PARAGRAPH 423-BROOMS. "There is also one other point which we wish to call your especial attention to, and that is, the American Handle Co. tries to force the broom manufacturers to buy all their handles which they use from them by allowing them a discount of 5 per cent, providing the manufacturers will buy 500,000 broom handles from them, to be taken within a certain period, and you can see at the present price of handles this extra 3 per cent is a big item, for the little manufacturer who can not buy 500,000 broom handles to be taken within a certain period is forced to lose this 3 per cent and the big manufacturer who can use 500,000 broom handles is forced to place a bona fide contract with the American Handle Co. that they will take 500,000 broom handles within a certain period in order to get this special discount of 3 per cent in addition to the 2 per cent usually allowed." It need not be pointed out that the broom manufacturers are compelled to pass along this extortionate rise in prices to the jobber and thence of the consumer. All the handlers of the brooms are compelled to make not only an additional outlay but must also get a profit upon the outlay and the carrying of additional capital. In other words, the American housewife and the American home must in the end bear the additional burden imposed by the Broom Handle Trust upon the broom manufacturer. Therefore, one of the elements in the rise in the price of brooms of which the public has heard so much is clearly pointed out in the above paragraphs. This trust has been sheltered behind the tariff since its birth. The Dingley bill tariff of 1897 carried the same rates of duty as are now enforced under the Payne bill, I am informed. As pointed out before, these rates on broom handles are prohibitive of importation. The American market is handed over to the trust. The only remedy for this is the placing of broom handles upon the free list. A mere reduction of 10 or even 20 per cent would do no good. The Broom Handle Trust can now manufacture these handles cheaper than they can be manufactured anywhere else. I believe they have the timber at their door, they have the best automatic machinery in the world. In fact, this machinery and manufacture in its present form is of strictly American origin, as I am informed. Every advantage in the case of protection rests with the Broom Handle Trust. There is absolutely no justification, from any point of view, for a protective duty or tariff in their favor. The tariff simply gives them the power to raise their price to an extortionate level. The figures from actual invoices, which are given in this brief and which can be produced in the invoices themselves, prove this statement beyond a doubt. The American broom manufacturer wants no favors from the Government in the way of tax levies through the tariff, but it does demand that it shall be released from the grip of a trust that has taken advantage of the tariff on his raw materials of manufacture. There never was a clearer case of abuse of a public privilege than the facts and figures herein cited bring to the attention of this committee. It is a situation that demands the only remedy that will be of any value whatever, namely, the transfer of broom handles to the free list. Whenever the American Handle Co. is referred to as a trust, a combination of factories is meant or a large corporation combining smaller factories. Respectfully submitted. SAMUEL WASSERMAN (Attorney for Amsterdam Broom Co.; Gardner Broom Co.; American STATEMENT OF WILLIAM A. GARDNER, AMSTERDAM, N. Y., RE BROOMS. Hon. OSCAR UNDERWOOD, AMSTERDAM, N. Y., February 22, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. UNDERWOOD: You will probably recollect that I was in Washington with Mr. Wasserman at the hearing before the Ways and Means Committee last month. A request was made by Mr. Wasserman that broom handles be placed on the free list, they now being assessed at 35 per cent under Schedule D, paragraph 215. During the discussion Mr. Wasserman was asked by a member of your committee as to the duty on brooms. Mr. Wasserman answered that he saw no reason why the duty on brooms should not be removed, providing the American broom manufacturers be placed on a perfect equality with those in any other part of the world. The question PARAGRAPH 424-BRISTLES. of prison-made brooms was alluded to as one that was likely to injure the American manufacturer, and House bill No. 5601, now in the Senate, was alluded to as bearing upon the question of prison-made goods. There are, however, other obstacles against removing the duty on brooms, which is now 40 per cent ad valorem. In the first place, the Canadian Government imposes a duty of 20 per cent on brooms imported from the United States into Canada. In the second place, railroad rates for transportation of broom corn from the United States into Canada seem to be more favorable to the Canadian manufacturer. In the third place, the cost of labor seems to be considerably less in Canada than in the United States. The American manufacturers formerly did a considerable export business to Europe and South American countries, which has dwindled to almost nothing in later years because of the Canadian competition which has resulted for the reasons above mentioned. What we desire to emphasize is the point that if your committee desires to reduce the duty of the manufactured brooms it should be in an amount not exceeding 10 per cent. If any further information is necessary, or if the matter is not made entirely clear, we should be perfectly willing to explain any further details, and also to appear before your committee at any time you may desire. Thanking you for your interest in this matter and assuring you that we are animated by the wish to do justice to the American consumer as well as the American manufacturer, we remain, Yours, very truly, WM. A. GARDner. PARAGRAPH 424. Bristles, sorted, bunched, or prepared, seven and one-half cents per pound. BRISTLES. THE WILLIAM WILKENS CO., BALTIMORE, MD., WRITE CONCERNING DUTY ON HOG BRISTLES. Hon. OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, Chairman Committee on Ways and Means, BALTIMORE, MD., February 24, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We did not file brief with your honorable committee on this subject, as we felt confident your honorable committee would not advocate to reduce the present duty on this article in view of the conditions as set forth in our brief presented at the former tariff-revision meetings, to which we respectfully refer you. We notice from a weekly journal of tariff news, however, that Messrs. John L. Whiting and J. J. Adams Co., of Boston, Mass., requested "that bristles be placed under one classification, as the fact whether they are crude, not sorted, bunched, or prepared is not essential." And for this reason we kindly ask you to consider our opinion on this subject: We do not quite see the point that Mr. Whiting desires to make from his newspaper article. We think that it is just as essential to distinguish the manufactured bristles from the crude as in any other commodity. We think the present classification "fills the bill." We have not experienced any difficulty when importing bristles to classify them properly. If it is the brush makers' intention to try to lower the duty on hogs' bristles and increase the protection on the manufactured brush, we beg to say the average size brush does not contain over one-half to 1 ounce of bristles. On this quantity the duty would be less than one-half cent per brush, which the public would not get the advantage of. This small difference in the cost of manufacture of the brush would not lessen the ultimate selling price of the brush to the user, whereas, on the other hand, we manufacture great quantities of the domestic hog bristles, and if the duty were lowered it would either eventually kill the manufacture of the domestic bristles entirely, as it is as much as we can do now to compete with the foreign labor at the price of the imported article; or, possibly, the importers may increase their prices to just within the price for the domestic article, taking the extra profit resulting from the lower tariff and the brush makers would not benefit thereby notwithstanding. The present duty of 74 cents per pound is barely adequate to offset the difference in the cheap Chinese labor (from whence the largest quantities of the imported article originates) and the American labor, and should the duty be lowered we fear it would PARAGRAPH 425-TROUSERS BUCKLES. drive us out of the bristle business, which we established over 60 years ago. We would regret this exceedingly, not alone for ourselves, but for the number of men who have worked at our factory all their lives and know of no other means by which to make their livelihood; besides, the Government would lose the revenue." We respectfully submit the above for your kind consideration, and beg to remain, Yours, truly, THE WILLIAM WILKENS Co., PETITION BY JOHN L. WHITING-J. J. ADAMS CO., BOSTON, MASS. Schedule N-Sundries.-424. Bristles, sorted, bunched, or prepared, 0.074 cents per pound. Free list.-523. Bristles, crude, not sorted, bunched, or prepared. We petition that all imported bristles be placed under one classification. If subject to duty, the same rate to apply, whether in prepared or crude condition. The quantity of crude bristles imported is insignificant, and will not increase. It is not practicable, or economical for brush manufacturers, who are the only users of bristles to buy them in crude state. Quality can not be ascertained or the percentage of waste in crude bristles, also labor in the United States is higher priced in comparison with foreign labor. The great objection to importing crude bristles is that quality can not be determined. The preparation of foreign bristles to be used in making brushes is entirely carried on by the manufacturers of brushes who have their own methods, which they hold as trade secrets. The buying of crude bristles and preparing them for use will_not become a business of itself. A small quantity of American bristles, which are short length and low grade, is prepared by bristle-dressing houses, and is diminishing in volume. If the Government can spare the revenue received from duty on bristles it will be of benefit to brush manufacturers to have all bristles on free list. Some brush manufacturers urgently desire this to be a fact. Our house would receive some benefit from free bristles, as the present duty is equivalent to a tax on bristle brushes of 2 or 3 per cent. It is of much more importance to all brush manufacturers in the United States that the duty on manufactured brushes be subject to a greater duty than at present, than that bristles be made free of duty. Bristles are the important raw material of brushes, but there are large quantities of brushes made abroad and in the United States which are made of various fibers and soft hairs. If raw materials in a general way are placed on free list, bristles are distinctly entitled to that classification. Bristles are a raw material which is not, and can not be produced in this country. Respectfully submitted. PARAGRAPH 425. JOHN L. WHITING-J. J. ADAMS Co., Trousers buckles and waistcoat buckles, made wholly or partly of iron or steel, or parts thereof, valued at not more than fifteen cents per hundred, five cents per hundred; valued at more than fifteen cents per hundred, and not more than fifty cents per hundred, ten cnets per hundred; valued at more than fifty cents per hundred, fifteen cents per hundred; and in addition thereto on each and all of the above buckles or parts of buckles, fifteen per centum ad valorem. See Adolph Keller, page 5125. TROUSERS BUCKLES. BRIEF OF DIECKERHOFF, RAFFLOER & CO., NEW YORK, IN RE TROUSERS BUCKLES. The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, NEW YORK, January 28, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: We respectfully request a reduction of duty on trouser buckles which are provided for in paragraph 425 under Schedule N of the present tariff, as follows: PARAGRAPH 425-TROUSERS BUCKLES. Buckles made of steel or iron valued at not more than 15 cents a hundred, 5 cents a hundred and 15 per cent ad valorem. Buckles valued at more than 15 cents and not more than 50 cents a hundred, 10 cents a hundred and 15 per cent ad valorem. Buckles valued at over 50 cents a hundred, 15 cents a hundred and 15 per cent ad valorem. The buckles which are being imported are principally of the grade of which the foreign value is less than 15 cents per box of 100. These are made of steel, and pay duty at an equivalent rate of 481 per cent ad valorem. Buckles which are made of iron, and used on cheap grade of clothing, pay an equivalent rate of 63% per cent ad valorem. Buckles made of steel and valued over 15 cents a hundred, and less than 50 cents a hundred, pay an equivalent rate of 51 per cent ad valorem. Buckles valued over 50 cents a hundred are not imported. Buckles made of brass pay duty as manufactures of metal at 45 per cent ad valorem. Buckles under existing rates of duty are almost confined to the domestic manufacture, and the importations are less than 10 per cent of those produced in this country. As buckles are an article of necessity, and are made in large quantities by machinery, we can safely state that with a reduction in duty imports and revenue would increase, and still would not interfere with the domestic manufacture of same. We would ask that trousers buckles made of iron, steel, or brass to be reduced to 25 per cent ad valorem. We would suggest that paragraph 425 of the present tariff act be changed to read as follows: PARAGRAPH 425. "Trouser buckles made wholly or partly of iron, steel, or brass, or parts thereof, 25 per cent ad valorem." The following is a statement of trouser buckles imported from Germany in wholesale quantities, showing foreign cost, amount of duty as assessed under present act, also the equivalent rate of ad valorem duty. We also submit a sample card of buckles which are imported from Germany, from which the calculations appearing in the statement are made. Article No. Foreign cost. Duty. Equal to ad valorem. 102-103. Iron....... 43 pfennigs per 100, equal to 10 cents, at 15 per cent... Plus 5 cents per 100... Total duty.... 124/5-131/2-231/2. Iron. 63 pfennigs per 100, equal to 15 cents, at 15 per cent.. Total duty.... 141/2. Steel.. 1.15 marks per 100, equal to 0.274 cent, at 15 per cent Total duty. 122-123. Brass...... 2.05-2.20 marks, 0.488-0.524 cents, at 45 per cent. 245 PARAGRAPH 425-TROUSERS BUCKLES. ALMA MANUFACTURING CO., BALTIMORE, MD., WRITE REGARDING BUTTONS, BUCKLES, ETC. Hon. J. CHARLES LINTHICUM, ALMA MANUFACTURING CO., Baltimore, January 7, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: As per our conversation this day, I submit below a list of the various products, headings in conformity with present tariff bills, and I also append to each heading the present duty: Buckles, trousers and waistcoats, or parts of, made wholly or partly of iron or steel, valued at not more than 15 cents per 100, 5 cents per 100 plus 15 per cent ad valorem; valued at more than 15 cents per 100, and not more than 50 cents per 100, 10 cents per 100 plus 15 per cent ad valorem; valued at more than 50 cents per 100, 15 cents per 100 plus 15 per cent ad valorem. Buttons, steel trouser, one-fourth cent line gross, plus 15 per cent ad valorem. Buttons, horn, three-fourths cent line gross, plus 15 per cent ad valorem. Snap fasteners or clasps, or parts of, by whatever name known, 50 per cent ad valorem. I am also sending by parcel post a few samples of the above, more for the purpose of identifying these items than anything else. With your permission, I beg to repeat that we are barely able with present tariff to meet European competition; in fact, in many instances, we are undersold by European manufacturers, which can readily be proven by list of imports. A reduction of tariff would mean a reduction of wages, because the wages paid in this country for skilled mechanics and operators is far in excess of the wages paid by our European competitors manufacturing in England, France, and Germany. The only other alternative would be to discontinue the making of above products in this country. Thanking you for the time granted me in to-day's interview and for your courtesy, I remain, H. KERNGOOD. Very respectfully, yours, ADDITIONAL DATA. BALTIMORE, January 11, 1913. Until 1893 casehardened steel products, such as buttons and buckles, were not made in this country, but were imported mostly from Westphalia, Germany, and France. I was induced by American dealers to undertake the making of these goods and began to do so that year. The difficulties beginning operations in this country were many, but we managed to exist under protection and continued to enjoy the patronage of the jobbing trade in this country until the tariff was reduced during the Cleveland administration. At this time we have quite a number of manufacturers making casehardened goods, and present duty is entirely satisfactory, though foreign manufacturers are competing with us for trade and receive a share of this business irrespective of present duty. It is obvious that they can manufacture cheaper because of cheaper labor. I am advised that they are about on a par with us on up-to-date machinery. Snap fasteners for use on gloves and on leather goods are brought into this country at an abnormally low figure at this time, irrespective of present specific duty of 50 per cent; the cost of raw material in this country and in Germany is about the same; the difference, if any, in the cost of raw material could not be considered a factor; it is simply a difference in cost of labor, which enables the European manufacturer to land, for instance, a fastener provided with a 24-line solid celluloid or horn top or button, stamped with design to suit the requirements of the customer, and such design or letters filled with bronze or aluminum, etc., at 91 cents per gross. Competition among American manufacturers on this article is exceptionally keen, and close competition has brought this specific article down to $1.10 per gross; the only "saving clause" is our ability to serve a customer more quickly than the European manufac turer, because of distance and length of time it requires to fill orders, but large orders, no doubt, are being placed abroad, because of the lower figure-orders for which the customer is willing to wait three or four months for delivery. We could submit many more examples, if desired, relating to buckles and snap fasteners as well. Steel buttons are imported in limited quantities only. The present tariff is ample protection. |