PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. HAMMOND. That is the only difference?

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes; and they have caused this great expense to the fur merchants.

Mr. HAMMOND. Evidently that language does not take care of the goods which Mr. Payne and Mr. Fordney have described.

Mr. EISENBACH. I think that it does in the paragraph. If you will permit me, I will read it to you:

Furs, dressed on the skin, not advanced further than dyeing, but not repaired, 20 per cent ad valorem; manufactures of furs, further advanced than dressing and dyeing, when prepared for use as material, in plates, linings, and crosses, 35 per cent ad valorem; articles of wearing apparel of every description, partly or wholly manufactured, composed of or of which fur is the component material of chief value, 50 per cent ad valorem; furs not on the skin, prepared for hatters' use, including fur skins, carrotted, 20 per cent ad valorem.

Since you have prepared in that special paragraph the words. "but not repaired" are absolutely unnecessary, because you protect in the next paragraph the other skins sewed together, which pay 35 per cent duty.

Mr. JAMES. What effect would an increase of this tariff on furs have? Would it bring in any more revenue?

Mr. EISENBACH. Hardly, because the skins which are sewed temporarily are in the minority. The skins are coming in at 20 per cent, and it would be an injustice to put that back after we have fought it and it has been decided in our favor.

Mr. JAMES. I am not talking about putting it back. I am asking you the general question, whether or not an increase of these duties would bring more revenue to the Government?

Mr. EISENBACH. Certainly.

Mr. JAMES. How much would an increase of 10 per cent bring, do you think?

Mr. EISENBACH. I do not know how much are imported and I am not prepared to state.

Mr. HARRISON. Of the undressed skins during the last fiscal year $17,000,000 worth came in; but of the kind that were taxed, that is, dressed skins, $8,125,000, taxed at an average of 25 per cent, the average being arrived at by including fur hats and fur garments, which are taxed higher than the 20 per cent rate. So that by imposing a 10 per cent tax on the undressed skins we would collect a million and threequarters revenue, and by putting a 40 per cent rate upon the dressed skins we would get three million and a quarter revenue on articles which at present only produce a little $2,000,000.

Mr. EISENBACH. I am not prepared to say whether an additional duty should be put on. It has never been put on before. You would thereby protect your home industries.

The CHAIRMAN. If the duty were put on the raw fur that came in and was raised on the finished product to the same extent, it would not injure the industry at all, would it?

Mr. EISENBACH. I think it would to a great extent injure the industry.

The CHAIRMAN. Why?

Mr. EISENBACH. There are a great many furs which are brought in, not as luxuries, but as necessities, and it would hurt the poor people very much; it would hurt those people who would have to pay more for goods than they were paying heretofore.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

The CHAIRMAN. What furs do you class necessities?
Mr. EISENBACH. All cheap furs.

The CHAIRMAN. How cheap?

Mr. EISENBACH. They range all the way from 10 cents a skinThe CHAIRMAN. I mean in the finished article. What are those furs which you refer to made into?

Mr. EISENBACH. They are made into graments, men's coats, women's coats, neckwear, etc.

The CHAIRMAN. At what price do those cheap furs sell?

Mr. EISENBACH. To the retailer?

The CHAIRMAN. No; to the consumer.

Mr. EISENBACH. It varies; they bring from $20 to $25.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not consider a $20 or $25 coat an absolute necessity, do you?

Mr. EISENBACH. No; I do not think so.

Mr. JAMES. What per cent of the plain people use furs?

Mr. EISENBACH. That I can not answer either.

Mr. FORDNEY. It depends upon what States they are in.

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes. A great many people away out west use them. It is a necessity for the car drivers. They have to have fur coats because it is very cold. There is a gentleman here who is representing a fur-manufacturing industry of New York, who could perhaps answer these questions much better than I can. Mr. Heilbroner is here.

Mr. JAMES. You have a decision that virtually strikes out these wards "but not repaired?"

Mr. EISENBACH. We have that decision; yes, sir.

Mr. JAMES. But you have sufficient confidence in it to let it stand that way, but you want us to strike the words out so as it will not be necessary to have any further decisions upon it?

Mr. EISENBACH. It would be simpler. We have evidence enough and I think we could easily get the decision again. It would be an unnecessary and unpleasant expense. I do not know that it would be necessary to file the case over again, but we want to prevent the possibility of such a recurrence, and we ask that the words be stricken out.

Mr. JAMES. You think it would be an unpleasant expense, you say? Mr. EISENBACH. I think so.

Mr. DIXON. If the words were stricken out, would not the importers insist that the same interpretation that was given to the section. before, should be again given to it?

Mr. EISENBACH. No; we are perfectly contented with the present tariff. It would not change it at all. We are perfectly content t let it remain as it is. Our only reason for asking to have those words stricken out is that they are unnecessary under the decision that has been rendered in our favor, and also because you provide in another clause in the paragraph for a 35 per cent duty on partly manufactured goods.

Mr. HAMMOND. Out what furs are you making the cheap fur coats that are worn by the farmers and cattlemen, etc.?

Mr. EISENBACH. Dogs, goats, sheep, raccoons, and so forth.
Mr. HAMMOND. Are those the cheapest coats?

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes, sir.

Mr. HAMMOND. Are those particular furs imported to any large

extent?

Mr. EISENBACH. I do not think so. Do you mean the finished coat

or the material?

Mr. HAMMOND. I mean the material.

I

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes; they are imported to some extent. believe they have perhaps decreased on account of the raise in duty to 35 per cent. They formerly all came in at 20 per cent. They were raised to 35 per cent and the importation has decreased.

Mr. HAMMOND. How many manufacturers in this country make these cheap fur coats, the heavy, rough fur coats, used by cattlemen and others?

Mr. EISENBACH. I shoud say perhaps 50.

Mr. HAMMOND. Their raw material is imported, you say?

Mr. EISENBACH. Not all of the raw material is imported. Some of of it comes from this country.

Mr. HAMMOND. But very much of it is imported?

Mr. EISENBACH. A great deal of it.

Mr. HARRISON. And those materials all bear duty now, the dogskins, etc.?

Mr. EISENBACH. They all have a duty of 35 per cent now.

Mr. HARRISON. Where we are talking about putting a duty upon raw furs, we are talking about putting a duty upon martins and sable and all kinds of black foxes and silver foxes, the most luxurious and high-priced articles that are in market now.

Mr. EISENBACH. You would have to classify them.

Mr. HARRISON. All except the raccoon skins.

Mr. EISENBACH. There are lots of other skins coming in now that are used for cheap manufacturing.

Mr. HARRISON. You did not include them in your statement. Suppose you enumerate the others.

Mr. EISENBACH. I did not refer to them because they have always been free of duty

Mr. HARRISON (interposing). Yes. All of the very luxurious, valuable, and expensive furs are on the free list now and always have been.

Mr. EISENBACH. I do not understand.

Mr. HARRISON. The furs of which $17,000,000 worth came in free are the luxurious, expensive, and valuable furs. The dogskins, the goatskin, etc., which you say go to make the cheaper fur coats, are now on the dutiable list. Is not that true?

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes; but I think the statement is not quite correct. The $17,000,000 worth of importations do not come from these luxurious furs at all.

Mr. HARRISON. They are all included within it, are they not?
Mr. EISENBACH. They are in the minority, absolutely.

Mr. HARRISON. The silver foxes that come in

Mr. EISENBACH (interposing). Silver foxes are not imported at all; they are caught in this country.

Mr. HARRISON. And black foxes?

Mr. EISENBACH. They are not imported.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. HARRISON. You mean that they come from Alaska?

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes.

Mr. HARRISON. Then the sable!

Mr. EISENBACH. Sable comes partly from Europe and they are partly caught in this country.

Mr. HARRISON. There are no real sable here, are there?

Mr. EISENBACH. Real sable? You will have to classify that. We have an American marten that is called sable and we have a Russian sable that is called sable.

Mr. HARRISON. In spite of the confusing trade names in the fur trade, the fact remains that the luxurious and expensive furs which are imported are coming in free and the kind which are used to make a cheap coat, with the exception of raccoon fur, already bear a duty. Mr. EISENBACH. I think the skins that are used as a luxury, which come in under that schedule are very, very small as compared with the ones used by the general public and by the poor people. You have referred to the most expensive skins which exist and in which importation is very limited as compared with the general importation of furs.

Mr. HARRISON. You would not think they were limited if you were to take a walk up and down Fifth Avenue in New York. Mr. EISENBACH. I do not know

Mr. HARRISON. You would not think they were limited either in quantity or value.

Mr. EISENBACH. There are a great many caught right in this country and not imported at all. There are a number of domestic furs that are, fortunately, very valuable.

Mr. JAMES. Could you not give the committee a statement showing those furs that are used by the people out West and in the North, the cheap furs, as you call them, that are used by motormen on cars, etc.; and will you also give us a statement showing furs that are high priced and that are used by the people who are well-to-do?

Mr. EISENBACH. Very likely I could do that. I did not know you had any intention of raising any other points.

Mr. JAMES. You came here for another purpose. I understand that.

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes, sir.

Mr. JAMES. But you are perfectly willing to give us whatever information you can?

Mr. EISENBACH. I am very glad to; yes, sir.

Mr. JAMES. We would like to have that.

Mr. EISENBACH. I will be very glad to do that.

Mr. JAMES. I wish you would; we would appreciate it.

Mr. EISENBACH. I will do so.

Mr. HILL. If the words "but not repaired" were stricken out, would it not be entirely possible to take a fur skin of any kind and patch another piece onto it, and then bring it in under the 20 per cent rate instead of the higher rate?

Mr. EISENBACH. It would be of absolutely no value. If another skin were just sewed to it it would be of no value, because it is taken care of under the schedule referring to partly manufactured goods at 35 per cent.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. HILL. Is it not a very difficult proposition to match fur?
Mr. EISENBACH. Yes, sir.

Mr. HILL. And if the words "but not repaired" are stricken out, would it not be entirely possible to have the matching process carried through and the pieces sewed together? And, of course, if you could put on one piece you could put on two pieces.

Mr. EISENBACH. That could be done.

Mr. HILL. Consequently, without it being manufactured at all, you could get in almost anything you please, with a large amount of work done on it, and yet not have it come under the manufactured class.

Mr. EISENBACH. Such a thing has not occurred heretofore. If you strike out the words "but not repaired," and want to be careful that such a thing could not be done, you could put in another phrase saying that more than one skin sewed together should come in as manufactures, and we would have no objection at all to that.

Mr. HILL. The reason I asked you the question as to the effect of striking out the words "but not repaired" is this: I remember distinctly four years ago a gentleman from Minneapolis came here with a large amount of furs just in that condition. I was of a mind to take his side of the case until I saw the articles and turned them over, and found that it was a complete system of patchwork, which was repairing from the original piece, and when he spread them out on the floor down in my office I changed my mind and voted for this.

Mr. EISENBACH. When we went over to Baltimore we presented such skins as we wanted to come in at 20 per cent. It was decided in our favor. I would be very glad to present to this committee such skins as we want to have come in.

Mr. HILL. Do you have any come in that way from China?

Mr. EISENBACH. They are coming in as partly manufactured and are paying 35 per cent.

Mr. KITCHIN. Before these words "but not repaired" were put into the statute did these skins sewed together as explained by Mr. Hill come in under the 20 per cent clause?

Mr. EISENBACH. They did formerly, and they were raised to 35 per cent.

Mr. KITCHIN. Yes; because of these words being put in.

Mr. EISENBACH. No; because of the following paragraph, in which you specially specify-and when they are further advanced, such as plates, linings, etc., they shall pay 35 per cent.

Mr. FORDNEY. I will state to the witness and to the gentleman from North Carolina that my recollection is that they all came in under that lower rate.

Mr. EISENBACH. Formerly; yes.

Mr. KITCHIN. That was my understanding.

Mr. EISENBACH. Formerly they did come in under the 20 per cent rate. Then you raised them to 35 per cent on account of these words "but not repaired".

Mr. KITCHIN (interposing). They came in under the 20 per cent rate before they put those words in?

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes. We had a duty of 35 per cent on skins. Such skins as were temporarily sewn together-for instance, a skin