PARAGRAPH 448-JEWELRY. We have seen a copy of the brief submitted by Dr. Kunz, gem expert (for several years connected with the house of Tiffany & Co., New York), in which he states that the duty of 60 per cent on jewelry is prohibitive, and 30 to 40 per cent would produce more revenue to the Government, and we answer that statement by saying that undoubtedly Mr. Kunz had in mind jewelry of the more expensive character, jewelry made by the single piece, a special design of which is made for that particular piece, and is not duplicated for another similar piece, such as the finest specimens of the jewelers' art that can be produced in Paris, Berlin, St. Petersburg, and other high-art centers, jewelry set with many high-cost precious stones. It is very evident that Dr. Kunz did not have in mind, and barely possible that he does not know about, the jewelry that is made in Providence and the Attleboros, to be sold by the dozen and by the gross; the kind of jewelry made in large quantities in our factories in which the labor cost exceeds by far that of the material used therein. Please note in our exhibits the item of labor exceeds many times the cost of the material used. By comparing our exhibits with our statements of costs here and abroad, you will see that Dr. Kunz's statement of 30 to 40 per cent duty does not fit our industry on the top, side, or bottom. An importer in New York has samples of gold brooches set with pearls and corals brought in under paragraph 434. If this can be done to-day, wouldn't the jewelry factories in Pforzhein get busy if you followed Dr. Kunz's suggestion and made the duty on jewelry 30 to 40 per cent, and wouldn't it close a like number of factories in Providence and the Attleboros? We surely know it would. Furthermore, you can readily see the duty asked for, 85 per cent, is nowhere near equal to the difference between the labor abroad and the labor here on the same article. Consequently, duty recommended by us, not being prohibitive or anywhere near it, will protect the industry somewhat and produce a greater revenue than the present rate of duty. Our exhibits show that our product is 75 to 95 per cent labor, and in consideration of the price paid labor here and abroad the present duty does not give us adequate protection that we need a duty commensurate with the difference between labor here and abroad. TARIFF COMMITTEE OF NEW ENGLAND MANUFACTURING STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, County of Providence: In the city of Providence, on this 9th day of January, A. D. 1909, personally appeared Henry G. Thresher, to me known, and he subscribed the foregoing brief in my presence and made oath that all information and statements contained therein are true and correct, to the best of his knowledge and belief. Before me: [SEAL.] ROBERT S. EMERSON, Notary Public. EXHIBIT A.--New England Manufacturing Jewelers' and Silversmiths' Association. from 1. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, close for longer than normal periods of time? If for longer than normal periods of time, how much longer?-A. Yes, we were closed tight for lack of orders nearly half of the time. 2. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, run on short time for longer periods of time than under normal conditions? If so, on how short time, and for how much longer periods than normal? A. Yes, we worked abont 3 days a week, 8 hours per day, then closed for entire week. There was no jewelry business during said time. 3. Did you discontinue the manufacture of any particular lines of goods, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897. If so, what were the lines discontinued, and were they discontinued because of low tariff? 4. What was the average number of your employees while the following tariff laws were in effect? (a) McKinley law, 1890 to August 27, 1894?-A. Fifty. (b) Wilson-Gorman law, August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897?-A. Twenty-six. (c) Dingley law, July 24, 1897, to August 5, 1909?-A. Eighty. (d) Payne-Aldrich law, August 5, 1909, to now?-A. Ninety. BLISS BROS. Co., Attleboro. PARAGRAPH 448-JEWELRY. 1. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, close for longer than normal periods of time? If for longer than normal periods of time, how much longer?-A. We did not operate over one-half time and failed in 1896. 2. Did your faetory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, run on short time for longer periods of time than under normal conditions? If so, on how short time and for how much longer periods than normal? A. Yes, 16 hours a week at times. 3. Did you discontinue the manufacture of any particular lines of goods while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897? If so, what were the lines discontinued, and were they discontinued because of low tariff?? 4. What was the average number of your employees while the following tariff laws were in effect? (a) McKinley law, 1890 to August 27, 1894?-A. Eighty. (b) Wilson-Gorman law, August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897?-A. Thirty-five. (c) Dingley law, July 24, 1897, to August 5, 1909?-A. One hundred and twenty. (d) Payne-Aldrich law, August 5, 1909, to now?-A. Three hundred and fifty; at present 475, and more wanted. WHITING & DAVIS CO., Plainville, Mass. JANUARY 17, 1913. NEW ENGLAND MANUFACTURING JEWELERS' ASSOCIATION. GENTLEMEN: It would be impossible for us to answer your questions. The reason is when we moved five years ago we destroyed all old time books and anything that we did not need and thought that we would have no occasion to refer to later. All we can say is that the period from 1894 to 1897 was extremely bad. We distinctly remember one time of running for months on 15 hours a week instead of 60 that we were running before the dull period set in. We also run with a reduced number of hands. We can not remember at the present time whether any lines were discontinued on account of the tariff law or not. Every six months we make large changes in our line, as we manufacture about every novelty that comes out, and our line is constantly changing. We regret that we can not give you any more definite information. WILLIAMS & PAYTON. PROVIDENCE, R. I., January 21, 1913. NEW ENGLAND MANUFACTURING JEWELERS Providence, R. I. GENTLEMEN: We are in receipt of your inquiry in regard to the running time of our factory during the period from 1894 to 1897, and in answer would say that we ran our factory on an average of 40 hours a week during these years, which we call a very short time. Trusting this is the desired information, we are very truly, yours, OSTBY & BARTON Co., By HAROLD W. OSTBY. JANUARY 18, 1913. THE NEW ENGLAND MANUFACTURING JEWELERS AND SILVERSMITHS' ASSOCIATION, 42 Weybosset Street, City. GENTLEMEN: Answering your inquiry of January 15, we beg to say that during the period from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, and which time the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, our production was very much reduced and the amount of labor employed much less than during a period previous to this time, or even after it. Very truly, yours, N. BARSTOW Co. PARAGRAPH 448-JEWELRY. from 1. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., August 27, 1894 to July 24, 1897, close for longer than normal periods of time? If for longer than normal periods of time, how much longer ?-A. Yes, we closed until further notice and stayed closed seven weeks. 2. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894 to July 24, 1897, run on short time for longer periods of time than under normal conditions? If so, on how short time, and for how much longer periods than normal ?-A. Yes, our working schedule was one and two days a week for months and even then many men were not given work. 3. Did you discontinue the manufacture of any particular lines of goods, while the the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894 to July 24, 1897? If so, what were the lines discontinued, and were they discontinued because of a low tariff ?-A. No. On the other hand we increased our line in an effort to keep our factory going. 4. What were the average number of your employees while the following tariff laws were in effect? (a) Mc Kinley law, 1890 to August 26, 1894 ?—A. Sixty. (b) Wilson-Gorman law, August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897 ?-A. Thirty-three. E. I. FRANKLIN & Co. 1. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894 to July 24, 1897, close for longer than normal periods of time? If for longer than normal periods of time, how much longer ?-A. Our factory was on short time for longer periods than usual during 1894-96 and we employed not more than three-quarters the normal help. 2. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894 to July 24, 1897, run on short time for longer periods of time than under normal conditions? If so, on how short time, and for how much longer periods than normal?-A. Half time for months and much less number of help. Short time six months on a stretch. 3. Did you discontinue the manufacture of any particular lines of goods, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894 to July 24, 1897. If so, what were the lines discontinued, and were they discontinued because of a low tariff ?-A. Times were so dull nothing sold but cheap new novelties. 4. What were the average number of your employees while the following tariff laws were in effect? (a) Mc Kinley law, 1890, to August 27, 1894 ?-A. Two hundred and fifty. (b) Wilson-Gorman law, August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897 ?-A. One hundred and fifty. (c) Dingley law, July 24, 1897, to August 5, 1909 ?-A. Four hundred. (d) Payne-Aldrich Law, August 5, 1909, to now ?-A. Four hundred and fifty. THEODORE W. FOSTER & BRO. CO. 1. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, close for longer than normal periods of time? If for longer than normal periods of time, how much longer? A. About an average of 65 days. 2. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, run on short time for longer periods of time than under normal conditions? If so, on how short time, and for how much longer periods than normal?—A. Our factory was run on short time during the entire period from 1894 to 1897, but we can not give exact figures. 3. Did you discontinue the manufacture of any particular lines of goods, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897? If so, what were the lines discontinued, and were they discontinued because of a low tariff? A. We have suffered much from the encroachment of German trade on nickel chains. We did not discontinue the line, but foreign-made chains of class are sold now in this country for less than we can produce them, 4. What were the average number of your employees while the following tariff laws were in effect? 78959°-VOL 5-13-48 PARAGRAPH 448-JEWELRY. (a) McKinley law, 1890 to August 27, 1894?-A. Eighty. (b) Wilson-Gorman law, August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897?-A. Sixty-one. (c) Dingley law, July 24, 1897, to August 5, 1909?-A. One hundred and one. (d) Payne-Aldrich Law, August 5, 1909, to now?-A. Eighty. THE O. M. DRAPER CO., North Attleboro. 1. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, close for longer than normal periods of time? If for longer than normal periods of time, how much longer?—A. Many months during that period, we were closed from 2 to 5 days weekly. 2. Did your factory, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897, run on short time for longer periods of time than under normal conditions? If so, on how short time, and for how much longer periods than normal?-A. Yes, from 1 to 4 days weekly many months during that time. 3. Did you discontinue the manufacture of any particular lines of goods, while the Wilson-Gorman tariff law was in effect, i. e., from August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897. If so, what were the lines discontinued, and were they discontinued because of a low tariff?-A. No. 4. What were the average number of your employees while the following tariff laws were in effect? (a) McKinley law, 1890 to August 27, 1894?-A. Sixty-four. (b) Wilson-Gorman law, August 27, 1894, to July 24, 1897?-A. Thirty. [From the Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Manufactures. (Special Agents Series No. 42, "Industrial Conditions in Europe, Part 2. Austria-Hungary.")] In Vienna: Goldsmiths and silversmiths receive per 50-hour week.. In Gablonz jewelry factories for a day of from 10 to 11 hours pay: $5.50-$7.50 Factory foremen.. Skilled helpers.. Women..... Young boys and girls.... 80-1.00 .60- 70 .40- .50 .30- .40 Much of this work is taken home and done by the piece, but it is claimed that only by working long hours and by special skill can better wages be secured through piecework. The general factory workmen, wagon drivers, and other laborers in Gablonz do not earn over 60 cents daily. The laboring classes in this section subsist principally on rye bread, potatoes, milk, and vegetables, with occasionally a bit of smoked meat or sausage, sour milk with potatoes, and some home-made cheese. PARAGRAPH 448-JEWELRY. MARSEILLE, FRANCE, November 4, 1912. The PAYE & BAKER MANUFACTURING CO., North Attleboro, Mass. SIRS: Replying to your letter dated the 10th instant I have the honor to report that, the wages paid to the workingmen per day in the Marseille jewelry factories range as follows The wage scale (wage per hour) paid by a representative silver-plate novelty house in Massachusetts: The scale of wages paid by a representative electroplate jewelry house in Massachusetts, showing the wage per hour for a 10-hour day: The scale of wages paid by a representative miscellaneous line jewelry house in Providence, showing the wage per hour for a 10-hour day: The scale of wages paid by a representative solid gold jewelry house in Providence, showing the wage per hour for a 10-hour day: The scale of wages paid by a representative solid gold chain jewelry house in dence, showing the wage per hour for a 10-hour day: |