'^bd vanced to 










Amount. 


Price of 
imported 
lead c. f. 1., 
N. Y., in 
pounds per 
ton. 


Cost 
penal 
duty of 
2} cents 
per 
pound. 


July 2 price reduced to 


1900. 


4.12* 
4.00 
4.25 
4.37} 

4.00 
4.10 

4.35 
4.65 
4.35 
4.10 
4.40 
4.10 
4.25 

4.40 
4.50 
4.35 
4.25 
4.20 
4.10 
4.20 
4.60 

4.45 
4.50 
4.60 
4.85 
5.15 
5.25 
5.60 

5.35 
5.50 
5.60 
5.75 

6.00 

5.75 
5.25 
4.75 


. d. 
17 10 
17 10 
18 
17 2 6 

10 10 
11 

13 10 
13 15 
12 
11 5 
11 5 
11 1 3 
11 3 9 

11 12 6 
11 16 3 
11 5 
11 11 3 
11 10 
11 5 
11 15 
12 18 9 

12 15 
12 8 9 
13 17 6 
14 1 3 
14 8 9 
15 7 6 
17 2 6 

15 15 
15 18 9 
16 1 3 
16 17 6 
19 7 6 

20 
20 15 
19 5 


5.92 
5.92 
6.92 
5.84} 

4.40 
'4.51 

5.06 
5.11 
4.73} 

4. 54 

4.65 
4.69 
4.57 
4.63 
4.62 
4.57 
4.68 
4.93 

4.90 
4.83 
5.03 
5.17} 
6.25 
5.46 
5.85 

5.53 
5.59 
5.62 
5.79 
6.45 

a 47 

6.73 
6.42} 


July 9 price reduced to 




August 1 price advanced to 




August 27 price advanced to 




December 17 price reduced to. . . 


1901. 


January 3 price advanced to. ... 


1902. 


March 10 price advanced to 


1903. 


March 13 price advanced to 




April 27 price reduced to 




June 16 price reduced to 




September 15 price advanced to . 




November 16 price reduced to. . 




December 14 price advanced to. 




January 13 price advanced to. . . 


1904. 


March 1 price advanced to 




May 20 price reduced to 




May 27 price reduced to 


* 


June 14 price reduced to 




July 25 price reduced to 




August 29 price advanced to 




December 1 price advanced to. . 




January 23 price reduced to 


1905. 


March 20 price advanced to 




July 25 price ad vanced to 




August 24 price advanced to 




November 1 price advanced to.. 




November 16 price advanced to. 




December 21 price advanced to. 




February 14 price reduced to. . . 


1906. 


April 20 price advanced to 




^fay 3 price advanced to 




May 14 price advanced to 




December 13 price advanced to. 




June 3 price reduced to 


1907. 


July 3 price reduced to 




September 6 price reduced to. .. 









LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGEB ET AL. 7973 



EXHIBIT C. 

CONTROL OF THE LEAD INDUSTRY FROM THE MINE TO THE CONSUMER. 

As illustrating the close affiliation of interest existing between the American Smelt- 
ing and Refining Company, smelters and producers of pig lead, and certain combina- 
tions of manufacturers of pig-lead products entering into the daily consumption of a 
commodity vitally necessary to the great mass of the people of the United States, we 
give the following details taken from Moody's Manual, issue of 1905, 1906, 1907, 
and 1908: 

(1) Guggenheim Exploration Company, (2) American Smelters Securities Company, 
(3) American Smelting and Refining Company, (4) The United Lead Company, (5) The 
Magnus Metal Company, (6) The National Lead Company. 

Guggenheim Exploration Company (Moody's Manual, 1908-2411), incorporated 
June, 1899, under New Jersey laws, controls a large number of mines and mining 
properties in Mexico and United States. 

Capital stock authorized, $22,000,000; issued, $20,319,910. Dividends, 10 per cent 
per annum, quarterly. 

Balance sheet December 31 j 1906. 





1906. 


1905. 


ASSETS. 

Treasury stock 


$1,680,700 


$4,000,000 


The Smelters Securities Company: 
Series A stock 


13,860.000 


015,400,000 


Series B stock 


1,800,000 


2,000,000 


Common stock 




61 


Other property and investment 


14,327,444 


2.711,538 


Furniture, etc 


7,711 


4,603 


Bills and accounts collectible 


47,472 


440,954 


Cash 


4,052,487 


611,470 








Total 


35,775,815 


25,168,566 










1906. 


1907. 


LIABILITIES. 

Capital stock 


$22,000,000 


$17,000,000 


Bias and accounts payable 


14,861 


1,301,317 


Surplus 


13,760,954 


6,867,249 








Total 


35,775,815 


25,168,566 









Par value, $11,249,000. 



6 Par value. 



Note their surplus increased from $6,867,249 at end of 1905 to $13,760,954 at end of 
1906, or (in one year) $6,893,705, although they reduced the valuation of their American 
Smelters Securities Stock, series A and B, $1,520,000 in the same period. 

Directors: Daniel Guggenheim, S. R. Guggenheim, Morris Guggenheim, N. Robert 
Guggenheim, Isaac Guggenheim. 

American Smelters Securities Company (Moody's Manual, p. 1899): Incorporated 
March 31, 1905, in New Jersey as The American Smelters Exploration Company, name 
changed as above in May, 1905. At its inception the company acquired from the 
Guggenheim Exploration Company various mining properties and interests in Colorado 
Missouri, and Mexico, and also received from that company about $5,000,000 in cash 
to complete certain purchases. Subsequently purchased other properties in Washing- 
ton, California, Utah, Missouri, and Mexico. Control of the Federal Mining and 
Smelting Company was acquired in May, 1905, and of the Utah Copper Company in 
November of the same year. In addition to the mining interests of the company 
which are operated largely as a base of supply for its various smelting works, it had in 
successful operation at the time of its organization the following: 

Lead Smelting and Refining Works of the Selby Smelting and Lead Company, at 
San Francisco; Lead Smelting and Refining Works of the Federal Lead Company, at 
Federal, 111.; and Lead Smelting and Copper Smelting and Refining Works of the 
Tacoma Smelting Company, at Tacoma, Wash. 

Capital stock authorized and outstanding, $30,000,000 common. 

Capital stock authorized and outstanding, $17,000,000 preferred A. 

Capital stock authorized and outstanding, $30,000,000 preferred B. 



7974 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

In April, 1905, the American Smelting and Refining Company acquired $17,751,000 
(a majority) of the common stock. Preferred stock Is is unconditionally guaranteed 
both as to the principal and dividends by the American Smelting and Refining 
Company. 



EXHIBIT D. 

AMERICAN SMELTING AND REFINING. 

(Moody's Manual 1908, p. 1897). Incorporated April 4, 1899, in New Jersey. 

Owns and operates plants for the smelting of ores and the treatment of lead bullion, 
copper bullion, and copper matte in Montana, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, 
Illinois, New Jersey, Mexico, and elsewhere. Bar gold and silver, pig lead, electro- 
lytic copper, and blue vitrol are the principal merchantable products. The output 
of lead and silver is understood to be about 85 per cent of the production of the United 
States. 

In April, 1901, acquired the smelting and refining business of various corporations 
controlled by M. Guggenheim Sons, thus very largely increasing the size and scope 
of the corporation. The Guggenheim properties included smelting plants at Pueblo, 
Colorado, Monterey, and Aguascalientes, Mexico, and Perth Amboy, N. J. In addi- 
tion to the properties mentioned above the company owns a controlling interest in 
the United States Zinc Company, whose plant is at Pueblo, Colo., and owns the entire 
stock of The American Smelters Steamship Company, which operates steamers in ita 
interests between New York and other ports in theUnited States and Mexico. In April, 
1905, acquired $17,751,000 (a majority) of the common stock of the American Smelters 
Securities Company, the latter owning a controlling interest in the Federal Mining and 
Smelting Company, the Utah Copper Company. 

Since the close of the fiscal year ended April, 1906, the company has effected a sale 
of a portion of the stock of the United Lead Company, owned by it. (See National 
Lead.) 



EXHIBIT E. 

FEDERAL MINING AND SMELTING COMPANY. 

[Moody's Manual, 1908-1900.] 

The company acquired all the mining property formerly owned by the Empire 
State Idaho Mining and Development Company, the Standard Mining Company, 
and also the Mammoth Mines in Idaho and certain smelting property at Everett, 
Wash. The smelting property has since 'been disposed of without loss. Recently 
acquired Morning and You Like Group in Hunter district, valued at $3,000,000. 

In May, 1905, control of the company was acquired by the American Smelters 
Securities Company, controlled in turn by the American Smelting and Refining 
Company. The mining properties consist of four groups of silver lead mines and 
claims, situated in the Coeur d'Alene mining district, Idaho, as follows: The Wardner, 
near Wardner, on the main lines of the Oregon River and Navigation Railroad; the 
Mace, located at Mace, Idaho; the Burke, situated in Burke, Idaho, and the Morning 
and You Like Group of silver lead mines, situated near Mullen, on line of Northern 
Pacific Railroad, 7 miles from Wallace, reached by a short railroad which is the prop- 
erty of the company. The company estimates that its properties contain silver lead 
ores such as is now being mined, as follows: 

Wardner mines: In sight, 200,000 tons; in reserve, more than 700,000 tons. 

Burke mines: In sight, 180,000 tons; in reserve, 3,000,000 tons. 

Mace mines: In sight, 200,000 tons; in reserve, 2,000,000 tons. 

Contract: The Federal Mining and Smelting Company has entered into contract 
with the American Smelting and Refining Company, by which it is agreed that for 
a period of six years from September, 1, 1903, the Federal Company will sell to the 
Smelting Company, and the Smelting Company agrees to buy, its entire output. 

Authorized capital: $20,000,000 7 per cent cumulative preferred and $10,000,000 
common. 

Outstanding: $12,000,000 preferred, $6,000,000 common. 



LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS MILTON L. LISSBERGEB ET AL. 7975 





Amount. 


Dividends. 


Preferred. 


Common. 


Earnings, net: 
1904-5 . 


$1.242,688 
2.685,300 


Percent. 
7 
7 
1 


9 

13 


1905-6 


1906-7 







Metal Production years ending August 31; lead in tons, silver in ounces: 

1904-5 44,137 2,689,867 

1905-6 63,029 3,920,824 

Tons of ore mined 1906-7 888, 950 

Metal contents lead in tons, 1906-7 59,746 

Silver in ounces 3, 689, 298 

Among the directors we find the following: 

G. M. Borden (one of the officers of the United Lead Company); F. W. Hills (also 
assistant treasurer of the American Smelters Securities Company); T. J. Phillips 
(the manager of the sales department of the American Smelting and Refining 
Company); Judge Stewart (also director of the American Smelting and Refining 
Company); Edwin Brush (vice-president of the American Smelting and Refining 
Company, member of the executive committee of the American Smelting and 
Refining Company, vice-president of the American Smelters Securities Company, 
director of the American Smelters and Securities Company, director of the National 
Lead Company, director in the United Lead Company). 

NATIONAL LEAD COMPANY. 
[ Moody 's Manual, p. 2136.] 

In 1904 this company was capitalized as follows: 

Common stock $15, 000, 000 

Preferred stock 15, 000, 000 

30, 000, 000 
During 1905 the capital was increased 

Common 25, 000, 000 

Preferred stock 25, 000, 000 

50, 000, 000 

During 1905 Daniel Guggenheim, Murray Guggenheim, and Edward Brush (all of 
whom were directors of the American Smelting and Refining Company) became mem- 
bers of the board of directors of the National Lead Company, and shortly thereafter the 
capitalization was increased to $50,000,000, the increase being largely for the purpose 
of purchasing the control of the United Lead Company, heretofore held by interests 
identified with the American Smelting and Refining Company. 

The National Lead Company was incorporated in New Jersey, December 7, 1891. 

The property of the company consists of white-lead works, smelters, and refineries 
in New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Ohio, Massachusetts, Illinois, and other States, 
and comprises 26 plants. It manufactures white lead, oxides, and kindred products, 
also castor oil, linseed oil cake and meal, and smelts and refines lead. 

[Moody's Manual of 1908.] 

In February, 1907, the company purchased the Magnus Metal Company, and for this 
purpose $3,750,000 preferred stock was issued. 



EXHIBIT F. 

THE UNITED LEAD COMPANY. 
[From Moody's Manual, 1908.] 

Incorporated under the laws of New Jersey in January, 1903, by interests affiliated 
with the American Smelting and Refining Company, the latter a Guggenheim prop- 
erty, the purpose of the company being to consolidate the various lead and manufac- 



7976 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

turing plants. The following is a complete list of the concerns whose plants were 
originally taken over by the United Lead Company: 

James Robertson Lead Company Baltimore, Md. 

Omaha Shot and Lead Company Omaha, Nebr. 

Northwestern Shot and Lead Company St. Paul, Minn. 

Callier Shot Tower Works St. Louis, Mo. 

Bailey & Farrell Shot Works Pittsburg, Pa. 

Mark if Lead Works St. Louis, Mo. 

Gibson & Price Cleveland, Ohio. 

Le Roy Shot and Lead Works New York. 

Union Lead and Oil Works Brooklyn, New York. 

Sportsmens Shot Works Cincinnati, Ohio. 

Cnicago Shot Tower Company. Chicago, 111. 

Hoyt Metal Company. St. Louis, Mo. 

Tatham & Bros New York. 

Raymond Lead Company Chicago, 111. 

E. W. Blatchford & Co Chicago, 111. 

Thomas W. Sparks Philadelphia, Pa. 

Chad wick-Boston Lead" Works Boston, Mass. 

Lanston Lead Works. . Chicago, 111. 

McDougall Whitehead Company Buffalo, N. Y. 

In September, 1904, the plant and trade-mark of Tatham Brothers, Philadelphia, 
was acquired, the consideration being one million, half cash, the balance bonds. 

Capital stock: Originally there was $15,100,000 stock, $100,000 of which was 7 per 
cent preferred, but in May, 1903, this was increased to twenty-five million of the last- 
named amount, ten million 6 per cent cumulative preferred, balance common; bonds, 
twelve million debenture, gold five. 

BARTON SEWELL, President. 
DANIEL GUGGENHEIM, 
MORRIS GUGGENHEIM, 
T. F. RYAN, 
BARTON SEWELL, 
. E. W. NASH, 
J. D. MORS, 

Director*. 

EXHIBIT G. 

MAGNUS METAL COMPANY. 
[The Moody's Manual, 1905.] 

Incorporated in New Jersey, in 1899, to consolidate the following companies engaged 
in the manufacture of brass and metal goods: 

Fort Pitt Bronze Company, Stiles Metal Company, Buffalo Brass Company, Brady 
Metal Company, E. Blunt Manufacturing Company, The Hewitt Manufacturing Com- 
pany, Chicago, 111. 

In 1907 they took Gerdes Brothers, Pittsburg, the Atcheson Lead Company, of 
Rankin, the Lead Pipe Manufacturing Department of the Standard Sanitary Company, 
and the Nevin White Lead Works, Pittsburg, Pa. 



SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT BY EDWARD BRUSH, NEW YORK 
CITY, VICE-PRESIDENT OF AMERICAN SMELTING AND 
REFINING COMPANY, RELATIVE TO LEAD. 

165 BROADWAY, 
New York, February 5, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR : Since the giving of my testimony before your committee 
with reference to the tariff on lead in various forms I have been 
particularly desirous of summing up in a few words the salient points 



LEAD AND LEAD PEODUCTS EDWAKD BRUSH. 7977 

of the situation, and I am particularly desirous of saying a few more 
words now since the receipt by your committee of a communication 
signed by Milton L. Lissberger, chairman. 

With reference to my testimony, so far as it applied to the produc- 
tion of lead in this country, I believe it can be summed up in a very 
few words. 

Concerning the production of pig lead in the Missouri region, there 
are various publications, scientific and otherwise, which indicate that 
the cost of production, not taking into account the annual depreciation 
of the mine, is approximately 3 cents. I filed with your committee a 
report with regard to a report from a former state geologist of the 
State of Missouri stating that the Missouri lead deposits would be 
exhausted if the production continued as at present in a period of ten 
years. Under those circumstances I am sure your committee will 
agree that the price of 4 cents, which is approximately the present 
price of lead, and which is approximately the average price of lead 
obtained during the last eight years (with the exception of the boom 
prices of 1906 and 1907), does not show an extravagant profit. In 
fact, when account is taken of the fact that a mine does not become a 
mine until the risk of the prospect has been overcome, and that many 
prospects with large expenditures of money never make any return 
whatever, it will be seen that the lead-mining industry can hardly be 
a very attractive one in which to take the risks of prospecting, even 
with 4-cent lead, in the State of Missouri. 

I was able to show that at 4 cents the profit of a typical Rocky 
Mountain mine was barely normal, and that when the market last year 
went below 4 cents many of the large producing mines of the Rocky 
Mountain region closed entirely; 

I urged that the duty of 1J cents a pound on lead in ore should be 
retained. This would give a protection of $30 a ton. I was able to 
show that this protection of $30 a ton was made necessary by the two 
facts that the Mexican lead producers could deliver lead in New York, 
so far as freight rates alone were concerned, for $17 a ton less than the 
Rocky Mountain region, producing two-thirds of all of the lead in this 
country, could ship to the New York market; also, the wages paid 
to mining labor in Mexico were from one-ninth to one-sixth only of the 
wages paid to miners in the Rocky Mountain region. These two con- 
ditions can not be overcome, and unless the mining of lead in the 
Rocky Mountain region is to be made unprofitable, a large portion of 
its product cut off, and the prospecting for lead mines absolutely dis- 
couraged, this duty of 1 \ cents a pound is absolutely necessary. 

Lead mining can not be treated as a manufacturing matter; it is 
not an infant industry to be encouraged and put on its feet and a 
clientele built up. It must, in the first place, oe more than usually 
profitable or no one will take pains to endeavor to discover mines and 
no one will go to the expense of prospecting for them. The long haul 
by rail from the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic seaboard, where a 
large proportion of all the lead produced is consumed, is worth the 
money charged by the railroads under the cost of operation in the 
United States. The laborers in the Rocky Mountains are being paid 
in accord with the expenses of living in those regions, and those are 
the crucial points that govern the situation. The damage to be 
reckoned with, however, should this industry be discouraged, is 
unique. Not only lead mining would be discouraged, but all mining 



7978 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

in the Rocky Mountain region in which such large quantities of silver 
and gold and copper are produced would also be equally discouraged. 

The precious metals can not be recovered from the refractory ores 
of the Rocky Mountains except as lead is used as a base to accumu- 
late the precious metals in the process of smelting. In this process 
of smelting there must be at least 10 per cent of lead in the furnace 
or the proper slag will not be produced and the precious metals will 
not be accumulated in the lead, from which they can afterwards be 
recovered and refined. If, therefore, the production of lead ore in the 
Rocky Mountain region is cut off 25 per cent by a reduction of the 
tariff, the ability of the smelters to smelt the other ores will be pro- 
portionately curtailed. The whole business of the Rocky Mountain 
section of the United States is based upon mining. This includes 
railroad freights, manufactures, and consumption of all natures. 
Peculiarly, however, the universal argument or those who have pro- 
tested against the present duty being kept in effect has been one of 
criticism of the American Smelting and Refining Company rather 
than one dealing with the actual cost of production. The statement 
has been made that the American Smelting and Refining Company 
held a monopoly of the lead situation of the country. The statement 
has been made that they do not sell pig lead to customers fairly ; that 
they make exorbitant charges to the lead miners, in connection with 
which reference has been made to the yearly profits of the American 
Smelting and Refining Company, and the inference is drawn that the 
price of lead is for the benefit or the American Smelting and Refining 
Company rather than for the benefit of the miner. Those making 
such statements are doubtless better informed in regard to the exact 
situation than are your committee. I beg in this particular to refer 
somewhat to my testimony and to amplify the same in order that 
the committee may more clearly see the position of the American 
Smelting and Refining Company as to the lead market and the lead 
industry of the country than is possible without a careful study of 
the situation. 

In the first place, the business methods of the smelting company 
are different from those adopted by any other large business industry, 
so far as I know. Where complaints have been made with reference 
to trusts and monopolies, they have been to the effect that the 
producers of the raw material found themselves obliged to sell to 
the trust at abnormally low prices, and the trust sold to the con- 
sumers of the country their product at abnormally high prices. 
Now, the business of trie American Smelting and Refining Company 
is based upon a payment to the mine of the market price of pig lead, 
whatever it may be. The smelting company makes contracts with 
the mining companies for their entire product agreeing to pay them 
the market price for their lead and their silver and their copper the 
day that it is shipped. The consequence is that if the smelting 
company should advance the price of pig lead it would be for the 
benefit of the mining company, and if the price declines it is an 
injury to the mining company. The interest of the smelting com- 
pany is not in the price of lead, but only in their fixed charge of so 
many dollars per ton of ore. Consequently, there is no depreciation 
on the part or the smelting company of the raw material, and there 
is no interest on the part of the smelting company in abnormally 
raising the price of refined product. The extreme erroneousness of 



LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS EDWARD BRUSH. 7979 

the criticisms of the smelting company as to the profitableness of its 
business is shown by the fact that they refer to its total profits and 
apply these only to its lead business. The value of the pig lead 
products of the American Smelting and Refining Company for the 
past year was less than $20,000,000, and the value of its entire 
product was in excess of $90,000,000. It is absurd, therefore, to 
refer to the profits of the smelting company as arising from its 
dealing in lead; and even the $20,000,000 lead value includes all of 
the lead smelted and refined in this country in bond obtained from 
Mexico, Canada, Spain, Africa, South America, and Australia. 
The total product of domestic pig lead of the company was about 
175,000 tons. The lead ores smelted averaged 10 per cent lead. 
This would indicate, therefore, that the ores smelted by the com- 
pany containing lead were approximately 1,750,000 tons, whereas 
the entire amount smelted by trie company was approximately twice 
this. Therefore, in tons of ore, not more than one-half of the tons 
smelted contained any lead whatever, and the smelting charge for 
the number of tons of ore smelted which contained lead applied to the 
silver and gold and the copper contained in the same ore along with 
the lead. A proof of the fact that the smelting charges of the smelt- 
ing company are not exorbitant is that the large producing mines 
which are owned by men of large capital find that they can not erect 
and smelt their own ore as cheaply as the American Smelting and 
Refining Company charges for smelting. The reason for the ability 
of the smelting company to offer these low smelting charges is their 
ability, to gather together a wide variety of ores in large quantities, 
thereby enabling them to lower their charges and reduce their costs. 

In the statement of Mr. Lissberger it is again reiterated that the 
smelting company has a monopoly of the production of lead. We 
beg to refer you to the information in the hands of the United States 
Geological Survey as to this statement. The American Smelting and 
Refining Company furnished the Geological Survey with a state- 
ment of the production of domestic lead by their company and all of 
their subsidiary companies for the year 1908, which was, approxi- 
mately, 160,000 tons. This included the production of every com- 
pany or mine in which the American Smelting and Refining Com- 
pany, or its directors, are in any way directly or indirectly interested. 
The Geological Survey received statements from all of the other pro- 
ducers of pig lead in the country and issued their annual statement 
early in January to the effect that the production of lead for the 
year 1908 in the United States was approximately 285,000 tons, 
which seems to indicate that other producers of pig lead in the 
United States, with which this company has no interest whatever, 
produced 125,000 tons during the year 1908. As sellers of lead, 
therefore, the American Smelting and Refining Company has no con- 
trol of the market whatever, and there is abundant opportunity for 
trading in lead entirely outside of the American Smelting and Refin- 
ing Company and its allied interests. 

We wish to repeat also, with reference to other statements made 
by Mr. Lissberger, that the American Smelting and Refining Com- 
pany are not in control of the various lead manufacturing com- 
panies to which he refers. If they were, however, it would have 
little or no pertinence with regard to the tariff situation. As a mat- 
ter of fact, the smelting company has no ownership whatever in the 



7980 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

stock of the various manufacturing companies referred to. It hap- 
pens that three directors out of fifteen of tne National Lead Company 
are also directors of the American Smelting and Refining Company. 
Those three directors own a very small proportion of the stock of 
the National Lead Company. 

Reference is made to the provisions of the tariff law with reference 
to sampling. Regarding this we beg to state that the Treasury 
Department does not require sampling works to be established, but 
they take grab samples from every car as it is imported, and anyone 
can import lead and the Treasury Department makes no difference 
in its method of sampling to whomever the ore may be consigned. 

Reference is made to wastage of lead in smelting and refining. In 
regard to this we beg to state that the Treasury Department has 
repeatedly made investigations relative to this point in connection 
with the amount of wastage to be allowed in drawback cases, and 
they have found that on average 10 per cent is a fair allowance to be 
made for the wastage of lead in smelting and refining. We beg to state 
that taking our operations as a whole we find that 10 per cent is a 
fair average to allow. We have some smelting works which con- 
stantly show a loss of 20 per cent in smelting alone of all of the lead 
put into the furnaces. This is not because these works are not as 
carefully and efficiently operated as other works, but because of the 
character of the ores smelted. It is entirely possible to smelt Mis- 
souri ores with a loss of 2 to 3 per cent, but these are not the class of 
ores imported, and this is not the class of smelting which has to be 
taken into account in connection with imported ores. No silver, 
gold, and copper has to be recovered from the Missouri ores, and the 
process is radically different from the process of desilverized smelting. 

Reference is made in the same statement to the supposed fact that 
the Government allows duty to be paid on only 99 per cent of 90 per 
cent of the lead imported. This is not the fact. The law is clear and 
the Treasury Department so carries it out. If the lead is exported the 
bonds can be canceled by the exportation of 90 per cent of the lead 
imported, the remaining 10 per cent having been lost in the process of 
smelting and refining; but if duty is to be paid on the lead for domestic 
consumption the duty of 1^ cents has to be paid upon the whole 100 
per cent imported, even though 10 per cent of it is lost in smelting and 
refining. 

But without wearying the committee with reference to these various 
erroneous statements, it may be well to indicate the carelessness with 
which such statements are made by referring to the sketch of a tree 
somewhat to indicate the ramifications of the lead business. Eight 
directors are mentioned as being in control of these many companies. 
Out of the 8 names mentioned 4 are not directors of any of the com- 

Eanies referred to. The trunk of the tree from which all of the rami- 
cations seem to radiate is referred to as the Guggenheim Exploration 
Company. This company, I may state from absolute knowledge, 
does not own a lead mine or a lead smelter or a lead refinery; does not 
sell or buy a pound of lead, and does not even own stock in any lead- 
producing, smelting, or refining company. 
Yours, very truly, 

EDWARD BRUSH, 
Vice-President American Smelting and Refining Company. 



LEAD AND LEAD PRODUCTS ST. JOSEPH LEAD CO. 7981 

STATEMENT OF ST. JOSEPH LEAD COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY, 
ASKING RETENTION OF PRESENT DUTIES ON PIG LEAD, BUL- 
LION, AND LEAD ORE. 

5 NASSAU STREET, 
New York City, February 15, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The State of Missouri is now the foremost lead pro- 
ducing State in the country. In the growth of this industry the St. 
Joseph Lead Company has had a prominent share since 1868. In 
the calendar year 1908, 55,000 tons of pig lead were made by it at 
its own smelting and refining plant on the Missouri River. This was 
made entirely from ore taken from the company's own mines and 
from the mines of the Doe Run Lead Company, all located in the 
southeast Missouri lead district, a description of which has already 
been presented to this committee. The output of this company is 
about 50 per cent of the total of the district and in 1908 it was about 
17 per cent of the total domestic production of the United States. 
As a large producer of the mineral which in 1907 added to the coun- 
try's wealth $38,707,576, the company deems it necessary to state to 
your committee some reasons why the present tariff should not in 
any event be reduced. 

I. The present price of lead is extremely low and the situation in the 
industry is unsatisfactoy to both capital and labor and should not be 
made worse. 

The average price of lead in the city of New York, the broadest mar- 
ket, for the year 1908 was $4.20 per hundred pounds, and at the 
present date, February 15, 1909, the price is $4.025 per hundred 
pounds. This is an abnormally low price, as the following record, 
extending over a long period of years, shows: The average price for 
the thirty years from 1820 to 1849 was $5.31 per hundred pounds; 
from 1850 to 1879 it was $5.94; from 1880 to 1889 it was $4.42; from 
1890 to 1893 it was $4.16; from 1894 to 1899 it was $3.55; and from 
1900 to 1908, inclusive, it was $4.58. (See Lead and Zinc in the 
United States, Ingalls, p. 203.) During the years 1906 and 1907, owing 
to the general business prosperity, the average price at New York was 
$5.66 and $5.33 per hundred pounds. But the impetus given to 
the industry during those years which brought about great improve- 
ments in the condition of the employees of this and other companies 
and which caused wide development work in all lead districts has 
been greatly checked by the low price of 1908. It is of vital impor- 
tance that the situation as it exists to-day after the companies have 
worked through the year 1908 shall be taken as the viewpoint of the 
lead industry and that the mistake of basing a new tariff law on out- 
of-date prosperity shall not be made. The present situation has 
developed notwithstanding the existing tariff and in spite of all com- 
binations. During the year 1908 the domestic production of pig 
lead in the United States decreased about 26,000 tons. (See Engi- 
neering and Mining Journal, vol. 87, 1909, pp. 51, 63, and 64.) Wide- 
spread closing of mines resulted from the situation and wages in Mis- 
souri were substantially reduced. Recently a petition for an increase 
of wages signed by nearly all of its employees was presented to this 
61318 AP 09 16 



70S2 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 



company and was denied. The signs of prosperity which surrounded 
the industry during the years 1906 and 1907 have disappeared and 
new projects are waiting for improved conditions. This is the situa- 
tion which has resulted in all lead mining districts of the country 
with an average price for the year of $4.20 per hundred pounds. It 
is submitted that with lead at this price there can be no adequate 
growth in the industry, and that only the largest corporations 
engaged inf it can be operated at all. If the tariff is not disturbed, 
renewed confidence in the future will arise and business will revive 
immediately; but if reductions in duty are made, radical readjust- 
ments by tne lead producers will be necessary to meet foreign compe- 
tition and to keep their mines in operation. 

II. The cost of making lead in this country is much higher than the price 
at which lead can be bought in the London market. Wages must be 
heavily reduced if this competition is to be met. 

The cost to this company of making lead for the year ending April 
30, 1908, was $3.48 per hundred pounds at the smelter, and for the 
calendar year 1908 the average price of foreign lead in London was 
about $2.93 per hundred pounds, or 13 9s. lOd. per ton of 2,240 
pounds. (See Annual Statistical Report New York Metal Exchange, 
1908, p. 21.) This company was carrying on the business of making 
lead when the so-called Wilson law went into effect in 1894, which 
reduced the duty on lead ore to three-fourths cent per pound and the 
duty on pig and bar lead to 1 cent per pound, and which brought 
down the average price for four years considerably below 4 cents.' 
While it continued to produce lead during the years from 1894 to 
1897, it became necessary several times to reduce the wages paid, 
and the hours of labor were increased. During this period the whole 
district where the company's mines are located was depressed and 
filled with men who were seeking work. After the passage of the 
Dingley Act in 1897 wages were advanced, until in 1907 they reached 
the highest point ever attained. The following table shows wages 
paid by this company over a series of years : 

Wages paid from 1890 to 1908. 





Mine drillers. 


Backhands. 




Mine drillers. 


Backhands. 


1890-1893 


$1.60 


$1.25 


1901... 


$1.60 to $1.65 


$1. 30 to $1. 35 


1893 


1.40 to 1.50 


1.15 to 1.25 


1902 


1.60 


.30 


1894 


1.25 


1.00 


1903 


1.80 


.50 


1895 


1. 15 to 1. 25 


.90 to 1.00 


1904-1906 


1.90 


.60 


1896 


1.25 


1.00 


1906 


2.00 


.70 


1897 


1. 35 to 1. 45 


1. 10 to 1. 20 


1907 


2.25 


.95 


1898 


1.45 


1.20 


1908^9 


1.70 


.45 


1899-1901 


1. 60 


1.30 





















From 1893 to 1901 a day's work was ten hours. Since 1901 it has 
been eight hours. 

If the present tariff is reduced the history of the years 1894-1897 
will be repeated in the lead industry. Wages will be reduced and 
works will necessarily close, for they can not run at a loss. Men resid- 
ing in the southeast Missouri lead district have no other work open 
to them, as the entire population is dependent on the success of the 
lead-mining industry. If this fails they and their families will be 



LEAD AND LEAD PKODUCTS ST. JOSEPH LEAD CO. 7983 

forced to endure another long period of depression and want. This 
company will endeavor to meet such conditions as arise, and it expects 
to produce lead, but it frankly admits that it can not maintain wages 
at anything like the present wage scale if the price of lead in this 
country is to be governed by the London price. 

III. The existing tariff has over the term of years since its adoption 
proved beneficial in raising revenue, in developing the home industry, 
and in adding to the wealth of the country. 

The. revenues obtained by the United States from lead imports 
since 1898 have already been brought to the attention of the com- 
mittee. From these it appears that notwithstanding the large 
domestic production of lead in the years 1906 and 1907 the duties 
collected on foreign ores and lead were in excess of those collected 
in any two years in the history of the country. The increasing 
domestic production shows clearly the benefit that has been derived 
from the Better price that was obtained during the years prior to 
1908. It is of advantage to the country to develop this natural 
resource, not only because it thereby increases the country's wealth 
but because it is of great moment that both in times of peace and war 
a substantial output of lead shall be -made. In order to insure inde- 
pendence in this respect, preparations need to be made for a number 
of years in advance and mining must be carried forward uninter- 
ruptedly. Moreover, a large amount of developing and prospecting 
work is essential to successful mining in the southeast Missouri 
district, where no veins occur, and this prospecting can only be carried 
on when reliance can be placed upon the continuance of a fixed 
policy on the part of the Government. The great growth in the lead 
production of the country and the increase in the wealth of the 
southeast Missouri lead district are shown by statistics already 
referred to. 

IV. The tariff benefits all miners alike and has not created any trust in 

lead mining. 

To demonstrate this proposition it is sufficient to cite the output of 
this company, which mines, refines, and sells its lead entirely inde- 
pendently and is not controlled by any other corporation whatsoever. 
This output has increased from 20,000 tons in the year 1900 to 55,000 
tons in the year 1908. Independent mines are also in existence in all 
the lead-producing States. It is sometimes claimed that the price of 
lead is arbitrarily fixed by a lead combination, but if this is so the 
price follows the demand, as is shown by its variability during the 
past three years and by its great decrease in the year 1908. No 
attempt has been made in the lead industry to keep the price where 
it was in the years 1906 and 1907, but actual market conditions have 
controlled. It is also noticeable that recently an international smelt- 
ing company has been organized which proposes to introduce active 
competition in the smelting industry. 

V. Manufacturers of lead products will only temporarily be benefited by 

a suppression of the domestic production. 

It seems probable that the effect of a decrease in the domestic pro- 
duction of lead will, while irreparably injuring this country, benefit 
to a large extent the Mexican and foreign producers of lead and manu- 



7984 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

facturers of lead products in this country, who will thereby tem- 
porarily increase their profits, as the public does M<>) buy pig lend. 
Mexican and Spanish producers, however, in this event will soon con- 
trol the market and gradually increase prices to a point where domes- 
tic production can not increase, but where the foreign producers, with 
a low labor charge, can realize greater profits. The permanent benefit 
will therefore go to the foreign markets, and manufacturers of lead 
products will find a situation developing which will hamper their ow r n 
work. The best interests of the manufacturers are not antagonistic 
to those of the domestic producers of lead. The producers, moreover, 
all stand together to ask the retention of the existing duties. While 
the situation in Idaho and the other Northwestern States is in many 
respects different from that in Missouri, the results that will follow a 
reduction of duty are substantially alike in both places. This com- 
pany desires to indorse the full and fair statement of the questions 
at issue made to your committee in behalf of the lead producers of 
the State of Idaho. 

VI. The voters in Missouri desire the tariff retained. 

It is universally true that sections of the country benefited by a 
tariff favor it. It is on this account that protection appeals to 
voters for they have realized in the past that the benefits to the 
locality and the country follow their votes. Missouri is no excep- 
tion to this rule. Great advance in that State has been made by 
reason of its lead and zinc deposits. It is now the leader in the 
country in both minerals. The voters in the State are more and 
more appreciating the situation. They do not favor the tariff to 
confer benefits on corporations, but to secure work for themselves 
and benefits for the State. They realize that the question in respect 
to the tariff is not controlled by the present difference in cost here 
and in countries with primitive civilizations because they are deter- 
mined that the workers in this country shall constantly improve 
their condition and shall not be considered a stationary element in 
the problem of production. Employers of labor in this country 
must meet this condition, and can do so only when adequate pro- 
tection is given an industry which can be attacked from without. 

ST. JOSEPH LEAD COMPANY, 
By DWIGHT A. JONES, President. 



MICA. 

[Paragraph 184.] 

THE ASHEVILLE MICA COMPANY, ASHEVILIE, N. C., SUBMITS 
PETITION FOR NEW CLASSIFICATION FOE MICA. 

ASHEVILLE, N. C., February 23, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Inclosed we hand you a petition signed by a great many 
miners of domestic mica, which we trust you can yet give due con- 
sideration to. The present tariff is defective in that it does not 



MICA ASHEVILLE MICA CO. 7985 

dofinitelyclassify mica according to the way it is known in the trade, 
and the consequence has been that a much lower rate of duty has been 
collected than was intended. 

The inclosed classification is based upon a fair rendering of the 
present tariff, except in one particular hereinafter mentioned, and has 
been written by men experienced in the mica business. It will give a 
fair amount of protection to the domestic miner and a greater amount 
of revenue than has heretofore been collected. The one raise in the 
proposed duty is in class C, from 12 cents to 20 cents per pound. It 
takes 2 pounds of class B and 3 pounds of class A to make 1 pound of 
class C; therefore it equalizes the amount of duty according to how 
far along the article has progressed to the finished state. 

We inclose herewith a copy of the decision lately rendered by the 
United States appraisers at New York, showing that under the present 
wording there has been evasion of the duty because of the indefinite 
wording of the present law. 

Any other information you desire will be gladly furnished you. 
Yours, respectfully, 

ASHEVILLE MICA Co., 
Per W. VANCE BROWN. 



EXHIBIT A. 

FEBRUARY 15, 1909. 

United States General Appraisers, New York. In the matter of protest 315568-837 
of Watson Bros, against the assessment of duty by the collector of customs at the 
port of Boston. 

Before Board No. 2; Fischer, general appraiser. 

The merchandise consists of mica which has been cut by a knife or scissors into 
rectangular sheets or plates. Duty was assessed thereon at the rate of 12 cents per 
pound and 20 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 184, tariff act of 1897, as "mica," 
cut or trimmed," and it is claimed by the importers that the said merchandise is 
dutiable properly at 6 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem under the same 
paragraph as "mica, XXX, rough trimmed only." 

The samples before us disclose sheets of mica cut by a knife or scissors to true geo- 
metric shape or definite size, and by assorting are found to be ready for use as imported 
for electrical, insulating, and other purposes for which merchantable and recognized 
"cut mica" is used. The evidence shows that rough-trimmed or thumb-trimmed 
mica, as uniformly recognized in the trade, is mica from which the rough circumfer- 
ences have been removed. To accomplish this a sickle or the hand of the operator 
alone is used; whereas to obtain the cut and trimmed mica the article after being split 
is cleanly cut to a definite shape or size, and is capable of use in that form for electrical 
> work, stoves, smoke shades, or lamp chimneys. Each particular use requires a par- 
ticular size and shape, and while the published price list of dealers in mica quote 
certain sizes, many other sizes than those embraced in said standard lists are cut aa 
each consumer may demand the same for his particular purpose. All of the sheets 
before us are finished and ready for use, and the trade recognize them as mica sheets 
cut and trimmed. The importers do not deny that this mica is cut and trimmed, but 
they contend that it is not cut to some true and exact size referred to in the trade cir- 
culars. There are many sheets in this lot which do not measure exactly up to the size 
called for by the said lists, and even if all are not of this character, in any event the 
importers' contention can not be sustained. The rule is well established that an 
admixture of merchandise subjects the whole to the highest rate provided for any por- 
tion of the same. United States v. Ranlett (172 U. S., 133). 

The evidence in this case justifies a ruling at variance with that arrived at by the 
board in Abstract 19340 (T. D. 29159); and we find therefore that the merchandise 
before us is mica cut and trimmed, dutiable at the rates as assessed. The protest 
is overruled and the decision of the collector affirmed. 

BOARD OF UNITED STATES GENERAL APPRAISERS. 



7986 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

EXHIBIT B. 

N 

CLEVELAND, OHIO, January 22, 1909. 
Hon. S. E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We being either miners, manufacturers, or dealers in domestic mica 
wishing to increase the production of mica in the United States, and believing that a 
fair protective tariff on foreign production properly administered will do this, have 
with several parties like interested conferred together to find an agreement of views 
to which we could all subscribe. 

Believing also that your committee would consider and possibly follow a concerted 
expression of opinion, we present the following, suggesting that it replace the present 
section 184 of Schedule C: 

Mica shall be classed as follows and subject to the following duty: (a) "Thumb 
trimmed," mica as mined or thumb trimmed, 6 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad 
valorem; (b) "knife trimmed," the rough edges removed with knife, shears, or machine, 
10 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem; (c) "cut mica," mica that has been 
cut or punched to any dimension or shape, 20 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad 
valorem; (d) "splittings," mica split to a thickness of five-thousandths of an inch or 
less, 12 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem; (e) "built-up plate," mica in any 
form, grade, or condition that is built up or cemented together with any binding mate- 
rial, 20 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem. 

Trusting that this will meet with your approval, we remain, 
Yours, respectfully, 

THE GREAT SOUTHERN MICA COMPANY, 
H. H. WARD, Secretary. 

(Signed by Hall Brothers, Booneford, N. C., and 71 others.) 



THE LATJRENTIDE MICA CO., OF PITTSBTJRG, PA., ASKS A MORE 
DEFINITE CLASSIFICATION FOR MICA PRODUCTS. 

PITTSBURG, PA., February 25, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I have been reviewing the statements made at the 
tariff hearings with reference to mica, and with your permission will 
call attention to some which have been made that may mislead the 
committee. For instance, Mr. Jefferson stated that his firm had not 
bought any Canadian mica and shipped it across the border. This 
statement is not true, as the Munsell Company, who own the Mica 
Insulator Company, with which Mr. Jefferson is connected, are large 
purchasers of Canadian amber mica and are shipping it to Schenec- 
tady, N. Y. 

The statement of Mr. Jefferson, in which he evidently refers to the 
production of white or muscovite mica as being ratner limited in 
this country, is due to the fact that the mica deposits have not been 
developed owing to India competition. In this connection I would 
state that our company has mined one million and a quarter pounds of 
rough-mined mica during the past twelve months in Custer County, 
S. Dak., where we have an unlimited supply, and are the largest 
miners in this country. 

Again, Mr. Jefferson asks that 60 per cent duty be placed on man- 
ufactured mica, which would include Canadian amber plate such as 
we are manufacturing in Ottawa and shipping to our works at East 
Pittsburg. If the prices of amber mica are known to the committee 
they will readily understand that it is quite a hardship to the import- 



MICA TIIK LAUREN TIDE MICA CO. 7987 

ers of this grade of material on account of the very high values. The 
amber plate which we build in Canada is built according to our speci- 
fication, and practically the same quantity of amber splittings is 
used in the plate that we would otherwise import as splittings. Our 
company will not ask for the elimination or, in fact, any change in 
the duty, ad valorem or specific, on Canadian amber mica, and are 
willing to have it remain as it is, but to be distinguished from the 
muscovite mica, which is imported from India and other foreign coun- 
tries and could be imported from Canada if the duty was eliminated, 
without distinguishing between the two grades of material, namely, 
phlogopite and muscovite. 

Mr. Jefferson states that the muscovite mined in this country is 
hard and clear and hardly adaptable for most electrical purposes. 
While considerable of the muscovite mined in this country is hard, 
as Mr. Jefferson states, yet our product obtained from South Dakota 
is as soft as the India, if not softer, and very desirable for electrical 
insulation. 

Mr. Underwood's reply to Mr. Jefferson is well taken, and we agree 
with Mr. Jefferson also that we should have protection against the 
foreign miner and manufacturer of muscovite mica in India or other 
countries where the price of labor, particularly in India, is about 
8 cents per day, against 2.50 to $4, which we are obliged to pay 
our miners for the same material. 

Mr. .Jefferson is careful to ask for protection against the manu- 
factured product being imported into the country, as his company con- 
trols a. large output of India mica, and, as stated by Mr. Kingsley, of 
the same company, they are miners of India mica, consequently they 
have had advantage of importing their own raw material at a very 
low cost, manufacturing it at Schenectady and selling it at very high 
prices; and as some of the consumers and manufacturers of India 
product purchased from Mr. Kingsley's company would be required 
to pay them 25 to 35 percent more for the raw material thajn they 
obtained it for themselves, you can imagine that the other importers 
and manufacturers in this country would have no chance whatever 
of marketing their product against that of the Munsell company. 

This is the reason why Mr. Jefferson asks that 60 per cent duty be 
placed on manufactured mica, muscovite, and phlogopite, or Canadian 
amber, as they have the advantage of importing the raw material 
(muscovite) at very low values, and consequently crowd out of the 
market any of the other manufacturers. The duty on manufactured 
muscovite mica is taken care of in our modified tariff clause mentioned 
hereinafter. 

Mr. Jefferson's reply to Mr. Clark is a misleading statement. The 
veins of mica in our mine at South Dakota are at least 15 feet wide, 
if not wider, and from present indications the supply is inexhausti- 
ble; so you will see there are large veins of mica, and mining in this 
country is profitable and can be made profitable if the miners are 
protected with suitable tariff to develop their properties. 

Mr. Webster's statement that "North Dakota is producing some 
mica" is misleading. North Dakota does not produce any mica, 
but South Dakota produces mica in abundance, as we can prove. 

Mr. Kingsley's statement that we can not get suitable mica in 
this country to manufacture built-up mica is not truthfully stated, 
as we are manufacturing built-up mica plate from the product of 



7988 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

our mines in South Dakota, which is just as satisfactory as any 
India mica ever produced. It is an exceptionally good mica for 
splitting or cleaving, and we have no difficulty in producing it to the 
right thickness, namely, from 0.0005 inch to 0.0015 inch. 

Mr. Kingsley states that his company ships Canadian amber mica 
to the United States. Mr. Jefferson is quoted as stating that they 
do not ship Canadian amber to this country. 

Mr. Kingsley is quite willing to sacrifice his interest with Mr. 
Grindstaff as a southern miner, because the Government has helped 
him to import India mica of the same quality at less cost. 

Mr. Kingsley's reply to Mr. Underwood to the effect that they can 
not use American mica for commutator work does not agree with the 
circular published by them to the effect that they are using India 
mica for commutator work of a certain class, and such India mica 
as they use for this purpose displaces the same amount of American 
muscovite of an equal grade. 

The statements made by Watson Brothers in their letter regarding 
the production of mica m the United States and its quality will 
evidently mislead the committee unless they are better informed. 
These have been covered in the foregoing part of this letter, and we 
will not take your time to repeat them further than to say that 
Watson Brothers are importers of mica and not miners in the United 
States. 

The statement that mica mining in this country consists of mining 
feldspar and quartz to get some mica is an absolute untruth. And 
that this country can not produce mica in equal size or quality and 
that the domestic material is used only for punching or grinding can 
be classed in the same statement. 

Mr. Watson's statement to the effect that splittings can not be made 
in this country is of course without foundation. We can produce 
for an exhibit splittings which we have manufactured from South 
Dakota mica which are equal in every particular, grade and quality, 
to those obtained in India. 

We are attaching hereto for your information a clause more defi- 
nitely and clearly stated than that in the present tariff. It differs 
from that which will be presented to you by the southern miners in 
that we have not included the Canadian or Mexican phlogopite, 
known to the trade as "amber" mica. As this material is not mined 
in the United States, we do not think it should be included with the 
muscovite. We are quite willing that the present duty on Canadian 
amber should remain as it is. As stated in previous letter, the Cana- 
dian amber mica question has received constant attention from the 
American consul at Ottawa, Canada, and the present value and duty 
places this material at such a point as it will not interfere with the 
product of the American miner. 

We have endeavored to give you the facts concerning the quantity 
and quality of the product of the American mines producing mus- 
covite mica, and correcting the misstatements that have been made 
by those who are interested only in the importation of a mineral 
which will, if it is fostered, jeopardize the mining of the same quality 
of material in this country. 

Yours, respectfully, W. J. LONGMORE, 

Vice-President. 



MICA WATCHES AND CLOCKS. 7989 

EXHIBIT A. 

All mica, with the exception of Canadian and Mexican phlogopite (known to the 
trade as "amber" mica), shall be classified as follows and subject to the following 
duty: 

(a) "Thumb trimmed." Mica as mined, cobbed, or thumb trimmed, 6 cents per 
pound and 20 per cent ad valorem. 

(6) "Knife trimmed." Mica with the rough edges removed with knife, shears, or 
machine, 10 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem. 

(c) "Cut." Mica that has been cut or punched to any dimensions or shape, 20 
cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem. 

(d) "Splittings." Mica split to a thickness of five-thousandths of an inch or less, 
12 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem. 

(e) "Built-up plate." Mica in any form or condition that is built up or cemented 
together with any binding material, 20 cents per pound and 20 per cent ad valorem. 

It is understood that the above classification and duties apply only to Muscovite 
mica which is imported into the United States, and does not apply to Canadian or 
Mexican phlogopite (amber) mica, as the latter material is not mined in the United 
States, and consequently does not compete with the domestic product. We agree 
together that the present rate of duty on American mica will be satisfactory, and we do 
not desire any change. 



WATCHES AND CLOCKS. 

[Paragraph 191.] 

THE WESTERN CLOCK MANUFACTURING CO., OF ILLINOIS, PRO- 
TESTS AGAINST REDUCTION OF DUTY ON TIMEPIECES. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 19, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

^Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The undersigned, Western Clock Manufacturing 
Company, an Illinois corporation, respectfully protests against any 
lowering of the tariff upon watches and clocks, and for reasons there- 
for state as follows: 

The ^Republican platform adopted at Chicago, June 18, 1908, pro- 
vides as follows: "In all tariff legislation the true principle of pro- 
tection is best maintained by the imposition of such duties as will 
equal the difference between the cost of production at home and 
abroad, together with the reasonable profit to American industries." 
This we believe to be the true principle and offer the following state- 
ment in support of our belief that the existing tariff on watches and 
clocks of the cheaper grade should not be reduced. A concrete illus- 
tration will afford perhaps the best argument that can be advanced. 

The well-known cheap clock that is sold to the consumer at 60 
cents to $1, sells at wholesale at 50 cents. The cost of this clock 
may be divided as follows : 

Cents. 

Labor 19 

Material 18f 

Superintendence, depreciation of plant, and general expenses, including experi- 
mental department and sales department 10J 

Profit 01J 

Total 50 

It requires 263 operations to put this clock together, one of which 
alone costs 1.65 cents, and three others together 3.10 cents, leaving 



7990 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

for the balance of 259 operations 15.25 cents, from which it will be 
seen that labor is not overpaid. 

In comparing the cost of this clock with a similar clock of foreign 
make, we find that the foreigner has the following advantages: 

First, it is found by actual investigation that the proportion of 
German to American labor is as about 8 to 20 cents, or, in other 
words, where the American labor on this clock is paid 19 cents, 
German labor is paid but 7.60 cents, maki ; a difference of 11.40 
cents in favor of American labor and advantage of German manu- 
facture. (A German workman, who had a contract to produce such 
clocks in Germany, made the statement that the contract price for 
labor on such a clock is 26 pfennigs, or about 6 cents United States 
money.) 

Second, material is cheaper abroad owing to the cheaper price paid 
for the labor to produce raw material used in this clock, whicn amounts 
in brass to about 1 cent per clock, and in steel wire about one-half 
cent. 

Third, the cost of superintendence, office expenses, etc., is in the 
same proportion as labor that is to say, where the American pays 
10.50 cents the German pays about 4.20 cents, a difference in favor 
of the German of 6.30 cents. 

From the above facts it is shown that the American manufacturer 
is at a disadvantage of 19.20 cents per clock, as compared with the 
German manufacturer, and the writer has seen instances where this 
clock imported from Germany has been appraised at 27 cents, this 
calling for a duty of 10.8 cents (file Nos. 40946-40947). 

The German manufacturer has under the present tariff an advan- 
tage over the American manufacturer of 19. 20 cents less 10.80 cents 
duty, or 8.40 on each clock, of which 6.90 are due to cheaper labor and 
1.5 to cheaper material. It will be seen, therefore, that under the rule 
laid down in the Republican platform the existing tariff should not 
be reduced, but should actually be raised. (According to latest 
information, such cheap clocks are priced as low as 25 cents to 26 
cents, paying a duty of no more than 10 cents to 10.40 cents.) 

Further, a very vital point is the advantage the German manufac- 
turer has over the American through the excellent horological schools 
established by the Government in districts where clock making is 
carried on. These schools are equipped by the State and headed by 
professors and experts whose services are free to the manufacturer, 
and a great deal of experimental work is done by them for the manu- 
facturers. In this country every manufacturer of clocks is obliged 
to sustain an experimental department at his own expense. Fur- 
thermore, he fails to receive the benefit of the expert workmen pro- 
duced through these schools in Germany. 

It may be suggested that in justice to the American manufacturer, 
appropriations should be made by Congress for similar horological 
schools, which would be a benefit not only to the manufacturer but 
to the laborer as well. 

If the existing tariff is reduced, two courses only are open to the 
American clock manufacturer. Either, first, to close out a business 
which would not possibly be conducted at a profit, or, second, to 
reduce the wages of labor, and the latter alternative is the one which 
in all likelihood would be adopted. 



WATCHES AND CLOCKS. 7991 

The average wage of the 610 workmen (exclusive of salaried 
employees) in our factory is 19 cents per hour. The average wage 
of the workman in the German clocK factories which the writer 
visited was given the writer as between 3 and 3 marks per day, that 
is in United States money 72 cents to 84 cents per day of ten hours, 
or 7.30 to 8.40 cents per hour, which is about as 8 to 20 compared 
with the wage paid in our factory, the latter being little enough for the 
workman to live upon, and yet is all that the factory can afford to pay. 

Mr. E. Roth, as secretary of The Western Clock Manufacturing 
Company, makes these statements in reference to the cost of labor 
and material in Germany from information received by him during a 
visit to Germany in 1905, from a German factory owner whose works 
Mr. Roth inspected with said owner. The information which he 
received from the owner was verified by a former superintendent of 
said factory who is no longer in its employ. 

The facts hereinabove set forth can be verified and substantiated, 
and we therefore submit that any reduction of tariff would be a 
wrong not only to the manufacturer, but to the American laborer 
as well. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

THE WESTERN CLOCK MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 
E. ROTH, Secretary and General Manager. 



STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COM- 
MERCE OF NEW YORK CITY, ON BEHALF OF THE IMPORTERS 
OF FRENCH WATCHES. 

32 BROADWAY, 

New York City, February 27,1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We respectfully beg to submit to you for your con- 
sideration the following remarks : 

Both the United States and France are manufacturers of watches, 
and import and export about the same quantity. The cost price 
and sale price of these watches is about the same for the different 
marks represented throughout the world, such as the "Waltham" 
and "Elgin," American marks; the "Omega," "Longines," and "Ze- 
nith," Swiss marks; the "Lip," "Gallia," and "Uti," French marks; 
which are all stem-winders with lever escapement, and jeweled gen- 
erally 15 holes. 

The raw materials for all these various fabrics are the same and 
often of the same origin. The methods employed are the same, 
and the cost of labor (which is only a secondary consideration in this 
case) is about the same in the three countries. All these marks, 
whether American, Swiss, or French, are sold to all French watch- 
makers at prices varying only by a few centimes. As an illustration 
we might state that the price of these watches for the marks above 
mentioned, in oxidized steel cases, duty and freight paid, is about 
22 francs for the average watch. 



7992 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



If we compare the duties on such watches in the United States 
and in France, we find: 





Value. 


Duly raid l>y French 
watches imported 
into the States. 


Amount 
(about). 


Per cent of 
the value. 


Lever escapement: 
ISiewels withoutcase 


$19 
22 
28 
125 


$8.75 
9.50 
11.00 
35.00 


46 
43 

39 
28 


15 jewels, in metal . 


15 jewels, in silver case, 35 grains 


15 jewels in gold case, 18 k., 25 grains 






Value. 


Duty paid by American 
watches imported 
into France. 


Amount. 


Per cent of 
the value. 


15 jewels: 
Lever escapement, without case.! 


$19 
22 
28 


16 
6 
8 
13 


32 
22 
28 
10 


Lever escapement, in metal . 


Lever escapement, in silver, 35 grains. 


Lever escapement in gold case, 25 grains * 







Owing to the high duty on watches imported into the United States 
competition by European manufacturers is greatly handicapped and 
the domestic manufacturers get a very high figure for their goods, 
but as they can not get rid of their whole production in their own 
country, they must export to Europe, and actually one of the largest 
American manufacturers is making great efforts to enter the French 
market. 

It stands to reason that if the duty on French imported watches 
is maintained the French manufacturers will have to ask the Gov- 
ernment, in order to protect themselves against the aggressive com- 
petition of American exporters, to increase considerably the duties 
on watches of American origin, and the first manufactured articles 
to which increased duties would be applied are the watch cases 
(designated as gold cased) which are imported from the United States 
and are called to find a very wide market in the near future in France, 
where this article is not manufactured, whilst it is in Switzerland and 
Germany. These prospects, which are certainly encouraging for 
your manufacturers, would be greatly handicapped if, in the next 
tariff, the exorbitant duties actually levied on French watches were 
to be maintained, whilst a reduction of the duties on French watches 
imported into the United States would be an equitable measure 
favoring the American consumer, and which woula stimulate by a 
loyal competition the activity of the domestic manufacturers, whose 
prosperity would certainly not be endangered by a small importation 
of French watches into the United States. 

It seems to us that in view of the above considerations you will 
recognize that the reduction hi the duties imposed upon French 
watches would have beneficial results for both countries without 
endangering the trade of either. 



WATCHES AND CLOCKS WATCH DIALS. 7993 

Trusting that you will give this matter the attention which it 
deserves, in our opinion, we remain, gentlemen, 
Very respectfully, 

THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, 
HENRY E. GOURD, President. 



WATCH DIALS. 

[Paragraph 191.] 

THE O'HARA WALTHAM DIAL COMPANY, WALTHAM, MASS.. 
SUGGESTS NEW CLASSIFICATION AND SCHEDULE OF KATES 
FOR ENAMELED WATCH DIALS. 

WALTHAM, MASS., February 16, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

SIR : We have the honor to file , as supplemental to our brief of Novem- 
ber 23 last, additional facts relative to the needs of our industry. 

As stated, since 1890 we have, at large expenditure, endeavored to 
maintain a manufacturing plant for the production of watch dials, 
requiring skilled employees, who receive good wages. When we 
commenced business, in 1890, enameled dials of all kinds were 
imported into this country in large quantities and at high prices. 

Years ago all dials were painted by hand. We then invented a 
process for painting in mineral colors on watch dials. This process 
could not be patented without advertising to the world the saving 
it made in labor. We were then enabled to not only compete with the 
low wages paid abroad but to make a good profit. Through it and 
our competition we reduced the price of dials to all manufacturers in 
America 60 per cent. 

Fifteen years ago we gave permission to the Waltham Watch Com- 
pany to use, for the sum of $25,000, our process, which later was 
stolen, or, as one Swiss manufacturer naively told the writer, was 
"rediscovered." As a consequence, all foreign dial makers are now 
using our process without remuneration to us and their labor cost is 
now one-third of what we are obliged to pay. 

In 1897 we appealed to the Committee on Ways and Means for 
a specific duty, rather than an ad valorem, as the only sure way to 
compensate for the difference between the wages paid here and 
abroad. The committee were of the opinion that 40 per cent ad 
valorem duty would protect us; that it has not is shown by the fact 
that the foreign watch dial importations have so steadily increased 
that they have practically absorbed the trade in certain lines. They 
are able to deliver dials at the United States watch factories and pay a 
commission to the middleman at prices we can not meet. 

Dials are small in size and are rarely counted by customs exami- 
ners. To facilitate this packages must be opened, to which the 
importers will not submit. Dials are an assembled part and do not 
go to the consumer, but are sent directly to the manufacturer; yet 
the importers claim that if the packages are broken for examination 
the value of their goods is affected. Substantially, enamel dials are 
not classified as a distinct article in Treasury statistics, but are 
bunched with other material associated with the manufacture of 



7994 SCHEDULE METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

watches, so that accurate data respecting quantities, values, and 
prices are inaccessible. 

The American watch and instrument manufacturers are now 
patronizing foreign factories; they only order from us when they 
desire especial expedition and in the case of order work. 

In 1897 we were informed that the volume of the dial business was 
not sufficiently large to be of much consequence to the Government 
as a revenue producer. This is true when compared with other 
classes of staple imports. We confidently assert that with adequate 
tariff production we can give employment in this country to several 
thousand work people at good wages. Instrument and watch makers 
are highly protected, but the dial maker has heretofore been asked to 
exist on but a remnant of protection. We are the only United States 
manufacturers of enameled goods to-day making watch dials. We 
have facilities in the way of tools and plant superior to any factory 
abroad, yet are unable to meet foreign competition and make a profit. 
Indeed, in the last year and a half we have run our factory at a loss, 
although this loss is not wholly due to the tariff, but in a measure to 
business depression. It may be of interest to your committee to know 
by name the various dial manufacturers who in the recent past have 
been forced by the inadequate tariff protection to abandon the 
business: 



Schmaltz & Firmbach, New York. 
Gold & Co., New York. 
Pilgrim Dial Company, New York. 
Caeser Brothers, New York and Long Is- 
land. 

Eaton Dial Company, Sag Harbor, N. Y. 
Haffen & Winchel, Brooklyn, N. Y. 
Moser Brothers, Chicago, 111. 
Chicago Dial and Enamel Company, Chi- 



Hinea & Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 
Duff & Solace, Torrington, Conn. 
Christ Wassmer, Waterbury, Conn. 
Roesger & O'Hara, Waltham, Mass. 
E. D. Wetherbee, Waltham, Mass. 
Williams & Wetherbee, Waltham, Mass. 
Elgin Dial Company, Elgin, 111. 
Joseph Solace, Hartford, Conn. 
Joseph Kiel, Providence, R. I. 



cago, 111. 

Foreign dials are put on American watches and sold at home and 
abroad as American goods. To avoid the law the foreign makers 
use a rubber stamp with which to imprint on the back of the dials the 
country of origin. With a slightly moistened cloth the marking is 
easily erased a common practice. In 1905 a large American com- 
pany objected to having their name stamped on the dials which were 
made abroad, because they did not fit the movements and were sold 
by importers as their goods. The importers have thus far been 
unable to induce any foreign manufacturer of note to establish a 
factory in this country. 

We feel that there is no positive way of insuring the proper assess- 
ment and collection of an ad valorem duty on watch dials, unless 
foreign market values are ascertained accurately and the goods 
counted on arrival by the customs officers. 

Dial making calls for skilled hand labor in a specific line. Our 
people are educated at large expense to us, and are difficult to replace. 
To the foreign maker much floating help is available, at lowest wages, 
and there are industrial schools which turn out dial makers. With 
the imposition of a higher duty, the manufacture of enameled goods 
in this country will certainly be stimulated, insuring large and lucra- 
tive employment of help. Substantially, we pay three times as 
much for labor, per employee, as governs hi Switzerland, France, and 
Germany. The "home workers" in these countries make "ordi- 
nary " dials at still lower rates. 



WATCH DIALS o'HAKA WALTHAM DIAL CO. 7995 

The American watch and instrument makers here, utilizing foreign 
dials, at minimum cost, are able to ship their product to nearly every 
foreign country. 

During the fiscal year of 1907 the American manufacturers of 
watches, who have gained great prestige for their products in foreign 
markets, have received hi the return of the duties paid on the imported 
materials used, including dials, a sum aggregating $8,193 in refund 
by the drawback privilege, substantially increasing their profits. 
During the same period, according to Treasury statistics, the value of 
the import of watches, movements, cases, and parts of watches, 
"including dials," paying 40 per cent fid valorem duty, has aggregated 
$844,000. 

We have referred to the fact that imported dials are passed per 
invoice as packed, not examined, graded, or counted, and that the 
values stated in the import documents are blindly taken for foreign 
market value. These values have been arbitrarily given by shippers 
and stand unverified by the customs officers because, chiefly, of the 
great difficulty in obtaining cost of foreign manufacture or of market 
value. 

We have therefore been confronted by administrative conditions, 
and further handicapped by the cheap foreign cost of production. As 
previously stated, the foreign dials must, by law, be stamped with 
"country of origin" on importation, yet has any member of your 
committee ever seen an American watch with a dial bearing the 
imprint of "Made in Germany" or "Made in Switzerland?" 

Permit us to refer to the communication of W. J. Riglander (an 
importer), of New York, dated December 24, 1908, who, in following 
the plea of the watch manufacturers, said: 

You will undoubtedly recollect me from my name, as I have had former communica- 
tions with you in reference to tariff matters and on several occasions have been before 
your honorable committee. 

There is nothing peculiar about Mr. Riglander's name, except so far 
as he uses it with you in a personal capacity in doing the official busi- 
ness of the watch material importing house of Hammel, Riglander & 
Co., of New York and Frankfort, Germany. Further, he says: 

I note an application has been made before your honorable body in reference to 
reducing the duty on watch glasses by putting them on the free list. 

A close scrutiny of the tariff hearings fails to reveal such an applica- 
tion. He recommends that "No reduction should be made in the 
duty on watch glasses unless the same reduction is made on the other 
items or parts of watches which are imported." 

He neglects to state the fact that no watch glasses have been manu- 
factured in this country and that, like white glass enamel, never can 
be, economically, because of the special conditions governing their 
manufacture; nor does he state that a few years ago the European 
watch glass manufacturers organized a combination in the form of a 
trust and that prices immediately soared. These prices are fixed 
by a foreign board, in a foreign country, without regard to the cost of 
construction. This result was largely achieved through the personal 
efforts of Mr. Hammel, of Frankfort, Germany, and Mr. Riglander, 
of New York, as heads of the house of Hammel, Riglander & Co. 
in their respective countries. It is not fair to domestic manufac- 
turers that "other items, or parts of watches," shoudl be placed in 
the same class with watch glasses, because the conditions which 



7996 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

govern the manufacture of other watch materials are wholly dis- 
similar. Enameled dials, for instance, have been and are manufac- 
tured in this country, and would be in increasing quantities if the 
law was so framed that expert importers could not evade it. 
Mr. Riglander further states : 

There are some small watch companies in the United States which, owing to lack 
of capital, are under the necessity of purchasing quite a large proportion of their mate- 
rial in the foreign market, and they certainly ought to be entitled to some considera- 
tion in the revision of the tariff. 

Mr. Riglander does not mention the name of any of these "small 
watch companies," and can not, because none exist in the United 
States. Large capital is a prerequisite for the manufacture of watches 
in order to meet even domestic competition. 

The records of the Treasury Department, if consulted, will show 
that the authorities had continued difficulty in collecting the proper 
duties on Mr. Riglander's importations, i. e., parts of watches, mate- 
rials, dials, etc., and in one year alone he was forced to pay, in 
increased duties and penalties, nearly $5,000. 

To indicate the effrontery of our foreign competitors, we submit 
the below letters: 

[Translations.] 

FLUCKIGER & DRECHSEL, 
ABRIQUE DE CADRANS D'ENAMEL, 

St. Imier, Suisse, September 10, 1908. 
O'HARA WALTHAM DIAL COMPANY, 

Waltham, Mass. 

GENTLEMEN: Permit us to attract your attention to our manufacture of dials 
(soigned) and extra (soigned). 

After a long experience and personal experiment of ateliers of painting exclusively 
for hand work and artistic decorations, we are in a position to respond to all calls. 
More especially it is our enamel dials, extra thin of (55 per cent thickness) second dial 
we desire to call your attention. They are destined to suit the very flat watch on 
account of their very feeble thickness. These dials obtain with all people. We 
recommend ourselves to your favor, and in return give the assurance of our perfect 
consideration. 

Yours, truly, FLUCKIGER & DRECHSEL. 

MANUFACTURE DE CADRANS EN TOUS GENRES, 

Le Lode, October 24, 1908. 
Mr. O'HARA, Enamelier, Waltham, Mass. 

MISTER: For a long time I have had the idea to establish in America a manufacture 
of dials. Some influential friends with capital have consulted me. However, before 
making a definite decision, I have an idea that we could with an agreement make 
this combination complete. The principal part of the manufacture is the enameling, 
which could be done in Switzerland. The rights of entry there would be very reduced 
to land the dials in America, so that the placing of the seconds and centers is all that 
is necessary to make the furnishing in all the kinds now selling, as well and as carefully 
made. 

The American manufacturers would have, without contending, a great advantage; 
they are not obliged to carry so much in stock. 

The Swiss watches could be imported without the dial plate, and the putting 
together could be done in America; another advantage, considering the fragility during 
the transportation. 

I wished in this letter to show you in a few words what a royal combination (in busi- 
ness) could be made among us. I want you to tell me frankly exactly what you 
think about it. 

I pray you to excuse me for the liberty I have taken, and with hope for a response, 
accept, Mister, the assurance of my distinguished consideration. 

Yours, truly, FRITZ HESS. 

(Mr. Hess is one of the largest dial manufacturers in Europe sup- 
plying American watch companies.) 



WATCH DIALS O KARA WALTHAM DIAL CO. 



7997 



CHARLES LAUPEE, 

Lode, Switzerland, November 20, 1908. 
Mr. D. O'llARA, 

\Yaltham Manufacturing Company. 

DEAR SIR: Since your letter of October 25, 1907, I have heard nothing concerning 
you. It was surely the consequence of the low state of the business, but you have 
now a new President and business is raising up again. 

I take the liberty to ask you if the experiments with transfer and paillons for dial 
decoration have given a good result in your States. 

I am sending you a small engraving, and shall be glad to hear news from you. 
I was very sorry not to see Mr. D. O'Hara when he passed through Switzerland; I 
hope very much to see him next time. 

Truly, yours, LAUPER. 



WALTHAM, MASS., December 9, 1908. 
Mr. CHARLES LAUPER, 

Lode, Switzerland. 

DEAR SIR: Please pardon delay in acknowledgment of your courteous letter. 
The samples of which you sent us were very nicely done and for less than half the 
price they could be produced in the United States, on account of the advantages 
which your country enjoys over ours in the lower price of labor and the ability to 
secure an abundance of skilled help in your particular line. The transfer to which 
you have adapted your engravings was invented and formerly worked by us alone. 
At that time we had large orders for American work and had to compete only with 
your country's photographic transfer and hand work. The writer expects to be in 
your country again late this winter or early in the spring, and will be pleased to look 
you up in a friendly way and discuss matters with you. 
Yours, truly, 

O'HARA WALTHAM DIAL COMPANY. 

According to the reports on commerce and navigation, since 1898 
the import activities or watch material, including watch dials, assessed 
40 per cent ad valorem, vide paragraph 191, have increased 263 per 
cent. 

At the present time by reason of our manufacture import prices 
have been largely reduced. 

Below are the prices of dials as listed by the different American 
watch companies: 



Company's name. 


One-piece dial. 


Two-piece dial. 


Three-piece dial. 


Discounts. 


Elgin Watch 


$9-$15 dozen .... 


$9-$24 dozen; $18, 


$24-$30 dozen 




E. Howard 


None listed 


decorated. 
$15 dozen 


$30 per dozen 


retailer. 


New England 


Dealer, 30 cents 


Dealer, 55 cents 


$5-$6 dozen 


retailer; 33J per cent, 
6 per cent to whole- 
saler. 
Cash, 6 per cent" C O 


New YorkStandard 


and 50 'cents 
each; price In- 
cludes dec.; re- 
tailer, 50 cents 
and 75 cents 
each. 
Sell their dials to 


each; retailer, 75 
cents each. 




D., 6 per cent; 10 
days, 6 per cent; 30 
days, 5 per cent; 60 
days, net. 

Jobbers, 25, 10, and 6 


Rockford 


the trade at $5 
per dozen. 
None listed 


$9-$18 dozen . 


$24-$30 dozen 


per cent; retail, 6 per 
cent. 
Jobbers, 25, 10, and 6 


S. Thomas 


$6 dozen, no sec.; 


$9 dozen; fancv, 


$18 dozen 


per cent; retail, 6 per 
cent. 
Jobliers, 33J per cent 


Waltham Watch, 
split second dials, 
minute register, 
and chronograph 
combined. 


press sec., $6 to 
$9; press sec., 
fancy, $18; imi- 
tation D. S., $12 
dozen. 
$7-$15 dozen 


$18. 

Sunk or cut sec., 
$15-536 dozen. 


$27-$48 dozen 


and 5 per cent net 30 
days; trade, 5 per 
cent net 30 days. 

Net price, $60 dozen. 



C1318 AP 09- 



7998 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



The Hampden Watch Company ignored our request for copy of 
their price list. 

In reference to wages paid abroad and in this country, we would 
refer you to letters of the Waltham Watch Company, and also to 
letters from George F. Hunter, of the Elgin Watch Company. 

Wages paid in the manufacture of watches or parts of watches, materials and dials, United 
States, England, Sivitzerland, and Italy compared. 



Average per day. 


WaKnam. 


England. 


Switzer- 
land. 


Italy. 


To men . 


(3.24 


$1.31 


$1.10 


$0.33 


To women . 


1.52 


.85 


.80 


.22J 













It thus appears that to men is paid in Italy one-tenth the United 
States rate, in Switzerland one-third, and about the same in England. 
The differences favoring American women employed are, as the above 
table shows, equally impressive. 

Mr. Hunter says that the foreign wages paid are "only 37$ per 
cent of those paid in the United States." 

The wages, at the present time, paid in dial making in Switzerland, 
Germany, and other places, is about one-third of what we pay here. 

Daily wages paid by us in 1908. 

MlnimnTn. ' \TaTfmiiTn- 



Painters, women '. .. . ... 


$1.48 


$1.85 


Flrers, men 


2.61 


3.27 


Enamelers, etc., men 


1.59 


1.95 


Finishers, men -. 


1.70 


3.00 


Designers and artists (men and women) 


4.50 


4.65 









Average, men, $2.90; women, $1.67. 

No children employed, as prevails abroad. 

Taking 100 as a unit, cost of production may be stated thus: 

Per cent. 

Material 15 

Labor 65 

Administration, fixed charges, interest, insurance, taxes, and profit 20 

We are capable, under a specific duty, to supply the needs of 
American watch, clock, and other registering instrument makers 
with the enameled dials they require. 

When the lower cost of foreign production is taken into considera- 
tion, also the gross undervaluations, cheap ocean freights, etc., we 
find that in practice the present ad valorem duty of 40 per cent does 
not yield half of that rate. 

Wnite glass enamel used on watch dials can not be made in this 
country. We have experimented repeatedly for those who have 
tried so hard to manufacture here. Our correspondence on this 
subject will be gladly submitted. Again, this enamel can not be 
utilized on anything except thin, chemically pure copper. The 
enamel which is used on jewelry, bath tubs, toilet articles, iron signs, 
cooking and eating utensils, etc., is of a wholly different nature and 
can not be used in making enameled dials. The production of this 
enamel is controlled by three families and the secret has been handed 
down from father to son for generations. One such enamel maker 



WATCH DIALS C/HARA WALTHAM DIAL CO. 7999 

can produce enough in any given time to keep 500 manufacturers 
busy at work during the same period. 

In the making of dials, using the imported enamel, one-third is lost 
in washing and other processes, and the waste incident to further 
manufacture is very great, approximating another one-third. The 
dials are extremely fragile and from this cause the waste is excessive. 
The foreign manufacturer pays no duty on his enamel. Except on 
white enamel we are required to pay duty. Upon the fusible enamel, 
which we use in quantity, the rate assessed is 25 per cent ad valorem, 
vide paragraph 113, which rate of duty should be retained, as well as 
paragraph 564 hi the free list. 

We have respectfully to recommend that paragraph 191 be amended 
by the elimination of the words "including watch dials," and any other 
enameled dials or indicators, and a new paragraph be supplied in the 
law to read as follows: 

Enameled dials of all kinds and enameled indicators or registering plates in one piece 
the duty shall be 4 cents each; on flat dials made in one piece with depressed seconds, 
6 cents each; on dials made in one piece with depressed seconds and centers, 7 cents 
each; on cut-second dials made in two pieces, 8 cents each; on double-sunk dials made 
in three pieces, 10 cents each; and white or colored dials, decorated or inlaid with gold, 
silver, platinum, or mineral paints, 12 cents each. 

We beg to explain in regard to the above rates that watches costing 
$1 or less each are fitted with paper or celluloid dials. 

The 4-cent duty would apply to dials for watches costing from $1 
to $3 each and instruments costing up to $500 each. 

The 6-cent duty to dials on watches costing from $3 to $7 each. 

The 7-cent duty and 8-cent duty to dials which would be applied to 
watches costing from $8 to $15 each. 

The 10-cent and 12-cent rates would apply to dials on watches cost- 
ing from $15 to $500 each. 

For your information we beg to hand you herewith a case of illus- 
trative samples of our dials, such speaking in our behalf more potently 
than words, in that they show at a glance how large an extent in 
manufacture is our labor cost, notwithstanding the claim made by 
various instrument makers that such product is raw material. 

All enameled dials for watches, clocks, or other registering instru- 
ments are made in one or more pieces. Some of them are plain flat 
dials, painted in black and white (see Exhibit A); some are made 
with depressed seconds in one piece (Exhibit B) ; some with depressed 
centers and seconds (Exhibit C); some with "cut seconds" in two 
pieces (Exhibit D) ; some in double sunk in three parts (Exhibit E) ; 
others are decorated in colors, or with gold, silver, platinum, or 
jewels (Exhibit F). The so-called "dollar watches," cheap clocks, 
and toy instruments are fitted with dials made of paper, zinc, cellu- 
loid, etc. Watch, clock, and water and gas meters and other regis- 
tering instruments costing from $2 upward have flat enameled dials 
made in one piece (Exhibit A). Watches selling from $4 to $10 are 
matched with dials having depressed centers and seconds (Exhibit C). 
Watches costing from $10 upward are assembled with "cut seconds," 
double sunk, or decorated dials (Exhibits D, E, and F), and may cost 
anywhere up to $100 or more. Taking completed watches and clocks 
of all kinds, the dials will represent one-tenth of the labor cost; in 
other words, an examination of the pay rolls of manufacturers of 
watches and clocks, making a completed article, show that 10 per 



8000 



SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



cent of the operatives are engaged in making the various grades of 
dials. 

Furthering our industry means good employment of the best class 
of work people, and we earnestly appeal to you for an adequate 
adjustment of the rates of duty, in order to save this industry to 
Americans, rather than to throw wide open the door to the product 
of the lower priced labor of Europe. 
Respectfully, 

O'HABA WALTHAM DIAL Co. 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE. 

[Paragraphs 192 and 514.] 

THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DIRECTOR, 
FURNISHES INFORMATION REGARDING PRODUCTION AND 
CONSUMPTION OF SPELTER IN 1908. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 1, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D, C. 

GENTLEMEN: The production of spelter in 1908, in tons of 2,000 
pounds, was as follows: 





1907. 


1908. 


Decrease in 1908. 


Quantity. 


Percent- 
age. 


Production of primary spelter In the United States 


249,860 
228,509 
813,842 


210, 424 
215, 401 
799,644 


39,436 
13,108 
14,198 


15.8 
5.7 
1.7 


C3nsumption of primary spelter in the United States 


Production of spelter in the world 





Production of -primary spelter in the United States in 1907 and 1908. 
APPORTIONED ACCORDING TO SOURCE OF ORE. 



Locality. 


Quantity. 


1907. 


1908. 


United States: 
Arizona 


77 
1,911 
140 
26,077 
3,508 
1,446 
220 
13,850 
358 
1 
141,824 


182 
2,002 
27 
24,885 
581 
298 
516 
8,628 
341 


Arkansas 


California 


Colorado 


Idaho 


Illinois ,. . 


Iowa - 


Kansas . .. 


Kentucky 


Maine ... 


Missouri 


123,655 
900 
398 
6,926 
134 
2,235 
341 


Montana 


Nevada 


1,692 
13,573 
136 
719 
181 
16 
1,972 
771 
15,273 


New Jersey 


New Mexico 


Oklahoma 


Tennessee 


Texas 


Utah 


282 
910 
17,538 


Virginia 


Wisconsin 


Total domestic 


223,745 


190,749 


Foreign: 
British Columbia % 


545 

25, 570 


2,425 
17,250 


Mexico 


Total foreign 


26,115 


19,675 


Grand total 


249,860 


210,424 





ZINC AND ZINC ORE GEORGE OTIS SMITH. 



8001 



Production of primary spelter in the United States in 1907 and 1908 Continued. 

APPORTIONED ACCORDING TO LOCALITY IN WHICH SMELTED. 



Locality. 


Quantity. 


1807. 


1908. 


Eastern, Southern, and Western States 


42,929 
56,056 
134, 108 
11,732 
5,035 


35,817 
50,244 
99,298 
10,201 
14,864 


Illinois . 


Kansas 


Missouri 


Oklahoma 


Total 


249,860 


210,424 





Production of secondary zinc in the United States in 1907 and 1908. 



' 


1907. 


1*908. 


Secondary spelter 


18.841 


012,000 


Recovered zinc in alloys 


1,417 


"700 









a Subject to final revision. 
Consumption of primary spelter in the United States in 1907 and 1908. 





19C 


17. 


19C 


18. 


Supply: 
Stock, January 1 
In bonded warehouses 






2 




At smelters .... 


3,824 




26,354 




Production 


249, 8C0 




210, 424 




Imports 


1,778 




88' 














Total available 




255,462 




237,671 


Withdrawn: 
Exports, foreign 


9 




8 




Exports, domestic 


563 




2,640 




Stock, December 31 
In bonded warehouses 


2 




9 




At smelters 


26,364 




19,613 














Total withdrawn 




26,938 




22,270 












Apparent consumption 




228,524 




215, 401 













World's production of spelter in 1907 and 1908. 





1907. 


1908. 


Australia 


1,098 


1,198 


Austria and Italy ... 


12.522 


al5,680 


Belgium 


170,307 


181,910 


France and Spain . .. 


61,438 


61,533 


Germany: 
Rhine District 


77,459 


80,696 


Silesia 


152.611 


158,379 


Great Britain 


61,286 


60,049 


Holland... 


16,526 


19,023 


Poland 


10,735 


o 10, 752 


United States 


249,860 


210,424 








Total... 


813,842 


799,644 



Quantity. 



Estimated. 



8002 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Exports. 





1907. 


1908. 




20,352 


26,108 


Zinc dross 


9,393 


8,405 



NOTE. Imports and exports of spelter are given above Under the heading "Consumpti >r." 

C. E. SlEBENTHAL. 



CHARLES T. ORE, WEBB CITY, MO., FILES BRIEF FOR ZINC ORE 
TARIFF CLUB, ASKING FOR DUTY ON ZINC ORE. 

WEBB CITY, Mo., February 6, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, M. C., 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: I desire to submit some reasons why the zinc miners 
of the Missouri-Kansas district need a tariff on imported zinc ore and 
the amount of tariff we believe necessary to afford us adequate pro- 
tection, also to make a few substantial statements refuting some of 
the arguments that have been submitted in the briefs filed by some 
of the smelter owners. 

REASONS WHY TARIFF ON ZINC ORE IS NEEDED. 

The zinc miners of the Missouri-Kansas district need a tariff on 
zinc ore by reason of the fact that zinc ore is mined in Mexico at a 
much less cost than it is or can be mined in the United States. The 
principal reason the cost is less to the Mexican miner is because in 
Mexico the labor costs are less. In addition to this Mexico has cer- 
tain natural advantages in the way of large deposits of ore that can 
be mined with comparatively little expense. 

THE DIFFERENCE IN COST OF MINING IN UNITED STATES AND MEXICO 
IS DUE TO THE CHEAP LABOR OF MEXICO. 

Now the question arises, what is this difference in cost? It seems 
to me that this is the sum and substance of the whole question. In 
briefs already submitted by Mr. Maury and by Mr. Mitchell in behalf 
of the American zinc miner, it has been shown that the cost of pro- 
ducing Mexican zinc ore is about $11.82 per ton. It has also been 
shown by the same briefs that the average cost of producing a ton 
of zinc ore in the Missouri-Kansas district is $37:78 per ton. This 
statement, you will observe by examining the references cited, gives 
the average cost of production as reported by ten representative 
mining companies for mines in the Missouri-Kansas district. 

Now, in support of the above statements as to the comparative low 
cost of producing Mexican zinc ore, I want to call your attention to 
the language of Mr. Cockerill, president of the Cockerill Zinc Smelting 
Company, as expressed in his brief filed before the Ways and Means 
Committee December 8, 1908, in which Mr. Cockerill makes use of the 
following language : 

The object of the tariff, as we have always understood it, is, first, to raise the revenue 
for the expenses of the Government; second, to protect manufacturers and tfie wage- 
earners employed by them. If the object in putting a tariff on zinc ore be to raise 
revenue, the duty that has been charged erroneously and unjustly up to this time, 
namely, 20 per cent ad valorem, which means about $3.20 per ton of ore, will be 
equal to what we consider a fair average profit. In other words, it means taking the 
entire profit on the imported article and appropriating it for the government expenses. 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE CHARLES T. ORR. 8003 

I do not desire to quote Mr. Cockerill for the purpose of Controversy, 
but for the purpose of having him support the statements I have 
already made regarding low cost of producing Mexican zinc ore. 
You will observe, after Mr. Cockerill states the two prime objects of 
the tariff (and- in their order as he sees them), he goes on to say that 
he has been paying about "$3.20 duty per ton, 20 per cent ad valo- 
rem;" $3.20 duty at 20 per cent ad valorem would then represent a 
total cost of $16 per ton. Now, taking Mr. Cockerill's own figures in 
this matter, what do we have? The Mexican ore costs the smelters 
$16 per ton, and this represents not only the cost of production to the 
miner, but also the Mexican miner's profit. 

It, is not my purpose in writing this article to enter into the dis- 
cussion of the comparative value of Mexican and American ore. 
Others have shown that in briefs already filed, but I will speak briefly 
of the comparative values of the two ores, in order to make the point 
conclusive, that the Mexican ore is produced at a cost so much less 
than the cost of the American ore that in order for the American 
miner to receive American wages he must have protection on the 
importation of zinc ore. 

The average Mexican ore will produce about 40 per cent metal, 
while the average Missouri-Kansas ore will produce about 60 per cent 
metal. Now, it is not within my province to discuss the comparative 
cost of smelting these ores or how much of this metal the smelters 
recover. Metallurgists of repute state that the Mexican ore is 
smelted at a less cost per ton than the Missouri-Kansas ore, due to the 
fact that the Missouri-Kansas ore contains a large per cent of sulphur. 
The Mexican ore, the smelters themselves say, makes, just as good 
spelter as the American ore. The only fair way to compare these two 
ores is to compare them on the amount of metal they will produce, 
since that is what the proposed tariff is based upon, and I have taken 
the average of both districts. 

The "metallic contents" of zinc ore means the number of pounds 
of spelter the marketable product that is manufactured from the 
zinc ore produced by the mines. 

I find that there is much confusion in many minds as to what is 
meant by a duty of 1J cents per pound on the "metallic contents" 
of zinc ores. The following examples are worked out in detail with 
a view of making the matter plain : 

(1) Take the case of a 40 per cent ore, such as comes from Mexico: 

2, 000 pounds in 1 ton of ore, 

. 40 percentage of zinc (metal) in the ore, 



800. 00 pounds metallic zinc in 1 ton or ore, 
. 015 proposed duty per pound on metallic contents, 



$12. 00 duty on metallic contents of 1 ton of 40 per cent ore. 

(2) Take the case of a 60 per cent ore, such as Missouri-Kansas 
concentrates : 

2, 000 pounds in 1 ton of ore, 

. 60 percentage of zinc (metal) in the ore, 



1. 200. 00 pounds metallic zinc in 1 ton of ore, 
. 015 proposed duty per pound on metallic contents, 



$18. 00 duty on metallic contents of 1 ton of 60 per cent ore. 

which is equal in metallic contents to 1$ tons of 40 per cent ore. 



8004 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

An illustration that will make this entirely clear might serve a 
good purpose. Suppose that 2,000 pounds or corn should yield 60 
per cent good meal. That would represent the metallic contents 
of 1 ton of 60 per cent ore. Then, again, suppose on account of 
larger cob or smaller gram another 2,000 pounds of corn should yield 
only 800 pounds (40 per cent of its -weight) of meal. Now, suppose 
again that the meal in both instances is of the same grade. We nave 
by this a fair comparison of the two ores. Just as good spelter is 
made from the Mexican ore as from the Missouri-Kansas ore, but 
the Missouri-Kansas ore yields more pounds of spelter to the ton 
than the Mexican ore. 

We have then this fact from Mr. Cockerill: Since a ton of Mexican 
ore will cost the smelter $16, then a ton and a half of the Mexican ore 
will cost the smelter $24. This ton and a half of ore will produce the 
same amount of metal as a ton of the Missouri-Kansas ore. Now, 1 
cents per pound duty on 1,200 pounds (which is 40 per cent of 1$ 
tons, or 3, 000 pounds), amounts to $18. This $18 added to the cost 
that Mr. Cockerill says he pays would make a total cost to the smelter 
of $42. Assuming Mr. CocKerilFs figures to be correct, 1 tons, or 
1,200 pounds, of metal of Mexican ore costs $42, including the tariff of 
\\ cents per pound and including the profit to the Mexican miner. 
Then, since the average cost to the American miner is $37.78 in pro- 
ducing a ton of zinc ore in the Missouri-Kansas district, the difference 
between $37.78 and $42 would be $4.22, or the margin 1 of profit to the 
American miner in the Missouri-Kansas district. It is generally 
conceded that the profit to the smelter man is much larger than this, 
and we do not begrudge the smelter man his profit. In fact we want 
him to make a profit and we want some profit ourselves. 

The smelter is a manufacturer and has a tariff protecting spelter, 
his manufactured article. 

The American zinc miner produces the raw material for the spelter 
and has no tariff protecting nis product. 

Comparing the two occupations, the smelters have protection by 
a tariff of $30 per ton on spelter, their finished product, and are 
engaged in a manufacturing proposition. They buy their ore at a 
certain price and usually sell their spelter in advance on contracts 
gauging those sales on the price paid for ore. How about the miner? 
The risk and uncertainty or the mining business generally are known 
to everyone, and zinc mining is no exception. Certainly the smelters 
should in fairness concede that the miners as well &s the smelters are 
entitled to a legitimate profit. 

WHY COCKERILL BUYS MEXICAN ZINC ORE. 

In June, 1908, Mr. Cockerill in the presence of one hundred or more 
mine operators and business men, at a meeting of the Engineers 
Club of Joplin. made the statement that he bought Mexican ore 
because he could make more money on it. And I for one am not 
surprised that the smelters prefer Mexican ore for that very reason. 
And for the same reason it is logical to suppose that they are now 
opposing a duty on Mexican ore. At that same meeting Mr. Cock- 
erill advised us to shut down our mines to curtail production, claim- 
ing there was a big surplus of spelter on hand, and yet he states in 
the brief referred to above that "The United States can not furnish 
the ore needed." 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE CHARLES T. ORR. 8005 

At that same meeting in Joplin last summer I asked Mr. Cockerill, 
when he was advising us to close down our plants to curtail produc- 
tion, "If we shut down our plants to curtail production, will you 
stop shipping in Mexican ore during that time?" And what did 
Mr. Cockerill reply? He said, "No; he had contracts that he must 
fill." (I will refer to those contracts directly.) Then I asked him 
the question, "Where would the miner of the Missouri-Kansas dis- 
trict be if we close down our mines according to your advice, and 
where would the laboring men of this district be if we close down 
while the smelters get their ore from Mexico and so encourage the 
Mexican miner to open up more mines and increase their produc- 
tion?" Mr. Cockerill did not answer that question. 

THE MEXICAN MINER PAYS THE TARIFF. 

I want to refer again to the quotation made from Mr. Cockerill' s 
brief, as given above, where he refers to the duty paid on the ore im- 
ports from Mexico and uses the following language, viz, "Twenty per 
cent ad valorem, which means about $3.20 per ton on ore, will be equal 
to what we consider a fair average profit. In other words, it means 
taking the entire profit on the imported article and appropriating it 
for the government expenses." . I do not know what method Mr. 
Cockerill uses, now in settling for his ore, but I do know that in com- 
pany with his buyer in the fall of 1905, in the city of Monterey, I was 
present when Mr. Robertson was settling for some ore bought of the 
Mexicans, and the tariff was deducted from the amount due the 
miner. I was told by Mr. Robertson at that time that this was the 
way they settled for their ore, viz, the tariff was deducted from the 
settlement. Mr. Cockerill very adroitly show r s that the Government 
is now taking $3.20 per ton as ad valorem duty, which he claims is a 
very good profit for the smelter man, and yet he deducts that tariff in 
settling with the miner. 

In further support of this I have a letter from Mr. Joseph Aldrich, 
who is mining in Mexico, and he states in answer to my questions, 
(1) that his ore is dutiable, and (2) that the duty is deducted by 
the smelter man when they settle with him for his ore. 

The Mexican mine operator has peon labor and should pay to the 
United States Government the difference in cost of his labor and the 
cost of same labor in the United States. 

Then it is not the smelter but the Mexican mine operator that pays 
the tariff, and that, gentlemen, is what we want. We want the 
Mexican mine operator put on a basis where he can not undermine 
the American mine operator by the cheap labor of Mexico. We 
want to make him pay the difference to the United States Government, 
and in this way the United States Government will derive a revenue 
and the American laborer, who is worthy of his hire, shall have 
American wages and an American home. 

Mr. Cockerill, in his brief submitted December 8, 1908, quoted very 
generously from Mr. Ingalls, editor of the Engineering and Mining 
Journal. One quotation that I desire particularly to refer to in quot- 
ing from Mr. CockeriU's brief is as follows: "A subject that is 
especially engaging attention in the Joplin district is the organiza- 
tion of an effort to secure the imposition of a tariff on zinc ore at 
the next session of Congress. In several of the towns of the district 
zinc-ore tariff clubs are being formed." 



8006 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

If Mr. Cockerill had gone on with that same article and quoted it a 
little farther down, he would have quoted Mr. Ingalis as saying the 
following: "The smelters are naturally opposed to any move in 
this direction. Theoretically the smelter is a middleman who doesn't 
care whether the price of spelter be high or low, provided he is able 
to realize an adequate margin. Practically, the smelter prefers a 
high price to a low price, because under the former condition his 
margin is generally larger." Mr. Ingalls states their position very 
clearly and correctly, we believe, when he says: "The smelter is a 
middleman who doesn't care whether the price of spelter be high or 
low, provided he is able to realize an adequate margin." 

MR. INGALLS, IN HIS EDITORIAL, COMPARES THE SMELTERS AND 

MINERS. 

Further on in the same article, under the same date, Mr. Ingalls 
says: "On the other hand, it is to be recognized that the present lot 
of the miners in the Joplin district is not a comfortable one." So we 
have in this editorial (see Engineering and Mining Journal, August 
22, 1908) from Mr. Ingalls (who is very generally recognized as an 
able defender of the smelters' interests) a fair comparison of the 
smelter and the miner and the relative positions they occupy. The 
smelter "doesn't care whether the price of spelter be high or low, 
provided he is able to realize an adequate margin," while, on the 
other hand, "the present lot of the miners of the Joplin district is 
not a comfortable one." 

SUMMING UP SOME OF THE INCONSISTENCIES OF MR. COCKERILL. 

Mr. Cockerill's arguments against the proposed zinc ore tariff are 
inconsistent with facts stated oy himself in nis brief and elsewhere, 
because 

(1) He advises at one time the zinc miners to close down their 
plants to curtail production. A few months later he states the Amer- 
ican mines can not produce enough ore. 

(2) He states he prefers Mexican ore to American ore, because he 
can make more money from it, and when advising the American 
miner to close his mines to curtail production refuses to discontinue 
Mexican shipments. 

(3) He minimizes the importance of Mexican ore shipments in 
tonnage by saying there were but 280,000 tons of Mexican ore 
imported during the past four years. (See brief filed December 14, 
1908.) And in his brief filed December 8, 1908, he foresees dire 
results if these shipments are interfered with. 

(4) He says the smelters pay the duty and yet that duty is 
deducted in settlements with Mexican mine operators. 

(5) He bewails the small smelter profits and attempts to support 
this Position by quoting partially an article from Mr. Ingalls, of 
the Engineering and Mining Journal, whom he cites as authority; 
and that same article fully quoted declares that "the smelter is* a 
middleman who doesn't care whether the price of spelter be high 
or low, provided he is able to realize an adequate margin." 

(6) The "small profits" plea is inconsistent with the fact that in 
six years Mr. Cockerill has been enabled to enlarge the business of 
his company to six times its original capacity. 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE CHARLES T. ORR. 8007 

(7) He laments that the cost of smelting Mexican ores is great 
and yet pays the Mexican miner a higher base price than he pays 
the American miner. (See Mr. Lang's letter infra.) 

(8) He states to the honorable members of the Ways and Means 
Committee that the United States can not produce enough zinc 
ore and yet he knows or could know, that in the past ten years 
nearly every year a close down of the mines has occurred in the 
Missouri-Kansas district because there was a surplus of ore in the 
bins; and further, in 1908 Mr. Cockerill, himself, in a speech to the 
mine operators advised them to curtail production. 

(9) He complains of not having sufficient ore in the United States 
and that the smelters are not able to run at full capacity, to which 
I would reply: If the smelting capacity is excessive that is an arti- 
ficial condition created by the smelters themselves, and doubtless 
the attractive profits of the business induced this excessive multipli- 
cation of plants. It might be further observed that on January 1, 
1908, there was a surplus of over 30,000 tons of spelter produced by 
these same smelters that Mr. Cockerill thinks were unable to run to 
their full capacity. 

(10) Mr. CockernTs opposition to a tariff on the importation of 
zinc ore is clearly revealed in his public statement that he made 
more money on Mexican ore than on United States ore, and, he might 
have added, a benefit he derived on account of cheap Mexican labor 
and a benefit that was at the cost of the American miner. 

I desire next to call "attention to some letters written by Mr. J. H. 
Lang, of Vogelstein & Co., a New York concern heavily interested 
hi smelters and the importation of zinc ore, who have also filed a 
brief protesting against a tariff on zinc ore. The correspondence I 
refer to was addressed by Mr. Lang to Mr. Clay Gregory, secretary 
of the Commercial Club of Joplin, Mo. The first letter under date 

of July 15, 1908, reads as follows: 

JOPLIN, Mo., July 15, 1909. 
Mr. CLAY GREGORY, 

Secretary, Joplin Commercial Club, Joplin, Mo. 

DEAR SIR: After talking with you to-day, it occurred to me that as all of the smelt- 
ers, as well as the miners, are losing money and equally as anxious as anyone here 
could be to see an improvement in the condition of affairs brought about, something 
might be done in that direction through cooperation tactics without inflicting spe- 
cial hardship on any particular interest; that is, if you could arrange to have the 
production reduced to around 4,000 tons, it might suffice, with the help of the smelt- 
ers, to bring about a higher price. Just as much spelter can be sold at 5 cents as can 
be sold at 4 cents or 4J cente, where the price more nearly is to-day. The danger 
is that once spelter is put up to 5 cents, your people here will at once begin to enlarge 
their output. Could it be fixed so in the first place the production should be reduced 
and in the second place that it would stay there until the smelters reported a demand 
that called for an enlarged production? 

I would like to have your ideas on this subject when I reach St. Louis, and hope 
to hear from you. care John Wahl Commission Cojnpany, at that point. 

I saw Mr. Cockerill in Nevada, and I expect this evening to see Mr. E. V. Lanyon, 
of the Lanyon-Starr Company, at Pitteburg, Kans., and to-morrow Mr. George S. 
Page, of the United Zinc and Chemical Company, in Kansas City. In St. Louis I 
have an engagement to see Mr. Gatch, of the Granby Company, and next week the 
Matthiessen-Hegler Zinc Company, the Illinois Zinc Company, and Mr. E. N. Hurst, 
of the Grasselli Chemical Company, at Cleveland . So you see by the time I get through 
I will be pretty well posted as to the views and ideas of all of these men, and advised, 
possiblv better than anyone else, just what could be done. If you can tell me any- 
thing I can say to them in the general interest it might be of help in accomplishing 
the object we all have so much at heart. 

I can not wait to sign this letter, but it will be delivered to you by Mr. Bell. 
Very truly, yours, J. H. LANG. 



8008 Si HKDULE C METALS, AM> M \XUFACTU HKS OF. 

Mr. Bell is ore buyer for the American Zinc, Lead and Smelting 
Company. 

In this letter you will notice that Mr. Lang's advice to the miner 
is to curtail the production, the same as was Mr. Cockerill's. You 
will also notice tnat Mr. Lang says as much spelter can be sold for 
5 cents as for 4 cents or 4J cents. This may throw some light on 
the statement made by Mr. Ingalls that the smelter made his profit 
whether spelter be hign or low. 

To this letter Mr. Gregory replied as follows: 

JULY 16, 1908. 
Mr. J. H. LANG, 

St. Louis, Mo. 

DEAR SIR: Your favor of the 15th was handed me by Mr. Bell. I am very much 
pleased you feel that our conversation was interesting enough to you to attract your 
attention. 

I agree with you that just as much spelter could be sold at 5 cents as can be sold at 
4$ or 4J cents, and also agree with you that if spelter were put up to 5 cents our district 
would increase its output. I feel there is a remedy, and that is this: If the smelters 
would stop importing Mexican ores I believe this district would curtail its production 
for a reasonable length of time, until the present stock of spelter would be used. It 
would, however, be useless to ask this district to curtail its production while Mexican 
ores are still being imported, because this district feels that on account of 100,000 tons 
of ore imported from Mexico last year you have 30,000 to 35,000 tons of spelter on hand. 
We feel that if no ore had been imported from Mexico there would be no surplus and 
that this district could be producing ore at a profit instead of : as it is now doing, at a loss. 

When you stop to consider the fact that this Joplin district produces 60 per cent of 
the spelter produced in the United States it indicates that there should be and must be 
closer relationship between the producer and the smelter. . 

The committee that met yesterday at Webb City adjourned to meet to-night in 
Joplin. Therefore I can not give you any detailed information as to what the district 
is likely to do. 

The output of this district for the first six months of 1907 averaged 6,077 tons of zinc 
per week. The output for the first six months of 1908 averaged 4,620 tons per week, 
a reduction of 25 per cent. It would not be hard to reduce this output to the figure you 
name that is, 4,000 tons. 

I take the stand that not over one-tenth of this country is being developed or mined, 
and that if the price of ore in this district was anything like what it ought to be it would 
be developed more rapidly, and the smelters would be able to take all the ore that they 
get from the United States. 

Any time I can be of service to you please command me. 

Yours, truly, CLAY GREGORY. 



PLANTERS HOTEL, 
St. Louis, Mo., July 17, 1908. 
Mr. CLAY GREGORY, 

Care Commercial Club of Joplin, Joplin, Mo. 

DEAR SIR: Yours of the 16th received. 

I am not very well posted on the subject of Mexican ores, but our people in New 
York are, and I will discuss the matter with them on my return ana communicate 
with you again. Meanwhile, there doesn't seem to be any alternative but to allow 
the law of supply and demand to take its course, and effect such further closing of the 
mines at Joplin as will bring production and consumption into line again. Business 
will improve, but help from that quarter will necessarily be slow, and meanwhile, 
I expect things will be worse rather than better. However, I have met with con- 
siderable encouragement along the lines of arranging for some sort of cooperation 
between the smelters, through which a higher price will be obtained for spelter and a 
correspondingly better rate paid for ores, only if this is done, it must be under some 
agreement whereby production will be artificially curtailed until the country is 
able to absorb a larger output. 

I hope to hear further from you at New York, and especially will be glad if you will 
send me a copy of the paper in which will be published the figures to which you 
referred. 

Yours, truly, J. H. LAXG. 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE CHABLES T. ORR. 8009 

The burden of his letter, you will note, is to curtail the production. 
Certainly this does not look as though it was necessary to go to 
Mexico for their ore. 

On July 28, 1908, Mr. Lang again addressed Mr. Gregory. His 
letter reads as follows: 

NEW YORK, July 28, 1908. 
Mr. CLAY GREGORY, 

Secretary Joplin Commercial Club, Joplin, Mo. 

DEAR SIR: Since last writing you, July 17, I am in receipt of yours of 16th of that 
month, addressed to me at St. Louis, and of July 23, directed to New York. Please 
note, however, that my address is as above, and not care of American Metal Company, 
as you have it. Many thanks for the statistics inclosed, which are very interesting. 

Imports of Mexican ores at the moment are quite a negligible proposition. They 
only amount to about 1,000 tons per week, the metal contents not being greatly larger 
than that much per month, and none is coming in except under guaranteed price of 5 
cents per spelter, consequently the metal can go to that price in this country without 
increasing the imports beyond the present limited quantity. Should spelter go above 
5 cents, naturally these imports will increase. An agreement not to buy them is 
quite out of the question. Should the smelters now operating make such an agree- 
ment, there are several idle plants and plenty of men and money to engage in the 
business once prices reach a profitable basis. The only way to handle this matter 
would be through a revision or the tariff. 

Confidentially, I might say to you that a meeting of the smelters next month is 
practically assured. It occurs to me that what you should now do is to perfect your 
organization and appoint delegates to meet at the same time and place with a view to 
adopting a policy beneficial to the interests of all concerned. Doubtless the smelters 
would welcome such an opportunity to talk matters over and arrive at an understand- 
ing. Awaiting your further communication, I remain, 

Yours, truly, J. H. LANG. 

From which you will note that no ore was then being shipped in 
from Mexico "except under guaranteed price of 5 cents for spelter," 
corroborating the statement that has previously been made by the 
miners that the smelters were paying a higher base price for Mexican 
ore than they were pacing the American miner, for on this very day, 
July 28, 1908, the Engineering and Mining Journal quoted spelter at 
4.42J to 4.47^. It seems to me, however, that the most conspicuous 
statement in Mr. Lang's letter, and one with which I most heartily 
agree, is that in which he says: "The only way to handle this matter 
would be through a revision of the tariff." 

Vogelstein & Co., in their letter of November 12, 1908, addressed 
to the Hon. Sereno E. Payne, say: 

As to the duties which shall be imposed, we are not interested other than to ask 
that the difference between labor costs in this country and abroad shall be protected 
by such margin between rates on raw materials and manufactured goods as will suf- 
fice for that purpose. 

I desire to refer to the Grasselli Company's brief, who are opposing 
a tariff on zinc ore, but who offer no arguments not already answered, 
but who in 1897 addressed the Ways and Means Committee in the 
following langauge : 

We desire to state that we are not opposed to the reasonable protection of any home 
industry; on the contrary, we believe in such protection to the extent that the same 
is necessary to equalize the difference between home labor and foreign labor. 

Their present position is not altogether inconsistent, as they have 
not attempted to maintain in the briefs they submitted that there is 
not such a difference in the cost of producing zinc ores here and in 
Mexico as is claimed in briefs already submitted by the zinc operators 
of tlu's district. 



8010 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

The Grasselli Company is opposed to a duty on zinc ore because, 
like Mr. Cockerill, it can make more money on Mexican ore than on 
American ore, and disregard the former declaration made in 1897 and 
quoted above regarding the difference in the cost of home and foreign 
labor. 

REPLYING TO THE SUBJECT OF LAND ROYALTIES. 

Some of the smelters' briefs that have been filed have attempted 
to show that the royalties in this district are too high. This matter 
I want to speak of very briefly and to show that the royalties are rea- 
sonable. Mr. Maury, in his brief, has already shov n in the cost of 
ten of the large producing mines of the district that the royalties 
averaged 12 per cent. This is not excessive. Some first-lease com- 
panies do the pumping and so assist in the mining, and rightly charge 
a larger per cent royalty than those mines pay that do the pumping 
themselves. Most of the royalties in this district now being paid are 
from 10 per cent to 15 per cent unless it is as stated above some 
special arrangement exists \vhereby the expense, of mining is shared 
by the land owner or the first lessee. 

In this connection I may add the American Zinc, Lead, and Smelting 
Company, in which, I am informed, the Vogelsteins are largely inter- 
esteci, pay no royalty. That is, they own the fee simple. In addition 
to owning several of the largest mines and the fees on which these 
mines are located, they also own several large smelters. Few com- 
panies can afford to do this, and few can command enough capital 
to purchase the fee simple, to operate mines, and to build and operate 
smelters. 

NO ZINC ORE TRUST EXISTS. 

Whenever this district becomes detached from the present system 
and is owned by a few large companies who can control the zinc 
from the fee simple until it is manufactured into spelter, then will 
come the opportunity for the formation of a trust in the zinc busi- 
ness. But so long as conditions are as at present, when the poorest 
man working for wages can take a part of his earnings and, along 
with some of his colaborers, lease a piece of land from the landowner 
and have it drilled or prospected for ore, so long then will the poor 
man have the opportunity that this district has always given the man 
of little or moderate means of becoming a mine operator. 

PRESENT SYSTEM OF ROYALTIES A BENEFIT TO THE POOR MAN AND 
TO THE OPERATOR OF SMALL MEANS. 

The system of leasing and paying royalties such as is in vogue in 
this district is a distinct benefit to the man of moderate means, and 
the Missouri-Kansas district has many men to-day who are operating 
mines that at one tune worked for wages in the mines, and their posi- 
tion as mine operator they gained by the method outlined above, so 
that the system of royalties, existing as it does, is and has been a 
distinct benefit in helping many energetic men from laborer to opera-v 
tor and in developing the ore bodies of this district. 

Bear this in mind also, that the landowner, when he leases his 
ground for mining purposes, is exhausting his principal. By that I 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE CHARLES T. ORR. 8011 

mean the ore taken out is a part of the value of that land, and, fur- 
thermore, when the ore is exhausted and mining purposes are dis- 
continued, the land often has little or no practical value, for it is 
covered with rocks, bowlders, tailings, and other mining refuse, punc- 
tured with shafts, and often undermined to the extent that it caves 
from the surface, leaving on his hands real estate of little actual value 
for any agricultural or other purpose. Then we say, Should he not 
under these conditions receive a rental or royalty commensurate 
with the value of the property? 

Now I come back to the starting point. The American miner 
wants a tariff of 1^ cents per pound on the metallic zinc contents of 
all zinc ores imported into the United States, so that the total cost 
of the foreign ore will equal the cost of the American ore to the 
American miner. The question very aptly arises, what is the prin- 
cipal cost of producing zinc ore in the United States, and especially 
in the Missouri-Kansas district? I want to answer, it is labor. 

LABOR IS OVER HALF THE COST IN PRODUCING ZINC ORE IN THE 
MISSOURI-KANSAS DISTRICT. 

It has been shown by briefs already submitted that the American 
miner gets wages far in excess of the Mexican miner. We do not 
want to reduce these wages; we want to maintain them. A zinc 
and lead mining and milling company .which is under my manage- 
ment is a fair average of a hard-ground mine of southwest Missouri. 
It has a monthly expenditure of about $9,000. The cost for labor 
alone is from $4,700 to $5,000 per month, or something over 50 per 
cent of the entire cost. Now, when I say "entire cost" I mean 
everything labor, fuel, explosives, supplies, etc. The item of labor 
expense referred to above does not include the expense of superin- 
tendent and of my office, so that the labor expense referred to is that 
shown by the weekly pay rolls. Then I have answered the question 
I asked above, and I answer it again: The mam cost of producing 
zinc in the Missouri-Kansas district is for labor, and the main person 
to be benefited by a tariff on zinc ore imported from Mexico or any- 
where else would be the American laborer. 

THE AMERICAN MINER IS IN COMPETITION WITH PEON LABOR OF MEX- 
ICO, AND THE LABORING MEN OF THE MISSOURI-KANSAS DISTRICT 
WANT A PROTECTIVE TARIFF ON ZINC ORE. 

My information now is that briefs have been submitted by 7 zinc- 
smelting companies opposing a tariff on zinc ore. None of them 
question our showing of the difference in cost of producing zinc ore in 
Mexico and the United States. Opposed to these 7 briefs I want to 
point out to you that a petition to Congress is now being signed by 
the miners of this district, and that over 7,000 miners of the Missouri- 
Kansas district have already signed it, in which they ask Congress 
for an adequate tariff on zinc ore, in the foUowing language: 

TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OP CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OP AMERICA: 

The subscribers hereto, being citizens, miners, and employees in the Missouri- 
Kansas lead and zinc mining district, respectfully petition your honorable body to 



8012 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

include in the new tariff bill to be considered by the Sixty-first Congress of the United 
States a duty of 14 cents per pound upon the metallic contents of all zinc ores imported 
into the United States. In so petitioning we believe and state that such duty repre- 
sents the difference in the cost of producing ore in this district and the cost of produc- 
tion abroad, and that the labor cost in this district represents over half the production 
coat of ore. 

MANY SMELTERS RECENTLY BUILT IN GAS FIELDS RISKING SHORT LIFE 
WITH EXPECTATION OF REAPING QUICK AND LARGE PROFITS 
SMELTING CAPACITY. 

Something has been said in the briefs filed bv the smelters regard- 
ing their smelting capacity, and as related to trie amount of ore pro- 
duced. Certainly the smelting capacity, which is now excessive, is 
an artificial condition that the smelters themselves created. The 
large profits in the smelting business induced the smelters to multiply 
their plants. Applying to this subject, I desire to quote the following 
from Air. Ingalls in the Engineering and Mining Journal of January 
4, 1908: 

"A smeltery in the natural-gas field has the great attraction that 
its cost per ton of capacity is much less than that of a modern smeltery 
to use coal as fuel. The development of the industry in the United 
States is taking place precisely on the line that I predicted several 
years ago, namely, there is the installation of new plants at new 
points in the gas fields where the builders are willing to risk short life 
with the expectation of reapjng quick and large profits." 

EXCESSIVE SMELTING CAPACITY DUE TO RECENT LARGE INCREASE IN 
BUILDING OF ZINC SMELTERS. 

Statistics published in the same journal of June 13, 1908, are par- 
ticularly applicable to the subject of excessive smelting capacity. 

In 1907 there was a large increase in the zinc-smelting capacity of the United States. 
The National Zinc Company, Bartlesville Zinc Company, and Lanyon-Starr Smelting 
Company each completed new works at Bartlesville, Okla. The American Zinc, Lead, 
and Smelting Company completed a new plant at Deering, Eans. The United Zinc 
and Chemical Company completed a small plant at Springfield, 111. Several of the 
works above mentioned did not begin operation until December, wherefore they had 
no material effect upon the production of 1907. The works of Hegeler Brothers, at 
Danville, 111., were completed in 1907, but did not go into operation. 

Among the older works there were also many increases in capacity in 1907. At 
Palmerton, Pa., the New Jersey Zinc Company added 1 furnace with 200 retorts. The 
Granby Mining and Smelting Company added 1 new furnace with 620 retorts to its 
works at Neodesha, Kans. TheGrasselli Chemical Company added a new furnace with 
576 retorts to its works at Clarksburg, W. Va. The Cockerill Zinc Company added a 
new furnace with 740 retorts to its works at Altoona, Kans. 

Certainly the smelters will not question the authority quoted and 
that an excessive smelting capacity exists is evident, an excess that 
the smelters are anxious to supply by importing Mexican and other 
ores. What the American miner wants is to have the Mexican ore put 
in fair competition with United States ore. At present it is not com- 
petition. The Mexican miner underbids the American miner and is 
enabled to do so by his cheap labor and other conditions already 
described . 

PEON LABOR AS COMPARED TO AMERICAN LABOR. 

The miners thought when they saw these new smelters being built 
that it meant more competition for ore and higher prices, but the 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE CHARLES T. ORR. 8013 

cleverness of the smelter man came to the rescue of that artificial 
condition by importing ore from Mexico. We stand but little chance 
of getting any benefit from improved business conditions so long as 
we are menaced by the importations of zinc ore from Mexico ore 
that is mined by peon labor at a cost less than half the cost for the 
same labor in the United States. Then what is the remedy? It is 
just as Mr. Lang, of Vogelstein & Co., said in his letter: "The only 
way to handle this matter would be through a revision of the tariff. 
The question might aptly be asked why have we not had a tariff 
before ? The reply is very simple. Importations commenced only 
about four years ago arid during that time no tariff law has been 
enacted. This is our first opportunity to ask Congress to give us 
adequate protection. 

COURT DECISIONS. 

The duty of $3.20 (20 per cent ad valorem), which Mr. Cockerill 
mentions, was payable by reason of a ruling of the Treasury Depart- 
ment. A case involving the legality of this ruling and before the 
United States circuit court of appeals of New Orleans has recently 
ruled that no kind of zinc ore is dutiable under any paragraph of the 
Dingley law. Hence the court decisions are against the ruling of 
the Treasury Department and against the producers of zinc ore in 
the United States so that at the present time there is no law on our 
statute books giving any protection to the zinc-mining industry. 
Since this decision was given ore has declined $6 per ton and wages 
hi this district have been cut 10 per cent in consequence of the 
decline in ore prices. 

Mr. Edgar, whose brief for the Edgar Zinc Company was printed in 
the St. Louis Republic on Monday, January 25, 1909, states, as others 
have done, that the United States can not produce enough zinc ore. 
On the very same page of the same paper that printed Mr. Edgar's 
brief in large headlines occurs the following : ' ' Zinc prices in slump. 
Buyers overwhelmed by surplus stock of last week." And the state- 
ment that there is a slump in prices and that buyers are overwhelmed 
by surplus stock of last week is true. 

Answering Mr. Edgar and others once and for all regarding the pro- 
duction of sufficient zinc ore hi the United States, the following must 
be the correct reply: The United States has been able to produce 
enough zinc ore, and the mines of the Missouri-Kansas district have 
almost every year for the past ten years created a surplus, and for a 
time each year would have to close down to sell that surplus. What 
is more, the mines of this district do not run to thebest economic 
advantage, as they do not run double shift as practically all other 
mining districts do. 

ENOUGH ZINC MINES HAVE BEEN CLOSED DOWN IN MISSOURI AND KAN- 
SAS THE PAST YEAR TO PRODUCE ALL OF THE ORE THAT HAS BEEN 
IMPORTED FROM MEXICO THE PAST FOUR YEARS. 

To run double shift would greatly increase our output. It would 
call for more men in this district, but that, I believe, would be a 
benefit readily supplied. Some of the smelters have said that to close 
a smelter because they could not get enough ore meant throwing some 
of their men out of employment, but they omitted to say that for 

63 318 AP 09 18 



8014 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND 1CANUFACTUBE8 OF. 

every man the smelters employ the zinc mines employ 10, and when 
ore is imported from Mexico hundreds of miners in this district are 
put out of employment on account of the mines being compelled to 
close down because they could not compete wjth Mexican importa- 
tions. This district is strictly an American district. No foreign 
or imported labor has ever been employed here. This can not be said 
of the smelters, who, in one instance at least, imported Mexican 
laborers. I refer to a smelter in Kansas, where it is well known the 
American laborers and the Mexican laborers could not agree to work 
together. 

Air. Edgar says: "It seems to me, Mr. Hill, very wrong to tax 
not only the smelters but also the consumers of spelter." Mr. 
Edgar is very anxious that the price of spelter for the consumer 
should not be advanced. He should also explain that 80 per cent 
of the stock in the Edgar Zinc Company is owned by the United 
States Steel Company, and that this Dig corporation uses all of the 
spelter manufactured by the Edgar Zinc Company, and it would 
naturally follow that if they do not manufacture ah 1 the spelter they 
need that they would like to buy their spelter as cheaply as possible. 

Now, concluding with the subject of producing enough zinc ore in 
the United States: The tariff we are asking for is not prohibitive; 
it is protective. So that if the smelters do need more ore than the 
United States zinc mines can supply they can still purchase it by 
paying a tariff to the United States Government, which the buyers 
in turn, to follow the custom they have been pursuing, deduct from 
the Mexican miner. So, then, we have this condition : The zinc miner 
shows that he has produced enough ore and asserts that with a pro- 
tective tariff he can continue to do so. But if he does or if he does not 
the American miner in the zinc mines of the United States and the 
United States Government are the beneficiaries. 

NEW ZINC ORE DISTRICTS IN THE UNITED STATES. 

The last few years have seen radical changes in the method of zinc 
mining in the Missouri-Kansas district. Large deposits have been 
discovered at greater depths and new areas have been opened, not 
only in the Missouri-Kansas district, but in other sections of the 
United States. Arkansas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Wisconsin, Idaho, 
and Arizona have all increased their production and extended their 
zinc ore producing areas, and with the encouragement of a tariff on 
zinc ore these districts will still further increase their production. 
The benefit of*the extension of this industry and the money expended 
in the increased .production of zinc ore will be, if the industry is pro- 
tected, for the benefit of the American miner and of communities in 
the United States. 

THE FINAL ANALYSIS OF THIS QUESTION. 

But whatever conclusion may be arrived at in balancing the self- 
interests of smelters and miners, there is one consideration greater 
than either of these, namely, the right and the wrong of it all. From 
the ethical point of view it is infinitely more important for you to con- 
serve to our children and to our descendants the advancing civiliza- 
tion, with its cities, schools, churches, industries, and all that makes 



X1NC AND ZINC ORE. b015 

for culture and good citizenship, which the people here from all walks 
and conditions in life have come together and built out of the product 
of the /inc mines of Kansas and Missouri, than to admit Mexican /inc 
ore duty free, and so permit the smelter men to cheapen ore prices. 
And who would be benefited by this reduction? Not the nomadic 
peons of Mexico, and certainly not the consumers of spelter. For 
whose special benefit then would this growing civilixation be wrecked? 
This is the ethical question upon which, in the final analysis, all 
citi/enship and your statesmanship will be judged. 

ZINC MINING AN IMPORTANT BRANCH OF ONE OF THE THREE GREATEST 

INDUSTRIES. 

Every pound of /.inc ore mined and milled increases just that much 
the world's wealth. 1 am sure it is not a new thought to the honor- 
able gentlemen of the Ways and Means Committee that mining is one 
of the three fundamental sources of new wealth. 

Agriculture with forestry and stock raising is one. 

The fisheries and kindred occupations is the second. 

And mining, including the discovery and recovery of all the products 
from within the earth, is the third. 

The products coming from those three great occupations yield to 
man the vast opportunities to exercise Ins brain and muscle in working 
over these products and making them contribute to the welfare and 
comfort of mankind. Certainly the production of /.inc is an important 
branch of the great occiipat ion of mining, and we believe it is deserving 
the recognition of a protective tarill'. 

THE TARIFF NEEDED TO KQUALI/E COST OF PRODUCTION IN UNITED 

STATES AND MEXICO. 

We very earnestly ask you to give us a tariff of H cents per pound 
on the metallic /.inc contents contained in all kinds of ores imported 
into the I'nited States, in order that we may successfully compete 
with the mines of Mexico and in order that we may pay the American 
miner American wages. 

Respectfully submitted. 

CHARLES T. ORR. ]\~fl>h City, Mo. 

(Chairman of the /inc Ore Tariff Club of the Missouri-Kansas /inc 
and lead mining district.) 



B. M. ROBINSON, JOPLIN, MO., AND W. R. CATJLKINS, CARTHAGE, 
MO., SUBMIT BRIEF ASKING A DUTY ON ZINC ORES. 

WASHINGTON, 1). C., February 19, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, 1). C. 

GENTLEMEN: A crisis has arisen in the zinc-mining business within 
the last three weeks. The price of /.inc ore has dropped $7 per ton 
since the decision of the United States court of appeals at New 



8016 S< IIKITLE C METALS, AND MAN I 1 A< I L'liKS OF. 

Orleans, January 19, 1909, to the effect that there is no duty on zinc 
ore of any kind under the present law. This decision has had the 
effect of closing down the zinc mines of the Joplin district, throwing 
thousands of men out of employment, and paralyzing business. Tariff 
on zinc ore means life or death to the zinc mines of the United States. 

The courts of the United States have decided that in the making 
of a will if a child is not mentioned it is to be presumed that child 
was forgotten. 

In making the Dingley bill, "zinc ore" was not mentioned, and it 
is to be presumed it was forgotten. 

When the Dingley bill was made no zinc ore had ever been im- 
ported into the United States. 

When the Dingley bill was made calamine was known only for its 
chemical uses, and not as a zinc ore. 

In 1905 it was discovered that carbonate and silicates of zinc 
(zinc ore) had been called calamine many years ago, and that cala- 
mine was on the free list. This discovery is plainly shown by refer- 
ence to your book of statistics, compiled "by Mr. Evans, which shows 
the increase of imports of calamine when the smelters discovered 
Mexican zinc ore could be imported free of duty by calling it 
"calamine." 

Value of all 
Year Imports. 

1894 124.00 

1895 11.00 

1899 50.00 

1901 28.00 

1902 41.00 

1903 63.00 

1904 378. 00 

1905 9, 264. 00 

1906 703,741.10 

. 1907 784,303.20 

The principal zinc ore in the United States from which spelter is 
made is sulphide ore. 

The difference between these three technical names for zinc ore is 
simply this: Of sulphide ore, 67 per cent is metallic zinc; of silicate 
ore, 54.3 per cent is metallic zinc; of carbonate ore, 52 per cent is 
metallic zinc. 

Silicate ores and carbonate ores are now being imported as "cala- 
mine." 

Sulphide ore is now being imported from Mexico as "zinc ore." 

The Government to-day is receiving no revenue whatever from 
zinc ore sulphide, carbonate, silicate, or calamine. 

The Government is receiving 1 cents per pound on the spelter or 
pig zinc imported, and the duty we are asking will in no way affect 
this revenue, unless it is to increase it. 

The duty we are asking will in no wav affect the price of spelter to 
the consumer. Since the price of ore nas dropped $7 in the Joplin 
district, a decrease of 20 per cent, the price of spelter has decreased 
less than 5 per cent. 

The average revenue to the Government the last ten years on 
spelter has been $23,152.40 per year (reference, Imports and Duties, 
p. 917; advance sheets Geological Survey, p. 20); and as there is no 
duty whatever on any kind of zinc ore (as determined by the decision 
of the United States court of appeals at New Orleans, January 19, 



ZINC AND ZINC QBE B. M. ROBINSON ET AL. 8017 

1909), $23,152.40 is the average yearly duty received by the Gov- 
ernment on the entire zinc business for the last ten years. While 
your reference books show $68,693.98 duty was collected in 1907, 
this duty was paid under protest, and the recent decision of the 
United States court of appeals, January 19, 1909, returns this 
amount to the smelters. 

So far as we are able to discover, no protest to the placing of a 
duty on zinc has yet been filed by any consumer of spelter. 

In 1907, 66 per cent of the spelter of the United States was used 
for galvanizing, 17.75 per cent was used in brass making, and 13.25 
per cent was used in sheet-zinc making; and yet these consumers of 
97 per cent of all the spelter have not filed one single protest to a 
duty on zinc ore. 

1'he protests filed are by L. Vogelstein & Co., of New York, who, 
with their associates, control the spelter market of the United States ; 
by A. B. Cockerill, who testifies to owning six smelting plants; and 
by the Edgar Zinc Company^ and the New Jersey Zinc Company. 
These protests have been concurred in by other smelting companies. 

With the experience of the first-named firm we are unfamiliar, but 
Messrs. Cockerill and Edgar have accumulated considerable fortunes 
from small investments within the last several years from the smelting 
of the Joplin zinc ores, and have never had the advantage of buying 
cheap Mexican ores until within the last two or three years. 

On December 1, 1908, the New Jersey Zinc Company appeals to you 
not to protect zinc ore what they buy and on December 16, 1908, 
appeals for 1 cents duty on zinc dust what they sell. 

Zinc dust is their finished product. 

Zinc ore is our finished product. 

We have never known or the failure or financial embarrassment of a 
zinc-smelting concern, and Mathieson & Hegeler, who started with 
very small capital and have never smelted anything but Joplin ores, 
except a small amount of ore from the Wisconsin district, are now 
rated to be worth 310,000,000. Other smelting concerns have made 
proportionate profits. 

On the other hand, the money made in zinc mining is in small 
amounts by hundreds of individual operators. 

Taking the year 1907 as a fair year to all concerned and Mr. W. R. 
Ingalls, to whom the smelter men continually refer, as an authority, 
the smelters averaged to receive $14.84 for the metal contained in a 
ton of Joplin ore over and above what they paid the miner for that 
ton of ore. In Belgium the smelting charge for zinc ore averages 
about $10 per ton, and they do not there have the advantage of nat- 
ural gas, so it would seem the zinc smelter in the United States had a 
comfortable margin. (Reference, W. R. Ingalls in Engineering and 
Mining Journal.) 

There are 20 laborers engaged in the mining of zinc ore in the 
United States to 1 engaged as a laborer in smelting that ore. 
There are between 18,000 and 20,000 men engaged as laborers in 
zinc mining in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, every 
one of them an American. They have no labor union, yet they 
work but eight hours a day and average to earn from $2.75 to $3 
a day each. Many of them own their homes. Many of them are 
skilled laborers, operating power drills, hoisting engines, air com- 
pressors, and other machinery, and handling large quantities of 



8018 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

dynamite, where their own lives and the lives of their associates are 
constantly hi jeopardy. 

The statement that Mexican ore is needed as a flux hi smelting 
Joplin ores is absolutely false. Joplin ores have been successfully 
smelted for forty years without a pound of Mexican ores. The 
statement that Joplin ores are needed to smelt Mexican ores is 
equally false. 

Conflicting statements have been offered to your committee as 
to the cost of producing zinc ore in Mexico, and they are bound to 
be conflicting because of the different conditions under which zinc 
ore is produced. The cost of such ores can be obtained from the 
sworn value at the port of entry of the ores imported. 

The sworn average value of all zinc ores imported in 1907 was 
$13.14 per short ton. 

(Tonnages given hi your reference books are long tons.) 

The sworn average value of all zinc ores imported in 1908 was 
$10.89 per short ton. 

As some of this ore came from British Columbia and was valued 
above $10.89 per ton, the Mexican ore must have been worth less 
than that amount per ton. But figuring this ore at its sworn value 
at the border and the duty we are asking at $12 per ton (on 40 per 
cent ore) it would cost the smelter man $22.89 per ton at the border. 
Enough of this ore to equal a ton of Joplin ore would cost them 
$34.33, while the average cost of mining zinc in the Joplin district 
is $37.78 per ton. 

Therefore if the contention that we can not produce sufficient ore 
for spelter requirements should ever become true, the smelters could 
get their additional requirements from Mexico at no more cost than 
for the ore here, and the Government would be receiving a large 
revenue. The smelters have filed a brief in which they say it will 
be necessary to import 150,000 tons of ore in 1909 to supply the 
demand for spelter in the United States. If this is true, why should 
not the smelters contribute to the revenue of this Government by 
paying a duty on this ore, when they are protected with a duty on 
spelter? The fact that they could, with 1$ cent duty imposed, still 
buy enough Mexican ore to equal a ton of Joplin ore for $34.33 would 
also prevent the Joplin producer from demanding an exorbitant price 
for his ore. 

We have shown that Mexican ore is worth $10.89 per ton at the 
port of entry. This must include cost of production and miner's 
profit, as thousands of tons are being imported at this value while 
most of the Joplin mines are shut down. 

The actual average cost of producing zinc ore in the Joplin district 
is $37.78 per ton, of which $17.02 is labor, as against $3 per ton to 
labor in producing Mexican ore. 

There are over 600 mines in the Joplin district employing from 4 
men in small mines to 475 in the largest mine, and unless your com- 
mittee provides for the difference in the cost of labor in Mexico and 
in the United. States, the unavoidable result will be to deprive thou- 
sands of American laborers of a means of livelihood as well as to 
bankrupt commercial interests which run into millions of dollars, and 
this loss will extend to even- part of the United States. 

We believe that we are broad enough not to ask vou to protect 
what we sell, and put on the free list what we buy. We ask you to 



ZINC AND ZINC ORE. 8019 

give zinc ore the same protection you give spelter and no more. If 
you leave spelter with a duty of 1^ cents per pound, we ask for 1 cents 
per pound on the zinc contents of zinc ore, and we believe 1J cents 
per pound duty is necessary for the protection of both industries. 

Total production of ore in the Joplin district. 

Prior to 1879 $10,761,463 

1879 to 1889 20, 121, 862 

1889 to 1899 48, 837, 076 

1899 to 1909 101, 268, 000 



Total to date 180,993,401 

Production of Joplin district last eight years. 

1900 $7,986,628 

1901 7,929,230 

1902 9,318,418 

1908 9,381,150 

1904 11,695,973 

1905 13,531,655 

1906 15,128,175 

1907 15,419,927 

1908 11,063,707 

Respectfully submitted. * 

B. M. ROBINSON, Joplin, Mo. 
W. R. CAULKINS, Cartilage, Mo. 



DAVID D. HOAG, JOPLIN, MO., STATES THAT THE SHUTTING 
DOWN OF MISSOURI ZINC MINES HAS SERIOUSLY AFFECTED 
OTHER LINES OF INDUSTRY. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 20, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: The writer is the vice-president of the Consolidated 
Light and Power Company, of Joplin, Mo., which company serves 
the people of that and adjoining cities with light and power. 

In October last our company contracted with Henry L. Doherty 
& Co., of 60 Wall street, New York, to spend $6,000,000 in increas- 
ing the lighting and power of that district, and with a special view 
of furnishing cheap power to the mines in southwest Missouri, 
southeast Kansas, and northeast Oklahoma. 

A careful examination was made by expert engineers and it was 
found that there is more than one hundred thousand horsepower in 
use in the territory named. 

The first unit of our new plant, viz, the gas engines from Salem, 
Ohio, and electric generators from Schenectady, N. Y., are completed 
and are now being tested and will be ready for shipment March 1 . 

About three weeks ago our attention was called to a decision of the 
court of appeals at New Orleans admitting zinc ore free of duty, which 
has had the effect of closing down many of the mines in our district. 

If this condition continues we shall not be able to find a market for 
this surplus power, as there are no other considerable manufacturing 
industries in the territory herein named. 



8020 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

In New York engineers have made an exhaustive study of the 
Joplin zinc district and we have accurate information in regard to the 
zinc industry in that district. 

If the figures that we have compiled and the data we have secured 
will be of any service to your committee, we will be glad to furnish it 
to you. This information can be had either from Henry L. Doherty & 
Co., 60 Wall street, New York City, or from the writer at Joplin, ^<>. 

Respectfully submitted. 

DAVID D. HOAG, Joplin, Mo. 



ANCIENT ARMS AND ARMOR. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

BASHFORD DEAN, OF THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART, 
NEW YORK CITY, WISHES ANCIENT ARMS AND ARMOR AD- 
MITTED FREE OF DUTY. 

MARCH 8, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman of Ways and Means Committee, 

Congress of the United States, 

MY DEAR SIR : May I beg you to inform me whether in the process 
of revising the tariff schedule it would be practicable to consider the 
reduction of duty upon ancient arms and armor? Numerous inqui- 
ries have come to me from collectors, and I would be glad to know if 
a signed petition in this matter would aid to this end? And, in case 
you deem it advisable, whether a few minutes (say five minutes, or 
less) could be spared me in committee in which to present the case ? 
Your petitioners would maintain: 

1. That ancient arms (interpreted to include firearms antedating 
1815) do not concern the protection of American fabricants. 

2. That their study fosters American arts and crafts, inasmuch 
as it stimulates and suggests improvements and inventions in Amer- 
ican products, and. to this degree, in the improvement of arms, 
strengthens our national defense. 

3. That it is a fact that all private collections known to your 
petitioners are open (upon request) to the inquiring student. 

4. That the present duty (45 per cent act valorem) retards and 
even prevents this study tending to keep models of good work- 
manship out of the country. 

5. That, therefore, it is urged that the duty upon such objects 
(ancient arms and armor) be either abolished or at least materially 
reduced. 

If your honorable committee regards the former alternative non- 
consistent with the plan of a revenue tariff, may the suggestion be 
made that these objects or collections of these objects (not for sale) 
be admitted at such a rate, for example, as $100 per ton? Believe me, 
Very respectfully, 

BASHFORD DEAN, 
Curator, Department of Arms and Armor, 

Metropolitan Museum of Art. 



COPPER GOODS MOTORCYCLES. 8021 

COPPER GOODS. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

THE VULCAN COPPER WORKS COMPANY, CINCINNATI, OHIO, 
THINKS THAT THE PRESENT DUTY ON MANUFACTURES OF 
COPPER SHOULD BE RETAINED 

CINCINNATI, OHIO, January 22, 1909. 
CHAIRMAN, WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR : It has occurred to us that your committee may possibly 
advocate removing or modifying the tariff on our line of products. 
We most earnestly request that this should not be done, for the 
reason that our business will be greatly harmed if any modification 
should be decided upon. Our products are manufactured entirely by 
hand labor, for which we are obliged to pay $3.50 per day. The 
foreign manufacturer pays a maximum of $1 per day for this same 
class of labor. The cost of the raw material abroad is but a trifle 
more than it is here, and can not be considered as an offsetting factor. 

In view of these facts, it is obvious that if the present tariff on 
copper goods is modified or removed it will mean the invasion of this 
country by the foreign manufacturer, under which conditions it will 
be absolutely impossible for us to compete. 

Our products are all sold to large corporate interests who can easily 
afford to pay the higher prices which the American manufacturer is 
compelled to ask because of the greater labor cost to which he is 
subjected. 

We earnestly request that your committee take these facts under 
consideration, and allow the tariff on manufactured copper goods 
to remain as it is at present. 
Yours, very truly, 

THE VULCAN COPPER WORKS Co., 
H. O. WENTE, President. 



MOTORCYCLES. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

THE OVINGTON MOTOR COMPANY, NEW YORK, THINKS THERE 
SHOULD BE A REDUCTION OF DUTY ON MOTORCYCLES. 

2234 BROADWAY, NEW YORK, February 24, 1909. 
Hon. E. J. HILL, M. C., Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: As I happen to be an importer of motorcycles and as 
the possible lowering of the duty on this product is of great inter- 
est to me, I should like to say a few words on this subject. 

The machine I import sells for $350 and with one exception it is 
the most expensive machine which one can buy in America. The 
average motorcycle sells for $175 up to $250. A few specially 
constructed machines go higher than this. There are only two 
makes of motorcycles imported into the United States, namely, 
our own F. N. and the N. F. U. The duty is so abnormally high on 



8022 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

this class of goods that only motorcycles of a very special construc- 
tion can be brought into the United States and compete with the 
American products. 

It is unnecessary for me to remind you that a duty is placed upon 
imported goods as a protection to American labor. The duty 
should not be so high, however, as to afford American labor a monop- 
oly and that is what it is doing in the motorcycle business. The 
American automobile is slowly driving the foreign product out of 
the country, but in the case of the motorcycle, the American manu- 
facturer is manufacturing so cheaply and is taking advantage of 
the work done in the automobile field that a foreign machine never 
has been able to get very much of a foothold in this country. 

As a patriotic American citizen, I do not advise the withdrawal 
of the duty entirely on motorcycles, but I believe a duty of 20 or, 
at the most, 25 per cent woula be more than sufficient to protect 
the American workmen. 

I trust that you will give the above facts due consideration, for 
which I thank you in advance, 
Very truly, yours, 

EARLE L. OVINGTON, 

Ovington Motor Company. 



NICKELED GOODS. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

HON. GEORGE P. LAWRENCE, M. C., .FILES BRIEF OF THE GOODELL- 
PRATT COMPANY, GREENFIELD, MASS., RELATIVE TO NICKEL- 
PLATED ARTICLES AND FOREIGN TARIFFS. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 25, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee. 

MY DEAR SIR : I invite the attention of the Ways and Means Com- 
mittee to the inclosed letter from William M. Pratt, treasurer of 
the Goodell-Pratt Company, of Greenfield, Mass., proposing a provi- 
sion to be included in the forthcoming tariff bill fixing a rate of duty 
on nickel-plated articles coming from foreign countries high enough 
to meet the rates established by such countries on nickel-plated 
articles from manufacturers in the United States. 
Very respectfully, yours, 

GEO. P. LAWRENCE. 



GOODELL-PRATT COMPANY, 

Greenfield, Mass., January 22, 1909. 

Hon. GEORGE P. LAWRENCE, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: It occurs to me, in connection with the new tariff bill, 
which you read so much about and know so little about, that if we 
are really to have a maximum and minimum tariff there is one par- 
ticular feature that should be inculcated into it. This matter I am 



NICKELED GOODS SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS. 8023 

going to bring to } r our attention for such consideration as you think 
it deserves. It refers particularly to articles manufactured from 
metal. 

Several European countries, France and Germany in particular, 
charge a very much higher duty upon articles that are nickel plated 
than they do upon the same articles when finished plain, without 
nickel plating (or, to be exact and specific, with an infinitesimal 
amount of nickel plating on them.) 

On the face of it, this didn't appear to amount to much. In reality, 
it amounts to a great deal, for no importer in either of the countries 
above mentioned will take an article that has any nickel plate on it. 
The small fraction allowed is ignored completely because the foreign 
buyer says if there is any nickel plating on the tool at all it gives a 
chance for argument on the part of the appraiser. Disagreements 
continually arise that are not only annoying, but expensive. There- 
fore they must have their goods without any nickel plating on them. 
As a result, we are not able to give them as well-finished an article 
or as attractive an article as would otherwise be possible, and we are 
at a greater disadvantage when coming hi contact with the French 
and German competition in their home markets. 

Furthermore, an article not nickel plated tarnishes and'rusts more 
quickly and will not look as well after use; therefore we are unable 
to give to the consumers and users of those goods as great value as 
we would like to give them and as we could give them were it not 
for this particular provision which works so decidedly against us. 

Now, why can't we have in our tariff bill a provision charging a 
higher duty on nickel-plated articles than is charged on articles that 
have no nickel plate upon them when such articles emanate from 
countries imposing a similar discrimination upon products of the 
United States? 

This should be a point admittedly well taken by both sides. We 
can see no possible objection to it from the standpoint of either high 
or low tariff, and if it is possible and practical to embody in the forth- 
coming tariff bill a provision of this character its value along recip- 
rocal lines will be very great. 

I thank you for the courtesy of giving consideration to this matter, 
and beg to remain, 

Yours, faithfully, WM. M. PRATT. 



SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

SEABURY & JOHNSON, NEW YORK CITY, PROTEST AGAINST THE 
DUTY-FREE ADMISSION OF SURGICAL APPLIANCES. 

59-61 MAIDEN LANE, 
New York City, February 4, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We are manufacturers of medicinal and surgical 
apparatus and preparations supplying our wares to hospitals who 
consume a very large percentage of the output of our factory, to sur- 



8024 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

geons, physicians, and afflicted people, to the medical and sur- 

g'cal departments of the United States Army, Navy, and Marine- 
ospital Service, etc. 

This trade with the hospitals is a valuable one and its ln>* through 
-a successful competition by foreign goods admitted duty free, would 
very seriously affect this industry which has taken many years of 
exploitation to build up. 

We prepare for and sell to these interests millions of yards 
of aseptic and antiseptic gauze, vast quantities of absorbent cotton 
and medicated cottons, splints, and other dressings and appliances 
used in hospitals and medical and surgical practice. 

We beg leave, respectfully, to protest against the petition addressed 
to your honorable body asking that medical and surgical apparatus, 
appliances, utensils, instruments, and preparations imported by or for 
hospitals and other institutions, shall be admitted to the United 
States free of duty. 

We also respectfully protest against any reduction in the duty 
existing in the present tariff law, our protests being based as follows: 

The rate at which these goods are sold by us to hospitals and similar 
institutions returns only an exceedingly small profit, as the competi- 
tion amongst the various American manufacturers is very keen and 
prices to hospitals are made with the knowledge that considerable of 
their work is done on a philanthropic basis, which therefore demands 
the closest possible prices. 

Such goods admitted free of duty to the United States would 
probably most largely come from England, Germany, and Austria, 
where labor is but 40 to 50 per cent of the American wages, and the 
cost of materials as a rule much less than here. Were these foreign 
goods to enter duty free, the trade of the various American manu- 
facturers with these hospitals would be substantially wiped out, as the 
American manufacturers could not compete against the lower foreign 
cost of production, and a reduction in wage scale to the foreign level 
would be impractical. 

The greater number of hospitals throughout the country are private 
or semiprivate institutions, charging fees for treatment given, though 
some or these have departments wherein free treatment is accorded. 
A minor number give treatment without pay, but this latter class 
usually are municipal or state institutions, supported by city or State 
from funds derived from the American taxpayer. The foreigner con- 
tributes nothing thereto. 

It would be impossible to separate hospital supplies used for 
patients who pay for treatment from hospital supplies used in the 
same institutions for charity patients. Any such attempt would be 
open and prone to gross .abuse. 

Many physicians and surgeons obtain their medical and surgical 
supplies for use in their private practice from hospitals with which 
they are connected, securing supplies at the low prices made to hos- 
pitals, and should foreign goods for hospital use secure entry free of 
duty further serious effects to the American industry would result 
through the practice here mentioned. 

Many millions of dollars are invested in the United States in 
various American factories devoted to the preparation of medical 
and surgical apparatus, utensils, instruments, and preparations, 
including our own, and these have been built up by these large 



SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS. 8025 

investments supplemented by the devotion to scientific study and 
the use of expert knowledge, mechanical and chemicu! skill by 
specializing in these lines, so to speak, to the end that we and they 
should attain the highest development in the art of preparing these 
medical and surgical supplies. The importance of these home indus- 
tries is appreciated by the professional and lay people throughout 
the land; their importance to the municipal, state, and federal govern- 
ments in times of peace as well as in times of war should not be 
underestimated. 

Ap&rt from the absolute necessity that the duty on this class of 
goods shall be maintained in order that such American industries 
shall continue to live, we further protest against favoritism to the 
foreign interests of free entry, which foreign interests neither pay 
our taxes in times of peace nor fight our battles in times of war. 

The amendments sought introduce the terms "apparatus, appli- 
ances, and preparations," which can be interpreted to include all the 
medical and surgical manufactures heretofore mentioned. 

We would, however, offer no objections to such amendment of 
paragraph 638 of the present tariff law as would permit the entry free 
of duty ol philosophical and scientific apparatus, utensils, instru- 
ments, and preparations not made in this country, for hospitals 
devoted to giving treatment free to those patients unable to pay 
therefor. 

Respectfully submitted. 

SEABURY & JOHNSON, 
S. C. LEWIS, Secretary. 



BRIEF PRESENTED BY THE AMERICAN SURGICAL TRADE 
ASSOCIATION PROTESTING AGAINST REMOVAL OF DUTY 
FROM SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS. 

DETROIT, MICIJ., February 9, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: This association has been in existence eight years 
and has for its aims improving the quality, maintaining a uniformity 
of surgical instruments, reforming abuses, correcting .quality and 
designs and standardizing the same, and generally advancing the 
interest of the trade in surgical instruments and physicians' supplies 
in the United States. More advancement has been made since this 
organization was started than ever before in the same period. 

Therefore, as an association we most respectfully protest against 
the proposed amendment to paragraph 638 of the present tariff law. 

First. Members of this association employ many thousands in the 
manufacture of surgical instruments, appliances, and preparations 
as outlined in the amendment, and we feel certain by bringing this 
matter before your honorable body you will see our rights and not 
throw all the people engaged in this line of trade put of business. 

Second. We have found it difficult to advance this business in com- 
petition with the foreign market. We can not compete in wages, as 
they are more than double in this country what is paid for like work 
in Europe; and the adoption of this amendment would practically 



8026 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

annihilate our industry, .together with the effort that is being made 
in this country to create and market the advanced ideas of the med- 
ical profession; and while we are engaged in earning an honorable 
livelihood, there is no other industry that can boast more than we 
can, as all our manufactured products are for the relief of suffering 
humanity. 

Third. They are largely used by hospitals, surgeons, physicians, 
and the public, and many of our products, such as dressings, are pre- 
pared on a larger scale in this country than anywhere else in the 
world, and have attained the highest perfection in the United States. 
Therefore, we can only look upon this amendment as a discrimina- 
tion, wholly unfair, for a class such as is represented by hospitals to 
expect favors in the way of professional duties, as against the Ameri- 
can manufacturer and dealer, who expends his time and contributes 
his capital to be able at all times to 3upply the immediate wants of 
the hospital and surgeon. 

Fourth. Should your honorable body recommend the entry of 
goods duty free, according to the elastic terms used by the hospital 
association, it would compel every manufacturer, every dealer, to 
change his avocation, and it would stimulate this industry in other 
countries, principally Germany, for the reason that they would not be 
able to supply the American markets with their present facilities in 
tunes of peace; therefore, what would be done in times of war with no 
surgical instruments and no surgical dressings, appliances, or utensils 
manufactured in America? 

Fifth. The removal of 45 per cent duty on surgical instruments to 
asylums, hospitals, sanitariums, and other institutions would throw 
out of employment many thousands of wage-earners. The loss would 
far exceed the gain that the hospitals seek through this removal of 
the duty, as a very small percentage of our poor would be benefited. 

Sixth. Hospitals are business institutions, and while they aim at 
and do philanthropic work this percentage of philanthropic work is 
a very small percentage of the total. 

Seventh. Many hospitals are endowed, not with German money 
but with American capital, and usually donors of large amounts of 
money to hospitals make provision for charity work, which is the plea 
used ny the hospitals to secure this reduction. American hospitals 
endowed with American money by liberal American citizens should 
be patriotic .enough to lend their aid, encouragement, and patronage 
to American industry..'", . 

Eighth. The means do not justify the end. A much larger propor- 
tion of our American people would suffer by being thrown out of 
employment than would be benefited by the reduction. 

Ninth. Besides, the proposed amendment is a discrimination against 
the American manufacturer in favor of the German manufacturer 
who does not in any way contribute to the success of this country 
nor to the paying of the taxes by which many of our public institu- 
tions are maintained, and it would be a specific discrimination against 
a weak and growing industry in this country. 

Tenth. Gynecology had its start in America through Dr. J. 
Marion Sims, and the inventions of his instruments to suit his opera- 
tions. These are now used the world over, and our industry has not 
had enough protection so as to manufacture them in this country 
and export them from America; but we are compelled to import 



SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS. 8027 

them for the want of sufficient and low-priced labor. In other 
words we can not compete, at double the wages, with Germany. 

Eleventh. Surgical instruments are manufactured very largely by 
Germans in their own homes, where father, mother, sons, and daugh- 
ters all help in making their living. In America the mechanics 
desire well-equipped factories with all the modern conveniences. All 
this adds to the cost of manufacturing. 

Twelfth. Nothing is dearer to any human being than his own life, 
and as our semiprofession aims to create and manufacture all the 
known means of prolonging life, it would seem to us that we should 
not depend upon a foreign nation. 

Finally, as individuals and as an association, we enter our solemn 
protest against any change or amendment to the present tariff law as 
applied to paragraph 638. 

J. L. HARTZ, 
President American Surgical Trade Association, 

Composing a Membership of Two Hundred. 

This memorial is indorsed by the following: 

The Justrite Company, Chicago, 111. 

Victor Electric Company, Chicago, 111. 

George Ermold Company, New York, N. Y. 

H. J. Penfold Company, Omaha, Nebr. 

F. A. Hardy & Co., Chicago, 111. 

Charles Lentz & Sons, Philadelphia, Pa. 

William V. Willis & Co., Philadelphia, Pa. 

The Valzahn Company, Philadelphia, Pa. 

The Physicians Supply Company of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Gemrig & Sons, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Edw. A. Merkel, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Jos. C. Ferguson, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Schneider & Allen Company, Philadelphia, Pa. 

George C. Frye, Portland, Me. 

Max Wocher & Son Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

Electro Surgical Instrument Company, Rochester, N. Y. 

Wardle Brothers, Hudson, N. Y. 

Dutro & Hewitt, Memphis, Tenn. 

William Eisen, New York, N. Y. 

Woodard-Clark Company, Portland, Oreg. 

William Hatteroth, San Francisco, Cal. 

Powers & Anderson (Incorporated), Richmond, Va. 

F. H. Thomas, Boston, Mass. 

Becton, Dickinson Company, Rutherford, N. J. 

McKee Surgical Instrument Company, Washington, D. C. 

Physicians Supply Company, Kansas City, Mo. 

J. E. Hanger, Washington, D. C. 

H. D. Caputain, Chicago, 111. 

Truax, Greene & Co., Chicago, 111. 

Globe Manufacturing Company, Battle Creek, Mich. 

Scheidel- Western X-Ray Coil Company, Chicago, 111. 

Codman & Shurtleff, Boston, Mass. 

Blees-Moore Instrument Company, St. Louis, Mo. 

Sharp & Smith, Chicago, 111. 

Spear-Marshall Company, Chicago, 111. 



8028 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

CHARLES HEBER CLARK, OF CONSHOHOCKEN, PA., PROTESTS 
AGAINST DUTY-FREE ADMISSION OF SURGICAL SUPPLIES. 

CONSHOHOCKEN, PA., February 10, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We are manufacturers probably the largest in the 
world of supplies, appliances, and apparatus for the use of hospitals, 
surgeons, ordinary physicians, and afflicted people. 

We make for these interests many million yards of absorbent and 
medicated gaiize a year, many million pounds of absorbent and medi- 
cated cotton, and the following appliances: Surgical ligatures, adhe- 
sive plasters, metallic splints, cauteries, hypodermic syringes, cathe- 
ters, trusses, and physicians' thermometers in great quantities. 

We beg leave respectfully to protest against the petition addressed 
to your honorable body asking that "medical and surgical instru- 
ments, appliances, and apparatus" imported by and for the use of 
hospitals and other institutions shall be admitted to the "United 
States free of duty. We protest, further, against any reduction of 
the duties imposed upon such articles by the existing tariff law, and 
we protest for the following reasons: 

First. The words "appliances and apparatus" employed in the said 

Eetition are not words of precision. They are indefinite and obscure, 
ut far-reaching. Under any usual interpretation of the customs 
law they could be made to cover and include practically every article 
produced in our factories. We are confident that the result would 
be the complete destruction of our great business unless we should at 
once reduce the wages of all our work people (about 2,000 in number) 
to the German level. 

Second. What that level is, and what is the difference between the 
wages paid in our mills and in European mills engaged in a similar 
business, may be learned from the fact that while we pay from $1.25 
to $1.50 per day to a female weaver in our gauze mill, the best wage 
in Europe for such a worker, as we are informed, is 64 cents. A larger 
difference appears in the wages paid in other departments, according 
to the available evidence. 

Many girls in our mills earn from $10 to $14 per week, which is, we 
believe, much more than male workmen earn in German mills making 
similar appliances. 

But even with the wages cut to European rates the higher cost of 
many of the materials in this country would still put us at disadvan- 
tage with European competitors under free trade. 

Third. The things we make are for the relief of human suffering. 
Many of them ligatures, for example require scientific knowledge, 
accurately and with most scrupulous carefulness applied. 

We have that knowledge. We employ highly skilled men to direct 
the operations. Our factories and work people are kept in condi- 
tions of positive cleanliness. We have learned and we practice the 
rules governing the preparation of aseptic goods for use by surgeons 
and hospitals. 

We are in constant communication and cooperation with the best 
surgeons and physicians in the country, experimenting for them and 
having them experiment for us, and we spare no expense, no trouble, 
no cost of research or inquiry, to give to the medical profession the 
best that science can produce. 



SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS TEXTILE MACHINERY. 8029 

To this end, for example, we have begun the manufacture of catgut, 
because all imported catgut is more or less infected and can with 
dilliculty be completely sterilized for operations upon the human 
body. We sterilize it finally and completely in the process of mak- 
ing it. 

We are confident that if the door shall be opened wide for the 
importation of this and other materials for surgeons there will be a 
death penalty for multitudes, perhaps for hundreds of thousands, of 
Americans. 

No European manufacturer, we positively declare, has done so 
much as American manufacturers have done to carry toward the 
safety point, in preparation of surgical appliances and apparatus, the 
methods demanded by advanced modern science. 

Fourth. We ask you to consider that it is of vital importance to the 
nation that factories making these articles in large quantities should 
be encouraged and maintained hi the United States. 

The great suffering of the southern armies during the civil war 
because of lack of a supply of just these necessaries will be remem- 
bered. We may have a war with the very nations upon which we 
may, if our own productive forces shall be paralyzed, be dependent 
for such supplies. In war time the ability to procure at once and in 
abundance the things made in our factories will be as important as to 
have access to supplies of gunpowder. 

Fifth. We make no objection to, but on the contrary would wel- 
come, such amendment of paragraph 638 in the present tariff law 
as would permit hospitals conducted upon a benevolent basis to 
obtain free entry of philosophical and scientific apparatus not made 
in this country. 

Sixth and finally. None of our prices are unreasonable. There is 
sharp home competition which makes extortion impossible. BOCPAISG 
we recognize that hospitals are maintained in the interest of suffering 
humanity we are, and long have been, supplying to them our products 
at low and practically nominal prices, little above cost. 

CHAS. HEBER CLARK. 

(For Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, N. J., and J. Ellwood 
Lee Co., Conshohocken, Pa.) 



TEXTILE MACHINERY. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

EVAN ARTHUR LEIGH; IMPORTER, OF BOSTON, MASS., SUBMITS 
STATEMENT RELATIVE TO FOREIGN LABOR. 

232 SUMNER STREET, BOSTON, MASS., January 25, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. 'C. 

DEAR SIR: Since my attorneys, Messrs. Searle & Pillsbury, filed 
brief on duty on textile machinery, I have received information from 
English builders as to the American manufacturers' statement that 
during the life of the present tariff wages have decreased in England 
while they have increased 10 per cent to 20 per cent in the United 

61318 AP 09 19 



8030 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

States. My correspondent states positively that since 1897 wages in 
the textile machinery industry have increased 15 per cent and over 
and the cost of material has increased more than 10 per cent. The 
American manufacturers' statement as to decrease in English wages 
is not only false and misleading, but is proven so by the list of English 
wages submitted with their statement of November 25, 19C8. This 
list covers the period from 1890 to 1903, and shows an increase in all 
lines. Further, I beg to point out that in 1897 the American builders 
claimed that labor was 75 per cent of the total cost in this country, 
and asked that the duty be advanced from 35 per cent to 45 per cent 
to offset difference between English and American labor cost. They 
now claim that labor is 50 per cent of the American total cost, and also 
claim that since 1897 wages have increased 20 per cent, but still main- 
tain that 45 per cent will offset the difference in labor cost between 
England and America. This certainly shows that the American 
manufacturers are reducing the labor cost in the face of an advance in 
wages amounting to 20 per cent. 

Having decided in 1897 that a duty of 45 per cent afforded ample 
protection with a fair profit to the American manufacturer when 
labor cost was 75 per cent, how can they consistently ask for the same 
rate while admitting that the labor cost is 25 per cent less than in 
1893 to 1897? If the truth could be learned, it would show that the 
labor cost in American textile machine shops is considerably less 
than 50 per cent of the total cost, owing to the improved tools used 
and the low wages paid. 

Under a 45 per cent duty it is absolutely impossible for me to 
import English machinery at anything near the prices accepted by 
American makers, while in Canada, where I sell considerable machin- 
ery, the American builders are constantly supplying machinery at 
a lower price than I can accept. 

An American machine builder recently sold to a mill in Canada 
500 or 600 looms at 33 per cent less than the cost of similar looms 
made in England ; other American machines are quoted as low, and 
lower than the English, yet both countries pay 10 per cent duty hi 
Canada. This shows how much protection the American textile 
machinery industry really needs. As to prices in the United States, 
I have never been able to import a carding engine at less than $650, yet 
the American builders are constantly selling at $450 and under, and 
other machines in the same proportion. 

Yours, very truly, EVAN ARTHUR LEIGH. 



TIN CANS AND BOXES. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

THE AMERICAN CAN COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY, THINKS AD- 
DITIONAL PROTECTION NECESSARY FOR MAKERS OF TIN 
CANS AND SIMILAR CONTAINERS. 

NEW YORK CITY, February 16, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: The present tariff on tin cans, boxes, and containers 
falls far short of protecting the American manufacturer to the extent 
of the difference in cost of materials and labor abroad as compared 



TIN CANS AND BOXES AMERICAN CAN CO. 8031 

with the same costs in the United States. This oversight on the part 
of the framers of the present law was doubtless due more to the inat- 
tention of the manufacturers of this line of goods than any purpose 
to discriminate against this particular industry, and the reason or the 
failure of the manufacturers to properly present their claims at the 
time the law was enacted was unquestionably due to the fact that up 
to the time of that enactment and for a number of years thereafter 
there were no important importations of these packages. 

There has grown up in the last few years, however, quite an exten- 
sive trade in this country in imported packages of the kind described. 
Importations are becoming large and alarmingly frequent, and manu- 
facturers in the United States are powerless under the present law to 
prevent them or their rapid increase. Tin plate can be bought abroad 
for $2.70 per base box of 112 sheets 14 by 20, 100-pound basis, and 
present l| cents per pound duty is equivalent to a 55 per cent ad 
valorem rate, while these packages of which tin plate constitutes from 
90 per cent to 95 per cent of the material but 30 per ceni to 75 per 
cent of the total cost are dutiable at 45 per cent ad valorem . Under 
the present law, therefore, American labor employed in making these 
packages is inadequately protected, since the duty on the imported 
packages is less than on the material from which they are made. On 
plain packages the percentage of labor necessary to produce $1 worth 
of goods is on an average of about 25 per cent of the total cost, while 
on decorated packages the percentage of labor is up to 55 per cent, 
varying with the number 01 printings, and it is plainly evident that 
the duty on the plainest package should exceed that on tin plate and 
a proper schedule give an increased and greater duty on packages 
where labor constitutes a larger percentage of the total cost. On 
lithographed or decorated tin packages the position of the manufac- 
turer is similar to that of a manufacturer of lithographed paper or 
cardboard work, and assuming that paper and cardboard are worth 
about the same in foreign countries as here as much protection above 
the duty on tin plate as the whole protection given on lithographed 
paper or cardboard is justified. The foreign labor conditions of which 
and the necessity for revision of the present law are set forth in a 
brief of the National Association of Employing Lithographers has 
been filed with your committee. 

We attach affidavit of Mr. Felix Eberhart, a German- American 
who is as familiar with the cost of labor in Germany as in America, 
showing that the cost of labor in Germany on this line of manufac- 
ture is about 40 per cent of the American cost. We submit his com- 
parative schedule showing the rate of wages paid in the United States 
and Germany for the different classes of labor employed in the pro- 
duction of lithographed tin packages, and we also submit estimate 
of costs here and in Germany for decorated or lithographed tin 
packages which are now being imported. 

Another factor of importance to be considered in establishing 
proper protection to the American industry is the capital invested 
in the .United States and abroad to secure the same volume and 
character of output. The machinery employed in the production 
of these packages is to a great extent special, and it is a well-known 
fact that such machinery can be bought in England and Germany 
for a very much lower price than here in many instances enough 



8032 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

lower to justify purchase abroad and the payment of freight and 45 
per cent duty. 

Importations of filled containers may now be made at varying 
rates of duty, determined entirely by the nature of their contents. 
For instance: A package filled with crackers is charged with the 
same duty as crackers or 20 per cent ad valorem, whereas the same 
style and quality of package filled with tea can be imported free of 
duty. This induces the packing of these goods abroad in containers 
which cost less than American-made goods, and which, under the 
existing method of classification, are entered at less than the regular 
duty of 45 per cent on containers, per se. 

It is asked that the duty on tin boxes, cans, and containers shall 
be fixed as follows: 

First. A specific duty on the weight of the packages which shall 
be not less than 20 per cent more per pound than the duty levied on 
tin plates, the additional percentage being added to cover the waste 
in manufacturing the package from tin plate. This specific duty 
will but fairly protect the American manufacturer in respect to the 
principal maternal used in the manufacture of these packages, which 
is tin plate. 

Second. In addition to the specific duty as stated, an ad valorem 
duty of 40 per cent on plain tin packages, 65 per cent on lithographed 
or aecorated packages in less than six printings, and 90 per cent on 
decorated packages of six or more printings. 

These proposed rates will barely protect the American manufacturer 
and allow the present rates paid labor to the extent, first, difference 
in cost of material; second, difference in cost of labor; third, difference 
in hi vestment allowing the same, and a moderate rate of profit to 
home and foreign manufacturers. 
Respectfully, 

AMERICAN CAN COMPANY, 
By F. RUDOLPH, Vice-President. 
A. J. MARCUSE, 
Assistant General Sales Agent. 



EXHIBIT A. 

Estimate of costs in the United States and in Germany for decorated or lithographed tin 
packages whifh are now being imported. 





American. 


German. 


Tin color boxes 


$24.25 


$13.48 


Tin cigarette boxes printed in six colors. 


9.55 


5.2t> 


Tin talcum powder boxes printed in seven colors 


20.07 


9.22 


Tin tobacco ooxes printed in six colors.. .. . 


11.07 


6.82 









EXHIBIT B. 

STATE OF NEW YORK, County of New York, ss: 

Felix Eberhart, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I reside in Harrsion, N. J. I 
was born in Wurttemberg, Germany, and am 43 years of age. I have resided in this 
country twenty-six years. I have prepared the following average comparative 
schedule, showing the wages paid in the United States and in Germany for the dif- 
ferent classes of labor employed in the production of lithographed tin packages, as 



TIN CANS AND BOXES TUNING PINS. 



8033 



near as I could ascertain the same from observation when I was in Germany three 
yc-irs ago. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the same is a correct state- 
ment of the conditions at that time. 







American rate 
per week. 


German rate 
per week. 


Stone grinders.... 


Lithographing. 


$15. 00-118. 00 


$4. 00-$6. 00 


Lithographers, inclu 


ding transferrers and pressmen ; 


20.00- 25.00 


8. 00-10. 00 


Engravers .. 




25.00- 35.00 


9.00-12.00 


Feeders 




9.00- 13.00 


4. 00- 4. 50 


Flyers 




6. 00- 8. 00 


1.50-2.50 


Apprentices 




4.00- 8.00 


() 


Feeder and flyer 


Coating-machine operations. 


8. 00- 9. 00 


2.00- 3.00 


Foreman 


Manufacturing labor. 


18. 00- 35. 00 


5 00-10 00 











o Nominal. 

Based on above comparison and estimating the output of the German competitor 
to be the same as the American, I figure the German labor cost to be about 40 per 
cent of the American. To the best of my knowledge and belief, a like proportion 
holds good in the other branches of the manufacture of tin cans. 

FELIX EBERHART. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 16th day of February, 1909. 
[SEAL.] WILLIAM D. FOSTER, 

Notary Public, New York County. 



TUNING PINS. 

[Paragraph 193.] 

THE AMERICAN MUSICAL SUPPLY COMPANY, JERSEY CITY, 
SUGGESTS SPECIFIC ENUMERATION OF TUNING PINS. 

THE AMERICAN MUSICAL SUPPLY 

COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY, 

20-26 MORRIS STREET, 
Jersey City, N. J., February 27, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, 

Washington, D. C. 

SIR : This company has been engaged in the manufacture of tuning 
pins, commonly known as piano tuning pins and zither tuning pins for 
the past twelve years. 

Our company is capitalized at $100,000, and the value of our plant 
and open accounts ranges between $50,000 and $60,000. We average 
from 35 to 40 employees on our pay roll, two-thirds of whom are boys 
and girls ranging from 16 to 20 years, and the balance are men. 
Our average pay roll is upward of $15,000 per annum. 

Our concern is the only one manufacturing tuning pins in this 
country. We are in competition with tuning pins which are manu- 
factured in Germany. When we started in the business twelve years 
ago, the price of tuning pins ranged from $3.25 to $3.75 per thousand 
pins. As soon as our competition commenced to be felt the price was 



8034 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

gradually reduced until at the present time it ranges from $2.25 to 
$2.75 per thousand pins. During the past year the prices of the 
imported pins were reduced about 15 per cent, and we have been 
obliged to accordingly reduce our prices in order to meet this ruinous 
foreign competition. Judging by our knowledge of the prices at 
which timing pins are sold in Germany and other European countries, 
we are convinced that the imported pins are greatly undervalued. 
We understand that these pins are subject to dutv at 45 per cent ad 
valorem under paragraph 193 of the Dingley tariff act. 

For your information we beg to state that the cost of the pins manu- 
factured in Germany as compared with ours, all expressed in United 
States currency, is as follows: 

Average cost per 1,000 pins, all sizes. 





Germany. 


United 
States. 




$0.71 


$1. 




.39 


1.24 








Total 


1.10 


2.32 









The average selling price for the past six months in the United 
States has been less than $2.50 per 1,000 pins. Without taking into 
consideration the interest on our investment, you will observe from 
the foregoing figures that the average difference in cost of manufacture 
between the German tuning pins and our own is about $1.22 per 
thousand pins. This difference in cost is principally on account of 
labor, the German labor cost being less than one-third of ours. We 
pay more in this country in weekly wages to the boys and girls we 
employ than is paid in the German factories to the men employed 
there; and to the men employed by us, all of whom are experienced 
mechanics and good workmen, we are obliged to pay three times as 
much in labor as is paid to like workmen in the German factories. 

We would also call your attention to the fact that our raw material 
costs us on the average 50 per cent more than the German manufac- 
turers have to pay for theirs. As our company is distinctly an Ameri- 
can enterprise, employing American workmen, using only American 
material, we claim that we are entitled to a reasonable "amount of 
protection, equivalent at least to the difference between the foreign 
cost of production and our own, plus a reasonable profit. In view 
of the fact that undervaluation is very easily practiced in this com- 
modity, we respectfully request that you malce a special provision in 
the proposed new tariff covering tuning pins. 

The costs mentioned above relate only to tuning pins, blued, bright, 
or tinned. Nickel-plated pins, which are used to a limited extent, 
cost about 75 per cent more to manufacture both in Germany and 
this country. In view of these facts, we respectfully suggest that the 
following provision be included in the new tariff bill. 

Tuning pins of iron, steel, or other metal, for pianos, zithers, or other similar musical 
instruments, plain, blued, bright, or tinned, $1.50 per 1,000 pins. 
All of the foregoing, nickel plated, $1 per 1,000 pins extra. 

The foregoing provision will enable us to continue in business in 
competition with the foreign pin manufacturers, employing low- 
priced foreign labor, and preserve for the American workman now 



TUNING PINS BISMUTH. 8035 

employed in this industry the reasonable standard of wages they are 
now receiving; at the same time only a fair return can be obtained 
on the comparatively large amount of capital invested in the business. 
During the past twelve years since we have been engaged in this 
business we have been obliged to fight very hard in competition with 
the foreign manufacturers to gain a foothold and establish ourselves 
in the trade. During all of this time we have been obliged to meet 
constantly reducing prices until at the present time the foreign 
material is being offered in this country at figures which, on many 
sizes of these pins, are lower than our cost. We feel confident, there- 
fore, that your committee will give our case the consideration it 
deserves and grant to us the measure of protection we ask for, thus 
assuring the continuation of this industry in this country, 
liespectfully, 

THE AMERICAN MUSICAL SUPPLY COMPANY. 
Per F. HESSMER, Secretary. 



BISMUTH. 

[Paragraph 495.] 

THE MONSANTO CHEMICAL WORKS, ST. LOUIS, SUGGESTS NEW 
PARAGRAPH TO PROVIDE FOR DUTY ON BISMUTH. 

1800 SOUTH SECOND STREET, 

St. Louis, February 22, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Referring to the brief on bismuth we filed with your 
committee November 18, 1908, our attention has been called to the 
fact that if you act favorably on our application for revision on the 
present tariff on this metal there is an opening for a misconstruc- 
tion of the paragraph we proposed, reading: 

Lead bullion or base bullion containing ninety-five per centum lead or less, two and 
one-eighth cents per pound on the lead contained therein : Provided, That in levying and 
collecting the duty on lead, duty shall also be levied and collected on any other duti- 
able material contained therein. 

We therefore suggest the following to replace the above paragraph : 

Lead bullion or base bullion containing ninety-five per centum lead or less, per 

pound on the lead contained therein: Provided, That in levying and collecting the 
duty on lead, duty shall also be levied and collected on any other dutiable material 
contained therein: Provided, That in no bullion containing bismuth shall such bis- 
muth be dutiable unless such bismuth is equal to or exceeds seventy-five per centum 
of said bullion. 

We sincerely trust you will give our application for a duty on 
bismuth the kind consideration it deserves, by reason of the fact that 
if a duty is put on this metal it can not possibly affect any consumer 
by reason of the comparatively small quantities in which it is con- 
sumed, and it will have the effect of building up a new industry in 
this country at the expense of a foreign monopoly, which at the present 
time exists, as stated in our brief. 
Very respectfully, 

MONSANTO CHEMICAL WORKS, 
Per JNO. F. QUEENY, President. 



8036 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

VARIOUS METALS. 

THE VIRGINIA ELECTROLYTIC COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY, 
SUGGESTS RATES FOR ALUMINUM, BARIUM, CALCIUM, MAG- 
NESIUM, SODIUM, AND POTASSIUM. 

99 CEDAR STREET, 
New York City, February 8, 1909. 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Aluminum is now subject to a duty of 8 cents a 
pound. Magnesium is on the free list. The other metals are subject 
presumably to 20 per cent ad valorem as unenumeratcd metals. 

The Virginia Electrolytic Company is interested as an actual pro- 
ducer of sodium and because it has developed processes for the reduc- 
tion of several of the other metals including aluminum, which pro- 
cesses with minor changes are applicable to all. 

Two of the metals, aluminum and sodium, are now very largely 
produced in the United States. These industries have been possible 
oecause of the patents of Hall and Castner, respectively, which pat- 
ents, both American and foreign, will expire shortly. Also because, 
in the case of sodium, of certain international trade arrangements. 

The ore from which each metal is made, is found in the United 
States as well as abroad, and so far competition is on a fairly even 
basis. 

All the metals are best produced by electrolytic processes. This 
is expensive, as may be judged from the fact that one electrical horse- 
power working continuously for a year w T ill produce from 200 pounds 
to 500 pounds a year, according to the metal. 

As we have in the United States all the ores needed, and water 
powers to supply the electricity needed, there can be no doubt that 
each metal will be produced here, provided that the requisite scien- 
tific skill exists, and provided also that a reasonable measure of tariff 
protection is granted. 

As to the skill: Hall and Castner, who invented the processes for 
making aluminum and sodium, were both young Americans graduated 
in our technical schools. It may be said generally that electrochem- 
ical science at large is well advanced in this country as compared with 
its conditions in other countries. 

As to the protection needed: The cost of ores, as already stated, 
may be neglected, the cost here and abroad being about the same. 

The cost of electro-hydraulic installations is greater in this country 
because of the higher first cost of turbine wheels, etc., and of dynamos 
and electrical appliances at large ; also because of the higher heads of 
water available in the European countries where electro-hydraulic 
establishments exist, to wit, in Switzerland, and the Alpine por- 
tions of France, Italy, Germany, and Austria, and in the Scandinavian 
countries. The lowest figure at which electrical current can be bought 
in this country is from $12 to $18 per horsepower per year. ' In Europe 
it can be bought at from $7 to $12. 

Presumably the cost of like installations in the United States and 
in Europe will continue to be divergent in favor of Europe so long as 
labor is lower in the latter and so long as the supply of water at high 
heads holds out there. We have few high heads in this country. 



VARIOUS METALS VIRGINIA ELECTROLYTIC CO. 8037 

The cost of labor: We are advised as the result of inquiries in 
Europe by members of our own sir. T that common labor in the Alpine 
and Scandinavian districts runs from 40 to 70 cents a day. In our 
country it runs from $1 to SI. 50 a day. Higher grade labor is more 
expensive proportionately with us. 

Assuming that the cost of electricity is 50 per cent greater in the 
United States and that labor is 50 per cent higher (both of these 
figures understate the actual differences) and that the ores or mate- 
rials do not represent more than 20 per cent of the ultimate cost 
(which is likely to be true, excepting in the case of aluminum, where 
the cost of ore may be 40 per cent), all on the basis ot the American 
cost, it is obvious that duties of from 50 per cent to 70 per cent are 
needed if the industries are to be permanently conducted in our 
country. Even so, the outlook for American plants could not be 
considered good, if one left out of view certain advantages that the 
home producer has as being nearer to the home market, the belief 
that manufacturing costs in the long run tend to equalize themselves 
the world over, and the hope that American skill is likely to prove 
greater and American labor more efficient than European skill and 
labor. 

The Virginia Electrolytic Company believes, as respects the metals 
in question, that any duty decided upon should be specific, not ad 
valorem. Its reasons for this belief are as follows: In the history 
of metals produced by chemical and electrolytic methods the cost 
to the consumer is high at first because sales are limited and processes 
are not perfected. Take, for instance, aluminum; it sold in early 
years at $2 a pound or more. It is now made in Europe possibly 
for 11 cents and in the United States for 16 cents per pound. A duty 
of 50 per cent ad valorem in the early days would have imposed a 
serious burden on consumers. The actual duty of 8 cents per pound 
has, on the other hand, proven high enough to give the industry a 
great start in our country. Magnesium is another instance. It 
now sells in Europe for $1 per pound. It may be made in this 
country, as we believe, for 29 cents a pound. So long as the Euro- 
peans keep up their price, obviously American producers would 
need no duty. When they get their cost down to a possible 17 
cents, obviously American producers will need protection. 

In all Jlie special metal trades continental producers have now 
combinations that work out results similar to our so-called trusts. 
These combinations are effected under the guise of selling agencies. 
The producers unite in the given combinations. Prices are made 
and production limited, if need be, by them. Excess supplies are 
shipped abroad rather than thrown on the home market. Our 
country is a favorite dumping ground. Obviously, specific duties 
rightly based will be more just to consumers and to producers, under 
J:hese circumstances, while the given industries are young, and as 
well in the time when production and competition are in the stages 
of more perfect development. 

In the following table we place the approximate ultimate cost of 
the metals named in this country and the approximate ultimate 
cost in Europe. 



8038 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 





In the 
United 
States. 


In Europe. 




$0.10 


10.11 




.375 


.215 




.375 


.215 




.29 


.175 




.145 


.095 




.26 


.18 









These figures are bused on cost of processes now in use. Of course 
the cost of some of the metals may become lower hereafter by the 
development of better processes. 

Taking the figures of present cost, it may be that the existing duty 
of 8 cents a pound on aluminum could be safely cut down to 6 cents. 
The other metals should bear duty as follows (no allowance being 
made for profit, because it may be assumed that producers on both 
sides will not sell without some profit): 

Barium $0. 16 

Calcium 16 

Magnesium 115 

Potassium 08 

Sodium 05 

We believe these duties would be just. 

We believe also that the metals would be cheaper to American con- 
sumers at no distant date if these duties should be levied than other- 
wise, for common sense teaches and experience demonstrates that 
merchandise sells lowest in our country when protection is high 
enough to enable our people to enter upon the manufacture of the 
given article, provided always, of course, that duties are not made so 
high as to encourage combinations. 

It remains to say that all of the industries named call for heavy 
outlays of capital. The cost of an installation to make a metal that 
yields one-half of a pound per horsepower per day is, say, $150. To 
produce 1 ton a day would call for a plant costing $150, multiplied by 
4,000 equals $600,000. This calculation is based on the proposition 
that the given manufacturer owns his own hydro-electric installa- 
tion, whicn at $150 per horsepower is cheaper than to pay the usual 
rate of $15 a year for electric current. , 

All the industries named are large consumers of labor proportion- 
ately to value of output, as well as very heavy consumers of elec- 
tricity. As they may be established at points where electric current 
has no other market, their usefulness in giving employment to labor 
which would have few opportunities otherwise is manifest. Trans- 
portation facilities of course are needed, but they often exist in 
districts remote from centers of population and in mountain territory 
where agriculture even presents no attractions. 

The metals named are important elements in commercial enter- 
prises. The uses of aluminum are well known. Magnesium will 
become almost equally important. Sodium is used in making 
cyanide, which material has given a great influx to the production of 
precious metals. Calcium is likely to have important uses in the 
production of high-grade steel. Barium has various uses. Potas- 
sium may be used along the same lines as sodium. In our struggle 



VARIOUS METALS ANTIMONY ORE. 8039 

for a standing in manufactures and commerce we can not afford to 
neglect them. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 

THE VIRGINIA ELECTROLYTIC Co., 
By GEO. F. SEWARD, President. 



ANTIMONY ORE. 

[Paragraph 476.] 

HON. JOSEPH M. DIXON, SENATOR, RECOMMENDS THE IMPOSI- 
TION OF A PROTECTIVE DUTY ON ANTIMONY ORE. 

MARCH 11, 1909. 
Hon. S. E. PAYNE, M. C., 

Washington, D. C. 

MY DEAR MR. PAYNE: I had intended before this bringing to the 
attention of the Republican members of the Ways and Means Com- 
mittee of the House what seems to me an important item that should 
go in the new tariff schedules. I hope it is not too late to have a 
duty on antimony ore included in the tariff bill that will be reported 
by you to the House. 

At the suggestion of a number of mining men in the West, I wish 
to especially call your attention to the present unfortunate condition 
of the tariff schedule as it affects the production of antimony in 
the United States. While the present tariff law provides for a duty 
of three-quarters of a cent per pound on the antimony metal, it 
places antimony ores on the free list. The result of this arrangement 
has been that practically no antimony metal is being produced in the 
United States from our own ores, 99 per cent of the metal produced 
here being made from the cheap ores imported from Asia, Turkey, 
Germany, and Mexico. 

The importations of antimony ore of recent years, in pounds, has 
been as follows : 

1904 2,409,897 

1905 2, 087, 136 

1906 1, 759, 295 

1907 3, 053, 082 

1908 1, 682, 774 

The importations of the metal during this time, in pounds, has 
been : 

1904 3, 930, 879 

1905 .' 4, 523, 281 

1906 7, 091, 318 

1907 8, 810, 197 

1908 8, 046, 116 

The value of the importations during these years in ore and metal 
has been as follows : 

1904 $247,700 

1905 363, 286 

1906 849, 285 

1907 2, 132, 366 

1908 764,461 



8040 SCHEDULE C METALS, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

The entire antimony trade is now controlled by. one house, the 
mother house, Cookson & Co., boin^ in England; and their house in 
the United States, I think, is Halls Brothers & Co. The United 
tes factory, where the imported ore is manufactured into the metal 
is on Staten Island, an establishment formerly owned by Mathison & 
Co., who were forced to sell to the English outfit or be crushed !>y 
them. As the matter now stands in the United States, this one outfit, 
with the metal protected by a tariff of three-quarters of a cent per 
pound, buys no ore in the United States, but imports it from Asia, 
Mexico, and the countries above mentioned, where the ore is mined 
with labor that is paid not over 25 cents per day. The sharpest com- 
petition for the American antimony comes from Japan and China. 
The importations of antimony ore is made in the form of a li'.rii tte; 
that is, the crude antimony sulphide is reduced to a imtte containim* 
about 65 per cent of antimony, the balance sulphur and some arsenic 
and iron. 

Against these half-finished concentrates made by Chinese or 
Japanese or Mexican labor the American mines are in urgent ne?d of 
protection. 

The fact that we have been wholly at the mercy of the foreign 
antimony market has made the price of the metal in this country most 
erratic, ranging from 10 cents in 1902 to 25 cents in 1906 and 1907, 
and about 16 cents in 1908. The Russian-Japanese war was the 
cause for the great rise in price during 1906-7, antimony being exten- 
sively used in the manufacture of fixed ammunition, and the liussian- 
Japanese war creating a tremendous demand for the metal during 
that conflict. 

Antimony is chiefly used in the production of babbitt metal, as an 
alloy with lead for the manufacture of certain hard kinds of lead pipe, 
for hard lead for fixed ammunition and shrapnel and for type metal. 
It is also largely used as a coloring matter and in the manufacture of 
porcelain. 

The present tariff schedule operates most effectively to create an 
absolue trust in the antimony metal market in the United States. A 
more perfect schedule could not have been devised for the purpose of 

Eutting the whole antimony trade into the hands of one outfit than 
as been done by the present schedules, putting the duty on metal 
and allowing the free importation of the ore and matte. 

CAN THE UNITED STATES FURNISH ANTIMONY ABUNDANTLY AND 
CHEAPLY FROM ITS OWN MINES? 

The Asiatic and Mexican importers of antimony ore and the con- 
cern controlling the antimony metal in the United States will possibly 
say "no." As a matter of fact, antimony ores are scattered in wide 
profusion in large deposits all over the Rocky Mountain States; 
immense bodies of antimony ores are found in Utah, Nevada, Idaho, 
Washington, Montana, California, Oregon, Colorado, Wyoming, 
Arkansas, and Alaska. .. 

The United States Geological Survey Reports for 1906 and 1907 
show in detail the location of the different deposits of antimony 
through the Rocky Mountain States. Millions of tons of antimony 
ore are in sig^ht ready for extraction and shipment in a dozen different 
States, but it is impossible to successfully mine and ship this ore to 



ANTIMONY ORE HON. JOSEPH M. DIXON. 8041 

market in competition with Asiatic and Mexican ore that is mined 
with a wage scale of 25 cents per day as against $3.50 per day paid in 
all of the mining camps of the West. 

The same argument that puts lead ore, iron ore, and zinc ore on 
the protected list applies with equal force to antimony ore. The 
present tariff schedules place a duty on granite, sandstone, and lime- 
stone of 12 cents per cubic foot; on marble 65 cents per cubic foot; 
mica, 6 cents per pound; iron ore, 40 cents per ton; lead ore, 1 cents 
per pound. 

In fact antimony ore is about the only metal that is found in large 
quantities sufficient to cover the demand for all commercial purposes 
in the United States on which a tariff duty is not levied for the pro- 
tection of the home market. 

A small duty placed upon antimony ore, retaining; the duty on the 
antimony metal, would immediately result in the mining within the 
United States of all the antimony now used in this country. 

The report of the Secretary of the Treasury shows that during the 
year 1907, the last year when imports were at a normal condition, 
that $2,097,285 was paid to foreign producers of antimony ores and 
metal, which should have been paid to our own miners in the United 
States. 

I would most respectfully urge upon you, as chairman of the Ways 
and Means Committee, the importance of remedying present con- 
ditions in this particular line of business. 

The 10 States of the Rocky Mountain country in which antimony 
is found are nearly all Republican States. At the present time the 
only immediate beneficial results from a protective tariff policy to 
the people of these States is the duty levied on wool, hides, coal, and 
lead. On behalf of these people I ask the favorable consideration 
of the Republican members of the Ways and Means Committee to 
the end that antimony metal and ore shall receive the same consid- 
eration in the new tariff schedules as shall be accorded to lead and 
zinc, as the duty on the metal without a corresponding duty on the 
antimony ores simply results in putting the whole control in the 
hands of one companv and preventing the building up of what should 
be one of the profitable industries of the West. 

Our people have so few products that are protected at this time 
that this would be an added inducement to continue in the faith that 
we all believe to be for the best interests of the country. 
Yours, very truly, 

Jos. M. DIXON. 



SCHEDULE D-WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



LOSSES IN LUMBER BUSINESS. 

THE MISSOURI LUMBER AND MINING COMPANY, GRANDIN, MO., 
SUBMITS STATEMENT SHOWING THE NET RESULTS OF ITS 
BUSINESS FOR ONE YEAR. 

GRANDIN, Mo., February 2, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: As you have some evidence and copies of pay rolls 
from the Missouri Lumber and Mining Company, I want to inclose 
you a statement of our business for 1908. It is the first time that we 
have been wholly on the wrong side of the ledger, although in the 
year 1897 we only made $5,000 for our total profit and interest on 
half a million dollars of capital. This last year, 1908, we have lost 
the interest on dur capital and $34,000 besides. 

I have asked the Bureau of Corporations to send an expert to 
examine our books and to examine the books of other lumber manu- 
facturers, and Mr. Herbert Knox Smith has promised to send out 
some men for this purpose in a few days. 

I know that you have worked hard and are tired, but these facts 
are important and in the interest of forest conservation and in the 
interest of yellow pine lumber manufacturers. I beg you to kindly 
consider the statements which I have made in the paper which I 
herewith inclose you. 

Yours, truly, J. B. WHITE, 

President and General Manager 
Missouri Lumber and Mining Company. 

MISSOURI LUMBER AND MINING COMPANY, GRANDIN, MO. 

Exposition of profit and loss for 1908. 

Detail cost of manufacturing and selling lumber: 

Tramroad depreciation $51, 287. 68 

Cutting and skidding 76, 970. 63 

Mill stocking 12, 368. 64 

Sawmill expen-e 40, 657. 58 

Dry kiln expense _., 7,553.56 

Yard expense .T.'.T , 27, 071. 96 

Planing mill expense 21,663.47 

Shipping expense 13, 216. 80 

Electric-lishts account 737. 79 

Office expense 3, 930. 97 

Lumber expense 23,770.68 

Cost of manufacturing and selling, per detail 339, 229. 76 

Stumpage, at $3 per M b. m. Cr. to pine" lands 93, 338. 99 

Taxes (lumber), $2,049.43; insurance, 56.955.75 9, 005. 18 

Lumber sawed on contract 496. 39 

Lumber purchased 32, 543. 11 

474, 613. 43 

8043 



8044 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Received for 1,612 care, 31,134,334 feet, shipped. $566, 654. 38 
Received for 563,899 feet used at Grandin 8, 390. 67 

Total sales, 31,698,233 feet 575, 045. 05 

Increase in stock January 1, 1909, over January 
1, 1908 19,905.57 

594, 950. 62 

Leas freight, $125,410.02, and discount, $6,975.68. 132, 385. 70 

$462, 564. 92 

- $12, 048. 51 

Sundry losses and expenses: 

Coal account 8, 036. 98 

Building repairs and expense 5, 066. 35 

Water works, active 514. 79 

Steam heating, active 767. 09 

Machine shop ' 650. 10 

Yard teams 2, 074. 27 

Log teams 2, 257. 78 

Hunter farming '. 1, 469. 03 

Hotel account 712. 56 

Tie contract account 1, 814. 19 

General improvement expense 211. 81 

General expense 9, 029. 79 

Legal expense 4, 901. 08 

Preaching and churches 1, 759. 34 

Charity account 31. 00 

Interest and exchange 1, 727. 24 

Oak lumber account 5, 766. 32 

Sundries in profit and loss account 1, 361. 93 

48,151.65 

Store No. 10 account: 

Cost of merchandise bought 1908 22, 159. 21 

Labor and expenses 5, 146. 21 

Decrease in stock January 1, 1909, under January 1, 1908. . . 78 

27, 306. 20 

Sales for 1908. ! 25, 272. 20 

2, 034. 00 
Total depreciation (exclusive of tram roads) 25, 056. 39 

87, 290. 55 

Lath account: 

Received for 8,962,850 laths sold 25,746. 99 

Decrease in stock January 1, 1909, under January 1, 1908. . 884. 85 

24, 862. 14 
Less freight, $7,145.69, and discount, $232.39 7, 378. OS 

17, 484. 06 

Cost to manufacture, sell, and ship. .'. 14, 064. 76 

3, 419. 30 

Store account: 

Grandin store sales, 1908 $152, 408. 11 

Decrease in stock January 1, 1909, under Jan- 
uary 1, 1908 4, 346. 50 

- 148, 061. 61 
Cost of merchandise during year 113, 693. 64 

34 367 97 
Labor, $12,206.82; expense, $3,774.17; freight, $6,668.07; 

insurance, $536.95; taxes, $373.47. . .'. 23, 559. 48 

10,808.49 



LOSSES IN LUMBER - LABOR IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 8045 

Store No. 9 account: 

Sales for 1908 .............................. $48, 761. 73 

Increase in stock January 1, 1909, over Janu- 
ary 1, 1908 ................................ 2, 761. 68 

- 51,523.41 
Cost of merchandise during year ......................... 38, 862. 58 

12, 660. 83 
Expense and labor .................................... 4, 564. 93 

- $8,095.90 
Sundry 



Supply account ....................................... 49. 02 

Rent account .......................................... 21, 939. 96 

Shop No. 1 ..................................... .' ...... 1,922.49 

Shop No. 2 ............................................ 1, 522. 38 

Shop No. 5 ....... . .................................... 793. 01 

Shop No. 6 ............................................ 57. 56 

Dairy farming ......................................... 70. 38 

Farming .............................................. .87 

Hub contract account .................................. 2, 803. 22 

Picket account ......................... ................ 326. 63 

Shingle account ....................................... 1, 040. 13 

- 30,525.65 

52, 849. 34 



Total loss on lumber and sundry losses and expenses 87, 290. 55 

Total profit on lath, stores, and sundry earnings 52, 849. 34 



Net loss, exclusive of interest on capital 34, 441. 21 

6 per cent interest on capital of $300,000 30, 000. 00 

Total loss 64, 441. 21 



LABOll IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 

THEODORE M. KNAPPEN, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., FILES SUP- 
PLEMENTAL STATEMENT RELATIVE TO ORIENTAL LABOR 
IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 

MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., February 4, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: We have put in a good deal of time trying to secure 
additional information as to the matter of employment of oriental 
labor in British Columbia sawmills and also in those of Washing- 
ton. It is rather difficult to secure this information by correspond- 
ence, however, because we find the Canadian lumbermen are very 
loth to supply us with information for fear that it will be inferred 
that they are trying to take a hand in the agitation for the repeal 
of the United States tariff. We have, however, succeeded in getting 
some data that may interest you. Mr. H. D. Blackford, who rep- 
resents the Brooks-Scanlon Lumber Company, of Minneapolis, at 
Vancouver, .writes as follows : . 

I note that some of the Washington lumbermen claim that there are 80,000 orientals 
working in British Columbia. The immigration department at Victoria informs me 
that the total number in British Columbia and the Yukon, which by the way is a terri- 

61318 AP 09 20 



8046 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

tory nearly as large as the United States, is as follows: Japanese, 12,000; Hindoos, 
3,000; Chinese, 18,000. 

Of the 12,000 Japanese, it is estimated lhat about 2,000 have smuggled themselves 
into the States. Six or seven thousand are engaged in fishing. Three or four thou- 
sand work in lumber mills, on railroads, and as porters around saloons, hotels, clubs, 
or keep stores. 

Of the 3,000 Hindoos that came here there are about 2,500 left. They are British 
subjects, work in mills, work on road work and clearing land, and all kinds of gen- 
eral labor. 

Of the 18,000 Chinese, it is estimated that there are 12,000 or 13,000 in British 
Columbia and the Yukon. Many have gone farther east in Canada, and many have 
gone over the line into the States. The remaining Chinese do not as a rule work in 
mills or at any very heavy labor. Nearly all the fish canning is done by Chinese, all 
the way from the mouth of the Fraser River to Alaska. A few are in mercantile 
business and several thousand are employed as domestic servants. Female help is 
almost impossible to obtain in this country, and Chinese work in private families. 
It is stated that the only hotels or boarding houses in British Columbia that employ 
white cooks is the Empress Hotel at Victoria and Vancouver Hotel of this city. 

In regard to the assertions that only two Washington mills employ 
orientals, the Western Employment Agency, of Seattle, Wash., state 
that orientals are employed by the following Washington State 
mills: 

A. J. West Lumber Company, Aberdeen. 

Standard Mill Log Company, Thomas. 

Mukilteo Lumber Company, Mukilteo. 

Minnesota Lumber Company, Avon. 

A. P. Perry Lumber Company, Mclntosh. 

Union Mill Company, Lacey. 

Salmon Creek Lumber Company, Little Rock. 

Chehalis Lumber Company, Littell. 

Northwestern Lumber Company, Kerriston. 

Reliance Lumber Company, Tacoma. 

Atlas Lumber and Shingle Company, Lake McMurray. 

Clearlake Lumber Company, Clearlake. 

Skykomish Lumber Company, Skykoinish. 

We have received information also that the Tacoma Mill Company, 
the C. D. Danaher mill, and the Puget Sound Lumber Company 
employ more or less orientals, the Puget Sound Lumber Company 
being particularly strong in that kind of labor. 

In regard to the misleading statement that the British Columbia 
government imposes no head tax on the Japanese it should be ex- 
plained again tnat the Jananese are now by a treaty arrangement 
with Japan more rigorously excluded from British Columbia than 
they are from the United States. 

We inclose also a copy of the official British Columbia timber 
license blank, which explicitly provides that neither Chinese nor 
Japanese shall be employed in lumbering operations on provincial 
lands. 

The secretary of the British Columbia Lumber and Shingle Manu- 
facturers Association, while declining to provide us with any data for 
the reason above given, admits that there have been some very wild 
statements made as to the number of orientals employed in the 
British Columbia mills. 

The Fraser River Lumber Company, Limited, Fraser Mills, B. C., 
who operate probably the largest lumber, lath, shingle, and box 
shook mill hi British Columbia, state in a letter signed by Mr. R. L. 



LABOR IN BRITISH COLUMBIA DRESSED LUMBER. 8047 

Craig, treasurer, that the total percentage of wages paid in all their 
mills to Asiatics is only 13 per cent. 
Very truly, yours, 

THEO. M. KNAPPEN, 

Secretary. 

EXHIBIT A. 

BRITISH COLUMBIA LAND ACT AND AMENDMENTS. 

Timber license. 

In consideration of dollars now paid and of other moneys to be paid under the 

said acts, and subject to the provisions thereof, I, W. S. Gore, deputy commissioner 
of lands and works, license to cut, fell, and carry away timber upon all that 
particular tract of land described as follows: 



The duration of thii license is for year from the 19Q-. 

The license does not authorize the entry upon an Indian reserve or settlement, and 
is issued and accepted subject to such prior rights of other persons as may exist by 
law, and on the understanding that the Govermnent shall not be held responsible for, 
or in connection with, any conflict which may arise with other claimants of the same 
ground, and that under no circumstances will license fees be refunded. 

N. B. This license is issued and accepted on the understanding that no Chinese or 
Japanese shall be employed in connection therewith. 

Deputy Commissioner of Lands and Worts. 
LANDS AND WORKS DEPARTMENT, 

Victoria, B. C., , 190- . 



DRESSED LUMBER. 

H. B. SHEPARD, BOSTON, MASS., URGES THE MAINTENANCE OF 
A PROTECTIVE DUTY ON DRESSED LUMBER. 

BOSTON, MASS., February 11, 1909. 
Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, M. C., 

Washington, D. C. 

DEAR SIR: Kindly allow us to express our views concerning the 
revision of the tariff now under consideration so far as it refers to 
rough and dressed lumber. Speaking as one of the oldest lumber 
corporations doing business in the New England or Middle States, and 
also as one of the largest handlers in this section, we desire to say that 
we believe in the principle of protection to the industries of the United 
States so far as such protection does not tend to foster monopolies, 
beneficial only to the few and harmful to the many. We believe that 
the forests of the middle and eastern portions of the United States 
are in urgent need of protection or they will be entirely destroyed or 
felled, as they now are in many localities. We cite Michigan as a 
striking illustration. Twenty-five years ago a large portion of Michi- 
gan was densely wooded, but to-day this State is virtually denuded 
of forest growth from end to end, and unless something is done to 
conserve our forest resources within ten years there will be hardly a 
tree left standing from Minnesota to Maine. We know that Canada 
has still immense resources in standing timber that should naturally 
find its principal market in this country, whereas under present con- 
ditions a large portion goes to England and South America. 



8048 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Why should we annihilate our standing timber, thus making our- 
selves' largely dependent on Canada for our future supply, when by 
proper legislation now we can husband our small resources, thus 
doing much to supply our citizens with forest products for years to 
come at a reasonable cost, which certainly would not seem probable 
had we no forest reserves in our own country to fall back upon. We 
therefore strongly urge that the duty be entirely withdrawn from 
white pine, spruce, balsam, and hemlock lumber in the rough, that 
is, not planed, which woods are largely the product of eastern Canada, 
and which would naturally seek an outlet to the United States market. 

We do not deem it necessary to reduce the duty on the products 
of the Pacific coast, such as red cedar, fir, and sugar pine; as our forest 
area in that section of our country is large and available, and should 
supply our needs for many years. 

Believing as we do in protection both to United States industries 
and United States labor, and seeing the largely increased tendency 
to transfer the millwork or dressing of Canadian sawn lumber as an 
industry to Canada, thereby throwing out of employment thousands 
of our workmen and silencing pur planing mills, we feel that it is 
clearly the duty of Congress to impose such duties on dressed lumber 
that the industry may be continued here. The present additional 
duty on dressed lumber is extremely inadequate, and unless it be 
largely increased our mills must be closed or transported to Canada. 
For instance, the additional duty on lumber planed one side is 50 
cents per thousand feet, whereas the saving on freight to the manu- 
facturer in Canada is about SI per thousand feet. Not only this, but 
cheap Canadian labor still further reduces the cost of milling. Canada 
exacts a duty of 25 per cent ad valorem on all dressed lumber imported 
from the United States, thereby prohibiting the millwork in this coun- 
try. Canada is wise. Why should we not profit by her wisdom and 
exact the same duty on all dressed lumber entering our country from 
Canada 1 

We can not urge too strongly the advisability of this action, as many 
large mills are now being erected in Canada especially to dress lumber. 
The largest in North America is that of W. C. Edwards & Co., at Ot- 
tawa, just completed, and if allowed to market the finished product 
of Canadian timber in our country, which is quite possible under the 
present tariff, it means that all the mills now occupied in kiln-drying 
and finishing lumber on our northern border viz, at Ogdensb\irg, 
Rouses Point, Malone, and Norwood, N. Y.; and at Burlington, St. 
Johnsbury, Island Pond, Richford, and Newport, Vt., as well as many 
others in these States, and in Maine must close down, thereby virtu- 
ally wiping out an important industry which has been one of the 
largest employers of labor in this section for more than the past 
forty years. 

With free rough-sawn lumber and a protective duty on dressed lum- 
ber that protects, it is quite possible to reduce the cost of that com- 
modity to the citizens of our country and still foster and increase our 
lumber manufacturing industry, so vitally important to the growth 
and prosperity of the United States. 

Trusting that you will give our views your most careful considera- 
tion, we are, 

Yours, very sincerely, 

SHEPARD & MORSE LUMBER Co., 
H. B. SHEPARD, President. 



YELLOW PINE L. J. GRIMM. 8049 

YELLOW PINE. 

L. J. GRIMM, OTTER CREEK, FLA., CLAIMS THAT REMOVAL OF 
DUTY FROM CANADIAN LUMBER WILL SHUT DOWN MANY 
AMERICAN LUMBER MILLS. 

OTTER CREEK, FLA., February 12, 1909. 
Hon. JOSEPH W. FORDNEY, M. C., 

Member Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. 0. 

DEAR SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of January 8, in reply 
to mine of previous date, wherein you state you will be glad to pre- 
sent to the committee any information of a convincing nature in 
favor of retaining the protection on lumber, and wish to submit the 
following for their further consideration, as I consider the removing 
of the tariff on lumber would be the hardest blow to the southern 
lumber interests that it has ever experienced. 

In reviewing Mr. Tift's testimony before your committee on the 
question of removing the tariff on Canadian lumber, there are a 
number of points bearing on this question that were apparently 
omitted or needed further explanation that I wish to call their atten- 
tion to. I will explain the condition that exists at our mill, which 
is applicable to all manufacturers of yellow pine where the timber 
has been worked for turpentine, which, through Florida and Georgia, 
is practically all of it. 

STUMPAGE. 

Take the matter of stumpage: At $1.50 per thousand (the ruling 
price here), it is necessary to add to this 15 cents per thousand each 
year to cover carrying charges in the ^vay of interest and taxes. 
Now, as our raw material has an increasing cost each year, we have 
naturally got to have an increasing price for our lumber. 

We own 120,000,000 feet of standing timber, and estimate that it 
will take us ten years to cut it out. The manufacturer of lumber 
has got to provide himself with the raw material when he starts to 
operate, sufficient for a number of years, in order for him to make 
his operations profitable, as it is necessary for him to lay out a large 
expenditure in the way of equipment to start an operation. The 
amount he invests in equipment is based on the amount of stumpage 
that he owns, or that is available, this equipment depreciates with 
each years' use, and the machinery, locomotives, and rail, which 
generally constitutes about 60 per cent of the investment, is, as a 
general rule, disposed of at about 30 per cent of the original cost, at 
the termination of operations, returning to the operator about 20 
per cent of his original investment in the way of equipment, so there 
is 80 per cent that has got to be charged off during each year's opera- 
tion. Take it with us, we consider that we have ten years in which 
to dispose of this item, to reduce our operations one-half would 
double the amount, and would naturally increase our cost of manu- 
facture per thousand proportionately. 

PRESERVATION OF FORESTS. 

Now, referring to preserving the forests, it is not practical here in 
the South, unless it would be possible to stop the turpentine operator 
from working it. On account of the sawmill pine timber all being 



8050 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTUBES OP. 

boxed for turpentine, fire is a very destructive element to this class 
of timber, ana it is impossible to keep it out, as the settlers set it to 
burn off ranges for their cattle. 

Our lands are cutting about 4,000 feet per acre, 50 per cent under 
10-inch and the balance 10 inches and over, with our present way of 
working it and the markets that are available at the present time. 
Now, if the tariff was removed, Canada could furnish all under 10 
inches at a price that we could not meet, practically cutting us out of 
hah* of our stumpage and reducing our operations from ten years to 
five, forcing us to leave 60,000,000 feet in the woods for the fire to 
destroy. Now, we would naturally have to meet this condition; Can- 
ada can not furnish the larger dimension. The consumer has got to 
have the large dimension as well as* the small. He goes to the yard 
man or jobber to buy his lumber. This yard man has bought his 
small dimension from Canada, his large dimension from us. His lum- 
ber from Canada, we will suppose he has saved per thousand feet the 
amount of the tariff; he has paid us $2 per thousand for the large 
dimension more than he would have paid if we could have furnished 
the whole schedule. The facts are the consumer has not bought his 
lumber any cheaper, the jobber has not made any larger profit, but it 
has enabled Canada to furnish a portion of the lumber and forced us to 
leave a portion of ours in the woods to be destroyed it reverts back 
to the sawmill operator. Now, would it not be better to retain the 
present tariff and enable us to sell all of our stumpage and Canada to 
handle its lumber in the future as it has in the past ? As I understand, 
her stumpage is improving each year that it is left standing, which is 
not the case with us. 

It is estimated that ten years will practically use up ah 1 of the saw- 
mill timber that is left standing in this section of the South; it proba- 
bly would be advisable then to remove the tariff and let Canada bring 
her lumber in duty free. Taking into consideration the present 
market and the way the timber has been handled through the South, I 
do not consider it as a proper time to remove the tariff, as all operations 
have been based on the prevalent conditions and to retain our present 
tariff for the period of ten years would give us ample time to work out 
our present operations and take the matter of tariff into consideration 
for any future operation. 

COST OF MANUFACTURE. 

The market price at the mill to-day on schedules carrying 50 per 
cent under 10 inches is $12 per thousand. Now, it is no trouble for us to 
secure $14 and $15 per thousand for schedules running to 10 inches and 
up, but our preference is to sell the larger dimension and the small 
together at the average price of $12, this would enable us to handle 
all of our stumpage. We are selling No. 2 common below cost but 
not at a loss. Tnis grade is selling at the mill to-day for $7 per thousand 
feet. This is practically what it costs us to manufacture, not putting 
any value on stumpage. 

It is impossible to grade lumber in the standing tree, therefore we 
bring logs to our mill that will not make better than No. 2 common. 
We have got at the rate of $3 per thousand invested in a log before 
we are able to distinguish its grade in the way of logging expense; 
now, rather than to burn it up and lose the cost of logging, we prefer 



YELLOW PINE L. J. GRIMM. 8051 

to invest $4 more in it and complete its manufacture and then sell it 
for $7 per thousand, by doing this we have saved the cost of logging 
which we have invested in it unintentionally and yet sold it below 
cost at practically no loss. This is a grade of lumber that Canada 
could furnish with the tariff removed, at a price that we could not 
compete with, forcing us to put ours in the slab pit. Taking into con- 
sideration the above facts, wnich can be substantiated, I consider that 
the retaining of the present tariff is preserving the forests. 

THE QUESTION OF A HIGHER TARIFF. 

The question was raised in Mr. Tiffs examination, if the tariff is a 
good tiling for lumber men why not make it higher? I wish to answer 
it in this w T ay : To raise the present tariff would naturally increase the 
price of small dimension ancl the low-grade lumber. This would natu- 
rally encourage home production to the extent of starting numerous 
small operations on lands that have been denuded of all their large 
timber years ago and create an overproduction in our home market 
and work an injury on the preservation of the forests, as the timber 
lands that would be used in these small operations are lands that were 
worked out for turpentine and saw mill purposes years ago when the 
turpentine operators did not box their timber near as small as they 
have done in the past few years, and the price of lumber did not per- 
mit of the sawmill operator cutting his small timber. There are 
thousands of acres of timbered lands of the above description in the 
South that the timber is improving on each year that it is left standing. 

It might be said that a substantial rise in the price of lumber would 
have the same effect as to increase the tariff. I contend that it 
would not, for the rule of supply and demand would govern a rise in 
price, and it might be high this year and low next year, while the 
tariff would natarally be supposed to be a fixed condition. 

CHEAP LABOR IN THE SOUTH. 

Referring to our cheap labor that is used in the manufacture of 
lumber in the South, I have worked the foreigner in the North, paying 
him one dollar and a half per day, and the native negro of the South, pay- 
ing him $1 per day. I could save at least 25 per cent on the same class 
of work *by using the foreigner at $1.50 per day rather than the native 
negro at $1 per day, if it were possible to get the foreigner; but that 
is not possible, so we are obliged to use our native negro, which makes 
our so-called cheap labor of the South the most expensive, as he is not 
a willing worker, but has to be forced. He has no regard for his 
position and seems to think he is doing his employer a favor when he 
does work a day. Their average days' work a month is sixteen. It is 
plain to see we have no advantages in the way of cheap labor over 
other parts of the country. 

CANADA'S LIMITED LARGE DIMENSION. 

In my judgment, Canada produces no lumber but that we could 
supply from our own forests; while on the other hand, we produce 
large amounts of high-grade dimension lumber that she can not 
produce, even for her home consumption. This accounts for Cana- 
dian buyers coming to our southern markets for this class of timber. 



8052 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Take with this class of timber, our home supply is hardly equal 
to our home -demand: We can not compete with Canada on small 
dimension, say 8 inches and under, even with the tariff in force, 
and would be forced out of business if that was all we had to offer; 
but from the fact that we can furnish the large dimension we are 
able to make the buyer take our small dimension by averaging the 
price of the two sizes. This would only apply to dimension lumber 
and not to dressed stock. 

PROPORTIONING OF THE PRICE. 

The question might arise, Could we force the buyer to take our 
small dimension in order for him to get our large dimension with 
the tariff removed? Possibly we could, but as this would naturally 
lower the price of small dimension we would have to make the 
average price proportionately lower, and rather than do this we 
would prefer to sell him the large dimension at an advanced price 
and leave the small dimension in the woods, 

ONLY REASONABLE PROFIT IN LUMBER. 

I can not recall one manufacturer of lumber in the South to-day 
who has made more than a reasonable interest on his investment. 
Take with our operations: We have about $300,000 invested; our 
mills and equipment are the most modern, and we have spared no 
expense in installing every device possible to produce lumber cheaply, 
which is about $7 per thousand f. o. b. mill. This cost does not 
include cpst of stumpage, cost of selling, or plant depreciation, 
which would amount to $3.50 per thousand feet, making a total cost 
of $10.50 per thousand, against an average selling price at the mill 
for the past year of $12 per thousand, leaving a margin of $1.50 
per thousand. On our output of 11,000,000 feet for the past year 
it would amount to $16,500, or a little more than 5 per cent on the 
investment. 

While we have operated the whole year, there were at least 50 
per cent of the mills of Florida and Georgia that were obliged to 
shut down and, in my judgment, had it not been for the existing 
tariff I do not think there would have been a mill in the two States 
able to operate. 

MILL V. STUMPAGE DELIVERY. 

Now, the average price at the mill may vary some, as the majority 
of all lumber in this territory is sold delivered. To base the price at 
the mill it is necessary to take into consideration fixed charges, such 
as freight and handling it at port, and the mill that has the least 
freight to port will have a higher average price per thousand at the 
mill; but as the price of stumpage is based on the distance from port, 
the saving to him in freight is consumed in the higher cost in stump- 
age; so he has practically no advantage over us. 

CAPITAL AND TARIFF. 

I am a northern man, and 75 per cent of the timber and lumbering 
operations in thjs State are owned by northern capitalists, who are 
men who have always supported the tariff question, and it can not 



. YELLOW PINti FOREST PRODUCTS. 8053 

be said of this class that they have supported the free-trade issue 
with their vote and then asked for protection on their products. 

In conclusion, I wisii to say if there is any further information 
bearing on this subject that the committee wishes and I am able to 
furnish it, command me; and I trust the committee will give this 
matter their most worthy consideration. 

Thanking you in advance for your courtesy in the above matter, 
I am, 

Very truly, yours, 

S. J. GUNN, 
Manager Otter Creek Lumber Co., Otter Creek, Fla. 



FOREST PRODUCTS. 

J. E. DEFEBAUGH, CHICAGO, ILL., EDITOR OF THE AMERICAN 
LUMBERMAN, FILES SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF. 

CHICAGO, February 18, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: I wish to present to your honorable body, on the sub- 
ject of duty on forest products, some facts showing the number and 
financial character of those who are interested in stumpage and lum- 
ber values as affected by the duty and who would be injured if the 
duty were lowered. 

It has been the claim by those favoring the removal of the duty that 
such action would lower the price of lumber in the United States and 
decrease the value of standing timber. Such we believe would be the 
result. 

AN ATTACK ON PROPERTY. 

It has also been intimated, if not directly stated, that the chief 
sufferers by the reduction of stumpage values would be sawmill 
operators and timber owners who have become wealthy by the ad- 
vance in stumpage; and it is further implied that no consideration ia 
due them, and that such an effect upon the value of their property 
would be just punishment for their business foresight. 

I wish to convince you that, on the contrary, for every rich lumber 
manufacturer or timber owner who will be injured by reducing or 
removing the present lumber duty, at least 500 farmers and small real 
estate owners will be injured in the same way, to say nothing of those 
who will suffer by disturbance of their business relationship with the 
lumber industry in other ways. 

I wish also to show that the lumber industry is not one for the rich 
men alone, but for any man who understands it and who is possessed 
of only small capital; and that, in fact, the greater part of the lum- 
ber production is by mills whose requisite capital for construction 
and operation is from S3, 000 to $25,000 only. 

AVERAGE SAWMILL IS A SMALL ENTERPRISE. 

I would refer you to the report on "the lumber cut of the United 
States, 1907," compiled by the Bureau of Census in cooperation with 
the National Forest Service. On page 41, table 46, is a classification 



8054 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

of sawmills according to, the quantity of lumber sawed. This classi- 
fication applied to 20,034 mills. 

15.168 mills cut 50,000 feet and less than 500,000 feet. 
4,820 mills cut 500,000 feet and less than 1,000,000 feet. 
5,279 mills cut 1,000,000 feet and less than 5,000,000 feet. 

25,267 mills cut less than 5,000,000 feet each. 

It is a fair assumption that the mills of the first class average 
250,000 feet each, of the second class 750,000 feet each, and of the 
third class 2,500,000 feet each. On that basis of calculation 25,267 
sawmills out of the total of 26,934 thus reported 'produced 20,604,- 
500,000 feet out of the total of 40,256,154,000 feet of lumber cut in 
the United States hi 1907. 

AVERAGE ANNUAL PRODUCT. 

The average product of the sawmills of the United States during 
1907 was 1,395,360 feet. The product of the small mills cutting less 
than 5,000,000 feet annually and which produced one-half of the 
total product, cut an average of 819,034 feet each. 

AVERAGE DAILY PRODUCT. 

Conservatively estimating that the average year of the sawmill is 
two hundred working days, then the average sawmill of the United 
States produced 6,977 feet a day, while the little mills, of the class 
that cut half the product, produced only 4,095 a day. 

COST OF THE AVERAGE MILL. 

It is usually estimated by lumbermen in planning for operations that 
the cost of a plant is about $1 ,000 for each 1,000 feet of daily capacity. 
The cost is less in a small mill which cuts 5,000 to 10,000 feet a day, 
but is more in very large mills which cut upward of 50,000 feet a 
day, because in the latter case large investments have to be made in 
logging equipment and with pine mills, in dry kilns, planing mills, etc. 
But assuming that this rough method of estimating is correct and 
it is sufficiently so for the purpose the average sawmill in the United 
States requires an investment for plant of about $7,000, while the 
average little mill requires an investment of about $4,000. 

I take pleasure in reproducing Table 36 referred to, so far as the 
totals for the United States are concerned: 



Class of mill. 



Number. 



Sawing 50,000 to 500,000 feet 15 168 

Sawing 500,000 to 1,000,000 feet 4 820 

Sawing 1,000,000 to 5,000,000 feet ! ^ 5, 279 

Sawing less than 5,000,000 feet >-, v,; 

Sawing 5,000,000 to 10,000,000 feet ' 813 

Sawing 10,000,000 to 25,000,000 feet 652 

Sawing 25,000,000 to 50,000,000 feet ... 161 

Sawing 50,000,000 to 100,000,000 feet 39 

Sawing 100,000,000 feet and over 2 

The mill sawing less than 10,000 feet a day is a little mill, as viewed 
by the lumber industry; their capacity is light and their cost of con- 
struction and operation is in proportion. A mill can be bought and 



FOREST PRODUCTS J. E. DEFEBAUGH. 8055 

set up and started running for $4,000 that will cut up to 10,000 feet a 
day. 

The "big mills," so much talked about, are those that cut 100,000 
feet or more daily; and there are not more than 500 of them in the 
entire country. 

It is a principle of the statistician that where the number of items 
runs into the thousands between arbitrarily placed limits an almost 
absolute average can be determined by dividing a total by the number 
of items. In the fdurth class the 813 mills cutting 5,000,000 to 
10,000,000 feet a year it will be safe to assume a lower average, say 
7,000,000 feet. Including the production of this class with that of 
the first three classes and we have a total of 26,285,500,000 feet, 
produced by mills cutting less than 10,000,000 feet annually. 

Going back to the first three classes, numbering 25,267, we find that 
the dairy output of the largest of the mills within the limit is 25,000 
feet. Few sawmills cutting less than 25,000 feet a day have back of 
them, to support their future operations, any considerable amount of 
standing timber. Nearly all such mills purchase their raw material 
their logs as needed, or buy some tract of timber which may suffice 
for from three months to a year or two. 

SIXTEEN HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVEN MILLS OP THE TIMBER-OWNING 

CLASS. 

The mills of 25,000,000 feet a year output or more, which are the 
only mills that as a class have large reserves of standing timber, 
number only 854. To be entirely fair and to include hi the number, 
all the mills that are likely to own timber in large quantities, we add 
those of 10,000,000 or more output, and have 1,667 in the United 
States that may be considered timber owners. Many of these do not 
own timber. 

Comparatively few of the mills in western Washington or Oregon, 
even among the large ones, own timber, but they buy their logs 
month by month or year by year. Many of the mills above 10,000,000 
feet output all over the country supply their current needs by current 
purchases, but if every one of these 1,667 mills be considered as own- 
ing timber the number which falls under the criticisms of the advo- 
cates of free lumber is relatively insignificant. 

TIMBER SUPPLIES OF THE SMALL MILLS. 

The 25,267 mills that own no timber have, as a class if not indi- 
vidually, as assured a future as the larger mills. Possibly a thousand 
sawmills in the United States are backed by sufficient quantities of 
timber to insure their operations for ten or twenty years to come, and 
a few hundred may be able to operate indefinitely by the use of 
forestry methods; but judging from the history of the lumber busi- 
ness, the continued operation of the little mills on currently bought 
timber is assured, ana experience gives me confidence in the predic- 
tion that their half of the product is backed by nearly or quite as much 
standing timber as that of the larger mills. 

OWNERSHIP OF STANDING COMMERCIAL TIMBER. 

I believe it entirely within the bounds of fact to state that the 
standing timber of the United States is held as follows: By the Gov- 



8056 



SCIIKDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



eminent, 20 per cent; by lumber manufacturers and heavy timber 
owners, 35 per cent; by farmers and small timber owners (classing in 
the above those who hold less than 1,280 acres), 45 per cent. 

WHERE THE LITTLE MILLS ARE LOCATED. 

Please note the location of the small mills by the following selection 
from the table above mentioned; I give only the States in which 
mills in at least one of these classes number 100; 



State. 


Total num- 
ber of 
mills. 


Sawing 50 
M to.500 
Mfeet. 


Sawing 500 
M to 1,000 
Mfeet. 


Sawing 
1,000 M to 
5,000 M 
feet. 




880 


466 


159 


198 




1,132 


499 


216 


332 


Colorado - 


230 


159 


29 


39 




236 


140 


45 


51 


Florida 


296 


103 


50 


93 




763 


443 


145 


129 


Idaho . .. 


240 


118 


35 


66 


Illinois 


499 


439 


34 


25 




994 


731 


138 


117 




1,436 


968 


293 


145 




515 


95 


71 


189 




848 


448 


162 


196 




293 


203 


56 


27 




511 


308 


74 


124 




846 


456 


130 


163 




388 


265 


50 


28 


Mississippi 


820 


301 


116 


290 


Missouri 


908 


654 


123 


118 


New Hampshire 


544 


189 


142 


187 




161 


144 


11 


6 


. New York 


1,382 


963 


256 


143 


North Carolina 


1,644 


880 


384 


314 


Ohio 


986 


689 


195 


% 


Oregon ... 


609 


239 


127 


179 


Pennsylvania . 


2.065 


1,440 


375 


206 


South Carolina 


357 


168 


62 


94 


Tennessee 


1,098 


667 


219 


181 


Texas 


647 


129 


83 


341 


Vermont 


570 


338 


112 


116 


Virginia 


1,513 


873 


342 


255 


Washington '. 


714 


139 


101 


274 


West Virginia 


1.001 


557 


200 


181 


Wisconsin 


738 


366 


122 


155 













It will be observed that the States with the larger number of mills 
are, for the most part, those lying in the originally timbered sections 
of the United States. Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Ken- 
tucky, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, 
Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, and 
Wisconsin are notable examples. Generally speaking, the small 
mill predominates in all the territory east of the Mississippi River, 
and are numerous west of the river in such States as Missouri, Arkan- 
sas, and Texas. 

BUY LOGS OR TIMBER AT CURRENT STUMPAGE VALUES. 

It should be borne in mind that these mills buy their logs at current 
stumpage values. Many of the larger mills supplement their own 
timber reserves in this way. Many large mills in the South, particu- 
larly those that have been cutting ten years or more, have as much 
standing timber as ever, without having made any large purchases, 
simply buying each year enough to keep their mills running that year. 
These purchases are made from farmers chiefly, yet there are many 
small investors who have timber to sell. 



FOREST PRODUCTS J. E. DEFEBAUGH. 8057 

My own business puts me in touch with this matter, and I am con- 
stantly receiving letters from people who wish to sell some small 
tract of timber, ranging from 10 acres to a few hundred acres, or 
from those who wish to make small investments in stumpage. Exam- 
ine the advertising columns of some of the Washington and Baltimore 
papers and there will be found many advertisements of farms and 
plantations for sale, which are almost invariably said to have on them 
commercial timber. 

FARMS AND FARM TIMBER. 

According to the last general census, the number of farms in the 
States east of the Mississippi River is 3,678,538. Adding to this 
number the farms in Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana, States of 
like condition, and we have a total of 4,258,087. Many lumber men 
who travel extensively over the country believe that 75 per cent of 
the farms east of the Mississippi River and in the three States west 
of the Mississippi, included in the above table, have on them stand- 
ing timber of commercial value. I think that it is entirely safe to 
assume, however, that at least 2,000,000 farms east of the Rocky 
Mountains are more valuable and produce a greater average annual 
revenue because of the timber growing on them. 

I think this statement is extremely conservative, for a similar 
condition prevails in parts of Texas, Oklahoma, Iowa, Minnesota, 
and the extreme Northwestern States. 

TWO MILLIONS OF FARMERS ARE STUMPAGE OWNERS. 

Here, then, are 2,000,000 fanners and an indefinite number of 
other small real estate holders who are directly interested in main- 
taining the present values of stumpage. 

If, as is claimed, and as I admit to be probable, the removal or 
reduction of the lumber duty would result in lowering th'e value of 
stumpage, the sufferers would not merely be the 2,000 or 3,000, 
possibly 5,000, sawmill and heavy stumpage owners, but all the small 
sawmill owners, so far as they are timber holders, and the 2,000,000 
or 3,000,000 farmers and small timber owners. 

FARMERS GET BENEFIT OF ADVANCES *N STUMPAGE PRICES. 

I ask you to consider this further fact, that the current timber or 
log purchases by the more than 25,000 sawmills, wliich supply half the 
lumber product of the United States, are made at current prices; that 
the farmers and others who sell to these mills secure the benefit of 
every advance in stumpage values. They are no more entitled, 
because they are small and relatively poor, to receive an undue meas- 
ure of protection than are the few large timber owners, yet the 
removal or reduction of the present too small degree of protection 
would be as seriously felt by them as by the others. 

VALUES OF LUMBER AND STUMPAGE MOVE TOGETHER. 

This fact will strike you, that the advance in lumber prices within 
the last ten years, which has attracted so much public attention, has 
been reflected in the values of standing: timber and that this increment 
in value has fully accrued to 2,000,000 fanners. 



sor>s 



SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



About one month ago I made an inquiry as to what this advantage 
has been. I distributed cards headed as follows: "Prices paid at mill 
or railroad shipping station for small lots of farmers' logs, by the 
thousand feet b. m., in years named. Averages." 

The leading species of wood were included, and the vears were 1890, 
1895, 1899, 1902, 1906, 1908, and 1909. 

I received replies from West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkan- 
sas, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Wisconsin, which territory is fairly 
typical of the eastern part of the country, though I should have been 
glpd to have made a more extensive inquiry. 

The returns indicate a fair agreement with the report of the Forest 
Service as to increase in stumpage values. These values, however, 
include cost of felling the timber, sawing it into logs, and moving them 
to the place where they will be taken possession of by the mill men. 

It is an interesting fact that some of those of whom I asked this 
information informed me that such an inquiry might be injurious to 
their interests, as the farmers already knew too much about the value 
of timber and logs. 

PRICES FARMERS RECEIVE FOR LOGS. 

I have averaged the reports on each kind of wood, where they were 
numerous enough to be of value, and present them in the following 
table : 



Kinds of timber. 


1S90. 


1895. 


1899. 


1902. 


1906. 


1908. 


1%9. 


Pine.. 


$7.08 


IB g4 


$8.84 


$9.77 


$11. 97 


$13.50 


$14 85 


Spruoe . . 


4.50 


4.50 


5.81 


7.75 


9.35 


9.50 


9.50 


Hemlock 


2.62 


2.75 


3.92 


5.10 


7.20 


8.20 


7.80 


Oak.. 


6.22 


7.22 


9.20 


11.13 


12.96 


14.59 


1459 


Ash 


6 06 


6 51 


7 72 


9.27 


11.27 


12.18 


11 85 


Birch 


5.83 


5.37 


5.58 


6.71 


8.43 


8.56 


8.68 


Beech 


400 


4.37 


4.32 


4.78 


6.50 


7.43 


7.33 


Poplar 


8.00 


9.15 


11.35 


15.63 


16.70 


18.38 


18 58 


Basswood 


6.43 


6.40 


7.69 


9.42 


11.39 


13.03 


12.86 



















The figures for pine are chiefly from Wisconsin and Michigan, 
but include some of the Appalachian pine; the spruce figures chiefly 
from Wisconsin and Michigan; the hemlock figures from the same 
States, with a few from Kentucky; all the States are represented in 
oak, but with Wisconsin and Michigan comparatively unimportant ; 
the ash figures are generally distributed; the birch represented is 
almost entirely from Wisconsin and Michigan; the beech is reported 
chiefly from Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan; the poplar from the 
Appalachian districts, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio; the basswood 
chiefly from Michigan and Wisconsin. 

There are marked variations in the figures. On poplar, for exam- 
ple, the Ohio and Kentucky reports substantially agree on a maxi- 
mum price of about $30. Two reports named $35 as having prevailed 
for two or three years. The average is brought down by reports from 
Wisconsin and Arkansas, where the poplar is not the yellow poplar 
so valuable in commerce. Oak prices vary from about $11 for the 
upper part of the lower peninsula of Michigan to as high as $35 for 
the selected oak bought by an Indiana manufacturer. 



FOREST PRODUCTS J. E. DEFEBAUGH. 8059 

These figures show clearly that the farmer and wood-lot owner 
and small timber investor has been marketing his timber crop year 
by year and receiving constantly increasing profit therefor. 

There is an open market for timber in the United States, and a 
high market. Even on the prairies of Kansas, Nebraska, and the 
Dakotas the farmers' wood lots and shelter tracts of timber are com- 
ing to be factors in the local lumber supply, and in every State the 
farmer with a dozen logs to sell can find a mill that will buy them 
and pay for them the current and' constantly advancing prices. He 
does not have to sell to a trust or combination, which sets the price 
for him. The sawmill competition, of which he has the advantage, 
is unlimited and unrestricted. 

MARKETS FOR LOCAL PRODUCTS. 

Another feature of this situation which is of interest is the fact 
that the many thousands of sawmills scattered almost broadcast 
over the country furnish nearby markets, often at high prices, for 
the farm products of the neighborhoods in which they are located. 

In the more important lumbering sections, where the proportion 
of land in timber is large, the farmers are often unable to supply the 
local demand. The mill man has to bring from a distance portions 
of his supplies, and to the farmer is saved the cost of transportation. 

THE SETTLERS GREATLY BENEFIT. 

The increase in value of forest products has also assisted in the set- 
tlement of once exclusively timbered sections. Thousands of farmers in 
Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota have paid for their farms, in whole 
or in large part, by the sale of the timber that the lumbermen left. 
Many hundreds of these settlers have not only realized in this way the 
full price they paid for their lands, but in addition have been able, 
by their winter s work in cleaning up their lands, to support them- 
selves and their families until their lands were cleared and became 
agriculturally productive. 

TIMBER GROWING EVERYWHERE. 

This process is going on everywhere, and in addition timber is grow- 
ing on every farm and reafforestation is an everywhere present fact in 
all the originally timbered areas of the United States. 

This timber is plentiful enough, but not so situated or in such com- 
pact bodies as to supply the needs of a great sawmill, but given a 
value, and with its present value retained by the retention of the 
duty on lumber, it promises forever to supply the raw material for at 
least half of the present lumber product or the United States. 

THE CHANCES FOR THE POOR MAN. 

I trust that in the above, in which I -have depended largely upon 
published statistics, compiled by government agencies, and have 
drawn inferences which I believe will appeal to the good judgment of 
every well-informed man, I have demonstrated that the lumber manu- 
facturing industry is not a rich man's business alone, but one into 



8060 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

which anyone with a capital that would be necessary to establish a 
corner grocery or drug store in a medium-sized town, provided he 
have the necessary knowledge of and experience in the business, can 
enter as freely as the individual or company with millions of capital. 

I think I have shown also that the advancing price of stumpage, 
which has been deplored by some, has been, in proportion to the 
quantity held, as profitable to millions of small timber-land holders 
and investors as to the very few thousand large sawmill operators 
and timber owners. 

Incidentally, and aside from the particular subject, I have pointed 

out the error in so many estimates of the standing timber of the United 

States resulting from ignoring the small tracts, and have indicated a 

more hopeful future for our timber supply than usually is prophesied. 

Very respectfully, yours, 

J. E. DEFEBAUGH, 
Editor American Lumberman. 



PROTECTION FOR LUMBER. 

BRIEF FILED BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE NATIONAL 
LUMBER ASSOCIATION, REPLYING TO CERTAIN ARGUMENTS 
FAVORING DUTY-FREE LUMBER. 

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 19, 1909. 
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

Washington^ D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: Theodore M. Knappen, in one of his supplemental 
statements, says: 

Rightly or wrongly the Canadians feel that the United States has not treated them 
in a brotherly way in trade and tariff relations, and they especially resented the impo- 
sition of a $2 duty on lumber in 1897. A repeal of the lumber tariff at this time by 
extending the market of a great Canadian industry might lead to concessions by Canada 
to the United States, and would in any event tend to stay the rising tide of feeling in 
Canada in favor of tariff discrimination against the United States. 

The above is written by a man who for a number of years has been 
secretary of the Canadian Immigration Association, composed of com- 
panies selling farm lands to citizens of the United States, and colo- 
nizing vast areas of western Canadian territory with men representing 
the brain and brawn of our Central States. 

It is needless to call your attention to the fact that Canada repre- 
sents a market of 6,000,000 or 7,000,000 of people compared with the 
American market of over 80,000,000. Because of her proximity 
Canada is one of our best customers and will continue to be. 

Mr. Knappen gives no consideration to the great American lumber- 
manufacturing industry. What, if anything, would this industry 
receive in return for giving Canada an opportunity to sell in our 
markets 1 

THE SCOPE OF THE LUMBER INDUSTRY. 

The lumber industry in the United States is national in its scope. 
Lumbering operations are conducted to a more or less extent in every 
State and Territory of the Union is a principal industry in 25 States. 



PROTECTION FOR LUMBER EDWARD HINES ET AL. 8061 

In 12 States it is the chief industry. There are over 28,000 sawmills 
in this country, whose annual output exceeds 40,000,000,000 of feet. 
More than half of this product is manufactured by small mills cost- 
ing on an average less than $5,000 each. Statistics of the Census 
Bureau show that 36,000,000,000 of the 40,000,000,000 feet of annual 
lumber production was manufactured by mills producing less than 
25,000,000 feet annually. Mills producing less than this amount 
are classed as small operations, as some of the larger mills produce 
more than 100,000,000 feet per year. The lumber business is there- 
fore in the hands of a vast number of operators, whose interests, 
together with that of their employees, should not be sacrificed for 
the benefit of the Canadian lumbermen. 

It is well to call your attention to the fact that the lumber which 
the Canadian seeks to dump upon the American market is his low- 
grade product, as he has a demand at home and for export more 
than sufficient to take his upper grades of lumber and the greater 
part of that suitable for ordinary construction purposes. The lower 
grades of lumber are principally used for the making of boxes, crat- 
ing packages, etc., which the average American consumer or home 
builder does not purchase directly. The admission of this class of 
lumber from Canada would benefit chiefly those manufacturers who 
use boxes in which to ship their various products. This lumber now 
comes from Canada, hi spite of the $2 duty, in large quantities and 
constitutes the greater part of the lumber now imported. 

CONSERVATION AND THE TARIFF. 

Mr. Knappen states : 

The tariff on low-grade lumber tends to increase the destruction and cutting of small 
trees and the consequent destruction of our future forests. 

This is directly contrary to the views held by many ..practical forest- 
ers, and is, indeed, a statement not based upon the facts. The way 
to conserve and husband any article is to make it valuable. When 
it is cheapened it is not used with the economy necessary to safeguard 
and preserve it. Foresters tell us that scientific principles of forestry 
can only be applied to logging operations when standing timber has 
reached that value where such methods can be adopted without actual 
loss. The experience of lumbermen in this country during the past 
few years amply verifies this fact. When it is possible to obtain a 
profit for low-grade material, that portion of the timber from which 
this class of stuff is obtained is fully utilized. Where formerly, in 
some sections, but ten or fifteen thousand feet of timber were obtained 
from an acre of land, it has been possible to more than double this 
output when the prices for lumber have been such as to cover the 
cost of logging the entire tree. In some classes of timber fully 60 
per cent or the present output consists of low-grade lumber. This 
is true, however, only where it is possible to find a market for all 
classes of products which can be obtained from the raw material. 
When low-grade lumber can not be sold at a profit it results in a tre- 
mendous loss in the available forest resources, and this is shared by 
labor, transportation lines, and in the decreased purchase of all mate- 
rials consumed by the lumber manufacturers. 

When the top logs, butt logs, and defective pieces are left in the 
woods because they can not be logged, manufactured, and sold at a 

G131S AP 09 21 



8062 SCHEDULE D \\"(.|. AND M A N I 1 At 'I TIIKS OF. 

profit, they rot and burn and are lost forever. leaving this material 
m the woods does not perpetuate the forest nor a i-t the growth of 
a second crop of timber. Leaving uncut small unprotected trees of 
the coniferous species, which furnish about three-quarters of our lum- 
ber product, does not insure their growth, because when they stand 
alone unprotected by the larger timber they invariably blow down 
and in turn are burned up. The inability of the American manufac- 
turer to utilize lu's raw material to the fullest possible extent nor 
only represents a direct loss to labor engaged in logging the same, 
but to the American farmer in decreasing the amount of supplies 
which would be consumed in this operation and to the American 
railroads in the loss of tonnage. 

A manufacturer is obliged to cut enough logs to keep his mill in 
operation, but when he is unable to convert the poor lots and sell at 
a profit the low-grade material which they produce, it is necessarv 
for him to cut over a correspondingly larger area in order to stock his 
mill with that class of logs which he can afford to handle. 

This is not idle theory, but is a condition which has been demon- 
strated by our experiences of the past and which any practical for- 
ester can easily verify. 

If the lumber duty b? removed, thus turning ths American markets 
over to the Canadian mills, which can produce low-grade lumber at a 
lesser cost than it is manufactured in this country, we shall have to 
destroy our forests at least 25 per cent faster in order that our oper- 
ators may obtain the class of timber necessary to keep their mills 
busy. This would hasten rather than delay the destruction of the 
American forests and would be an economic waste of stupendous 
proportions. 

TIMBER GROWING MUST BE PROTECTED. 

Mr. Knappen states 

The raising of timber is not an industry in the United States. The hand of man ie 
not involved. 

We contend that the raising of timber should be an industry in this 
country. Lumbermen would be greatly pleased to adopt such meas- 
ures as would perpetuate their supplies of raw material, and inci- 
dentally their business of manufacturing lumber, but such methods 
can not be adopted at a loss, no matter how much men may be 
prompted by sentiment. 

The repeal of the present duty, or its material reduction, would 
postpone the day when methods of reforestation and preservation 
can r>e considered. 

LUMBER DUTY IX3WEST ON TARIFF SCHEDULE. 

Mr. Knappen states, "the lumber tariff is not merely $2 a thou- 
sand." 

He seeks to give the wrong impression as to the amount of the fin- 
ished product imported into this country. He does not at all refer 
to the fact that the duty on what are known as timbers, consisting 
of pieces 8 by 8 inches square and larger, is only 83 cents per thou- 
sand feet. 

The duty on rough lumber is $2 per thousand feet, or about 1 1 per 
cent ad valorem; and is the only protection afforded the sawmill in- 



PROTECT I OX FOR Ll'.MBER EDWARD HfXES ET AL. 8063 

dustry. The added duty of 50 cents per thousand for each side of the 
lumber which is surfaced or finished is entirely a measure protective 
of American labor, purely for the encouragement of the American 
industry of planing, matching, and finishing the rough lumber. Ac- 
cording to Mr. Knappen' s theory this mechanical labor should be done 
by Canadian workingmen instead of in American planing mills. 

WHY NOT PROTECT AMERICAN LABOR? 

Ke again states: 

The finished lumber is the raw material of the mill worker. American sash and 
door manufacturers and mill workers can compete anywhere. 

It is only necessary to say that the mill worker always purchases 
his lumber in the rough and finishes it in the various forms required 
in his own factory. Mr. Knappen would give the impression that 
the American sash and door manufacturer usually purchases his 
lumber surfaced, which is not the truth. 

NOT AN ARGUMENT. 

Mr. Knappen refers to the fact that only one Minnesota lumberman 
appeared before your committee in favor of the retention of the 
lumber tariff. He wishes to convey the impression that the lum- 
bermen of Minnesota have but little interest in the question. The 
facts are that there was only time for a limited number of representa- 
tives to appear before vour committee on November 20, 1908, and 
it was desired that all of the lumber-producing sections of the country 
should be represented. 

The lumbermen of Minnesota are as keenly alive to the detri- 
mental effects which would follow the removal or a material reduc- 
tion of the existing tariff on their interests and all dependent upon 
them as are the lumbermen of any other section. 

Mr. Knappen quotes an opinion by Mr. Daniel Wells, of the White 
Pine Lumber Company, of Detroit, Mich., on the low-grade lumber 
question, who states that Canada should be considered as another 
State of the Union, and that there should be no tariff wall between 
the United States and Canada any more than there is between anv 
of our States. Mr. -Wells's chief financial interest is in a sawmill 
and Canadian timber limits, located at Blind River, Ontario. You 
may draw your own conclusions as to the motive of his testimony. 

MOLDING- PUBEIC OPINION. 

The most remarkable part of the supplemental brief submitted by 
Mr. Knappen is the newspaper articles quoted by him from the 
Minneapolis Journal, of November 26 and 27, 1908. These articles 
stated that Messrs. Hines, Walker, and others were engaged in 
forming a gigantic white-pine combination to include the Weyer- 
haueser properties. There was absolutely no truth whatever in 
these reports, but they were written by Mr. Knappen himself and 
published by the Minneapolis Journal for the manifest purpose of 
prejudicing the public against the lumbermen as a class. 

Mr. Knappen might have included the third article of this series, 
also published in the Minneapolis Journal, which stated that a com- 



6064 SCH I IT 1. 1. r -Wool), AND MANUFACTURES OF. 



puny \va- benii: oriiaiii/ed to control the timber lands of Canada, 
the 1'nited State-, ami Mexico. The articles quoted by him in his 
brief are no more true than the last one referred to, wnich was un- 
doubtedly omitted because the MatemeiiN were so grossly exagger- 
ated that they would not for one moment be accepted by any member 
of your committee. 

Previous to his employment as secretary of the Canadian Immigra- 
tion Association, and later as press agent for the Canadian timber 
interests in their efforts to create public sentiment against the lumber 
tariff, Mr. Knappen was a reporter on the Minneapolis Journal, and 
has maintained close personal relations with the staff of that papev, 
which has been glad to publish many articles written by him in behalf 
of his present clients. All these grossly exaggerated articles of which 
he has been the author, the two referred to by him being only sample- 
of many others even more sensational, have been widely dissemi- 
nated through the papers of the Middle Western and Northwestern 
States. 

"TECHNICAL DUST" ESSENTIAL. 

Mr. Knappen has the temerity to say that the questions of railroad 
rates, competition on low grades, etc., are "technical dust thrown 
into the e-yes of the committee.' 7 We consider this a reflection upon 
the intelligence of your honorable body, who are well aware of the 
bearing of freight rates upon final prices of commodities. 

Mr. Knappen, with the evident intention of misleading your com- 
mittee, refers almost wholly to white pine. He says: 

Does the committee wish by legislation to impose an additional tax on the con- 
sumers of this white pine whicfi will soon be as scarce as the buffalo? 

He purposely overlooks the fact that white pine does not represent 
10 per cent of the lumber ordinarily used for building material, and is 
careful not to draw your attention to the fact that yellow pine con- 
stitutes 75 per cent or more of the building material consumed in this 
country. 

We direct your attention to the statistics of lumber production for 
1907, as compiled jointly by the Forest Service and the Bureau of 
the Census. 

Of a total lumber production of 40,256,154,000 feet, 13,215,185,000 
feet was of yellow pme. The total production of white pine, which 
includes Norway or red pine, and a considerable amount of other 
species, was 4,192,708,000 feet, or 10.4 per cent of the whole. This 
was produced by 6,369 mills, located in 28 different States. 

Mr. Knappen refers to white pine as a "luxury." We contend 
that low-grade lumber, of which every species of timber produces a 
large proportion, especially the hemlock of the Northern States and 
the yellow pine of the Southern States, not to speak of fir and other 
woods of the Pacific coast States, is in need of protection from serious 
competition from Canada. 

\S e have no fear whatever of competition from high-grade white 
pine, which is largely exported from Canada to foreign markets, or is 
used for certain special purposes, but which Mr. Knappen would 
have you believe should receive your first consideration. 



PROTECTION FOR LUMBER EI/WARD HINES ET A_L. 8065 

In what he has to say regarding the comparative cost of produc- 
tion of lumber between the United States and Canada, Mr. Knappen 
submits a statement of wages paicl by the Brooks-Scanlon Lumber 
Company, of Scanlon, Minn. Little comment is necessary on this 
question. It is well known that the standard of living in tnis coun- 
try is somewhat higher than that in Canada among nearly all classes 
of employees engaged in the lumber business. American labor must 
be protected in order that it may continue to pay the high cost of 
foodstuffs and general living expenses if national prosperity is to be 
continued. Subject American labor to competition with the lower 
wages paid by other countries and the effect will be quickly felt in 
all the avenues of business in the United States. 

In this connection we would call your attention to the photographs 
filed with your committee, showing the employment of oriental 
common labor in the mills of western Canada. The Chinese, Hindus, 
and Japanese do not receive the same wage scale as is paid the white 
men, and wherever they are introduced they seriously threaten the 
American standard of living among wage-earners. It is a significant 
fact that men employed in woods work in Canada are glad to come to 
the States for the higher wages paid. 

It is true that certain kinds of skilled labor in some mills receive 
higher wages than are paid in this country, but they are American 
workingmen who have been taken to Canada for the purpose of 
quickly establishing lumber industries, and educating the Canadian 
employees, and receive these high wages as a bonus for removing to a 
foreign country and living under alien conditions. It is quite sig- 
nificant that the tables of wages paid to various classes of labor in 
Canada are submitted from those firms in which the witnesses appear- 
ing before you favoring the abolition of the tariff are financially 
interested. 

COMPARATIVE PRICES OF COMMODITIES 

The statement by Mr. Knappen that lumber is relatively higher 
than other commodities is misleading. He quotes on page 4373 of 
the tariff hearings Bulletin No. 75 of the Bureau of Labor, which 
shows that "lumber and other building materials" have advanced 
somewhat more than other general commodities for the years 1902 
to 1907. "Other building materials" includes a variety of articles, 
such as cement, steel, brick, stone, etc., some of which are produced 
by high-priced labor, and a number of which have advanced more 
than has lumber. In the statement referred to, the high prices are 
shown in 1907, since when there has been a decline of from 25 to 35 
per cent in the prices of lumber, while the prices on many other com- 
modities, especially farm products, show advances over those which 
prevailed in 1907. The truth is that a bushel of gram of any kind, 
a hundredweight of live stock, or a team of .work horses will purchase 
more lumber to-day than ever before. 

SHINGLE MANUFACTURING CONDITIONS AND CONSERVATION. 

In response to Mr. Knappen 's reference to the tariff on shingles, 
we call your attention to the brief submitted by Mr. J. H. Boedel, 



Sllfif) SCHI.I'I I.I. I. \\ool>. VXD MAMTACTI-KKS <>F. 

i)f Brllingham, Wash., flowing the importation of shingles last year 
from Canada t<> have been '.iss, ()()(). 000 pieces. 

There is no sawed forest product into which labor enters so largely 
in its cost as in the manufacture of shingles. The American shingle 
manufacturer utili/es a large part of the raw material which would 
be absolutely wasted were he to be subjected to Canadian c>mi>ei ition. 

Mr. Knappen says 

The Washington shingle manufacturer can make as good a shingle as is made in 
British Columbia, but he prefers not to, and asks thai he l>e protected in the produc- 
tion of an inferior article. 

The shingle manufacturer of our Northwestern States uses up that 
portion of the logs which the lumberman is unable to take to the mill, 
and he therefore acts as a scavenger of the forest, converting into 
shingles everything that the lumberman is unable to use. 

The Canadian shingle manufacturer, cutting timber owned by the 
government, is able to select the better logs, and the w r aste of valuable 
raw material which follows his operations is enormous. He is able 
to make a better shingle than is the American producer simply be- 
cause the government is willing to take the loss consequent upon his 
methods. 

The Canadian manufacturer also has a decided advantage because 
his shingles are packed by Chinamen, who work on a piece basis, 
netting wages on which the average American laborer can not live. 

Mr. Knappen quotes F. L. Meares, of the Olympic Lumber Com- 
pany, Alaska Building, Seattle, who says that if the American shingle 
manufacturer were not protected by a tariff he would be obliged t<> 
make a better shingle. This is poor logic in view of the decidedly 
different conditions under which the American and Canadian shingle 
manufacturers operate, as explained above. 

It will be of interest to your committee to know that Mr. Meares 
is not a manufacturer but is an agent of British Columbia mills, 
selling Canadian shingles in .the United States. 

AX AUTHORITY ON CONSERVATION AND THE TARIFF. 

Mr. Knappen states that the tariff does not favor forest conserva- 
tion. We have already clearly demonstrated that the most economic 
use of the forest can be made when it is possible to conserve it because 
of its value. In this connection w r e quote Gen. C. C. Andrews, for- 
estry commissioner of the State of Minnesota, who has for many 
years been recognized as the dean of the foresters of the United 
States. He says: 

1 do not think the removal of the duty on lumber would conserve American forests. 
My reason for this opinion is that a large part of the American forest is physically and 
financially ripe, and would entail loss to the owners if not cut as fast as there is a good 
market. By financially ripe is meant when the trees cease to earn good interest by 
their growth. Such forests should then be cut, and where land is nonagricultural 
should be replaced by new plantations. 

If the market conditions are such that the land being cut over will 
not produce the highest quantity of material possible, then the 
re?namder must be left in the woods in the shape of poor timber and 
young growing trees. Under these conditions, the latter, unpro- 
tected by the surrounding timber and mingled with the litter and 
debris from logging operations, top logs, branches, etc., are soon 
destroyed by fire and disease. 



PROTECTION FOR LUMBER EDWARD H1NES ET AL. 8067 

Again to quote Mr. Knappen : 

The testimony of the high-tariff lumbermen on this subject (referring to conserva- 
tion) then simply resolves itself into a threat that if the tariff is reduced they will leave 
their cut-over timber lands covered with the debris of the unused portions of the trees. 

This is not a threat, but is the statement of an economic fact. 
When the price of low-grade lumber will not net the manufacturer a 
sufficient return to enable him to utilize all of the product of the tree, ' 
he must leave it in the woods to waste. 

No sensible manufacturer will leave in the woods any portion of 
his raw material from which he can realize a profit. What he may 
be obliged to leave is not only a loss of resource but is a loss to 
labor, to the farmer because of the reduced consumption of his prod- 
ucts in the operation, a loss to transportation lines, and a loss to 
posterity. 

LOW GRADES QUANTITY AND USE. 

In his comments regarding "percentage of low grades," we crn 
say that this term means nothing unless described, because it is 
understood differently when applied to different kinds of timber. 
Generally speaking, "low grade means lumber ordinarily suitable 
for boxes, coarse sheathing, etc. As was testified by several witnesses 
before your committee, Nos. 3, 4, and 5 boards of northern pine 
constitute about 60 per cent of the product of the sawmills. Only 
a small portion of the No. 3 product can be used in any way for con- 
struction purposes. The Nos. 4 and 5 boards, referred to by other 
witnesses, constitute about 40 per cent of the total product of the 
mills sawing northern pine. 

Mr. Knappen refers to one of the large Minneapolis mills which 
from 1896 to 1903 produced only 16.2 per cent of No. 4 and No. 5 
boards. This information is undoubtedly based upon a statement of 
Mr. Arthur R. Rogers, who was formerly a member of the C. A. Smith 
Lumber Company, of Minneapolis. This was probably correct at the 
period given, when low prices at which these grades were selling pro- 
hibited the manufacture of that portion of the timber which prin- 
cipally produces them. The No. 4 and No. 5 boards obtained at that 
time were cut from the slabs and defective pieces from the better 
grade of logs, and the poor logs which produce little less than boards 
of this type were left in the woods. The proportion of No. 4 and No. 5 
boards which has been obtained in the total production of the average 
northern pine mill for the past five years, during which, with the 
exception of 1908, the general prosperity has created a large demand 
for box material, has been 40 per cent. 

SAWMILL OPERATION HAS SMALL PROFITS. 

Mr. Knappen further states: "During the seven years preceding 
1908 the profits from the manufacture of lumber, generally speaking, 
have been lavish." 

It is well known among lumbermen that lumber manufacturers, as 
such, have never made large profits, the greatest profit arising from 
their incidental ownership of timber. Hundreds of firms within 
the time specified have attempted to buy logs on the open market and 
saw them into lumber, but have found that the profits were not suffi- 
cient to justify continued operations. In Minneapolis, where Mr. 



8068 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

Knappen lives, several sawmill concerns have gone out of business 
\\itlun this period for the reason stated. 

I'nquestionubly the profits which are credited to the lumbri 
business have cniefly been made from the increased valuation of 
-tunding timber and hardly without exception those benefited 
from this fact have held their timber for many years, and are as 
much entitled to the increased value of their property as are those 
who have realized profits from enhanced values of farm or city ival 
estate. 

Mr. Knappen quotes Chief Forester E. (). West fall, of the Wash- 
ington State Reforestry Association, to the effect that the admission 
of lumber from Canada free of duty would conserve American forest-. 
Against this opinion we again refer you to the opinion of such com- 
petent and widely known foresters as Gen. C. C. Andrews, for- 
estry commissioner of Minnesota, and to other equally competent 
foresters. 

In what Mr. Knappen has to say regarding the "California mar- 
ket," he admits the contention of American lumbermen as to the 
advantage which British Columbia manufacturers have in that 
market in vessels' freight rates. We invite your attention to the 
period of the Wilson-Gorman bill when the British Columbia mills 
practically controlled the entire lumber trade of the State of Cali- 
fornia. 

THE TIMBER HOLDINGS OF THE UNITED STATES. 

In concluding his statement Mr. Knappen says that instead of 
three large interests controlling one-third of the standing timber of 
this countiy, as he orally testified before your committee, he finds 
upon further investigation that about one-fifth of the timber is 
owned by three great interests. 

Had Mr. Knappen pursued his investigations further he would 
have found that not to exceed 3 per cent of the standing timber of 
the United States is controlled by any one interest or group of affili- 
ated interests. This fact is beyond dispute and can be verified to 
the satisfaction of your committee. 

What are known as the "Weyerhaueser interests," w r hich taken in 
the aggregate, though not under one control, constitute the largest 
group of individual timber-owning companies in the United States, 
do not own 3 per cent of the standing timber of this country; and 
if the statement made February 9, 1909, by Mr. R. S. Kellogjr, assist- 
ant forester of the United States Forest Service, to the effect that 
the timber of this country amounts to 2,500,000,000,000 feet, be 
correct, then no other interest in the United States owns to exceed 
one-quarter of 1 per cent of the standing timber, and those would 
include the properties of C. A. Smith, T. B. Walker, the Kirby Lum- 
ber Company, and others who were mentioned as being very large 
holders. 

We believe it to be true that the standing timber of the United 
States is divided into holdings about as follows: 

IVr cent. 

United States Government 20 

Sawmill operators and heavy timber investors 35 

Small holdings, not manufacturers 45 



PROTECTION FOK LUMBER EDWARD HINKS Kl AL. 80()9 

To remove or lower the duty on lumber will decrease the value 
of standing timber and injure not only the actual manufacturers of 
lumber but the hundreds of thousands of individuals, throughout 
every section of the country, who own commercial timber in small 
tracts. 

In concluding our comments regarding Mr. Knappen's brief, we 
think it only necessary, in order to emphasize the prejudice which 
permeates his testimony, to refer to the admission which he made 
before your committee when, in reply to a question as to who he 
represented, he stated, "The National Forest Conservation League," 
and in explaining its personnel said: "I am mostly it." 

Relative to the brief of W. S. Dwinnell, it may be of interest to your 
committee to know that Mr. Dwinnell is treasurer of the American 
Timber Holding Company, a $6,000,000 corporation which un- 
organized February 1, controlling timber licenses in British Columbia, 
and now offering stock to the American public. Mr. Dwinnell is 
interested with Arthur R. Rogers, M. J. Scanlon, and S. H. Bowman, 
all of Minneapolis, and to whom he refers in his brief in an effort to 
substantiate his claims. All of these gentlemen are heavily inter- 
ested in Canadian timber lands, and are promoters of the American 
Timber Holding Company, which is being exploited purely on the 
basis of the removal of the tariff on lumber. 

Mr. Dwinnell is not actively engaged in the manufacture of lumber, 
being an attorney at law. In the main, he attempts to show that the 
timber of the United States is controlled by a comparatively few indi- 
viduals. We have illustrated the fallacy of this argument in our 
reply to the brief filed by Mr. Knappen. The price of standing 
timber is of interest to all of the people, because the people, entirely 
apart from the sawmill operators and lumber manufacturers, own the 
majority of the stumpage of this country. 

IMPORTATIONS CONSIST LARGELY OF COMMON LUMBER. 

Quoting Mr. Dwinnell: 

From the Georgian Bay country there may be, and probably is, some shipments of 
low-grade lumber, but to my certain knowledge the bulk of the importations from 
Georgian Bay mills is of high-grade pine. Moreover, the timber in the Georgian Bay 
country is of limited extent and the life of the mills there of limited duration. 

This is not a statement of the facts, because the greater part of the 
higher grades ot lumber produced in Canada is consumed at home and 
shipped to England. By far the greater part of the lumber imported 
from Canada to this country is of low grade. The records of the 
Treasury Department show that fully 80 per cent of the lumber im- 
ported from Canada comes from the Georgian Bay and the east thereof, 
in Ontario and Quebec. 

The life of the lumber industry of the Georgian Bay mills on the 
basis of their present production is calculated by Canadian author- 
ities to be more than fifty years. 

HIGH PRICES CONDUCE TO COMPLETE UTILIZATION OF PRODUCT. 

Mr. Dwinnell further says: 

The waste so often referred to is that erf the sawmills, there often being no market 
for the slabs, shavings, sawdust, and lath, and in the fir mills of the Pacific coast to 



snii-.nri.K i>- \\ooi.. AND MANIFAI i rid-.s OF. 

the uniniiiaU'd the greatest waste comes from what appears to be a sacrifice of good 
lumber, whk-hj in point of fact, is so filled with pitch as to be unusable for any known 
merchantable purpose. 

Tliis argument is true except as to pitch, and simply proves that 
higher prices permit the complete utilization of the raw material. 

ADVOCATES OF TARIFF REPEAL INTERESTED IN CANADIAN TIMBER. 

Mr. Dwinnell states: 

All of the lumbermen appearing before your committee in advocacy of the remova 
of the tariff were large holders of American timber, and some of them among the largest 
manufacturers. 

It may not he necessary to call your attention to the fact that every 
one of the gentlemen referred to is largely interested in Canadian 
timber, and only one of them is a manufacturer conducting largo 
operations. 

Indeed all of the hriefs and statements which have heen filed with 
your committee in advocacy of the repeal or material reduction of the 
tariff on lumher have heen prepared by men who are hi some way 
connected with the Canadian lumber industry, either manufacturing 
or selling. 

It is also significant that since some of these gentlemen appeared 
before your committee they have organized the American Timber 
Holding Company, which holds 1,500,000,000 feet of timber in British 
Columbia. In addition to that, M. J. Scanlon, president of this com- 
pany, owns large quantities of timber on the Bahama Islands and. on 
Vancouver Island. 

CANADIAN TIMBER BROKER FAVORS FREE LUMBER. 

Mr. Dwinnell refers to W. I. Ewart as a timberman who favors the 
repeal of the duty on lumber. It is well to call your attention to the 
fact that Mr. Ewart is a timber broker at present engaged in selling 
licenses issued by the British Columbia government on Canadian 
timber, and it is common knowledge that, he has endeavored to en- 
courage the sale of these licenses by announcing that the removal of 
the duty would increase the value of Canadian stumpage from $1 to 
S'2 per thousand feet. 

CANADIAN STUMPAGE COSTS LESS THAN AMERICAN TIMBER. 

Mr. Dwinnell claims that Canadian timber, including the land rents 
and royalties, is worth as much in accessible localities as is American 
timber. It is undoubtedly true that original holders of some Cana- 
dian timber have paid in a few cases more than was paid by original 
holders of American timber twenty years ago, but the average Ameri- 
can timber owner to-day has paid not less than S3 per thousand feet 
for his stumpage, whereas the average Canadian timber holder to-day 
has paid not over 35 cents per thousand feet and assumes no fire risk. 
The American holder, in addition to having a heavy carrying charge 
on a larger, initial investment, carries a heavy fire risk besides. 

At the same period of purchase statistics prove a lesser cost in 
Canada for timber than in this country, coupled with more favorable 
taxation and lighter carrying charges, thus each year making a pro- 



PROTECTION FOR LUMBER EDWARD HINES ET AL. 8071 

portionately less carrying charge and hence a lesser investment to the 
Canadian operator as compared with the American. 

Relative to the supplemental brief submitted by A. R. Rogers 
relative to lumber, Mr. Rogers mainly seeks to show that the testimony 
of Edward Hiiies before your committee relative to the comparative 
cost of transportation was misleading, when Mr. Hines said that it 
costs about $7 per thousand feet to ship lumber bv rail from Hayward, 
Wis., to Buffalo, X. Y. 

The railroad freight rate from Hayward, Wis., to Buffalo, N. Y., and 
surrounding territory is 25 cents per hundred pounds. The average 
weight of rough lumber is from 2,500 to 3,000 pounds per thousand 
feet, showing conclusively that the freight is from $6 to $7.50 per 
thousand feet. When rough lumber is worked into flooring, or other 
similar finished product, it reduces its weight approximately 400 
pounds per thousand, but the saving in freight rate by the process is 
offset by the additional expense of putting the lumber through the 
planing mill, to which Mr. Rogers has failed to call your attention. 

Mr. Rogers seeks to show that the testimony of Mr. Hines with 
respect to the weights of lumber was erroneous. Mr. Hines's testi- 
mony was to the effect that yellow pine timber weighs 4,000 pounds to 
the thousand feet, and this is verified by the table of weights issued 
by the Yellow Pine Manufacturers' Association, to which Mr. Rogers 
himself refers. 

Mr. Rogers, in this connection, states that lumber is seldom shipped 
rough. Timbers of yellow pine, or any other wood, are invariably 
shipped rough. 

ADVANTAGE TAKEN OF A MISUNDERSTANDING. 

In the print of the tariff hearings, under the subheading "As to 
stumpage values," Mr. Rogers takes advantage of a very evident and 
unintentional error in Mr. Hines's testimony to place him in the 
wrong light. Mr. Clark asked: 

"Is the lumber output, if you want tp call it that, greater in the 
United States now than it was, for instance, in 1897?" 

"No, sir," was Mr. Hines's reply. 

"Is it smaller?" asked Mr. Clark, to which Mr. Hines replied: 

"It must necessarily be smaller by the amount which has been 
cut." 

It is evident from the above that Mr. Hines misunderstood Mr. 
Clark's question, as his reply referred to the amount of standing tim- 
ber and not to the amount cut, which Mr. Rogers himself must have 
understood when reading the recoroT. 

THE EVIDENT FALLACY OF THE FREE-LUMBER ARGUMENTS. 

The brief of Mr. Rogers, together with the statements and briefs 
submitted by his associates, endeavor to show from the comparative 
statements of wages paid in this country and in Canada, from the 
statements regarding relative costs of farm supplies and the value 
of standing timber, that the cost of producing lumber in Canada is as 
much, if not more, than it is in the united States. 

In this case no doubt your committee can arrive at but one con- 
clusion, namely: If it costs more money to produce lumber in Canada 



8072 SCIII.M I.K D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

than in the Tinted States, how can the American consumer hope to 
derive any benefit from the importations of free lumber from that 
country? The admission of lumber from Canada free of duty, or 
under a reduction in the existing tariff, under those conditions, would 
not reduce the price to the American consumer and would deprive 
(>ur Government of a much-needed revenue. 

NATIONAL LUMBER MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION. 

By board of governors: 

EDWARD HINES. 

WILLIAM IRVINE. 

J. B. WHITE. 

GEO. K. SMITH, Secretary. 



FREE CANADIAN LUMBER. 

THE WOLVERINE CEDAR AND LUMBER COMPANY, MENOMINEE, 
MICH., THINKS FREE CANADIAN LUMBER WILL BENEFIT 
MANY AND HURT NO ONE. 

MENOMINEE, MICH., February 20, 1909. 
Hon. S. E. PAYNE, 

Chairman Ways and Means Committee, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We notice a great deal of discussion going on in the 
newspapers and periodicals, particularly the American Lumberman, 
of Chicago, regarding the proposed tariff reduction on lumber. The 
editor of the American Lumberman is probably influenced by his 
holdings of yellow pine, as we understand ne is quite largely interested 
in a manufacturing plant down South. 

The writer is familiar with the cost of production in Canada anil on 
the north shore of Georgian Bay; the logging bill is from $10 to $12 
per M feet; that is, the cost of getting the Fogs to the stream or railroad. 
There are no logging railroads in that vicinity, however, as it is too 
rocky to permit of railroads being built, but the general method is to 
put them in the river and drive them down to the bay and tow them 
to the mills. The cost of labor also is high, if not higher, and sup- 
plies are about the same. 

Against the above is the cost of logging in the South, which is about 
$2 to $3 per 1,000 feet for railroading the logs to the mill. The mills 
of Washington are flooding the Prairie States east of Moosejaw in 
British Columbia and Alberta with their lumber, to the detriment of 
the British Columbia lumberman, and there are millions of feet of 
Wisconsin hemlock shipped every year into western Ontario around 
London, Ingersal, and Dorchester. Yellow pine is finding its way up 
into Muskpta, Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto, so we fail to see why 
the Canadians should be expected to take our lumber free when there 
is a duty against their lumber. In our opinion it will make no differ- 
ence whatever in the price of yellow pine product, any more than it 
might prohibit some multimillionaire who got for little or nothing or 
by other means than fair a million or two dollars' worth of timber from 
cutting that said timber and flooding the market to the detriment of 
the other lumbermen who go into the market and pay for their 
stumpage what it is worth. 



FEEE CAN ADI AX LUMBER FOREST CONSERVATION. 8073 

The above is our opinion. Our timber holdings are largely on the 
Escanaba and Lake Superior Railroad in Northland, Mich., and we 
expect to get just as much if not more for our material if the duty on 
Canadian timber is removed as we do now. 
- Yours, truly, 

WOLVERINE CEDAR AND LUMBER Co., 

Per THOMPSON. 

. 



FOREST CONSERVATION. 

GIFFORD PINCHOT, CHIEF OF FOREST SERVICE OF THE UNITED 
STATES, MAKES STATEMENT TO SUBCOMMITTEE RELATIVE 
TO CONSERVATION OF FORESTS. 

WEDNESDAY, February 24, 1909. 

Q. * * * Concerning the very important question of the pres- 
ervation of the American forests, I suggested to one of the witnesses 
that our natural American supply was diminishing, and it seemed to 
develop that Canada would be almost our exclusive source of supply, 
and it then developed that the plan for conserving the American 
forests would lead to a much more speedy denuding of the Canadian 
forests, and the suggestion was made that any plan of conservation 
of forests would be inadequate if we did not take into consideration 
the preservation of the Canadian supply; in other words, there was 
a mutual interest in the adjoining countries in doing what was nec- 
essary for forest preservation, and that seemed to be assented to. I 
would like to have your opinion on that subject. A. It is rather 
interesting that late last night a conference between the United 
States, Canada, and Mexico on the conservation of natural resources 
ended its work and signed a declaration of principles, in which the 
delegates of the three countries united in a very strong statement as 
to the necessity of forest conservation in general, so that I am fully 
of the opinion that any plan for the conservation of forests in the 
United States ought to be attended, so far as it can be attended, by 
agreement between the three nations, covering the territory of each 
of the three nations, assisted by the people from each of the others. 

Q. What is being done by the three governments toward bringing 
about such an end? A. This is the first step hi this direction, and 
what will happen will be that the conclusions reached by this confer- 
ence will be laid before the three governments, and then it will be a 
question of their acting. A particular recommendation is for the 
appointment of a permanent conservation commission in each 
country. 

Q. What, advance is being made by the lumbermen themselves in 
this matter of conservation of the forests? A. Very little. When 
the white men first came into this country, we had about 850,000,000 
acres of forests ; we now have about 550,000,000. Of that 550,000,000 
there are about 200,000,000 acres of mature forests in which growth is 
offset by death and decay. There are 250,000,000 acres which is 
reproducing fully enough to produce a . fair second crop, and 
100,000,000 acres which will not yield another crop without forest 
planting. That, of course, is a very rough figure. As to the growth. 



8074 ill'l I.I l \\OOI), AMI MAM FACTrKK* OF. 

on the total area of forest land in this country it is estimated at about 
12 cubic feet per acre per annum. That is because so much of the 
forest is in bad condition. There probably would be 40 cubic feet 
per acre per annum if our forests were properly handled. We arc 
cutting timber three and one-half times as fast as we grow it, and thi- 
is very rapidly reducing the supply. Of all the forests in the United 
States about one-fourth of the acreage is held by the nation and the 
States and three-fourths in private ownership. This three-fourths 
contains about four-fifths of the standing timber. It is safe to say 
that not to exceed 1 per cent of the privately owned timber is being 
handled in a conservative way; the rest is being cut without any 
reference to the future. About 18 per cent of the whole area, includ- 
ing the national and state forests, is being handled in a conservative 
way. This means, briefly, that although our forests at present are 
producing only one-third of what we use, we are still taking no thought 
of the future and are allowing them to be destroyed, practically un- 
checked, except for the one-fourth of the total area that is in tho 
government or state ownership, so that the forest situation is a most 
serious one. We use four or five times as much timber per capita as 
the other large nations. Our whole civilization has been accustomed 
to an enormous use of wood, and when the shortage comes, as it i> 
coming, it is going to be a very serious one. The destruction of our 
forests will also have a very serious effect upon our water supply. 

We estimate now that there is hi the neighborhood of 2,500,000,- 
000,000 feet of timber in the United States and that the total use of 
wood for all purposes is about 100,000,000,000 feet a year. At that 
rate our forests would be exhausted in about twenty-five years. As a 
matter of fact they will not be exhausted in that time because of the 
growth which will take place and a lessened consumption caused by 
higher prices; but there is no question in my mind that we are ap- 
proaching very rapidly a position where we are going to suffer as a 
nation very seriously from a shortage of wood. 

Q. In that connection it has also developed in the oral hearings 
that in Great Britain and on the Continent of Europe it is almost 
impossible to see what we call a "frame house" or any fence dividing 
line constructed of lumber. What part in the annual consumption of 
lumber is borne by house and structural building and fencing in the 
United States? In other words, how great a change would it make if 
we followed in the European way in building our structures of brick 
and stone? A. It probably would make very little change in the 
total consumption. The history of the matter has been that as sub- 
stitutes for wood come in they have failed entirely to reduce the 
consumption; I do not mean the per capita consumption, but tin- 
total consumption. There is vastly more lumber used now, when 
many of our structures are of iron and steel, than when all were built 
of wood. There is vastly more used now in building ships than when 
the whole ship was built of wood. I do not anticipate that total 
exhaustion wifl come, but we shall certainly have a very serious timber 
famine. I think it will make very little "difference to the consumer 
whether he is restricted in the use of wood by the absence of wood or 
by an excessively high price. 

My judgment is that free lumber under present conditions would 
have practically no effect on the price to the consumer. 



FOREST CONSERVATION GIFFORD PINCHOT. 8075 

Q. How do you figure that? A. I believe the. Canadian stump- 
age holder and manufacturer and the dealer in the United States 
would practically take up all the profits, so that whatever benefit 
resulted would not come to the man who finally used the lumber. 

I have no definite figures as to the amount of Canadian stumpage 
owned or controlled by leases, etc. I think that in British Columbia 
perhaps half of the timber that is under leases is held by men from 
the United States, not more than half is my best judgment; it has 
been stated by some to be four-fifths, but the best information we 
can get is not more than half. 

Q. How in the rest of Canada $ A. I do not think the proportion 
is nearly as large; I would not attempt to put in percentage: there 
is considerable held in Ontario and Quebec. 

Q. It appeared that the price of stumpage had increased very rap- 
idly in the last few years in the United States, and I ask you what 
the effect the removal of the duty on lumber would be, whether it 
would operate as a check on that increase? A. So far as it had any 
effect, it would operate as a check to that increase, but I do not believe 
the effect would be large. 

As things go now, of every thousand feet of timber standing in the 
forest the quantity which actually goes into use is about 320 feet, and 
the rest is waste of different kinds about two-thirds waste. About 
one-fourth of the standing timber that might be used is wasted in 
the woods. That waste consists, of course, of the low-grade stuff, 
defective logs, etc. There are two ways of increasing our timber 
supply: One by saving what we have and getting all we can out of 
it, and the other by practicing forestry using our forest lands to 
grow wood. If prices rise so that it pays to get out the low-grade 
logs, there will be a very considerable increase in the amount of 
timber cut from a given area. If prices sink so that low-grade logs 
can not be got tsn out, the area cut over will probably oe larger, 
but there will be a large percentage of logs left in the woods. There- 
fore a low price of lumber does not tend to forest conservation. 
We can not reproduce the standing timber at the present price of 
stumpage over a very large part of the United States. I think 
there can be no doubt that a very low price of lumber does not tend 
to forest conservation. I do not believe it will be possible again 
for us to have as low-priced lumber as in the past. I do believe that 
with the rapid destruction of our forests the price wHl rapidly rise. 
The lumbermen are persuaded, either rightly or wrongly, that their 
destruction lies in the reduction of the tariff. My personal opinion 
is that the effect upon them would be slight and temporary. I do 
not believe that the conservation of the forests requires a reduction 
of the tariff, or would be aided by a reduction of the tariff. 

Q. If the result of taking off the tariff on lumber should be a large 
importation of the cheaper grades of lumber from Canada to fill the 
place of cheaper grades of American lumber, the result would neces- 
sarily be a leaving of a great deal of the smaller portions of the cut 
trees in the woods that are now taken out of the woods? A. So far 
as it had any effect on the price that would be the effect. 

Q. Would that not increase the danger of forest fires and the 
destruction of the timber by such fires? A. It would. 

Q. I understand it is expected by forestry experts that clean lum- 
bering tends to the reduction of the danger of forest fires. A. It does. 



SU7G SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OP. 

O. So that if the argument of these people \\lio are in the lumber 
business be correct, that the removal or the tariff will lead to impor- 
tations from Canada which will largely supplant the lower grade of 
American lumber, the tendency wouhf be toward forest destruction, 
if they are correct in their theory of what would happen? A. It 
would tend not so much toward forest destruction as to the waste of 
our standing timber. To grow timber a man must be reasonably 
safe against fire and the fixed charges must be reduced to a point 
where he can make a profit. The greatest charge at present is taxe- 
I have known cases in Minnesota where the tax was 6 per cent on a 
fair valuation of the timber. That means that the owner must cut 
down the timber and get rid of it just as soon as he can. One of the 
compelling reasons why lumbermen do not practice forestry is the 
present bad system of taxation. We have recommended that the 
land be taxed separately, and that the timber be taxed separately. 
Xow they tax the whole thing as timber land at a very high rate, and 
in order to save himself the owner has to cut the timber off. 

Q. While there is no real provision of law in Washington and Mis- 
sissippi, they are there assessing the timber separately from the land 
where the timber is owned separately. A. It is a question whether 
that can be done, whether if you OWTI the timber and I own the fee, 
and you pay the taxes on the timber and I fail to pay on the fee, 
the question whether my fee to the land does not carry with it your 
fee to the timber. 

Q. Do you know what the system is in Pennsylvania? A. The 
land and timber are taxed together. 

Q. The question of tariff would not have much to do with state 
taxes? A. No. 

Q. Suppose the lumbermen are right, and the removal of this tax 
of $2 should bring a flood of lumber in from Canada, would it help 
supply our demand? A. It would help supply our demand, but if 
it led to a greater waste of our forests it would retard our getting a 
permanent timber supply of our own. 

Q. K you are right in the assumption that the removal of the duty 
would have no effect upon the price, they would have the same 
incentive still to take care of the low-grade lumber, whether from 
Canada or the United States, so that would not be a very important 
factor. A. Yes. 

Q. These lumbermen admitted that the removal of the duty 
would make no appreciable difference on the price of lumber? A. I 
do not think it would make any difference to the consumer; a very 
little to the stumpage owner. My guess has been that the demand 
for the reduction of the tariff has not been so much from men who 
wanted a reduction of price to the consumer as from a general idea 
that the removal of the tariff would tend to forest conservation. 
The origin of the thing, I think, lies in a desire to save the forests 
rather than in a desire to affect the price. The lumbermen of the 
United States have gone right ahead cutting their timber without 
reference to the future, and if we are not to have a great calamity 
from lack of timber that -has got to be stopped. It seems to me that 
the tariff question is subordinate to this great question of getting our 
forests saved. The lumbermen now say, and have said for a great 
many years, that they are anxious for forestry. It seems to me it is 
the duty of the lumbermen to assist in bringing about systems of fire 



FOREST CONSERVATION GIFFORD PINCHOT. 8077 

protection, wiser taxation, etc., which will save the forests, and if 
they do not do it voluntarily, then the nation and States must either 
force the lumbermen to conserve the forests or do it themselves. 

Q. What percentage of the standing timber in private ownership 
is held by lumber companies and corporations for speculation? A. I 
do not know. It is a considerable percentage; there has been an 
investigation by the Bureau of Corporations, and I think the figures 
are not complete yet. It is an increasing percentage, in my judgment. 

Q. Describe what you mean by low-grade lumber. A. You take 
a 24-inch tree in the woods; cut that tree down; say there are four 
logs in it. The first log will produce the largest amount of clear 
lumber, the second a smaller percentage, and the third a large per- 
centage of common lumber, and the fourth still poorer lumber. The 
cost of logging 1,000 feet of clear lumber as compared with 1,000 
feet of common lumber is the same in the woods; cost of sawing is 
the same. At certain prices it will pay to take out two logs, because 
the third log will not pay the cost of logging and sawing. At higher 
prices you would take three logs. That is an exact illustration, I 
think, of the way the price affects the waste in the woods. So the 
lower priced lumber is, the more logs would be allowed to remain to 
rot or burn. 

Q. Do you think the time has not arrived when the whole tree is 
taken out? A. Over a large part of the United States it has not; 
there is a great deal of waste in the South and West yet. 

Q. In the last fifteen years the price of the lower grade of lumber 
has advanced from $10 to $20 a thousand; at $20 a thousand there 
is a good profit in taking the common grades and shipping it to any 
part of the United States? A. I think that is a price to the con- 
sumer and not to the manufacturer, but the price the manufacturer 
gets decides what he can take out. 

Q. Do you assume that the advance of 100 per cent has not had 
the effect of taking the entire tree to be cut up into merchantable 
shape and that we have not reached the point where low grades are 
all consumed? A. I think not. There has not been an advance of 
100 per cent in the price received by the manufacturer. 

Q. There has been a new factor coming in in the production of 
paper; what effect has that had on the price? A. It is limited so 
far, almost entirely to one or two species, and has had no effect on 
ordinary logging. I mean it has had very little effect on the method 
of ordinary logging. The total consumption for paper is very small. 
I want to make clear the difference between saving waste and grow- 
ing forests. What the lumbermen have spoken of mainly was saving 
the waste. 

Q. The higher the price, of lumber goes, the more rapidly it is cut 
off? A. I think not. 

Q. What inducement has the lumbermen to hold logs in the face 
of very high prices ? A. There is certain amount of capital invested 
in mills now. That capital, if it is allowed to lie idle, involves a very 
large loss. It pays a man better to keep his mill running, even at a 
small loss. Therefore the change of price does not have as rapid 
effect as it otherwise would have. A man who would otherwise shut 
down his mill simply leaves a few logs in the woods, and takes out 
from each tree the best and fewer logs. The lumbermen take from 
the tree now everything that they can get out at a profit; no doubt 

61318 A 



8078 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

about that. There is a great deal of waste left in the woods. As the 
price rises it will pay to market the standing timber much more 
closely; thev can tnen use the low-grade lumber. We do not begin 
to use our forests anything like as closely as they do in Europe; I 
mean as to what we leave in the woods. The brush is the greatest 
source of fire danger. If the stumpage owner gets 50 cents more 
from the logs than he otherwise would, he can afford to put a larger 
part of that into the disposal of the brush than he could if the margin 
was small. 

Q. Then your argument would tend toward a higher duty to pre- 
vent importation? A. I think the trend, whether there is addition 
to the tariff or not, is toward higher prices ; that nothing will prevent 
it, not even taking the tariff off. 

Q. You have been investigating for some two or three years the 
question of trusts or combinations on lumber; state what you have 
found. A. I can not state what the Bureau of Corporations has 
found, but my own conclusion is purely of a negative nature. I have 
not now and never have had any evidence of a lumber trust. My 
information does not lead me to believe that there is any great lum- 
ber trust. 

O. The high price prevailing at the retail yards is not due to the 
high price of lumber at the point of manufacture? A. You ask there 
one of the most difficult or all the questions; the relation between 
the manufacturers, retailers, and line yards is one of the things I do 
not understand. The Bureau of Corporations is investigating them 
and have not yet reached a conclusion, and I have no information 
sufficient to permit me to speak about it. Whether there are com- 
binations to affect the price in restricted localities or not I do not 
know. I do not think the situation is at present such as to make 
possible a lumber trust affecting the whole United States. It is 
true that a large number of capitalists have been engaged during the 
last few years buying up the stumpage. There is no question but 
that a greater profit has been made from rises in stumpage prices 
than from the manufacture of lumber. 

Q. Then your position is there is no hope for the ultimate con- 
sumer? A. I do not think that he will ever get lumber much cheaper 
than he does now. 

Q. If you were a member of this committee, would you vote to 
leave the tariff on as it is, to reduce it to $1, or make it free? A. 
Personally I would be in favor of letting the tariff alone. I believe 
the best results, all things considered, will follow if it is allowed to 
remain as it is. 

Q. What effect would it have on the price of lumber in the United 
States if the Canadian supply was stopped? A. The Canadian 
supply is only about 5 per cent; less than 5 per cent is imported. 

Q. You do not mean to say that the Canadian supply is 5 per 
cent? A. Less than 5 per cent. 

Q. I am speaking of the marketable commodity; is it not larger 
than 5 per cent? A. I understand not. The total annual importa- 
tion is less than a billion feet of lumber now; we cut fortv billion feet 
from our own forests. Were the importations of lumber from Canada 
to be doubled with free lumber they would then amount to only 5 
per cent of our own cut. 



FOREST. CONSERVATION BASKETS. 8079 

Q. An important element in forest conservation, from your stand- 
point, is to make the price of lumber so high as will pay the lumber- 
men to reforest? A. That is an important element. If the duty 
was removed from lumber it probably would not affect the price to 
the consumer. If it had any effect it would be a slight reduction in 
the price that the stumpage holder the man who owns the timber 
land gets for his timber. 

Q. If the price here was the same, it seems to me that the value of 
stumpage would remain the same? A. I think there would be very 
little change one way or the other. 

Q. You are of the opinion that it costs substantially as much to 
produce lumber in Canada as in the United States ? A. Substantially, 
yes. 

Q. What effect would an increased tariff have? A. If it worked as 
usual, it would raise the price of lumber. I do not think the con- 
sumer is ever going to get cheaper lumber, unless in a panic. 

Q. At one time your opinion was that the conservation of spruce 
timber in this country could be obtained by allowing wood pulp and 
print paper to come in at a lower rate of duty? A. I am in a rather 
unfortunate position to answer that question. I have not taken that 
matter up again, but shall take it up within the next week. 

Q. We cut timber only for profit; is there any place in the world 
where they grow timber for profit? A. Yes. 

Q. Is there any place where they grow timber for profit unless 
their cutting is regulated by the Government? A. Yes; England, 
France, Germany, etc., all over Europe. 



BASKETS. 

[Paragraph 206.] 

NEW YORK IMPORTERS AND MANUFACTURERS OF BASKETS 
AND WILLOW WARE ASK A SPECIFIC CLASSIFICATION. 



T YORK CITY, February 6, 1909. 
To THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

\V(isMngton, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We, the undersigned importers and manufacturers 
of baskets and willow ware, desire to be heard in favor of a moderate 
and equitable rate of duty upon baskets and the raw material for 
baskets. 

We would, first of all, call attention to the urgent necessity of 
providing for a uniform rate of duty upon baskets. Under the pres- 
ent act, and, indeed, under all tariff acts since the repeal of the act of 
1883, baskets have paid duty as manufactures of the material of 
which they were composed. Under the Dingley Act, for example. 
manufactures of the different materials take different rates of duty. 
Thus, to illustrate, baskets composed of straw pay a duty of 30 per 
cent under paragraph 449 as manufactures of straw. Baskets com- 
posed of chip take the same rate under the same paragraph. On the 
other hand, baskets composed of willow pay 40 per cent ad valorem 
under paragraph 206 as manufactures of willow. It is a well-known 



8080 SCHEDULE D WOOD, AM' MANUFACTURES OF. 

fact, under the development of the basket industry, that baskets are 
composed in part of one material and in part of another. It is not 
unusual t<> (ind one composed of several materials. Great difficulty 
is found by the classifying officials, and, indeed, by experts in the 
trade, in determining the component material of chief value. The 
n-Milt has been much controversy, litigation, and annoyance, which 
could all be obviated by a uniform rate for baskets. We strongly 
urge upon this committee a return to the policy of the act of 1883, 
which contained this provision, known as paragraph 395: 

Buckets and all other articles composed of grass, osier, palm leaf, whalebone, or 
willow, or straw, not specially enumerated or provided for in this act, thirty per 
centum ad valorem. 

There would seem to be no sound reason for not providing for such 
a well-known article of commerce specifically. 

Osier, or willow, prepared for basket makers' use is a well-known 
article of commerce, which under the present act is provided for under 
paragraph 206 at 20 per cent ad valorem. It is the raw material 
which is absolutely necessary to manufacturers of baskets, and as 
such is indispensable. We understand that representations have 
been made to this committee alleging the necessity for the imposi- 
tion of a high rate of duty upon this material, on the ground that 
excessive protection is needed to build up what is now conceded to be 
a scarcely existing industry. We are informed that a rate of 50 ptr 
cent ad valorem has been suggested upon peeled willow. Such a rate 
would be harsh and absolutely destructive. The American variety 
of willow is not adapted for use in making the superior grade of 
baskets. The area producing such osier, or willow, is limited practi- 
cally to certain lowland sections in France and Germany. The 
imported willow has a peculiar fiber and quality, due doubtless to 
the soil and climate, which the native willow utterly lacks. We 
append to this petition three letters from well-known manufacturers 
of willow ware, which corroborate and emphasize these assertions. 
We commend them earnestly to serious consideration as the practical 
statements of practical men who speak from experience. We submit 
that instead of imposing what would practically be a prohibitive rate 
of duty upon this necessary raw material, the same quality of which 
experience has shown can not be grown in this country, would not only 
impose a needless burden upon American manufacturers of baskets, 
but also result in a serious shrinkage of revenue. 

The highest rate imposed upon any grade of baskets for many years 
has been the present rate of 40 per cent on willow baskets. Tjnder 
the present act baskets of straw, as above pointed out, pay 30 per 
cent. Under the act of 1894 baskets paid a practically uniform rate 
of 25 per cent, the rate for manufactures of willow, chip, straw, etc., 
happening to be the same. W T e would suggest as fair and equitable 
to all parties a return to this rate, and a special provision for osier 
or willow prepared for basket makers' use at 15 per cent ad valorem. 
It should not be overlooked in this connection that the finer grades 
of baskets and fancy baskets in general make up the great bulk of 
those imported. They are not, and can not be, made in this country. 
\Vr have not got the workmen. 

We strenuously deny that "importers are allowed to make their 
own valuation on willows and baskets." Such goods are subjected 
to the same supervision as other varieties of merchandise. There 



BASKETS. 8081 

has been no undervaluation, and no official complaint of undervalua- 
tion. The volume of importations has, indeed, scarcely kept pace 
with the increase in population. It is absolutely absurd to multiply 
the value of importations for one year by three, on the ground that 
the invoice prices "are often only one-third of the original price." 
Such assertions are flagrantly misleading, and have no foundation 
in facts. 

We suggest in the new tariff a provision substantially as follows: 

Baskets composed of grass, osier, palm leaf, willow, chip, straw, or other vegetable 
fiber, or of which these substances or either of them is the component material of 
chief value, twenty-five per centum ad valorem. 

Osier or willow prepared for basket makers' use, fifteen per centum ad valorem. 

Respectfully, 

CHARLES ZINN & Co., 

138-140 Grand street, New York. 
A. LEIPZIG (INC.), 

426 Broome street, New York. 
KRAUSS & Co., 

11 and 13 W. Houston street, New York. 
THE BASKET IMPORTING Co. (!NC.), 

139 Duane street, New York. 



EXHIBIT A. 

138 AND 140 GRAND STREET, 

New York, February 4, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: We, Charles Zinn & Co., as the largest importers of willows, are ap- 
proached by the undersigned New York manufacturers of willow furniture, to protest 
to your honorable body against an increase of duty on imported French and German 
willows. 

The reasons are as follows: The United States grows only about 40 per cent of the 
willows consumed by manufacturers in this country, and we are compelled to buy in 
Europe the qualities of willows which are principally used for manufacturing furni- 
ture. The willows that grow in different sections of the United States are consumed 
in those sections and are by far not enough for their immediate needs, as we 
can show by sales of imported willows to the manufacturers in all the individual 
States in the United States. The willows that are produced in this country are cheaper 
than any good quality French or German willow, nevertheless the manufacturer can 
not get along without French or German willows. 

The willow growers in this country will not be able to produce in the next ten years 
one-half of the raw material that will be needed by the manufacturer of willow goods. 
On the above grounds we respectfully submit that a lower tariff on imported French 
and German willows will work toward the upbuilding of willow ware manufacturing in 
this country, while a higher tariff will drive the best established factories out of 
existence. Therefore we ask for a reduction of the tariff on raw material (willows) to 
10 per cent. 

CHARLES ZINN & Co., 

138-140 Grand Street, New York City. 
THE PAHLOW REED & WILLOW MFG. Co., 
128 West Thirty-third Street. 
M. FRAENKEL, Treasurer. 
ALBERT SPESHING, 

354 Third Avenue. 



SCHEDULE D WOOD, AND MANUFACTURES OF. 

EXHIBIT B. 

NEW YORK, February 4, 1909. 
WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, 

Washington, D. C. 

GENTLEMEN: At the invitation of Messrs. Charles Zinn & Co., of Now York City, we 
are pleased to place before your committee some facts regarding willows taken from 
practical everyday experience in our shops. 

The willows grown in this country, which we try from time to time, are entirely 
inadequate to our needs. They weigh much heavier than the French or German 
willows, that is, there are many less willows to the pound, and the small sizes, espe- 
rially, are so far inferior to the imported willows that we have actually never been able 
to use them for our purposes. The French and German willow? are also far easier for 
the workmen to handle, being less tough and more pliable, and we have found finally 
that our goods are of much better workmanship, and therefore of better appearance 
(which is one of our aims in manufacturing) when made of the imported willows