PARAGRAPH 439-FURS. would have a hole in it, and naturally it would be put together so that it would not fall apart on the way over here. Mr. KITCHIN. You are not objecting to paying a 35 per cent upon those kinds of furs sewn together, are you? Mr. EISENBACH. Unless more than one skin is sewed together; we do not object to skins which are temporarily sewed. Mr. KITCHIN. I see. You want these words stricken out, and you want fur repaired to come in at 20 per cent, as it did formerly? Mr. EISENBACH. We do not want anything else than what is going on now. We are getting them at 20 per cent and we do not want it changed. Mr. FORDNEY. Under the ruling of the Board of Appraisers he gets them in now at 20 per cent. Mr. KITCHIN. Has that ruling ever been appealed from? Mr. EISENBACH. I do not know. The witness thereupon exhibited to the committee some samples of furs. Mr. HARRISON. What kind of fur is that you hold in your hand? Mr. EISENBACH. That is astrakhan skin. Mr. HARRISON. Is that imported? Mr. EISENBACH. Yes, sir. Mr. HARRISON. You would not describe that as a necessity of life? Mr. EISENBACH. It can be made up very cheaply and it will keep people warm. Mr. HARRISON. What about chinchillas? Are they necessary? Mr. EISENBACH. No. There are very few come in. We do not get enough to speak of. Mr. JAMES. What kind of fur is that? Mr. EISENBACH. That is American muskrat. The CHAIRMAN. The substance of that decision was that when the skin was mounted the Government tried to throw it into the 35 per cent clause, but the board of appraisers did not sustain it? Mr. EISENBACH. Yes, sir. Mr. PETERS. I notice there are exports of $14,975,000. What class of skins are exported? Mr. EISENBACH. American furs principally, such as mink, sable, muskrat, skunk, raccoon, and foxes of all kinds. Mr. PETERS. Mostly in the unmanufactured state? Mr. EISENBACH. In the raw state; yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Eisenbach, your time has expired. FUR MERCHANTS' CREDIT ASSOCIATION OF THE CITY OF NEW York, The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, January 30, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: As a representative of the Fur Merchants' Credit Association of New York, I have been elected to appear before this committee, and respectfully say, on behalf of the fur merchants, that we are contented with the present tariff schedule pertaining to furs. We, however, respectfully ask to have the three words "but not repaired," in second line of paragraph 439, stricken out in the bill now being prepared. These words are ambiguous, and the interpretation of their meaning have caused the fur merchants a great deal of expense, and after considerable delay a decision was PARAGRAPH 439-FURS. rendered by the General Board of Appraisers nullifying their import as originally interpreted, and it is to eliminated the probability of the same question arising again that we ask for the elimination of the three words above mentioned. Respectfully, yours, ALFRED EISENBACH (For Fur Merchants' Credit Association). BRIEF OF ALEX. E. KLAHRE & CO., NEW YORK, N. Y. NEW YORK, January 29, 1913. The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIRS: We would respectfully call your attention to paragraph 439 pertaining to furs, skins, etc., and would ask that on the following furs dressed on the skins, namely: Sheepskin rugs, goatskin rugs, dogskin robes and mats, kidskin crosses, and lambskin crosses, which are under paragraph 439 in the prevailing law dutiable at 35 per cent, be reduced to 20 per cent. The above-named skins are tanned and sewed together in China, but can not be used in this condition as imported and must be resewn, cleaned, and dyed. On single tanned goatskins, single tanned dogskins, single tanned sheepskins and lambskins, a duty of 20 per cent, same duty as in prevailing law. All raw skins free as in the present law. We are convinced that in the event of the reductions of duties on the skins named, he revenue to the Government will be largely increased. It is a well-known fact amongst the trade that owing to the present rates of duties our manufacturers and importers are somewhat timid in importing the quantities of skins from China they otherwise would do if lower rates of duties prevailed, depending upon the European markets for their purchases from time to time and paying the extra profit to the importers of those markets, which should inure to the benefit of manufacturers of our country. One of the largest firms of manufacturers in Milwaukee made the statement a few days ago that owing to the excessive duty of 35 per cent the firm was compelled to discharge a large number of working men because of the difficulty in selling their output on account of the high duty. Very respectfully, yours, ALEX. E. KLAHRE & Co. BRIEF OF LOWERRE & CO., NEW YORK, N. Y., ET AL. The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, NEW YORK, January 27, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: Referring to paragraph 439 under Schedule N of the present tariff, we beg to petition your committee in regard to the rough furs which are commonly known as goat and sheep "rugs" and "mats" and dog "mats," and ask that this class of furs be separated from the general class and be put by themselves with a special rating of their own. We ask this for the reason that they are of an entirely different class of material, being cheaper and rougher than what are commonly known as "fancy furs." However, on account of not having separate classification, they are included in the second part of paragraph 439 under "Manufactures of furs further advanced than dressing and dyeing and prepared for use as material, including plates, linings, and crosses, 35 per cent ad valorem," thus putting them on an equal basis with goods which are already prepared in the greater part for manufacture. We give you the following arguments in favor of a separate listing and reduction: First. We have no ax to grind. We neither gain nor lose on account of the higher duty. The only effect it has is to make the manufactured article cost more to the consumer, without giving to anyone any added protection whatever, as this class of furs is used only for the manufacture of carriage robes and a cheap grade of men's fur coats, none of which are imported into this country in the manufactured state. Second. The terms "rugs" and "mats" are simply trade names for certain standard sizes of furs, and has no meaning in any other sense than this. While they are not one separate skin, the skins are simply pieced out on the sides with a loose stitch and basted to bring them up to the standard of measurement. This stitch is absolutely worthless as far as being of any use in the manufacturing, it being necessary to rip the sewing, cut the "rugs" and "mats" apart, rematch and sew before they are of marketable value as far as manufacture is concerned. The principal reason for these furs PARAGRAPH 439-FURS. being imported in these sizes is because the importer in this country is better able to ascertain what amount of material he is getting than if he bought them in the regular skin shape, the skins being of variable sizes. Thirdly. It requires just as much work to manufacture a robe or coat from these "rugs" or "mats" as it would to manufacture from natural shaped skins. Fourthly. The natural shaped skins, which are no further advanced than these "rugs" or "mats," can be brought in at 20 per cent, even though they may be dyed abroad. The fancy fur plates, such as squirrel, etc., even though dyed, can be brought in at the same rate of duty (35 per cent) as our "rugs" and "mats," which we import in the undyed state entirely. What we claim is that China goat and sheep "rugs" and "mats" and dog "mats," loosely basted together to make a standard size, not machine sewed, should be under a separate heading, so worded, at 20 per cent duty. In making this appeal to your committee, we beg to impress upon you the fact that this will reduce this class of skins to the old rate of duty at which they were always entered under the old Dingley tariff; that the advance of 15 per cent made in the last revision of the tariff simply increased the cost of the manufactured article to the consumer, giving no protection to any manufacturer in this country; and that under the present tariff it would be advantageous for us to have our raw material dyed abroad instead of in this country, as we are doing now, and importing it in the dyed state, being able to do so without any increase in the tariff rate. We beg you to take this all into consideration. Respectfully submitted. LOWERRE & Co. HENRY HOFFMAN. BRIEF OF LANPHER, SKINNER & CO., ST. PAUL, MINN., CONCERNING FUR AND FUR-LINED GARMENTS. The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, ST. PAUL, MINN., January 28, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: Referring to paragraph 439 under Schedule N of the present tariff, we beg to petition your committee in regard to the rough furs, which are commonly known as Chinese dog mats and dog plates, and ask that this class of furs be separated from the general class and be put by themselves with a special rating of their own. We ask this for the reason that they are of an entirely different class of material, being cheaper and rougher than what are commonly known as fancy furs. However, on account of not having separate classification, they are included in the second part of paragraph 439 under Manufactures of furs further advanced than dressing and dyeing and prepared for use as material, including plates, linings, and crosses, 35 per cent ad valorem," thus putting them on an equal basis with goods which are already prepared in the greater part for manufacture. We give you the following arguments in favor of a separate listing and reduction: First. We neither gain nor lose on account of the higher duty. The only effect which it has is to make the manufactured article cost more to the consumer without giving to anyone any added protection whatever, as this class of furs is used only for the manufacture of carriage robes and a cheap grade of men's fur coats, none of which are imported into this country in the manufactured state. Second. The terms "mats" and "plates" are simply the trade names for certain standard sizes of furs and have no meaning in any other sense than this. While they are not one separate skin, they are simply pieced out on the sides with a loose stitch and basted to bring them up to the standard of measurement. This stitch is absolutely worthless as far as being of any use in the manufacturing, it being necessary to rip the sewing, cut the mats and plates apart, rematch them, and sew them, before they are of marketable value, as far as manufacture is concerned. The principal reason for these furs being imported in these sizes is because the importer in this country is better able to ascertain what amount of material he is getting than if he bought them in the regular skin shape, the skins being of variable sizes. Third. It requires just as much work to manufacture a robe or coat from these mats or plates as it would to manufacture from natural shaped skins. PARAGRAPH 439-FURS. Fourth. The natural shaped skins which are no further advanced than these mats and plates can be brought in at 20 per cent, even though they may be dyed abroad. The fancy fur plates, such as squirrel, etc., even though dyed, can be brought in at the same rate of duty (35 per cent) as our mats and plates, which we import in the undyed state entirely. What we claim is that China dog mats and plates loosely basted together to make a standard size, not machine sewed, should be under a separate heading, so worded, at 20 per cent duty. In making this appeal to your committee, we beg to impress upon you the fact that this will reduce this class of skins to the old rate of duty at which they were always entered under the old Dingley tariff, but the advance of 15 per cent made in the last revision of the tariff simply increased the cost of the manufactured article to the consumer, giving no protection to any manufacturer in this country, and that under the present tariff it would be advantageous for us to have our raw material dyed abroad instead of in this country, as we are now doing, and importing it in the dyed state, being able to do so without any increase in the tariff rate, and it could be stated in the separate clause for China dog mats and plates, loosely basted together to make a standard size, not dyed and not machine sewed, to be admitted at 20 per cent duty. This would protect our dyers and benefit us all, giving us a separate heading, and not including us in the fancy-fur schedule. We beg you to take this all into consideration and give the matter an unbiased decision. LANPHER, SKINNER & Co. Yours, very truly, A. HOENIGSBERGER, CHICAGO, ILL., WRITES ON THE SUBJECT OF FURS. The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. CHICAGO, January 27, 1913. GENTLEMEN: Referring to paragraph 439 under Schedule N of the present tariff, we beg to petition your committee in regard to the rough furs, which are commonly known as goat and sheep "rugs" and "mats" and dog "mats," and ask that this class of furs be separated from the general class and be put by themselves with a special rating of their own. We ask this for the reason that they are of an entirely different class of material, being cheaper and rougher than what are commonly known as "fancy furs." However, on account of not having a separate classification, they are included in the second part of paragraph 439, under "Manufactures of furs further advanced than dressing and dyeing and prepared for use as material, including plates, linings, and crosses, 35 per cent ad valorem," thus putting them on an equal basis with goods which are already prepared in the greater part for manufacture. We give you the following arguments in favor of a separate listing and reduction. First. We have no ax to grind. We neither gain nor lose on account of the higher duty. The only effect which it has is to make the manufactured article cost more to the consumer, without giving to anyone any added protection whatever as this class of furs is used only for the manufacture of carriage robes and a cheap grade of men's fur coats, none of which are imported into this country in the manufactured state. Second. The term "rugs" and "mats" is simply the trade name for certain standard sizes of furs and has no meaning in any other sense than this. While they are not one separate skin, they are simply pieced out on the sides with a loose stitch and basted to bring them up to the standard of measurement. This stitch is absolutely worthless as far as being of any use in the manufacturing, it being necessary to rip the sewing, cut the "rugs" and "mats" apart, rematch them, and sew them before they are of marketable value, as far as manufacture is concerned. The principal reason for these furs being imported in these sizes is because the importer in this country is better able to ascertain what amount of material he is getting, than if he bought them in the regular skin shape, the skins being of variable sizes. Third. It requires just as much work to manufacture a robe or coat from these "rugs" or "mats" as it would to manufacture from natural-shaped skins. Fourth. The natural-shaped skins which are no further advanced than these "rugs" and "mats" can be brought in at 20 per cent, even though they may be dyed abroad. The fancy fur plates, such as squirrel, etc., even though dyed, can be brought in at the same rate of duty (35 per cent) as our "rugs" and "mats," which we import in the undyed state entirely. PARAGRAPH 439-FURS. What we claim is that China goat and sheep "rugs" and "mats" and dog "mats,” loosely basted together to make a standard size, not machine sewed, should be under a separate heading, so worded, at 20 per cent duty. In making this appeal to your committee, we beg to impress upon you the fact that this will reduce this class of skins to the old rate of duty, at which they were always entered under the old Dingley tariff; that the advance of 15 per cent made in the last revision of the tariff simply increased the cost of the manufactured article to the consumer, giving no protection to any manufacturer in this country, and that under the present tariff it would be advantageous for us to have our raw material dyed abroad instead of in this country, as we are doing now, and importing it in the dyed state, being able to do so without any increase in the tariff rate, and it could be stated in the separate clause, for China goat and sheep "rugs" and "mats" and dog "mats" loosely basted together to make a standard size, not dyed and not machine sewed, to be admitted at 20 per cent duty. This would protect our dyers and benefit us all, giving us a separate heading and not including us in the fancy fur schedule. We beg you to take this all into consideration and give the matter an unbiased decision. A. HOENIGSBERGER, BRIEF OF DAWES & HANN, JOHNSTOWN, N. Y. SECRETARY WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, JOHNSTOWN, N. Y., January 28, 1913. Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We are little manufacturers and can not come to Washington, but we would be very grateful if your committee would look into the matter of duty on furlined gloves. It seems to us that the duty should be just as much on furs when they are used as glove linings as on fur skins when we import them to be used here as glove linings. If we pay 20 or 35 per cent ad valorem should not this same duty be added to imported gloves when fur lined? Thanking you for your consideration, we beg to remain, DAWES & HANN. BRIEF OF CONRAD FUR CO., WINONA, MINN. The COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS, WINONA, MINN., January 30, 1913. Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: Permit us to add our little mite in the number of petitions with which we presume you are at the present time flooded. We refer to paragraph No. 439, under schedule 'N,' in the present tariff. We believe that the present rate of 35 per cent is altogether too high. Remember this one thing: The rich do not wear garments made from "sheep rugs" or "dog mats." The only people who wear this class of merchandise are the poorer western farmers in the Dakotas and throughout the Northwest; possibly, to some extent in the cities, the chauffeurs and street-car drivers, who are constantly exposed to the extreme cold and to whom a cheap, warm garment is a necessity. Take as an example a dog mat that costs a dollar down in the New York customhouse. It stands the importer $1.35. He figures 5 per cent profit on $1.35. We, the manufacturers, figure at least another 10 per cent when we sell the made-up article to the retailers. The retailer, in his turn, must add at least 25 per cent on his cost, so that ultimately the consumer pays at least from 40 to 50 per cent on top of the 35 per cent. We believe that this is an injustice to the consumer. The dressers and dyers do not need a 35 per cent protection, as far as the difference in the cost of labor is concerned, and it looks inconsistent to us that the rich, who wear Russian sables and other costly furs, pay no duty on these articles, simply because the skins come in raw. We believe that if it is necessary to retain a certain amount of duty on furs for the purpose of defraying the expenses of the Government, it would be better to put a certain amount of duty on raw sable skins, chinchillas, sea otters, broad tails, and other fine foreign furs-furs that are used almost exclusively by those to whom a difference of $10 or $100 doesn't amount to anything. Yours, very truly, CONRAD FUR Co., Per MAX A. CONRAD. |