PARAGRAPH 423-BRUSHES. Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir. Mr. HILL. How much do you think it would increase the importations? Would it double them? Mr. HOLTON. I think it would more than double them. Mr. HILL. You think it would more than double? Mr. HOLTON. I think it would more than double. Mr. HILL. You stated it would produce more revenue. Mr. HOLTON. I think it would produce more revenue than it does to-day. Mr. HILL. What effect would more than double in quantity in brushes imported have on the revenue from bristles? If we more than double the importation of the finished brush, what effect would it have upon the importation of bristles, which bring us a larger revenue than brushes do? Mr. HOLTON. I do not agree with you there. The revenue is not larger on bristles. Mr. HILL. On page 314 of our Handbook you will find that brushes were imported last year to the amount of $2,074,000, and bristles were imported, sorted, bunched, and prepared, to the amount of 3,354,000 pounds, with a value of $2,926,000, or nearly a million dollars more than the value of the brushes imported. Now, as the importation of brushes increases, the importation of bristles will fall off, will it not? Mr. HOLTON. No, sir. Mr. HILL. Then would you put into one pocket what you would take out of the other? Mr. HARRISON. That would be true, Mr. Hill, if the rates of duty were the same for bristles and brushes. Although there was more in value in bristles imported, there is three times as much revenue obtained on brushes. Mr. HILL. Yes, I understand the rate is much higher, but the whole question as to whether you would lose revenue or gain it would depend on the accuracy of your guess or anybody else's guess, and anybody else's is just as good as yours as to what the effect of a 20 per cent duty would be on the importation of brushes compared with the 40 per cent duty. The chances are, it would seem to me, that the Government would be a loser by the operation. Still I want you to put in your opinion. Mr. HOLTON. It is entirely an estimate. Mr. HILL. If brushes were increased in importations, the bristles would be decreased? Mr. HOLTON. It is entirely an estimate. Mr. LONGWORTH. What do you base your argument on? Is it that you desire to increase the revenue, to benefit the ultimate consumer, or to benefit yourself? Mr. HOLTON. All three. Mr. RAINEY. Mr. Holton, you know something about the manufacture of brushes in this country, up there in the State of New York? You live up there in New York? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir; I will reach that presently by exhibits, showing the different kinds of brushes, how they are manufactured, and I will reach that in a moment if I am allowed to proceed. PARAGRAPH 423-BRUSHES, Mr. FORDNEY. Just one question at this point. Are those bristles produced in this country? Mr. HOLTON. To a very small extent. Mr. FORDNEY. So that all the bristles that the American manufacturers use come from Europe, don't they; they are imported anyway? Mr. HOLTON. China and east Prussia. Mr. FORDNEY. Now, then, would we not get more revenue if we were to increase the duty on brushes and prohibit the importation of brushes, and lower the duty a fraction on bristles and increase the importation of bristles and increase the American manufacture of brushes in this country-get more revenue and get more employment? Mr. HOLTON. No, sir. Mr. FORDNEY. Would it not be better to have it brought in in bristles than in brushes? Mr. HOLTON. If the bristles come in in brushes, we pay 40 per cent ad valorem on the bristles in the brush. Coming in in the bundle, as they do, they pay 7.5 cents per pound specific, which, at the least calculation, would not amount to over 4 per cent; and the higher grade but 2. Mr. FORDNEY. It is a protection of the labor put upon the brush when you put the duty on the brush over and above the duty on the bristles. My suggestion would give us all the importation of bristles we want, give all the American labor employment to make all the brushes we consume, transfer the industry from there here and still give us the revenue. Mr. RAINEY. Inasmuch as he has brought up the question of the labor, I think we had better go into that right now. I want to ask you a few questions. Is it not true that this industry in New York State employs children as young as 7 years? Mr. HOLTON. Even younger. Mr. RAINEY. Is not this a sort of household industry, where they take these brushes up to their rooms in the nighttime and work, the children putting the bristles in the brushes? Mr. HOLTON. That is done in the tenement-house district in New York. Mr. RAINEY. And in many houses that are not licensed for that? Mr. HOLTON. I believe the biggest part are not licensed. Mr. RAINEY. Independent of your own interest in the matter, because you might be prejudiced and they might insist upon the other side that you are prejudiced, have the manufacturers of these brushes been investigated in New York, and has it not been investigated by the National Child Labor Committee? Mr. HOLTON. Quite recently. You are anticipating my speech a little bit. Mr. RAINEY. Mr. Fordney just anticipated your speech, so I wanted to bring that out now. Have you got the report on the National Child Labor Committee up there on this industry? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir. I have some authenticated photographs from that same committee. Mr. RAINEY. Yes. Let us also see some of those photographs. Mr. FORDNEY. I presume under Democratic administration now you will have no more child labor; you will have a child-labor law PARAGRAPH 423-BRUSHES. to control that class of labor. I suppose we will have a good law right away quick under the Democratic administration that will prohibit the employment of children at that age. If not, we should have it. Mr. RAINEY. They do it in violation of the law there in New York State. Will you describe these pictures? Mr. HARRISON. Just on that point I would like to say about my State: We have at the present time a commission investigating industrial conditions, labor conditions, in all the factories in the State, and that commission is nearly ready to make report, and based upon that we expect to reform those conditions. Mr. RAINEY. Fortunately, they are now under a Democratic administration. Mr. FORDNEY. Do you know whether or not the child labor of China would get more pay per day than these children 7 years of age in New York get? I venture to say that this child labor that is employed that the gentleman speaks of in the State of New York in putting these bristles in the brushes gets twice as much as the laborer does in China, as the Chinaman gets for doing the same kind of work. Mr. RAINEY. We would rather have the Chinaman do it, anyway, than these little children. Mr. FORDNEY. Let me tell you, my dear friend, that this comparison of child labor is not very pertinent. Of course, child labor should be prohibited, and if you have not got a law in the State of New York that will prohibit it, you ought to have one. Mr. RAINEY. Will you describe some of these photographs of the children, so as to get it into the record, and hand them up here? Mr. HOLTON. Shall I anticipate my speech and put them in now, or come to that later? Mr. RAINEY. I would like to have you take it up now. Mr. HOLTON. Shall I read this? Mr. RAINEY. Yes, sir. Mr. HOLTON. The Universal Brush Co. makes a brush known as the "Hughes Ideal" brush. Their factory is in Troy, with an office at 114 East Sixteenth Street. Mr. RAINEY. Of the Universal Brush Co. Mr. Alexander is president? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir. Mr. RAINEY. He was on the calendar here ahead of you, but he ran away? Mr. HOLTON. His name was called this morning. Mr. RAINEY. He was not called at all, but he ran way. Now, go ahead. Mr. HOLTON (reading): I now notice that I am charged with manufacturing my "Ideal" brush in America, with American workmen, in a sanitary American factory. I plead guilty and am proud of it. 'If this is treason, make the most of it." Mr. RAINEY. Have you got any pictures indicating the conditions? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir. Mr. RAINEY. Describe those pictures you have there. Tell what they are PARAGRAPH 423-BRUSHES. Mr. HOLTON. One picture shows the Shultz family, of 476 Third Avenue, Brooklyn, working at this occupation. Mr. RAINEY. What are their ages, before you leave the Shultz family? Mr. HOLTON. The girls in this family are 12 and 14 years of age. Mr. RAINEY. How many girls are in that picture 12 and 14 years of age. Mr. HOLTON. The mother and two children. Mr. RAINEY. Is the work going on in the night-time? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir; the photograph was taken at 9 p. m., and they worked later. Mr. RAINEY. Now, tell us about the next one. Mr. HOLTON. "Making hairbrushes. Hausner family, 310 East 71st Street, New York City. Frank is 6 years old and John is 12. The mother had a sore throat and wore a great rag wrapper around it, but she took it off for the photo. They said they all (including the 6-year-old) worked until 10 p. m. when busy. Their neighbor corroborated this. She said: It's a whole lots better for the boys than doin' nothin'. The mother said the night work hurts their eyes and John said so, too. He was not very enthusiastic about the beauties of work. All together they make about $2 a week. Mr. RAINEY. All three of them? Mr. HOLTON. All. The committee has indorsed it. Mr. RAINEY. How many are in that picture, of children working, putting bristles in these brushes? Mr. HOLTON. There are two children here. Mr. RAINEY. Is that in the nighttime, too? Mr. FORDNEY. This is New York State, is it? Mr. RAINEY. It is in Brooklyn. Mr. HOLTON. New York State. Mr. RAINEY. These pictures, every one of them, were taken by the National Child Labor Committee? That last picture, was that taken in the nighttime? Mr. HOLTON. This was taken, I believe, at 10 p. m. Mr. RAINEY. Then that shows those little children at work? Mr. HOLTON. It says they work until 10 p. m. taken at 6 p. m., January 31, 1912. The picture was Mr. RAINEY. Have you got any more of them? Mr. HOLTON. Here is a copy of an advertisement appearing in the New York paper, headed: "Help Wanted-Female. Unskilled labor to be done at home. Apply 114 East Sixteenth Street, sixth floor." That is the office address of the Universal Brush Co. Mr. RAINEY. Of which Mr. Alexander is president, and he ran away to avoid being examined? Mr. HOLTON. Quite right. Mr. RAINEY. Have you the report of the National Child Labor Committee? Mr. HOLTON. I will only read the extract pertaining to brushes. Mr. RAINEY. Yes; read what pertains to brushes only. When was that report made? Mr. HOLTON. Pamphlet No. 181, reprinted from the Child Labor Bulletin of November, 1912. 78959°-VOL 5-13-23 PARAGRAPH 423-BRUSHES. Mr. RAINEY. Will you read so much of it as pertains to the manufacture of brushes? Mr. HOLTON. On page 4, as regards brushes, it says: Manufacture of brushes requires a license. Of 124 families given by brush manufacturers as outworkers, 10 families were found to live in licensed houses, 114 families in unlicensed houses. On page 5: Forty-one families visited, containing 72 children. Out of these, 69 children were working, of the following ages: Mr. FORDNEY. May I ask you what do you bring these pictures here to Congress for, and submit them to this committee? Do you want this committee to correct a wrong that is absolutely in the control of the State of New York? Mr. HOLTON. I merely want to show how the brush manufacturers Mr. FORDNEY (interposing). Oh, no; that is not the point at all. Do you want Congress now to go to the State of New York and correct a wrong that exists there in the employment of child labor that should be corrected by the State law? Mr. HOLTON. I believe the State is caring for that now. Mr. Lovejoy Mr. FORDNEY (interposing). Well, then, what do you bring it here before the committee for? Mr. PAYNE. You do not pretend it is lawful to work children under 7 years of age? Mr. HOLTON. No. Mr. RAINEY. You brought them here to show what kind of an industry Mr. Fordney wants to protect? Mr. HOLTON. Exactly. Mr. PAYNE. It is a violation of the law, the working of children of that age? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir; and I do not think it ought to be encouraged. Mr. RAINEY. You are showing what kind of labor this paragraph of Mr. Payne's bill is protecting up there in New York? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir. Mr. FORDNEY. Now, my friend, is that true? Mr. HOLTON. Yes, sir. So much has been said Mr. FORDNEY (interposing). Do you think the rates were put into the Payne tariff law to bring about this condition? Mr. HOLTON. No; I do not. Mr. FORDNEY. Then, what did you say so for? |