« AnteriorContinuar »
List showing a number of articles for which a reduction of the duty might be found well
Guns, for whale hunting.....
Brandy and punch...
Probable 45 per cent (see also pars. 156
and 157.) D, 201 50 cents per 1,000 feet and additional
50 cents to 150 cents per 1,000 feet. D, 215
35 per cent.
2 cents per pound.
2 cents per pound to 50 per cent ad
to $2.60 per proof gallon.
50 per cent.
cents pound, manila cent pound.
6 cents per gross.
Wrapping paper and paper not specially provided for.
Nitrate of calcium.-In the bill voted by last Congress concerning the revision of the chemical schedule this product was placed on the free list as a compound of calcium. This product being a fertilizer of equal value as nitrate of natrium, it is supposed that these two products will continue to be on the free list. For the minister of Norway.
W. M. JOHANNESSEN,
Secretary of Legation.
Referring to the legation's memorandum of January 25 last, concerning some items in the customs tariff act, the legation begs to draw the attention to the fact that the American mackerel fisheries no longer are of the same importance as they were when the duty on mackerel was fixed. While in earlier years the mackerel fisheries in the United States were very important, now only a few thousand barrele are yearly salted. The reasons for protecting the American fisheries against the foreign competition in salted mackerel, which is used as ordinary food by common people, therefore do not seem to exist any longer.
The minister of Norway should appreciate very much if a copy of this memorandum could, through the kind intervention of the State Department, be transmitted to the Committee on Ways and Means.
STATEMENT OF PUSTAU & CO., REGARDING SEVERAL TARIFF
New YORK, January 25, 1913. Honorable COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Dear Sirs: While it is not likely that sugar will be put on the free list, will you permit me to point out to you that even if a reduction in the present duties on sugar should be contemplated, such a lower duty will be immediately reflected by higher prices of foreign sugars, particularly beet sugar, and that whatever the reduction may amount to, will be equalized immediately by a higher cost of importation here. At the same time, the beet-sugar industry in this country which, if left alone, will gradually work to constantly increasing figures, would be seriously jeopardized. Last years' production amounted to about 600,000 tons, against an importation of sugars of 2,200,000 tons. A duty on sugar is the best revenue that any country can have, as it is easily collectible, and the whole population of a country contributes toward it.
For the same reason I have always advocated a duty on coffees, teas, and particularly spices. An ounce of pepper, when ground up, retails for 5 cents per ounce. The wholesale price of Singapore pepper unground, to-day is under 11 cents per pound. White Singapore pepper is worth about 18 cents. A duty of 5 cents on spices (and double this rate for ground spices), including cinnamon, ginger, cassia, nutmegs, mace, etc., is easily collectible, and while the total amounts to quite large quantities per annum, the average consumption per capita is probably less than 1 pound per annum.
In a similar way a duty on tapioca, not the four which is used for manufacturing, but the tapioca pearl and flake, of from 1 to 2 cents per pound would be worth collecting. It is retailed for about 10 cents per pound or even more, and the average cost is seldom over 5 cents. People who eat tapioca puddings will hardly feel such duty. The total aggregate of importations in the United States is in the neighborhood of 4,000 tons per annum.
Referring to the so-often expressed intention to reduce the cost of living, or reduction on food imports, in relation to this I believe that it would recommend itself to allow egg albumen and egg yolk in powder form, to be put on the free list. The Chinese are exporting to Europe tremendous quantities of both of these articles, costing in the neighborhood of 40 cents per pound. With the scarcity of eggs, particularly at certain seasons of the year, these two products are of great help to tho candy manufacturers, and should therefore be put on the free list. Albumen is also used largely for technical purposes.
I, however, would recommend a reduction in the duty, or in fact, would advocate the putting on the free list of all bale made of fiber, other than hemp, costing less than 50 cents per dozen first cost in producing countries, not of hats that are sewed together, but are woven by hand. A great many of these hats come now from Java, and our farmers use them largely, paying 25 cents per piece. They can probably be sold for 15 cents per piece if the duty, which is now 35 per cent, were taken off. Finer quality fiber hats, exceeding the cost of 50 per dozen, should pay the same duty as they pay now, as they are made up here into more expensive hats.
Fiber hats also come from China; grass hats, and hats made of chip (wood), and those costing 50 cents or less per dozen first cost should also come in here free of duty:
A careful examination of Japanese curios will probably lead your committee to come to the conclusion that it hardly pays to collect duty on these. We would advocate that fans costing less than 5 cents per piece first cost should all be admitted here free of duty. They make an article which is sold here by the 5 and 10 cent stores, and the samples which we have and can submit to you will readily convince you that it would be almost impossible to make any such goods here, anywhere near the price that they can be bought for in Japan, and the duty of 50 per cent would not be a protection for the manufacturer, while it is a burden for the poorer classes who need fans in hot weather just as much as other people.
It would carry matters too far for me to go into further details and particulars regarding these different matters in writing, but if you feel interested the writer willingly will go over the entire list and give you an extract of what his experience would suggest you to do.
I recommend a duty on human hair, whether raw or clean and drawn, but not manufactured, of 25 or 30 per cent ad valorem, and 50 per cent on all hair which has been manufactured. Hair of this kind is nothing but an article of luxury, and Chinese and Japanese hair of the cheaper kind can well stand a duty of 25 or 30 per cent ad valorem. The cost of importation is from 70 cents to $1 per pound, according to quality, while Italian hair is selling from $3 to $10 and $20 per pound, and is often
sold when it is manufactured here at that price per ounce. If you will look at the rating of most of the hair manufacturing houses in New York City you will find that they have all accumulated a great deal of money.
Hair combings used for mattresses and stuffings, etc., in value. less than 15 cents per pound, imported in bales, should come in here free of duty, because it is not manufactured into hair, but used as a cheap upholstery article.
Braids for plaiting hats, straw plait, hemp plait, grass plait, etc., shall all come in here free of duty, while the duty on manufactured hats untrimmed should remain 35 per cent and on lined hats ready for wear remain at 50 per cent. The competition of England and Japan itself on hats made of panese and Chinese strawbraids is so strong that English-made hats are coming in here in large quantities every season in spite of the 35 per cent ad valorem duty.
Straw plait now pays 15 or 20 per cent if colored or dyed. Straw plait twice or three times in my experience was on the free list. The manufacture of mackinaw is so insignificant that it cuts no figure in the manufacture of hats, and there are no cheap fibers in the United States which lend themselves to the manufacture of hats.
Another article which can very well stand the duty without interfering particularly with the cost of production would be a duty of 25 per cent on rubber unmanu. factured, with double this duty on rubber which has been advanced by chemical process in value and is imported here practically without any loss when manufactured here, owing to the impurities being eliminated. Para rubber, which sold about two years ago at over $2 per pound, and has probably averaged for the last two years over $1.50, is now selling at $1.05 to $1.10, according to quality. This rubber shrinks about 10 to 11 per cent in moisture, while Ceylon sheet rubber, with probably no loss, sells for $1.15. per pound, and crude rubber containing impurities from 18 to 25 per cent, is worth about 75 cents per pound. The rubber trade has been so wonder: fully prosperous in the last few years, the consumption having immensely increased, and as a great deal of it goes into automobiles and other articles of luxury the duty would never be felt..
While I favor a revenue tax on manufactured tobacco in our own country, foreign tobaccos, which are imported here from Sumatra, China, Turkey, etc., should come in free of duty, because it would greatly improve the quality of the smoking material in the United States and at the same time hardly affect the prices of American tobacco, of which, according to statistics, a great proportion is exported to Europe and furnishes France and Germany. and Italy with cheap tobacco. I beg to remain, dear sirs, very truly, yours,
BRIEF OF B. F. TAYLOR, REPRESENTING SOUTH CAROLINA
COTTONSEED CRUSHERS ASSOCIATION.
COLUMBIA, S. C., January 8, 1913. The WAYS AND MEANS CỌMMITTEE,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC. GENTLEMEN: On behalf of the cottonseed oil mills doing business in the State of South Carolina, of which there are 1ll mills actually engaged in such manufacture, and whose combined capital amounts to nearly $7,000,000, employing 3,600 persons, and spending for various expenses over $11,000,000, and the value of whose products in the course of a year amounts to $13,217,000, I wish to present for your consideration several items of the tariff of 1909 which in our opinion should be revised, and which will materially aid the manufacturers of cottonseed products and the consumers of
Paragraphs 73, 75: Alkalis are used in the refining of cottonseed oil, and a reduction in the rate of duty on these articles is desirable from our standpoint.
Paragraph 38: Edible olive oil now takes a duty of 50 cents per gallon. This oil competes with cottonseed oil, and from our standpoint it should be given no advantage over our product. Italy discriminates against cottonseed oil in its duty, and we can see no reason why we should admit the Italian product at a low duty to compete with our product.
Paragraph 90: Fullers earth is used in the refining of cottonseed oil, and we have never yet been able to find a satisfactory substitute for the English fuller's earth, which now takes a heavy duty. This duty should be removed.
Paragraph 125: Cotton ties are used in the putting up of bales of linters manufactured by the oil mills, as well as in the ginning operations, and any tariff on cotton ties affects directly the farmers who produce the cotton as well as the oil mills. The duty should be removed.
Paragraph 128: Tin cans and tubs are used by the manufacturers of cotton oil and lard compounds, and any reduction that can be secured on tin plate will be of material benefit to the industry, as well as to consumers.
Paragraph 210. Oil barrels, lard tierces, tubs, and soap boxes are incidental to the marketing of cottonseed oil and its compounds, as well as soap. The present duty on these articles is 30 per cent ad valorem. Oil barrels and tierces are getting very scarce and going up in price on account of scarcity of material. A reduction in the duty on these articles will be of material benefit to manufacturers and consumers.
Paragraph 249. There are more oil mills in the United States, with greater capacity, than there is production of cotton seed. If we could get a seed that we could work during the summer months that would be easily stored, it would materially benefit the industry: Soya beans, on which there is a duty now of 40 cents per bushel, are eminently suited for crushing with our present machinery, and the oil made from them is rapidly becoming a factor in the manufacture of soap. There is no reason why there should be a duty on the beans, since the oil manufactured from these beans in England is admitted to this country free of duty.
Paragraph 288. The present duty on lard is 14 cents per pound. The cottonseed oil industry is opposed to a reduction in the duty on lard, since if it is reduced or placed on the free list it would result in competition with the edible oil and cooking fats produced by the cottonseed oil industry. If the duty is entirely removed the American market may be flooded with inferior lard, which is produced in China in great quantities. At the present time Congress itself imposes a duty upon cottonseed oil compound in the shape of oleomargarine in order to protect the butter industry. There is no reason why our product should be discriminated against, and the modicum of protection afforded in the duty on lard and other oils introduced into this country is certainly needed by the industry.
Paragraph 352. A material reduction in the duty on bags and sacks would be of material aid to the oil mills. At the present time our expense for bags amounts to at least $1 a ton for sacking our products, and a reduction in this cost would result in a corresponding reduction in the price asked from the consumer for our products.
Paragraph 355. We are in favor of the removal of the duty on bagging for cotton, as nearly all oil mills are ginners of cotton, and a reduction would benefit the farmers as well, as they would have the option of buying their own bagging if they saw fit to do so.
Paragraph 370. We think that if any reduction is made in the woolen schedule on the manufactured articles that a corresponding reduction should be made in the raw material. We do not believe that the manufacturers of camels' hair press cloth and woolen press cloth, which is used by the oil mills, should be legislated out of business. If the tariff is taken off of the manufactured article we think it should be taken off of the raw material so as to put these manufacturers on an equal basis with the foreign manufacturers.
Paragraph 640. We wish to retain oleo stearine on the free list.
Paragraph 639. There should be a duty on soya-bean oil, as it competes with the lower grades of cottonseed oil. We think a duty of one-fourth cent per pound would be sufficient, and also that this would furnish some revenue for the Government. Respectfully subunitted.
SOUTH CAROLINA COTTONSEED CRUSHERS ASSOCIATION,
BRIEFS SUBMITTED BY FRANKLIN PIERCE, NEW YORK, N. Y.
New YORK, December 16, 1912. Hon. Oscar W. UNDERWOOD,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SIR: I have observed in the newspapers the dates before your committee which you have fixed for discussions upon the various schedules of the tariff. I do not want to be heard upon any of these schedules because I am quite conscious that I have not sufficient technical knowledge on any one schedule as to be of aid to your committee. I have, however, something in mind which, if I can get the time to come to Washington, I would like to present to your committee.
We have become so used to outrageous tariffs in our country as not to appreciate that we have such a tariff. Sixty-five per cent of all the German imports of manufactured products pay duties and the average ad valorem duty on this 65 per cent is 12 per cent. Our duties, on the other hand, are about four times that amount, or, as I remember, forty-one and a fraction ad valorem on the entire duty-paying imports. Outside of Russia there is no other country in the world which has such monstrous duties and we have actually got so used to these enormities that we do not know what is moderate and temperate.
If nothing effectual is done by Mr. Wilson's administration to do away with the industrial combinations, a considerable reduction of the tariff will not relieve the distress among the consumers. Our combinations in restraint of trade are able to avail themselves of the full amount of the tariff left when you get through with your revision.
But that is not all. No country in the world has so great a barrier against foreign imports in its natural conditions as ours. There is not an element of iron or steel that could be imported into our country and taken farther than Harrisburg, even though there was no duty upon iron and steel, as you well know. What is true of iron and steel is true to a great extent of all imports of bulky articles. Again, we lead the world in the hand labor saving quality of our machinery, and we have the greatest supplies of raw material, and are better fitted for manufacturing than any other country in the world.
Now, these are only a few of the things on which I want to talk to your committee, for I am just as sure as I can be that there will be a terrible disappointment among the people at the lack of relief which comes from the tariff as it will be reduced, and then they will damn the Democratic Party and say that it has humbugged them. The reduction of the tariff will never give complete relief, however much you reduce it, until domeste competition is restored.
It is along this line and along the line of the benefits which will come to our people through exports induced by imports that I want to talk to your committee, and all the talk will lead toward inducing them to bring about such a reduction in the tariff as will avail something to the people. Pardon this long letter. Sincerely, yours,
The WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
You have been listening to hundreds of manufacturers who are insisting that you should not reduce the duties on imports. They have for 50 years been in the habit of making this same plea. As a rule they know little about the cost of production abroad or the benefits of commerce or their superiority in the use of machinery over their foreign competitors or any of the elements which go into manufacturing. They have been so long shut off by high duties from commerce with foreign countries that they know very little about the result of freer commerce with the world, and therefore they object on general principles to any reduction in the tariff.
The writer has no interests to protect and nothing to be anxious about except the general welfare of the great body of our people. The Democratic Party has pledged itself to relieve the consumers, and the tariff bills which it contemplates approving, if we cad judge from the tariff bills which have been presented during the present Congress, will not relieve to a considerable extent the burdens of the people, and there will be general dissatisfaction with the results. The consumers expect great results from these bills, and if they get slight results they will think that a tariff for revenue is a humbug.
The reason why relief will not be obtained by these tariff bills is that the existing tariffs are simply outrageous when compared with the tariffs of the remaining countries of the world. Let us see: