Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. COCKRAN. You can define that and describe it?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes.

Mr. COCKRAN. Why do you not then submit to the committee such a 'definition?

Mr. RICHARDSON. I will make such a definition.

Mr. RANDELL. Do they have low grades over there?

Mr. RICHARDSON. They buy most of their so-called "low grades." Mr. RANDELL. If you want to take the duty off the English article, that might mean all the kaolin from England. Do you mean to say that there is no low grade?

Mr. RICHARDSON. They have refuse grades.

Mr. RANDELL. Then they have no low grades?

Mr. RICHARDSON. No so-called "low grades." The lowest is about 16s. a ton.

Mr. GRIGGS. Don't you believe it would destroy the kaolin industry in this country?

Mr. RICHARDSON. No, sir.

Mr. GRIGGS. You do not believe that?

Mr. RICHARDSON. No, sir.

Mr. GRIGGS. When you take off the duty on the English clay, then the English clay will be as cheap as the clay mined in the United States. You admit that, don't you?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Very close to it.

Mr. GRIGGS. "Very close to it Very close to it" does not mean the same thing. But then they would practically be the same price, and then everybody would use English clay instead of American clay, would they not?

Mr. RICHARDSON. I think there would be still very large consumers of the American clay.

Mr. GRIGGS. Why?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Because newspapers use it.

Mr. GRIGGS. And you say that English clay is so much better? If English clay is so much better than any clay in America, and we arrange so that it can be put into the American market at the same price as the American clay, then would anybody with any sense use the American clay?

Mr. RICHARDSON. They would.

Mr. GRIGGS. They would practically shut down this industry if that was the case?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes; if that is the case.

Mr. COCKRAN. If it is maintained that English and American clay is exactly the same, then you could not describe the English clay. Mr. RICHARDSON. They are not the same; they are different. Mr. COCKRAN. Are they used for different purposes?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. COCKRAN. Do I understand you to say that the English clay has a special use which does not come in conflict with any clay produced in this country?

Mr. RICHARDSON. That is the statement I make.

Mr. COCKRAN. Is that English clay capable of such description that you can describe it in the language of a schedule, so that the tariff law will apply to that and that only?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes, I think it could be so described.

Mr. GRIGGS. In addition to that the gentleman will repeat, I presume, that when English clay must be laid down at the same price as American clay, that English clay will be used for all purposes?

Mr. COCKRAN. He said it is not produced for the same purposes. Now, let us get that straight, because your testimony is leaving a different impression upon my mind than upon Mr. Griggs's. It is a fact that this clay, this English clay that you want upon the free list, is valuable for some purposes that the American clay is not valuable for?

Mr. RICHARDSON. It is.

Mr. COCKRAN. Then the English clay would not come in conflict, in competition, with the American clay no matter what the conditions were under which it would be admitted?

Mr. RICHARDSON. I will not say that. I think that if the duty were taken off the chances are that more English clay would be used for the low-grade paper, but there would still be much use for the southern clay.

Mr. GRIGGS. But did you not say in addition to that, that everybody who had any sense, and could purchase English clay at the same price as American clay, would use the English clay?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Very likely to; yes.

Mr. GRIGGS. That seems rather clear.

Mr. RANDELL. As I understand it, the English clay can be used for some things that the American clay is not used for, but it can also be used for the same thing as the English clay?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. DALZELL. Now, I would like to ask my question over again. Is it a fact that this duty protects an American industry and does bring into the Federal Treasury over a half million dollars?

Mr. RICHARDSON. I think that that is so.

STATEMENT OF MR. HARRY A. AUER, OF CLEVELAND, OHIO.

Mr. AUER. I am here on behalf of the Standard Reduction Company, a corporation of the State of Alabama. I have a very keen appreciation of that ancient rule of business, that "the longer the spoke the greater the tire," and I will try to be as brief as possible in my observations. The reason I speak of this matter at all, rather than submitting my brief, is that there are certain peculiarities in connection with this product which I believe have no analogy in the other articles of the tariff schedule. The United States Geological Survey reports of 1907 on fuller's earth define fuller's earth as follows: "The term fuller's earth is used to indicate a variety of substances that possess strong absorbent qualities:" a very general definition. Its chemical analysis is about as follows: Ignition loss-and by ignition loss is meant water and certain fluids that pass off when it is burned-11.4 per cent; silica, 57.62 per cent; alumina, 22.82 per cent; ferric oxide. 4.78 per cent: lime, 1.54 per cent: magnesia, 1.44 per cent. The Geological Survey report further states that this chemical analysis is of very little value in determining the quality, and that only a physical test suffices to determine it. I bring this to your attention because it will have a good deal of bearing upon what I shall have to say hereafter.

Now the action of this fuller's earth in bleaching and clarifying is a thing entirely unknown to the chemist. Some of the chemists say that it is mechanical, others say that it is chemical. I talked with one of the chemists from one of the largest plants in Chicago, a gentleman who has devoted a great many years to this particular branch of chemistry, and after an exhaustive series of examinations on the subject, he concluded with this statement: That fuller's earth was composed of a number of particles that were atomic in their fineness, and that each one of them was covered with hooks that had a particular affinity for impurities. He said that after years of study, that was the nearest he could get to it, and that sounds foolish. But I guess it is as close as they can get.

Now this earth has many uses and purposes. In India it is used for the refinement of cocoanut oils, and in this country it is employed by large packing houses in refining and clarifying of lards, the manufacture of soap, and refinement of cotton-seed oil. It also has some use in the refinement of mineral oils, and is used to some extent in connection with the rubber industry. This fine gray powder that we see on rubber bands, as we get them from the factory, is fuller's earth. This was first discovered in the United States in Quincy, Fla., in 1893, and was first manufactured in the United States in 1895. Since that time there have been other deposits discovered, and in 1907 the following States were producing it: Florida, Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, Massachusetts, Colorado, Texas, and Alabama. In 1907 the total production of the United States was 32,851 short tons, of which Florida produced about 69 per cent.

Prior to its discovery in the United States the only source of supply was England. At present by far the most important deposits are found there. As I stated, in the geological report the term includes a variety of substances that possess strong absorbent qualities, and these various earths not only differ in chemical analyses and physical appearances, but differ greatly in absorbent properties.

Again, I am informed by the chemist of one of these packing houses that earths having the same chemical analyses as this English fuller's earth and having the same physical qualities leave an entirely dif ferent effect as a bleaching agent.

Mr. GRIGGS. What is your opinion about that?

Mr. AUER. It sounds fishy, but I think it is correct. They are able to produce synthetically the earth which will bear the same chemical analysis as fuller's earth, but in action it will have an entirely different effect, so that a chemical analysis, as stated by the Geological Survey report, is of little or no value in determining the quality, and only a practical test suffices.

Now, I come to the distinction between the American and the English earths. Until last year the English earth was the only known refining and bleaching agent that was suitable in the use and refinement of food. We have American earths that are suitable for the refinement of soap, mineral oils, in the rubber industries, and nonfood products, but this is the only earth, the English earth, that was suitable for the refinement of cocoanut oils, cotton-seed oil, lards, animal oils, and so on, because it is the only earth that does not leave a taste and a smell.

Mr. DALZELL. What are you advocating?

Mr. AUER. I am advocating a continuance of the duty upon English earths.

Mr. GRIGGS. You mean fuller's earth?

Mr. AUER. Fuller's earth; certainly.

The CHAIRMAN. We have information here with reference to fuller's earth, its uses and its qualities, and all that sort of thing, and where it is found in the United States. Perhaps you might print what you have there on the subject without reading it.

Mr. AUER. There is one point that is not contained in your printed information, I believe, and I will get to it shortly.

The CHAIRMAN. Please confine yourself to that, and then print your brief, and that will contain all the information besides what you have there.

Mr. AUER. AS I have stated, the only earth that was suitable for the manufacture and refinement of food products was the English earth; that is, until within a year; but within a year-and that is a point that will not be contained in your information-there has been discovered in southern Alabama a very large deposit of fuller's earth. It is owned and operated by the Standard Reduction Company of Alabama. In the development of this enterprise we have made a very heavy investment in tugs, barges, dredges, and electrical processes, employing a number of men, both skilled and unskilled, and this is the significant thing about this newly discovered earth, that it is the only American earth that is suitable for the refinement of food products.

Mr. GRIGGS. Have you tried that in southern Georgia, in Decatur County ?

Mr. AUER. NO; I have not tried it.

Mr. GRIGGS. You had better try that before you make that state

ment.

Mr. AUER. The only information that I have on this subject is from the Chicago packers, who are large users, and they state that the English earth is the earth that they find that they could hitherto use until they got hold of ours. That is the only information that I have, that that is the only earth that is suitable for their purposes other than the English earth.

Now, here is the whole crux of my contention, that heretofore there has been little or no need for a protective duty on this industry; that with the advent of an earth that will compete and can compete successfully with the English earths there arises a decided necessity why the duty heretofore erected presumably for revenue should be continued as a protective duty.

The CHAIRMAN. Pardon me for a moment, but I want to make an announcement. We will run until 7 o'clock, and then take a recess for dinner until 8 o'clock, proceeding with this schedule this evening. The glass schedule will not be taken up until to-morrow. I make this announcement so gentlemen will govern themselves accordingly. You may now proceed, Mr. Auer.

Mr. AUER. I claim that since this legislative policy has called into being this industry whereby the consumers of its product are furnished with their requirements without delays and vexations incident to foreign importations, that it should be continued. It is a small industry. The total amount of importations are very small.

Now, there is another question that I want to bring before you. It is a question of differentiation in duty on fuller's earth. The act provides "Fuller's earth, unwrought and unmanufactured, $1.50 per ton; wrought or manufactured, $3 per ton." Now, I assume that the rationale of this distinction rests in the inducement offered to import the clay in its crude state at a low duty, and to insure to American labor the benefit of the employment in advancing it from a crude condition to that of a finished article of commerce. I see no other reason for such a distinction, and I assume that to be the legislative intent. This leads us to the question of what is wrought and unwrought, manufactured and unmanufactured. If the legislative intent is that unwrought and unmanufactured shall contemplate the clay in its natural state, unaltered and unadvanced by process of manufacture and refinement, so that the labor of changing it from its crude condition to its finished state shall be performed after its importation, it necessarily follows that a judicial or administrative interpretation of the unwrought and unmanufactured shall allow the importation of the clay at the lower rate of duty, $1.50 per ton, notwithstanding it may have gone through a number of processes and many advancements, stopping only short of complete manufacture, and only defeats the legislative intent with which advancements shall be accomplished by American labor, and also operate as a direct evasion of that portion of the act imposing a $3 per ton duty on wrought earth.

The CHAIRMAN. You are familiar with the decision of the Board of Appraisers, that the granulated form, which is held to be unwrought, is bolted, it is wrought clay. Do you quarrel with that decision? Mr. AUER. Most decidedly I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Then come to that point, please.

Mr. AUER. Here is the point: The production of this clay is controlled by a powerful English combination and trust.

The CHAIRMAN. But aside from that, let us get to that point.

Mr. AUER. I am coming to it.

The CHAIRMAN. How does clay become granulated clay? Is there a manufacturing process?

Mr. AUER. Surely; and it is ground up in a burr mill.

The CHAIRMAN. But that hardly answers the question. I ask you for information. Then if it is unwrought, unground, and unmanufactured it would meet your contention?

Mr. AUER. I think not.

The CHAIRMAN. Then go on and tell us what would.

Mr. AVER. In the manufacture of this clay there are a number of processes. What these processes are the American consul has tried to ascertain, but was unable to do it, because it is a secret matter and the manufacturers will not reveal it. But we have had some experience ourselves in the manufacture of this clay, and we find that we can produce the clay up to the point of grinding, and up to that point it is 90 per cent manufactured; so that I say that if clay can be admitted in which the elements of labor have been incorporated up to the point of grinding it can be admitted when it is 90 per cent manufactured. That is my point.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, if there is any occasion for any differential at all, that should come in at the higher rate of duty.