Total foreign bristles imported into the United States during the year ended June 30, 1907, were as follows: Large quantities of Chinese bristles are also shipped into the United States from Germany and England. From the above it will be seen that over one-third of all bristles imported (or 1,159,487 pounds, 33 per cent) are Chinese, the average price of which is 56 cents per pound; 7 cents per pound specific duty on same is 13 per cent. But over one-third, or about 36 per cent of all Chinese bristles imported, being 21 inch, the size most used, with an average value in China of 16 cents per pound, the present duty is equivalent to 47 per cent. The average cost during the past five years for 21-inch Chinese bristle to brush manufacturers in the United States has been from 27 cents per pound to manufacturers located in cities on the Atlantic coast to 29 cents to manufacturers in western cities. Our average cost per pound on 24-inch Tientsin Chinese bristles in the past five years has been_-_. Cupping or straightening Combing and dressing-. Fourteen per cent loss on twine, wrappers, straightening, and combing__ $0.28 .02 .10 .04 .45 Assuming the same length (2 inch) to be worth in China or Japan 16 cents (our expert male workmen average $2.56 per day, Japanese male workmen average $0.50 per day), their labor on the bristles for straightening and combing is four-fifths less than ours, or 0.024 cent, allowing same loss of 14 per cent, 0.022 cent; Japanese net cost when ready for the brush, 0.206 cent. The advantage to foreign brush manufacturers in countries where there is no duty on bristles is obvious, even though no consideration is given to labor costs, which in our industry is a big item. The following is the average wage we paid our employees during the past four weeks: 50 males average $12.92 per week, or $2.15 per day, of which number 35 are men, average $15.39 per week, or $2.56 per day; of which number 15 are boys, average $7.14 per week, or $1.19 per day. Thirty females average $4.97 per week, or $0.83 per day. We work nine and one-half hours five days per week and eight and one-half hours Saturday; total, fifty-six hours per week. We have no means of knowing the number of hours required of employees in foreign brush factories, but presume they operate their factories at least as many hours per week as we do, and have learned through our United States consul in Japan that in the brush industry Males receive.. Per day. $0.50 .15 .05 In ten years the importation of foreign brushes has increased from $745,267 to $1,648,310, or over 121 per cent. The increase from Japan alone has been over 4,000 per cent in twenty years. From that country the importations of brushes in 1887 were about $1,000, and in 1907 more than $400,000. The increase has been largely in toilet brushes, and thus far the paint and varnish brush manufacturers of the United States have been affected but little. However, we see a menacing cloud on the horizon; the handwriting on the wall indicates that our competition from foreign markets will very soon become even more fierce on paint and varnish brushes than it is at present on toilet brushes. As an illustration, permit me to call your attention to the following tabulated example, samples of the brushes herewith submitted, both of which are made from 24-inch Chinese bristles our brush stamped "A," Japanese brush stamped "J:" Weight per brush. Our female help (the kind employed in making these brushes) averages 83 cents per day, same kind of labor is paid 15 cents per day in Japan, or 82 per cent less than ours, making their labor on a gross of these brushes cost 14 cents, as against 78 cents which we pay. Selling expense, office expense, and losses must come out of this. Thus it will be seen they are able to produce these brushes and add the same percentage (25 per cent) to their factory cost and lay them down in the warehouses of the United States jobber, with 40 per cent for duty and 10 per cent for transportation and insurance added, at a net price of $3.36 per gross, or 42 per cent less than we can sell the same article, and, as a matter of fact, 10 per cent less than our factory cost; so that even though the ad valorem duty imposed were 75 per cent it would no more than cover the difference in labor between the two countries. However, we are not asking for any such increase, but conscientiously feel that the duty should be at least 50 per cent on brushes, and that the specific duty of 7 cents per pound on bristles should be removed. Respectfully submitted. WOOSTER BRUSH WORKS, BRIEF OF FIELDER C. SLINGLUFF, FOR WILLIAM WILKENS CO., BALTIMORE, RELATING TO BRUSHES AND BRISTLES. WASHINGTON, D. C., November 28, 1908. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: The William Wilkens Company is a corporation doing business in the city of Baltimore. It has branches in New York and Chicago, and has been in the same business-that of hair-bristle and brush-fiber manufacturersfor the last sixty-four years. It employs on an average about 500 hands, and a large and important branch of its business is and has been during the entire time of its business life the cleansing, treating, and manufacturing of bristles for brushes. It buys these bristles in the packing centers in the West, in the crude state, and then prepares them for the brush makers, and it is now the principal consumer of these bristles left in the country, nearly all of the other manufacturers in this line having been forced to cease business because of the competition with bristles from the markets of China. Some years ago Armour & Co. and Swift & Co. made an effort to dress their product of crude bristles and fight the Chinese competition, but after suffering serious loss they had to give up. The William Wilkens Company, assisted by their skillful workmen and with the most improved machinery, much of it of their own invention, have so far been able to meet this Chinese competition. How long they may be able to do so depends entirely upon the question now before the committee as to the reduction or entire elimination of the now existing duty of 7 cents a pound. Bristles grow on the backs of hogs around the spinal column, and when the hog is killed and thrown into the boiling tub of water, and taken therefrom ready for the next process, these bristles are pulled off by several hundred of the employees of the William Wilkens Company, at the different packing places, and in this crude shape shipped to their factory in Baltimore for treatment. In this way the packer has a market for one of the many parts of the hog which would otherwise be wasted. The Chinese Empire is a very large grower of hogs, and with its cheap labor can prepare and ship bristles far cheaper than can be done in this country. The average wage in China per day is a few cents or a handful or two of rice; while the William Wilkens Company pays its skilled labor in this line from $2 to $2.50 per day; and it has in its employ at its factory a large number of men who have been brought up in this business and know nothing else. The company has been preparing about 20,000 pounds of these bristles per month; but this amount is gradually decreasing because of this Chinese cheap labor; and, unless the business is fostered and protected by a proper and living tariff rate, this industry will certainly disappear in a few years from the country. The protection given to it at the present time is 7 cents per pound, but this barely gives a profit to the manufacturer, and should be increased and not diminished. The bristles are bought in this country in a crude state, just as they come from the back of the hog. When imported from China they are in a condition prepared for the brush, as will be seen from the samples shown to your committee. All the loose skin is cleaned therefrom, and they are assorted in lengths, and the butts and flags of each hair separated and tied together, and are practically ready for the brush, and present a marked contrast to the crude American bristles, a sample of which also has been shown to your committee. The bristles thus shipped from China have been subject to the tariff of 7 cents per pound, and although many attempts have been made to have the same passed as crude or raw material through the customhouses, the Government, through its appraisers and courts, has persistently held up to the present time that the China product as shipped was manufactured and not crude material and was subject to the duty. An effort is now made to have this duty of 7 cents removed and the China bristles entered free of duty, irrespective of the fact whether they are in a crude shape or are prepared or manufactured. The William Wilkens Company does not claim that the bristles from China should pay duty if they are imported in a crude condition, although, even in this case, the American manufacturer finds it almost impossible to successfully compete with the Chinese cheap labor, but they do most earnestly protest against the removal of the 7 cents duty on the manufactured or semimanufactured material, as shown by the sample presented to the committee, and which is the condition. in which these goods come from China. It costs the American manufacturer 15 cents per pound to convert the crude bristle from its crude condition to the condition of the China bristle, as imported, which is double the amount of the duty of 74 cents now imposed; so that, at the start, the China bristle, exclusively because of the cheapness of the Chinese labor and methods of living in that country, has the advantage of 7 cents per pound as against the American bristle. Take off this 7 cents and the hopelessness of the American manufacturer is apparent. With this state of the case in view, Congress has heretofore failed to let the China product in free of duty, except in the crude condition, although strenuous efforts in the past on the part of the brush makers has been made to this end. The act of July 24, 1897, which fixed the duty at 7 cents per pound, says, in paragraph 411, that this duty is to be imposed on all "bristles, sorted, bunched, or prepared," while paragraph 509 of the same act excludes from the payment of said duty "bristles, crude, not sorted, bunched, or prepared.' The proper construction of these two paragraphs has been under consideration by the United States appraisers, as well as by the United States court, with the result that the duty has been affirmed as to the China importations put up in the shape of the samples shown to the committee. The committee is referred to the opinion of General Appraiser Sharretts in case of Lewisohn & Co. (T. D. 15969, G. A. 2993). Also in case of Peter Woll & Sons (T. D. 20213, G. A. 4297). Also in case of J. C. Pushee & Sons (T. D. 24797, G. A. 5483), which case was affirmed in Pushee v. United States (155 Fed. Rep., 265), and which is now the law. If the present status of this law is changed and the duty of 71 cents is removed, the prompt and inevitable result will be to close every bristle factory in this country now engaged in the business, and, as we have already stated, this branch of manufactured industry will disappear. Unless, then, there is a great corresponding benefit to be derived by the people or some large part of the people, Congress should hesitate before taking such action, and the question naturally arises, What influence and interests are back of the movement to have the tariff removed? It is apparent that the brush maker is the party in interest. The wages of his employees can not be increased by taking off so small a duty as 7 cents per pound, and hence they will derive no benefit from the same. While these employees will not be benefited, the employees of the bristle factories will lose their places entirely. The consumer of the brush can not be benefited, because it takes only from one-half to two ounces of bristle to make the brush, and hence the actual cost of each brush would be so infinitesimal that no difference in price could be made to the consumer. The issue, then, is simply one between Chinese and American labor, with a very small resultant benefit to the importer of the China bristle or to the manufacturer of the brush therefrom. Respectfully submitted. FIELDER C. SLINGLUFF, For WILLIAM WILKENS COMPANY. HANLON & GOODMAN COMPANY, NEW YORK CITY, ASKS A SIXTY PER CENT DUTY ON BRUSHES, AND FREE BRISTLES. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, NEW YORK, November 30, 1908. Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: Referring to Schedule N, paragraphs 410 and 411, relating to the duty on bristles and brushes, we desire to call attention to the following facts regarding the brush industry of the United States: First. There are between 4,000 and 5,000 men and women employed making brushes in the United States and between 500 and 1,000 making handles, ferrules, nails, tacks, and other materials used in the manufacture of brushes. Of this number, at least 60 are engaged in making small and inexpensive brushes on which the labor and American material figures 80 per cent or more of the cost. Second. In our factory the average wage of males is $2.58 per day; females, $1.23 per day. No child labor. Japanese brush factory pays males 50 cents per day, females 15 cents per day, children 5 cents per day. REPORT ON BRUSH MAKING IN GERMANY. Brushes are made principally in the territory surrounding Chemnitz. About 50 per cent of the brushes are made in factories and an equal quantity made by the poorer classes in farmhouses and small homes in and around the city. The plan generally followed is known as the factor system. Men calling themselves factors supply the home brush makers with a stock, such as bone, wooden parts, and bristles. After the brushes have |