consumption is comparatively small, like the chemical schedule, is a proposition which needs no argument. In conclusion, the association respectfully submits to your committee (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 import 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 importations to any great extent would necessitate such radical reductions 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 examination of the table. This association does not desire to place the burden of reduced revenues unfairly on other American manufacturers, 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 percentages of importations which they have shown and the larger market which they have enjoyed. Respectfully, yours, MANUFACTURING CHEMISTS' ASSOCIATION, Chairman of the Executive Committee. Table showing relation of imports to gross consumption under the act of 1897. NOT A TRUST. THE GENERAL CHEMICAL COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY, REPUDIATES THE CHARGE THAT IT IS A TRUST. 25 BROAD STREET, NEW YORK, N. Y. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, Washington, D. O. February 9, 1909. 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, 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. Hon. S. W. MCCALL, M. C., 30 KILBY STREET, BOSTON, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. January 19, 1909. 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 consideration 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 selling 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 manufactured 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 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 be 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. Consequently, 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, 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 honorable 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 Palmer, president, Yorktown Heights, N. Y., capacity 750 barrels daily; Steacy & Wilton Company, by |