Imágenes de páginas

PARAGRAPH 432-ARTIFICIAL ABRASIVES. represent to you that we, like many others in our line of business, are greatly concerned about a future supply of abrasive materials.

Recently there has commenced coming foreign offerings of artificial abrasives, prin. cipally crude electrical crystals, similar to so-called “carborundum," and for the following reasons we respectfully ask and request you to see that these products be placed upon the free list of the new tariff:

First. Corundum as formerly mined in the United States and for recent years has been supplied from Canada is now practically exhausted, both in the States and Canada, and corundum having been used to make the highest grade grinding wheels, some other high-grade abrasive must be found to take its place.

Second. The two largest grinding-wheel and abrasive-material users, the two concerns who practically monopolize the trade of the United States to-day in so-called emery and grinding wheels, manufacture solely for their own use from electrical crystals made from clay. Their ability to inake this material, which they refuse to sell to other wheel makers, gives them a complete monopoly to-day, as Turkish and other emeries are in no sense equal to this material for many kinds of work, and unless we and other wheel makers can get some of these foreign electrical abrasives at a reasonable cost the monopoly will remain where it is today.

Third. If this product comes in free of duty the cost to us will be much more than the cost to our competitors who manufacture their own crystals.

Fourth. All manufactures of abrasives for all purposes, not only for wheels, but for cloth, paper, and the glass trade, will be benefited correspondingly by the free entry of the crude electrical abrasives—the goods can not be made in this country under present conditions without the investment of an enormous amount of money, and we feel that our industry is a useful one, growing in importance and volume, and that we are now up against what amounts to a combine because of the exclusiveness maintained by the makers of the goods in this country.

Trusting, gentlemen, that you will give this matter very thorough investigation and that you can see your way clear to comply with our request, we beg to remain, Yours, very truly,


New YORK, January 28, 1919. The Ways AND MEANS COMMITTEE,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: We wish to respectfully advise you of our desire to have placed upon the free list crude artificial abrasives. We are now the importers of crude artificial abrasives in large quantities, and as such, sell to the so-called grinding wheel trade or manufacturers of abrasive wheels large quantities thereof.

We have, as customers who rely upon imported abrasives to be able to compete with certain large wheel manufacturers, who themselves manufacture their own artificial abrasives in this country, the following: Safety Emery Wheel Co., Springfield, Ohio; Dayton Grinding Wheel Co., Dayton, Ohio; Detroit Emery Wheel Co., Detroit, Mich.; Waltham Emery Wheel Co., Waltham, Mass.; Vitrified Wheel Co., Westfield, Mass., and many others.

All of the above manufacturers of abrasive wheels and grinding and polishing material must rely upon European artificial abrasives to compete with such concerns as the Carborundum Co., of Niagara Falls, and the Norton Co., of Worcester, Mass., neither of which companies will sell to their competitors their own manufactured product, excepting one abrasive, manufactured by the Carborundum Co., which is sold by them to the grinding-wheel trade in smaller quantities for special purposes.

Heretofore these independent grinding-wheel companies were able to rely considerably upon Canadian corundum for the purposes for which they are now more and more relying upon artificial imported abrasives. Due to the increasing scarcity of the Canadian corundum, it is now becoming a live situation to be met by the so-called grinding-wheel trade in this country.

We believe it to be to the best interests of American manufacturers that the tariff on crude artificial abrasives be removed, but we do not think it wise to remove the tariff on graded material. Yours, very truly,

Karl S. S. BEHR.


Dayton, Ohio, January 27, 1913. The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS,

Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: As manufacturers of abrasive wheels, we are vitally interested in the use of artificial abrasives, a part of which enter into the manufacture of our product.

Since the question of tariff on the above crude materials is to be considered by you, we beg respectfully to request that, if at all possible, this material be admitted duty free.

There are some twenty-five manufacturers of abrasive wheels in this country, all representing active industry, and who are almost wholly dependent upon outside sources of supply for any of the artificial abrasives they may use, so that it seems only fair that their interests in this connection should be given what advantage might accrue from placing crude abrasives on the duty-free list.

We trust your honorable committee may give this matter your careful consideration, and for which we want to thank you in advance. Yours, very truly,

F. R. NRY, Manager.


Firecrackers of all kinds, eight cents per pound; bombs, rockets, Roman candles, and fireworks of all descriptions, not specially provided for in this section, twelve cents per pound; the weight on all the foregoing to include all coverings, wrappings, and packing material.



Mr. WAGNER. I would like to call the attention of the honorable chairman and the gentlemen of the committee to the duty on fireworks. I have asked for permission to be heard in the matter of the duty on fireworks, and I want particularly to speak about the duty on fireworks imported from Europe, which duty at present is 12 cents per pound gross weight. This item is covered in paragraph 433.

My justification to appear before the committee in this matter I derive from the fact that there does not exist any association or combination of importers in this line.

The previous tariff bills do not make any provision at all for fireworks, as formerly, and until I started the importation there were practically no fireworks imported other than Chinese goods, which, if not exclusively, then mainly, consisted of firecrackers for which provision was made, and therefore they were entered as articles not enumerated, bearing a duty of 20 per cent ad valorem. In the 18 years since I started this importation I have at all times been the largest importer in that line.

The duty of 12 cents per pound gross weight on fireworks is equivalent to an increase of duty from 400 per cent to 1,200 per cent of the former duty, and on my whole line of fireworks it runs from about 73 per cent to 200 per cent ad valorem. It is needless for me to tell you that this is prohibitive.

Permit me to illustrate this with some figures: For instance, I formerly imported a line of so-called fireworks sticks. This is an article which the European railroads shipped as play matches, and can therefore be shipped in larger cases. In Europe it is not permitted to ship fireworks in large cases. The case can not be heavier than 75 kilos, which is about 165 pounds. They are bound, by the regula


tions, both the European regulations and the steamship companies' regulations, to be shipped in heavy zinc-lined cases; therefore, the packing is comparatively heavier than most of the goods, particularly taking into consideration that the cases must be so small.

These sticks (indicating) come from Germany, and are not shipped there as fireworks. The railroads take them as matches. It is more like a play match. They could, therefore, be sent in larger cases. They come in boxes, and two-gross boxes, with a gross of sticks in each box of the so-called Bengal sticks, cost net in Germany, 232.75 marks, equal to $55.86. They weigh about 500 pounds or somewhat over, and the duty is at least $60.

The costo price in Germany on each box of Bengal sticks is 19.4 cents and the duty 21 cents, the duty being considerably over 100 per cent ad valorem. That makes the cost price 40.4 cents, to which is to be added 8 cents per gross for transportation and other expenses.

This article is sold here, American manufacture, at 33 to 35 cents per gross. It is therefore obvious that the duty that formerly was a little less than 4 cents per gross is now 21 cents, a raise in duty of 425 per cent, is absolutely prohibitive, even if some few cents more can be had per gross for the European sticks, as they are somewhat better in quality than the American goods.

I was just able to import this article with the old duty of about 31 cents per gross, and the revenue the country has lost by prohibiting the importation of this article is quite considerable. I formerly imported up to 45,000 or 50,000 gross colored sticks a year, and from August 5, 1909, I have not imported a single gross.

Bengal matches come in cases of 25 gross, weighing 175 pounds. They cost, net, $16.08 per case and the duty is $22.20. The duty per gross is 85 cents, equal to 183 per cent ad valorem, or a raise in duty over the old tariff of 667 per cent.

Permit me to submit a couple more examples. An article called special grasshopper, which I show you here (indicating) comes 75 gross in a case, weighing 170 pounds, with a duty of $20.40. The cost price in Germany is 23 cents per gross. The duty is 27 cents per gross, equal to 117.5 per cent ad valorem, a raise in duty of 587 per cent over the former duty.

I name all these small articles, of which I used to import a lot, but of these articles, since the new tariff went into effect, not a single gross has been imported by me, nor to the best of my knowledge by anybody in the United States.

No. 5 grasshopper comes 18 gross in a case, weighing 170 pounds, or a little more. Their price is 2 marks per gross. The value of a case, 36 marks, equal to $8.64, carries a duty of $20.40, equal to $1.13} duty for each gross. The cost price in Germany is 43 cents. This is a duty of 250 per cent ad valorem, or a raise of 1,250 per cent over the former duty.

As a last example I will call attention to garden assortment No. 5. A case containing 10 pieces of fireworks costs 40 marks, equal to $9.60. The duty was formerly about $1.92 for such a case. The net weight of the goods is 40 pounds. They are comparatively large, bulky goods, and the packing cases weigh 72 pounds each. For the case alone I have got to pay $8.64 in duty, the value of the case being


about $1.25 in Germany. The total duty for the assortment is $13.44, which is a raise in duty.of more than 610 per cent of the old duty, or 150 per cent ad valorem.

The fireworks which I import are not dangerous. They consist almost exclusively of small pieces that are sold from 1 penny to 5 cents retail, and I never heard of an accident being caused by them.

I have handled some 62 articles of different sizes before the enactment of the present law. After a very close calculation as to the number of articles which I was able to import under the tariff act of 1909, I found I only could bring in 11 articles that were light enough, in weight, and the weight of packing could be decreased, and with a large sacrifice of my profit and in sales, but I was compelled to discontinue the importation of 51 articles, which were the bulk of my business.

Fireworks under the new tariff are divided into two parts-firecrackers and fireworks. The class called fireworks come exclusively or mainly from Europe and are packed in heavy zinc-lined cases. The other class, firecrackers, are imported exclusively from Asia, from where the goods are shipped in very light packing, only being wrapped in matting, where the weight of the packing cuts no figure, and duty is assessed at only 8 cents per pound gross weight.

That means that fireworks in heavy metal-lined cases from countries where the labor is paid many times higher than in Asia pays 50 per cent higher duty than fireworks imported from a country with low price for labor and where of the weight the packing is insignificant. Is that just?

In 1907 I imported fireworks of the value of $45,012, upon which I paid a duty of $9,000.

In 1909 imported fireworks of the value of $50,628, upon which I paid a duty of more than $10,000.

In 1909, from the 1st of January to August 5, I imported fireworks of the value of $26,484, and from the fatal day, August 5, to the end of the year my importations dropped to $578.

In the years 1910, 1911, and 1912 I imported goods of the value of $3,973, an average of $1,324 a year-somewhat more in the year 1912 than in 1910.

You will see by these records that the average of my importations are now about 2 per cent of what they were. The 98 per cent of my business was lost, and the Government has lost a revenue from me of about $40,000 since the enactment of the tariff of 1909. While this amount of duty may be insignificant, at the same time it brings my case before you in the most forcible manner, showing that a ridiculously high rate of duty of 12 cents per pound, gross weight, practically prohibits the importation of fireworks from Europe.

I have no figures to submit on the value of the fireworks manufactured in this country, but the consumption of fireworks in this country is enormous, and the exorbitant transportation expenses on European fireworks alone would be more than sufficient protection for the domestic goods, even without duty, if protection is needed.

I am practically doing no business in the importation of fireworks at the present time, and in view of the contemplated revision of the tariff, I trust you will place the duty on fireworks at 20 per cent àd va

[ocr errors]


lorem, so as to permit me to recover at least some of the business I have lost through the tariff act of 1909.

The articles I imported were mostly all small fireworks for the amusement of the young people.

In conclusion, I wish to say my statements are based on my records, and your statistical records will confirm the statement I have made, that the present rate of 12 cents per pound gross weight on fireworks imported from European countries is absolutely prohibitive.

In the last statistics, for 1912, I see there were imported some fireworks under the name of bombs, which are no fireworks at all-some $3,000 worth, having an average tariff rate of 63 per cent. That is not correct, but it is in a way correct, for the 63 per cent is not on fireworks, because there must have been taken into consideration other things on the list.

The average on the fireworks I import is 73 per cent, which is so low on account of one, only one, little article I import, on which the duty was comparatively small. That is such a little thing as this [indicating that could be packed very close and did not weigh much. That brought my duty to an average of 73 per cent; but the bulk of my business I have not been able to import. If I should import the average of the goods I did before, with the average per cent of the law now, it would be from 150 per cent to 250 per cent, and would probably be in average at least about 175 per cent ad valorem.

Mr. HARRISON. There is an enormous manufacture of fireworks in the United States to-day, is there not?

Mr. WAGNER. Yes, sir. Mr. HARRISON. The importations are a very small proportion of what is used here?

Mr. WAGNER. Yes, sir. There was no importation formerly until I started it. It took me 10 years to make a living business before I could make a living business out of it.

(r.. HARRISON. Have you any idea of the amount of American manufacture?

Mr. WAGNER. It runs into the millions.
•Mr. Harrison. It runs into the millions ?
Mr. WAGNER. Millions; yes.

Mr. HARRISON. Do you believe if we should decide to impose an internal-revenue tax upon domestic manufacture of fireworks we could collect a good deal of revenue in that way?

Mr. WAGNER. It is not improbable. I would not answer yes. That would not be fair. I would not like to do that. That you can do on everything. If you want to impose a domestic tax you could impose it on almost anything, for instance on bread.

Mr. FORDNEY. Mr. Wagner, you have stated that the production of these goods in this country is very great in quantity and in value. Do you consider them a luxury or a necessity?

Mr. WAGNER. Some consider it a luxury and others a necessity. If you will ask the young American who uses them, they will tell you they are a necessity. °I will tell you what I consider it; I would, in another country, consider it a nuisance. In this country I consider it is a necessity, because there is a patriotic feeling in this country that I have not seen the equal of in the world, and I have

« AnteriorContinuar »