ports per 1,000 population with the total domestic clock and pinver watch sales per 1,000 population for the past 3 years when the ports were largest. In preparing the following table, the figures said table on page 18 of their statement were used, to which were ded (1) clock imports, which were obtained from the table on page of the statement; (2) pin-lever pocket watch sales obtained from nited States Tariff Commission statistics (the 1952 sales were not ailable but were estimated at 5 million units); and (3) clock sales 30 million annually as testified by Mr. Lux before the Tariff Comission (which figure is corroborated by the 1947 Census of Manucturers, Department of Commerce). The sales of jeweled lever atches manufactured in the United States have not been included cause the clock manufacturers do not manufacture such watches.

atch and clock imports per 1,000 United States population compared with domestic clock and pin-lever watch sales per 1,000 population, 1950-52, inclusive

It will be seen from the foregoing table that the clock manufacrers unquestionably supply the lion's share of the domestic market or watches and clocks. The increased competition that they have xperienced in the smallest segment of their business, namely, the sales f pin-lever wrist watches, could not possibly result in serious injury o them or even a threat thereof, in view of their enormous producion of pocket watches and clocks and their virtual freedom from ompetition from imports in those items.

With respect to clocks dutiable under paragraph 368 of the present ariff act, the clock manufacturers look with alarm at the imports hereof into this country since October 1, 1951, the date when the 50 ercent tariff reductions negotiated at Torquay became effective, and hile admitting that the volume of such imports in 1952 was not suficient to support a complaint of injury by their industry, nevertheess state that the sudden increase in "imports of clocks following the eduction in duties is both highly significant and ominous." They omplain, in effect, that the 50-percent reduction in the duties on clocks hould not have been made and state that the rate of duties on clocks rior to the said reduction "afforded reasonably sufficient protection o the domestic clock industry because it was, and it still is, sharply competitive at a low retail price level."

In answer to the foregoing, let us examine the facts. The rates of luty provided in paragraph 368 of the 1930 Tariff Act for clocks were so high that far from affording "reasonably sufficient protection" to the clock manufacturers, those rates constituted a virtual embargo on the importation of clocks. This is conclusively established by the total number of clocks imported annually.

The table (statement, p. 21) shows such imports to have been 1057 units in 1948; 32,572 units in 1949; and 135,260 units in 1950.

Compared with the domestic-clock sales of 30 million per ann the imports represented about 0.00035 percent in 1948, 0.00108 pe cent in 1949 and 0.00450 percent in 1950. As previously indica herein, this constituted virtual monoply of the domestic clock mari by the clock manufacturers.

With the exception of certain level movements of plate- and brid type construction, 1.77 to 2 inches wide, having more than 4 jewels. clocks containing such movements (which are not manufactured the clock manufacturers), the rates of duty on clocks dutiable und paragraph 368 were not reduced in any trade agreement negotiate prior to October 1, 1951, when the 50-percent reduction in those rate agreed to at Torquay were proclaimed effective.

Thus, from June 1930 until October 1951, the clock manufacture did not have merely a reasonably protective tariff on clocks uni which imports could compete with the domestic products on any s blance of equality, but they enjoyed a tariff protection that preclud competition from clock imports.

There can be little question that it was because of this situation tr the trade-agreement negotiators finally decided in 1951 to reduce t prohibitive tariff rates on clocks to the fullest extent permitted unde the law, in an effort to encourage some clock imports.

While it is still too soon to predict with any certainty what eff the reduction in duty will have on clock imports, the number importe in 1952, the first full year following the duty reduction, is still neg gible, the total being 280,764 units, which represent less than 1 per cent of domestic sales.

Whether the tariff rates on clocks, as reduced at Torquay, will ena imports to compete with the domestic products is difficult to determi because the reduced rates still provide a high measure of protecting to the clock manufacturers. In a report entitled "International Tr Policy Issues" published in February 1953 by the foreign commer department of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, the a valorem equivalent in effect on May 1, 1952, on clocks, is shown follows (pp. 64–65) :

Valued $5 to $10 each_-_-
Valued more than $10 each.
Valued $2.25 to $5 each__

Valued $5 to $10 each_

Valued more than $10 each____

These ad valorem equivalents were obtained by dividing the reporte value of the import items for 1950 in the duty collected. Correctic were made to take account of duties which had been negotiated Torquay.

It is thus evident that the reduced duties on clocks still constitute: formidable barrier and that it remains to be seen whether imports c successfully compete with the domestic clocks on the new duty basis.

It is not difficult to understand the efforts of the clock manufacturer to endeavor to have the embargo duties on clocks reinstated, but should be observed that of the thousands of items listed in the dutiab schedules of the tariff act, only a handful enjoy the measure of tar protection that is afforded the clock manufacturers by the preser duties on clocks.

> is clear, therefore, that the clock manufacturers' fear of injury n clock imports, which in the final analysis is all that their present ition adds up to, is wholly unwarranted. Something much more n this must be shown before there would be any justification for on that would result in an upward revision of the duties on clocks. nay well be that at some future date, if clock imports remain neglile, the duties should be further reduced, as the present rates might I be too high to permit any appreciable quantity of imports. However that may be, there are no reasonable grounds at the present e to support the clock manufacturers' claims of injury or threat reof from either watch or clock imports.

CONCLUSION

Ve have in the past supported and endorsed the reciprocal-tradeeements program whenever the question of extension thereof for urther period has been under consideration by Congress, because ough this program we believe that the United States is gradually ening up the channels of world trade that have been clogged for a eration.

We can choose no better words to express our concept of what this intry's foreign-trade program should be than those used by the blic Advisory Board for Mutual Security in its report to the Presint, entitled "A Trade and Tariff Policy in the National Interest," omitted on February 24, 1953, as follows:

e trade policy of the United States should be based on the national interest her than the interests of any small group of producers of this or that article ich comes into competition with imported goods.

We conclude this memorandum by again urging that the Reciprocal rade Agreements Act be extended for a period of 1 year witht amendment, as requested and recommended by the executive partment.

I would like to call the committee's attention to the fact that in the ar 1951 Switzerland bought from us $216 million worth of United cates products and sold us only 131 million. In other words, she ought from us nearly twice as much as she sold to us, and it is likeise, I think, appropriate to state that Switzerland is a rocky country epending on a few industries and rugged farmers to survive. She as been very circumspect in selling goods behind the Iron Curtain. She is a great manufacturer of precision machinery. As many of ou who have visited Switzerland know, it is my thought that if these eople, who are one of the great major industries, of which there are ew in Switzerland, who make watches, find that their product is xcluded, as I fear it will be if the tariffs are increased in the United States, they will be compelled with great reluctance to find markets ehind the Iron Curtain for precision machinery in which they excel, nd that would not be to our interest.

We would only be penny-wise and pound-foolish if we drove the Swiss commerce behind the Iron Curtain, where it seems like it is most opportune for it to go.

I would now like to offer for the record a history of the American watch factories which shows there were many to start with relatively and they have all been merged into just a few companies.

The CHAIRMAN. That is printed matter, is it not?
Mr. TYDINGS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it may be included in the recc. (The information referred to is filed with the committee.)

Mr. TYDINGS. I would like also to furnish for the record the emp ment, wages, and hours in Connecticut where a great many of the watches and clocks are manufactured. They will show a comparis from month to month of the steady increase in employment and q often in wages.

This is just an exhibit, not to be incorporated in the record, beca it would make it too voluminous. However, I would like it to be a able in case any member of the committee wants to look at it. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

(The document was received for filing by the committee.) Mr. TYDINGS. Finally, I hold in my hand, many, many copies to drawn out of the Waterbury Sunday Republican in which you r find marked in red advertisement after advertisement for more a more workers at higher wages. There are probably 25 or 30 pl here from the watch and clock industry scouring the countrysid get people to come in and help them produce their product. I would like to file that with the committee.

The Chairman. The name of the paper indicates it is authentic Mr. TYDINGS. Yes, sir, and from a good Republican paper tha a pretty good argument.

The CHAIRMAN. We will file that for the record.

(The document was received for filing by the committee.) The CHAIRMAN. Does that conclude your statement?

Mr. TYDINGS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We want to thank you for your very fine staten. and now I believe Mr. Curtis would like to inquire.

Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. Senator, what jeweled watch industry located in Connecticut?

Mr. TYDINGS. I am advised that these ads deal primarily with t pin-lever watch and the clock industry and not with the jewelwatch industry.

Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. As a matter of fact, there are no jewel watch movements manufactured in Connecticut.

Mr. TYDINGS. I think that is correct. There are in New York ne door. As you know, Bulova has a watch up there.

Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. What companies do you represent! Mr. TYDINGS. I represent Gruen, Benrus, Longines-Wittnauer, a quite a few others. I will give you a list of them. They are q long and I only know the more prominent among them. I do : know the smaller companies. Would you like to have a list put the record?

Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. All right, yes.

(The information referred to is filed with the committee.) Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. Which ones of those companies that y represent manufacture jeweled movements in this country? Mr. TYDINGS. Bulova.

Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. Are they manufacturing the jeweled mor ment in this country?

Mr. TYDINGS. Yes; sir. They make a completed watch. They m about a million of them last year.