figures to their brief on hosiery, dated Philadelphia, Pa., November 30, 1908, and published in the Tariff Hearings, in contradiction to the statements made in a brief filed by the tariff committee of the National Wholesale Dry Goods Association, dated New York, February 5, 1909. The examples of comparative costs, I to VI, inclusive, submitted by the National Wholesale Dry Goods Association are not only absolutely absurd but show a total lack of knowledge of manufacturing hosiery, a comparison in some instances having been made of two totally different qualities, costs, and makes. They have also in several other instances taken the selling price, including profit, of the foreign manufacturer as the cost of manufacturing abroad, placing same in flat comparison with the sworn-to American costs, whereas the National Association of Hosiery and Underwear Manufacturers have made an absolutely even comparison of cost of production of the same identical article made in Germany and in this countrythe only proper and just method to employ in order to arrive at a proper conclusion for the adjustment of tariff rates. The foreign costs submitted by us in our brief referred to were obtained from fourteen prominent Chemnitz hosiery manufacturers and can easily be verified by your committee by reference to the latest consular reports, while the American costs were given by a large number of equally prominent American manufacturers in the form of affidavits. In our brief we stated that, taking the American wages at 100 per cent, the foreign wages were somewhat less than 30 per cent. We find by the latest official reports that the difference in wages is even greater than stated above; that wages paid in Chemnitz to-day are less than 25 per cent of the wages paid in America for the same grade of work. (See latest consular reports.) We take issue with the National Wholesale Dry Goods Association's statement that very few goods the result of the "cottage industry" are imported into this country. We find that same represents a large percentage of the exports to this country, Chemnitz manufacturers selling such merchandise as the product of their own mills. For the cottage industry, the importance thereof, effect on wages of mill operatives, hours of labor of aged, children under 14 years, and free hours of housewife, we would respectfully refer committee to latest official reports. We find upon investigation the following are the official figures of the average yearly wage (which the committee can easily verify) of expert hosiery knitters and expert women in the hosiery mills of Chemnitz: In 1908 the wages were reduced to the 1897 level and which wages are prevailing now. We also find that, taking the American production of cotton hosiery at 100 per cent, the importation of cotton hosiery duties paid in 1907 was 22 per cent; that in 1906 and 1907 the importations increased at the rate of over $1,000,000 per annum -a self-evident conclusion that the rates as provided for in the tariff of 1897 do not measure the differential in cost of manufacturing abroad and in this country. We also find that the importation of cotton hosiery under Schedule I, paragraph 318, was fully 10 per cent in 1907 of the total imports of manufactured cotton goods. The National Association of Hosiery and Underwear Manufacturers do not question the honor or integrity of any importer, but the facts are, that either the examples of comparative costs as submitted are incorrect and erroneous, as we know and believe them to be, or else the proper rate of duty has not been paid on an enormous amount of foreign hosiery which is being freely offered for sale in the open market at prices materially less than the foreign costs submitted. Respectfully submitted. WILLIAM L. WARING, Chairman for Tariff Committee National Association of Hosiery and Underwear Manufacturers. I, William L. Waring, of New York, N. Y., as chairman, and for the tariff committee of the National Association of Hosiery and Underwear Manufacturers, do solemnly swear and affirm that, to the best of the committee's knowledge and belief, the foregoing facts are true as set forth. WILLIAM L. WARING. Sworn and subscribed before me the 3d day of March, A. D. 1909. [SEAL.] Jos. A. COXE, Notary Public. (Commission expires March 6, 1909.) ELASTIC TISSUES. [Paragraphs 320 and 389.] BRIEF SUBMITTED BY FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF NEW YORK, ON BEHALF OF IMPORTERS OF FRENCH INDIA RUBBER, GUTTA-PERCHA, AND ELASTIC TISSUES. 32 BROADWAY, New York City, February 27, 1909. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: Considering that the actual duties on the following articles are prohibitive, 45 per cent ad valorem on cotton suspenders, 45 per cent on cotton and elastic tissues, 50 per cent on silk braces, 50 per cent on elastic silk tissues, we request your honorable body to reduce these duties to: Thirty-five per cent ad valorem on cotton suspenders and tissues of elastic cotton; 40 per cent ad valorem on silk suspenders and tissues of elastic silk. We trust that you will give this matter the consideration that it deserves, and remain, gentlemen, Very respectfully, THE FRENCH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, OF NEW YORK, MATERIAL FOR INSOLES. [Paragraph 322.] AMERICAN MANUFACTURERS OF CORK INSOLES WISH LEGISLATION THAT WILL REDUCE THE DUTY ON THEIR RAW MATERIALS CLASSED AS COTTON MANUFACTURES. WASHINGTON, D. C., January 17, 1909. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: As manufacturers of cork insoles, used in the manufacture of boots and shoes and as loose insoles, we have found it necessary to use to a considerable extent an imported article, composed of ground cork and linseed oil applied to cotton muslin for backing. A competitive article is made by American manufacturers of the same guage and thickness at a price considerably less than the article herewith represented. This article at first was brought in under Schedule N, paragraph 448, of the tariff act of July 24, 1897, as a manufacture of cork or of which cork was the component material of chief value, at 25 per cent ad valorem. Subsequently, it was raised by the Government as to classification by being placed under Schedule 1, paragraph 322, as a manufacture of cotton not specially provided for at 45 per cent ad valorem. Protests as to this latter classification have not been settled by the National Board of Appraisers at last accounts. This latter duty is absolutely prohibitive, and we therefore would request that you give this article proper classification that no misunderstanding as to duties can hereafter arise. Even under its first classification, viz, as an article of which cork was the component material of chief value, its price was so far in excess of the American manufactured article that it has rendered it a tremendous handicap to its usage. As manufacturers of insoles from fabrics of this nature, with a demand for a quick supply, we respectfully submit this said article for your careful consideration for classification. We decidedly object to the contents of the brief submitted by the Armstrong Cork Company, dated at Pittsburg on November 23, 1908, in which they suggest a duty of 5 cents per pound on cork bark, wholly or partially manufactured, for life preservers, for cork insoles, etc. Taking the weight of this article into consideration-which is about 1 pounds to the square yard-it would simply mean a prohibitive duty and eliminate foreign competition absolutely to the benefit of the cork trust and consequent handicap to ourselves as American manufacturers of cork insoles. We would suggest that an ad valorem duty of 12 or 15 per cent be placed on this article, which will permit of a sufficient protection to the American manufacturers and not be a prohibitive duty on the foreign goods. Respectfully submitted. WILLIAM M. GARFIELD. H. H. BECKWITH, President. GEO. G. LONDON MANUFACTURING Co. J. A. WILEY, President. SCHEDULE J-FLAX, HEMP, AND JUTE, AND MANUFACTURES OF. OILCLOTH AND LINOLEUM. [Paragraph 337.] THE NATIONAL WHOLESALE DRY GOODS ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK CITY, THINKS THE DUTIES ON OILCLOTHS AND LINOLEUM SHOULD BE REDUCED. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, 346 BROADWAY, New York, February 25, 1909. Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We beg to refer to the recommendations made to your committee by the oilcloth and linoleum manufacturers for increased duties. The manufacturers have asked, first, that the duty now assessed on linoleum over 12 feet in width-namely, 20 cents per square yard and 20 per cent-be applied upon all linoleum over 7 feet in width. Linoleum is made in the following widths: 6 feet, 7 feet 6 inches, 9 feet, and 12 feet, the wider widths being used to fit rooms with the least possible cutting. All linoleum is sold by the square yard. The manufacturing cost per square yard is little or no greater on the wide goods than on the narrow. The assessment of higher duties on goods over 7 feet is therefore indefensible. In the second place, the manufacturers have asked that granite and oak-plank linoleums, which are now dutiable at 8 cents per square yard and 15 per cent, be placed in the same class as inlaid linoleum, which is dutiable at 20 cents per square yard and 20 per cent. These goods, the granite and oak plank, are made by a very simple process, the cost to produce being far less than in the case of the inlaid linoleum, and the assessment of these goods at the same rate as inlaid linoleum is manifestly unjust. Quoting from the Government Statistical Record of Imports for the year ending June 30, 1907: The average cost of all linoleums, other than inlaid, was 21.4 cents per square yard. This includes both of the classes mentioned above, namely, those under 12 feet in width and those known as "granite and "oak plank" linoleums. The duty proposed upon these goods of 20 cents per square yard and 20 per cent equals 24.28 cents, or an equivalent of 113 per cent ad valorem. The duty at present assessed upon these goods of 8 cents per square yard and 15 per cent equals, according to the government statistics, an ad valorem equivalent of 52.32 per cent, which we submit is amply high. Linoleums, particularly those of the grades mentioned, are used by the poorer classes, and the proposed duty would mean the doubling of the tax on the poor for the benefit of a few manufacturers already too highly protected. The duty at present assessed upon inlaid linoleum of 20 cents per square yard and 20 per cent equals an ad valorem equivalent of 56.64 per cent, and, as stated above, all other linoleums under 12 feet in width are at present dutiable at 8 cents per square yard and 15 per cent, or an ad valorem equivalent of 52.32 per cent. The present schedule, being thus evenly applied on high and low cost goods, should not, we contend, be changed in its form, but as it affords such high protection should be reduced in amount. Very respectfully, THE NATIONAL WHOLESALE DRY GOODS ASSOCIATION. By KENNETH BARNHART, Chairman Tariff Committee. BOBBINETS. [Paragraph 339.] THE AMERICAN MAKERS OF NETS AND NETTINGS SUGGEST A SPECIAL CLASSIFICATION FOR THEIR PRODUCTS. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, NEW YORK, February 9, 1909. Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: The undersigned American manufacturers of bobbinets respectfully ask that the following special paragraph be enacted in the tariff law to cover bobbinets, nets, and nettings: Bobbinets, net, or nettings, other than lace curtain nets, made on the Nottingham lace curtain machine, or Nottingham warp machine, composed of cotton or other vegetable fiber, shall pay a duty of one-third of one cent per square yard for each hole or part of a hole within the area of a square inch, counted perpendicularly on the warp and diagonally on the bobbin lines, counting the corner hole twice; and shall pay in addition to the foregoing, when made of single yarns up to and including number fifteen, three cents per pound. When made of single yarns, exceeding number fifteen and up to and including number thirty, one-fifth of one cent per number per pound. When made of single yarns, exceeding number thirty, onequarter of one cent per number per pound. When made of yarns combed or advanced beyond the condition of singles, by grouping or twisting two or more single yarns together, on all numbers up to and including number twenty, six cents per pound. When made of yarns combed or advanced beyond the condition of singles, exceeding number twenty and up to number eighty, one-quarter of one cent per number per pound. When made of yarns combed or advanced beyond the condition of singles, including number eighty and above, three-tenths of one cent per number per pound. When such bobbinets, net, and netting are composed of more than one count of yarn it shall pay duty according to the highest count. All articles composed wholly or in part of bobbinet shall pay the duty provided by their respective paragraphs and in addition thereto the duty imposed on bobbinet. From a thorough study of the cost of manufacture in Europe as compared to the cost to manufacture in this country the above |