THE DAISY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, PLYMOUTH, MICH., IS GREATLY CONCERNED ABOUT PROPOSED FRENCH CLASSIFICATION OF TOY AIR guns. Hon. SERENO PAYNE, M. C., 66 PLYMOUTH, MICH., February 20, 1909. Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We desire to enter a protest before your committee against the proposed action of the French customs authorities to change the present classification of toy air guns from "toys" to arms" and make them pay a duty of 600 francs per 100 kilograms as against 75 francs per 100 kilograms as at present. The present duty on toy air guns run about 35 per cent of their value, and the proposed new tariff would make the duty nearly 300 per cent of their value and render their exportation into France entirely impossible. We have spent a considerable amount of money introducing our toy guns into France and have succeeded in building up a fair business, and would dislike to have this business taken away from us at this time by what we consider the unfair action on the part of the French customs officials. The present patent laws in France compel the American manufacturer to work their patents in their country; otherwise the patent affords them no protection. The volume of business we do in that country being coupled with the fact that our goods are sold on a very close margin makes it impractical for us to manufacture there, and in consequence one party in France has copied our goods, and we presume that it is at his solicitation that the French customs officials propose to change the classification and thus bar our goods from that country. It would seem as though some provision might be put in our tariff looking to reciprocity along these lines, and we will certainly appreciate any action your committee may take toward this end. Very respectfully, DAISY MANUFACTURING COMPANY, HON. J. J. GARDNER, M. C., SUBMITS LETTER OF THE NEIDICH PROCESS COMPANY, BURLINGTON, N. J., RELATIVE TO THE FRENCH TARIFF AND TYPEWRITERS. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, WASHINGTON, D. C., March 1, 1909. House of Representatives. Chairman Ways and Means Committee, DEAR SIR: I have to-day received a letter as follows: Hon. JOHN J. GARDNER, M. C., BURLINGTON, N. J., February 27, 1909. Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: It has been brought to our attention that the French Government has appointed a special commission, having in view a new tax on typewriters of American manufacture amounting to 75 francs each. The proposed duty would be extremely harmful to the American typewriter industry, in which we are interested, and if any steps could be properly taken by our Government having in view the maintenance of the present tariff it will be exceedingly valuable to this important industry. We would greatly appreciate your kind attention to this matter, and trust that you may be able to influence some action tending to defeat this purpose. Yours, very truly, NEIDICH PROCESS COMPANY, The original of the above letter I have forwarded to the Department of State with a communication. Very truly, J. J. GARDNER. THE HART MANUFACTURING COMPANY, CLEVELAND, OHIO, INVITES ATTENTION TO PROPOSED INCREASE IN FRENCH TARIFF ON MACHINE TOOLS. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, Washington, D. C. CLEVELAND, OHIO, March 4, 1909. DEAR SIR: We are manufacturers, as our letter heading indicates, of a line of mechanics' tools, which have for a number of years been exported in quite large and increasing quantities to France. A few days ago we received a letter from our agent in Paris telling us of the new customs tariff being considered by the French Government. This on such goods as ours would be 15 per cent of their value, as against the present duty of 27 francs on every hundred pounds, which by actual figuring for comparison only amounts to from 1.1 per cent to 5.4 per cent of the value. Such an increase will make it very difficult to compete with the French manufacturers, but what is even more serious is the disadvantage we shall be at, according to the proposed tariff, in meeting the competition of manufacturers of some other European countriesof Germany and England, for instance, who present difficult competition on even terms, but whose goods would enter France at a rate onethird less than that charged on ours, because of the application of the minimum tariff to which these favored nations having commercial treaties with France would be entitled. We can assure you that such a situation would, in all probability, prove fatal to the exporting of our goods to France, as we have no doubt it would with many other American products." We urge you to use your influence for providing means for the State Department to treat with the French nation in such a way as to at least keep the manufacturers of this country on an equal footing with those of European countries. Yours, truly, THE HART MFG. CO., LOUIS F. HART, Vice-President and Secretary. HON. WILLIAM H. DRAPER, M. C., SUBMITS LETTER OF THE WALTER A. WOOD MOWING AND REAPING MACHINE COMPANY RELATIVE TO THE FRENCH TARIFF. HOOSICK FALLS, N. Y., March 4, 1909. Hon. WILLIAM H. DRAPER, M. C., Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Reminding you of our recent conversation in Washington upon the subject of French tariff discrimination against American manufacturers of harvesting machinery, I beg to submit the following brief memorandum upon the subject: The present French tariff upon harvesting machinery is 15 francs maximum and 9 francs minimum per 100 kilos on all weights. Under this tariff American manufacturers in every case pay the maximum, while English manufacturers at least, if not German also, have the benefit of the minimum rate. The resultant advantage to some of our competitors under the present tariff averages about $2 on a horserake, $3 on a hay tedder, $3.75 on a mower, $4 on a reaper, and $9 on a harvester and binder complete. This discrimination expressed in figures-that is to say, the aggregate amount in dollars of the difference between the maximum and minimum tax now laid by France upon harvesting machines of the kind and to the number which we now annually export to that country-approximates $40,000. In view of the immense volume of American imports of this kind of goods into France, the grand total equivalent of this discrimination in a given year, if extended into figures, would become startling. The English and German makers, under this large discrimination in their favor, have already seriously impaired our trade in certain machines, noticeably in hay tedders and horserakes. Moreover, the customs commission of the Chamber of Deputies of the French Government has recently proposed not only an increase of duty on our make of goods, but a still heavier discrimination against American makers. The proposed new schedules impose a maximum tax of 20 francs and a minimum tax of 10 francs on machines weighing 400 kilos or less, with 16 francs maximum and 8 francs minimum on machines weighing more than 400 kilos. If this proposition becomes law, the comparative result, as far as this company is concerned, will be as indicated in the two following schedules: SCHEDULE 1. Approximate present maximum tax, approximate proposed maximum tax, and consequent increase, expressed in dollars, upon our line of harvesting machinery. SCHEDULE 2. Difference between maximum and minimum French impost under present tariff, expressed in dollars: Rakes Tedders Mowers Reapers. Harvesters and binders_-_ Difference between maximum and minimum French impost under proposed new tariff, expressed in dollars: 2.06 3. 11 3.75 4.00 9.67 Basing our conclusion upon past experience, and fortified by the positively expressed convictions upon the point of our friends on the other side, we have not the slightest doubt that if the proposed new French tariff law in this respect shall be adopted the maximum impost will invariably be levied against American-made products. So that already seriously handicapped by the present discrimination in favor of certain of our competitors, we are confronted both with an increased burden by reason of the threatened additional impost and with a still wider discrimination against us in favor of our competitors. From the foregoing schedules it will be observed that while in the case of the harvester and binder, which is our heaviest machine, the increase of the proposed maximum tax over the present maximum amounts to $2.16, the difference between the proposed maximum and minimum tax on the same machine is increased by $3.51 over the present difference; while in the case of all the other machines the difference between the proposed maximum and minimum, although larger than at present, does not quite reflect the amount of the proposed maximum increase. But it is in the case of our heaviest machines that we are now finding our sharpest competition; and if the existing discrimination against us is to be still further increased the result will be disastrous to our trade. Only by a lessening of cost. through reduction of wages would it apparently be possible for us to meet the competition of England, Germany, and Canada, where a lower scale of wages obtains. We include Canada among the competitors last referred to, for the reason that there is now pending between Canada and the Republic of France a commercial treaty, already, as we are advised, approved by both nations and only awaiting the action of the French Senate to become operative. It appears probable that this treaty will be confirmed in time for Canadian manufacturers to benefit by its provisions during the business season of the current year. Under that treaty Canadian harvesting machines get the benefit of the minimum. tariff rates, and incidentally, of course, would still further benefit by the reduced minimum rate under the proposed new French tariff law above referred to. The International Harvester Company, a corporation formed by five of the theretofore leading independent manufacturers of harvesting machines, has already gone across the boundary and established a manufacturing plant in Canada; and the same corportion, in anticipation, as we suppose, of the impending additional tariff hardships under the French law, has, it is reported, embarked upon the establishment of a manufacturing plant in France. As a result of all this it should be unnecessary to argue that the few remaining independent makers of harvesting machinery in the United States will be sadly handicapped in struggling for even a retention of their present French trade without any regard to such natural increase thereof as might ordinarily be expected as time passes. And in the absence of any other suggestion of possible relief we can only urge serious consideration of reciprocal trade agreements between France and the United States, whereby this country, also under the operation of what might be called a dual tariff, providing for maximum and minimum rates, might afford to our own manufacturers the same commercial advantages now or to be enjoyed by Great Britain, Canada, and Germany. There can be no reasonable doubt that the proposal of the French parliamentary committee has been framed especially as an aggressive measure against American exports into France, and it so is considered by the American Chamber of Commerce in Paris. In an introduction to an article on the tariff, M. Viger, chairman of the committee on customs of the French Senate, declares "The minimum tariff should continue to comprise all articles of our national production, with such compensating rates as may be required by a legitimate protection; but the general tariff should comprise, in addition, certain special rates directed solely against particular manifestations of foreign production and establishing for our negotiations precious elements for discussion and for the exchange of favors." Inasmuch as the United States is now the only commercially important country the importations of which remain subject in most cases to the French maximum tariff, the full significance of the preceding quotation is at once apparent. The proposed change would be sufficient to shut out the importation into France of machines on which the margin of profit is already so small that the increased tariff discrimination would be sufficient to wipe it out altogether. The cable reports indicate that the report of the customs committee is taken as representing the answer of the commercial interests of France to the severe customs regulations of the United States; and unless Congress meets the demonstration by providing something of a similar nature, whereby American manufacturers may also become entitled to the minimum French rates, the trade of the independent manufacturers of harvesting machinery with France is doomed. With a trade in France approximating one-fourth of our total output of machines, you will appreciate how very anxious we are in regard to this matter, and we therefore urge that you shall not fail to bring the facts to the early attention of the proper committee, in order that this particular phase of the tariff question should not be lost sight of while the whole subject of tariff revision is under consideration. We shall, of course, be glad at any time to furnish additional facts or figures, either in the form of a printed memorandum or by personal attendance, if the latter should be deemed advisable. Respectfully, yours, DANFORTH GEER, President, Walter A. Wood Mowing and Reaping Machine Co. |