The total amount of bearings used by the concerns mentioned is easy to ascertain, and I have positive knowledge that many orders ranging from $50,000 to $150,000 each have been placed during 1907 for the foreign make of bearings.

If you will kindly let me know what other information you desire me to supply to you, I shall be glad to do it. You, of course, understand that it is impossible for me to give you accurate data as to the exact number of bearings purchased by the different concerns, or the exact amount of the purchase. I can, however, supply a list showing the number of automobiles manufactured by the majority of the concerns mentioned, together with the number of bearings which they use on a car, but I think that you would prefer to secure this information from some other sources, so as to have it absolutely accurate.

There are a large number of concerns that have purchased a larger amount in value of foreign ball bearings in one year than the total imports, amounting to $47,000, which was reported as being the full amount shown in the records of the Treasury Department.

In the package of bearings which I left with you, you will find one bearing consisting of two rings with balls between them, which constitutes an annular ball bearing, and which is similar to the bearing shown on the page of our catalogue which we herewith inclose.

This type of bearing could be imported so that the balls would be classified under their proper heading, while the rings, constituting the races and cones, might be imported as steel and duty paid upon them at that rate. If this is the case, it is entirely wrong, as the greater portion of the value of the bearing is in the rings, the balls representing perhaps 10 per cent of the cost of the completed bearing. If any further information is desired, I shall be pleased to furnish it to you.

Yours, very truly,

S. S. EVELAND, President.

Users of foreign annular ball bearings.

Holley Brothers Company, Detroit, Mich.; McCarthy Brothers & Ford, Buffalo, N. Y.; New Process Raw Hide Company, Syracuse, N. Y.; Long Arm System Company, Cleveland, Ohio; A. O. Smith Company, Milwaukee, Wis.; Brown & Lipe Company, Syracuse, N. Y.; Warner Gear Company, Muncie, Ind.; Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company, Pittsburg, Pa.; General Electric Company, Schenectady, N. Y.; General Electric Company, West Lynn, Mass.; Western Electric Company, Chicago, Ill.; Heinze Electric Company, Lowell, Mass.; Continental Motor Manufacturing Company, Muskegon, Mich.; Albert Champion Company, Boston, Mass.; Jeffrey Manufacturing Company, Columbus, Ohio; Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, Ohio; J. H. Lehman & Co., New York, N. Y.

Users of foreign steel balls.

The White Company, Cleveland, Ohio; American Ball Bearing Company, Cleveland, Ohio; Stanley Motor Carriage Company, Newton, Mass.; Illinois Sewing Machine Company, Rockford, Ill.; National Sewing Machine Company, Belvidere, Ill.; Sharpless Cream Separator Company, West Chester, Pa.; Chicago Roller Skate Company, Chicago, Ill.; Buick Automobile Company, Flint, Mich.; Olds

Motor Works, Lansing, Mich.; Garford Company, Elyria, Ohio; S. P. Townsend & Co., Orange, N. J.; Sheldon Axle Company, Wilkes-Barre, Pa.

Automobile manufacturers using foreign annular ball bearings.

Acme Motor Car Company, Reading Pa.; Allen-Kingston Motor Car Company, Kingston, N. Y.; American Locomobile Company, Providence, R. I.; American Motor Car Company, Indianapolis, Ind.; Austin Automobile Company, Grand Rapids, Mich.; Belden Motor Car Company, Pittsburg, Pa.; Cadillac Motor Car Company, Detroit, Mich.; Cameron Car Company, Beverly, Mass.; Chadwick Engineering Works, Pottstown, Pa.; Chalmers-Detroit Motor Company, Detroit, Mich.; Cleveland Motor Car Company, New York, N. Y.; Colburn Automobile Company, Denver, Colo.; Columbus Buggy Company, Columbus, Ohio; Corbin Motor Vehicle Corporation, New Britain, Conn.; Daimler Manufacturing Company, Long Island City, N. Y.; Dayton Motor Car Company, Dayton, Ohio; De Luke Motor Car Company, Detroit, Mich.; Electric Vehicle Company, Hartford, Conn.; Elmore Manufacturing Company, Clyde, Ohio; H. H. Franklin Manufacturing Company, Syracuse, N. Y.; Garford Company, Elyria, Ohio; Knox Automobile Company, Springfield, Mass.; Locomobile Company of America, Bridgeport, Conn.; Lorraine Automobile Manufacturing Company, Chicago, Ill.; Lozier Motor Company, New York, N. Y.; Nordyke & Marmon Company, Indianapolis, Ind.; Matheson Motor Car Company, WilkesBarre, Pa.; Mitchell Motor Car Company, Racine, Wis.; Mora Motor Car Company, Newark, N. Y.; National Motor Vehicle Company, Indianapolis, Ind.; Olds Motor Works, Lansing, Mich.; Packard Motor Car Company, Detroit, Mich.; Peerless Motor Car Company, Cleveland, Ohio; George N. Pierce Company, Buffalo, N. Y.; Pope Motor Car Company, Toledo, Ohio; Premier Motor Manufacturing Company, Indianapolis, Ind.; York Motor Car Company, York, Pa.; Pungs-Finch Automobile and Gas Engine Company, Detroit, Mich.; Rainier Company, Saginaw, Mich.; Royal Motor Car Company, Cleveland, Ohio; Simplex Automobile Company, New York, N. Y.; F. B. Stearns Company, Cleveland, Ohio; Stevens-Duryea Company, Chicopee Falls, Mass.; Stilson Motor Car Company, Pittsfield, Mass.; Studebaker Automobile Company, Cleveland, Ohio; E. R. Thomas Motor Company, Buffalo, N. Y.; Walter Automobile Company, Trenton, N. J. Winton Motor Carriage Company, Cleveland, Ohio; Woods Motor Vehicle Company, Chicago, Ill.; Anderson Carriage Company, Detroit, Mich.; Babcock Electric Carriage Company, Buffalo, N. Y.; Baker Motor Vehicle Company, Cleveland, Ohio; Waverly Company, Indianapolis, Ind.; Rauch & Lang Carriage Company, Cleveland, Ohio; Mack Brothers Motor Car Company, Allentown, Pa.; Elwell Parker Electric Company, Cleveland, Ohio.

Importers of foreign ball bearings.

Hess-Bright Manufacturing Company, 2101 Fairmount avenue, Philadelphia, Pa.; J. S. Bretz Company, 410 Times Building, New York, N. Y.; Lavalette & Co., 112 West Forty-second street, New York, N. Y.; Barthel & Daly, 42 Broadway, New York, N. Y.; R. I. V. Company, 1771 Broadway, New York, N. Y.

Importers of steel balls.

Herman Boker & Co., New York, N. Y.; J. S. Bretz & Co., New York, N. Y.; Brandenburg Brothers Company, Chicago, Ill.

THE PACKARD MOTOR CAR COMPANY, DETROIT, MICH., ADVOCATES RETENTION OF THE PRESENT DUTY ON ANTIFRICTION BALL BEARINGS.

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE,

DETROIT, MICH., December 19, 1908.

Chairman Ways and Means Committee,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: Relative to duty on ball bearings, I would like to register with the Ways and Means Committee the attitude of this company toward the duty on ball bearings. This company favors the retention of the existing duty, namely, 45 per cent, on ball bearings. We are now large importers of ball bearings, importing over $100,000 worth from Germany and other European countries each year, on which we pay 45 per cent duty. We do this because there are no ball bearings made in America of the same quality and durability as those which we import. We feel that with the existing tariff the American ball-bearing manufacturers may learn to make better bearings, as good as those in Germany, in the course of time. In this event the American competition would naturally reduce the price. American ball-bearing manufacturers have not yet gotten to a competitive basis. They have all been so busy supplying a new trade that it was more of a question to get the stuff out than it was as to price or quality, but the whole situation is rapidly shaking itself down to a competitive basis.

Yours, very truly,

PACKARD MOTOR CAR Co.,
HENRY J. B. Joy, President.

STEEL HOOPS, BANDS, AND COTTON TIES.

[Paragraph 128.]

WALLACE H. ROWE, OF PITTSBURG, PA., PROTESTS AGAINST REDUCTION OF DUTIES ON THESE ARTICLES.

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE,

PITTSBURG, December 3, 1908.

Chairman Ways and Means Committee.

DEAR SIR: As a manufacturer of steel hoops, steel bands, and steel cotton ties, and the authorized representative of other manufacturers of this class of product, I beg to submit to you the following suggestions as to tariff on these commodities:

Our average wages per day for years 1906, 1907, and 1908 were as follows:

Average wages for same work in Germany and Belgium:

Heaters

Rolling-mill hands.

Mechanics

Laborers

$1.65-$1.88 1.88-2.35 1. 16-1.43 .75- .83

The ocean freight from seaports of Germany and Belgium to our Atlantic Ocean and Gulf ports is less than the railroad freight from steel manufacturing centers to the same destinations. Hence, these advantages of the foreign manufacturer can be met, if the tariff is removed, only by such reduction of wages as will enable us to meet that competition at the Atlantic seaboard. Of course, as you recede from the Atlantic seaboard these factors change in our favor, because the railroad freight rates diminish relatively on our products and increase on the foreign products.

It is therefore evident that if the tariff is taken off steel hoops, steel bands, and steel cotton ties, we must reduce or surrender the Atlantic coast and Gulf trade to the foreigners. This will include substantially the entire cotton-tie trade, because all of the cotton is baled at Atlantic and Gulf ports or near-by points. Furthermore, the producers of cotton realize a profit instead of being at an expense in the use of cotton ties in the baling of cotton, for the reason that all cotton is sold at the total gross weight as shown per bale. This includes bagging and ties.

Even at the present tariff of five-tenths of a cent per pound, the imports of cotton ties have been as follows:

From this it seems that we are now on or near to the point of foreign invasion of steel cotton ties. Hoops are similar products, manufactured of the same materials and in the same mills as cotton ties.

If a reduction is made in the present protective tariff, wages must be reduced proportionately or the trade surrendered. I would consider any reduction of the present tariff as compelling a surrender to the foreign manufacturers of our steel hoop trade in New England and Atlantic seaboard, and of our steel cotton tie market in substantially the entire cotton belt. Respectfully submitted.

WALLACE H. ROWE.

COTTON TIES AND JUTE BAGGING.

[Paragraphs 129 and 344.]

HON. BOURKE COCKRAN, M. C., SUBMITS MEMORIAL OF THE NEW ORLEANS COTTON EXCHANGE.

NEW ORLEANS, LA., November 9, 1908. Whereas the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives will meet in the near future to hear argument in relation to tariff amendments; and

Whereas the present tariff on jute bagging used for baling cotton and on steel cotton ties amounts to 9 cents or more per bale; and

Whereas this tax is a direct burden on the cotton-raising industry of the South for the benefit of a few manufacturers who are thus enabled to thrive at the expense of the most important class of agriculturists in this country: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the New Orleans Cotton Exchange earnestly urges that all bagging and ties used in the baling of cotton be put on the free list.

Resolved, That our Senators and Representatives in Congress from Louisiana and those from the other cotton States be earnestly urged to present this matter before the Committee on Ways and Means, or any other congressional committee before which it may be considered, in such light as will prove the justice of our request and the urgency for all proper relief in the premises.

A true copy.

H. G. HESTER,
Secretary.

THE NATIONAL COTTON ASSOCIATION, ATLANTA, GA., URGES THE SPEEDY REPEAL OF THE PRESENT DUTIES ON COTTON TIES AND JUTE BAGGING FOR COTTON.

ATLANTA, GA., December 8, 1908.

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS,

Washington, D. C.

GENTLEMEN: As an official representative of the cotton-growing interests of the South I desire to file with your committee an urgent appeal for a speedy repeal by the Federal Government of the present duty on imported iron cotton ties and imported jute bagging used as a covering for cotton. It is quite evident that the American manufacturers of these two articles do not now require the present protective tariff levied as an import duty on these commodities. It should be borne in mind that the purchase of bagging and ties by the cotton. growers of the South is a distinct and definite loss to them, as their customers, the spinners, both in this country and Europe, only pay for the actual weight of the lint cotton, tare being always deducted in the price of the original purchase from the growers. This being true, it should be the duty of the Federal Government to see that this very large class of its citizens should be protected against the unnecessary expenditures of their earnings for articles which are protected from outside competition by high and useless import duties.