course can not sell our goods at a higher price than they can buy the imported article for, and for that reason we are not able to keep our mill going. Very truly, yours, HARTFORD CITY PAPER COMPANY, EXHIBIT A. NOVEMBER 28, 1908. Mr. H. ZIMMERMAN, West Carrollton, Ohio. DEAR SIR: We have again had occasion to think over the proposition of parchment paper, and remembering your visit to us during last February, we have been discussing whether or not you stated to us that vegetable parchment paper can be made from an exclusively sulphite stock. As the writer remembers your statement, you stated that the vegetable parchment can be made and often is made from a purely sulphite stock and that the use of cotton fiber is not absolutely necessary, and furthermore, that the use of it depended on whether or not cotton fiber was cheaper than sulphite fiber; in other words, that which of the two fibers they used depended upon the price. As you know, we are not in position here to use cotton rags, and if we should in future decide to make this paper we would necessarily have to make it from sulphite fiber base. Awaiting your advices with interest, we beg to remain, Very truly, yours, HARTFORD CITY PAPER COMPANY, EXHIBIT B. KALAMAZOO, MICH., December 4, 1908. HARTFORD CITY PAPER COMPANY, Hartford City, Ind. MY DEAR MR. VAN WINKLE: I received yours of the 28th addressed to me at West Carrollton, Ohio-same was forwarded to me at Kalamazoo, Mich.-contents carefully noted, and in reply wish to say that I will again give you the same proposition that I gave you last February. If you will remember, my proposition was that you add vegetable parchment paper with your parchmyn and glassine papers; in that way you would be manufacturing a full line of specialties for wrapping meats, lards, and butter; also for the canneries. I am sending you a few samples of vegetable parchment paper made from all sulphite pulp which I can manufacture with ease. Now, Mr. Van Winkle, I can not quite catch the drift of your letter; you did not state in your letter, were you to take on the manufacturing of vegetable parchment, just who your vegetableparchment man would be, and this being the case we can not be confidential as yet. I would be much pleased to hear from you, and wish to say that I do not know of any party who would be able to take on the manufacture of vegetable parchment with a less outlay of money than the Hartford City Paper Company. Very truly, yours, HARRY ZIMMERMAN, 1825 Center Street, Kalamazoo, Mich. ENVELOPES. [Paragraph 399.] THE AMERICAN PAPER GOODS COMPANY, KENSINGTON, CONN., SUGGESTS NEW CLASSIFICATION FOR ENVELOPES. KENSINGTON, CONN., December 4, 1908. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, M. C., Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: In connection with proposed revision of the tariff we desire to call attention to the fact that duties prescribed in existing tariff, sections 397, 398, 399, and 402, in reality discriminate against the American envelope manufacturer in favor of the European. There has been a constantly growing demand the past few years for envelopes made from high-glazed transparent papers, which papers are produced only in Europe, chiefly in Germany. We have endeavored to supply this demand, but since the business has assumed large proportions have been decidedly hampered by the importation, chiefly from Germany, of the completed article. The chief cost of these goods is the paper, admitted at present (section 402) as paper not otherwise specifically provided for at a rate of 25 per cent ad valorem, while the completed article is admitted (section 399) at a rate of 20 per cent ad valorem. In making envelopes in the United States paper must of necessity be imported in sheets or rolls, and there is a loss in cutting the irregular shapes required often as high as 12 and 15 per cent and a further waste running often as high as 5 per cent in manufacture. On all this waste the American manufacturer pays the duty of 25 per cent, while the foreign manufacturer pays but 20 per cent on paper actually used in the completed article plus his cost of manufacture, which is smaller than ours, and selling profit. Were suitable papers made in the United States, we should be glad to avail ourselves of this source of supply; but they are not, nor have experiments in this country turned out favorably, nor is there any inducement to the American paper maker to develop these grades of paper for envelopes so long as the German envelope is sold here cheaper than the German paper, and the American envelope manufacturer is unable to engage in the business. We, therefore, feel that in justice to domestic manufacturers of both paper and envelopes, the rate of the raw material should be compensated for by a duty on the manufactured article. On account of waste in cutting, running, and cheaper labor abroad, the rate on the manufactured article, to be really equitable, should be materially more than on the raw material. Without knowledge of what the raw rates on paper will be, we therefore strongly recommend that section 399 be amended as follows: Paper envelopes, plain, 20 per cent ad valorem; if bordered, embossed, printed, tinted or decorated 35 per cent ad valorem, plus an additional duty at the rate imposed on the paper used in their manufacture. This gives us very little protection. Practically it simply gives us a chance to compete in the American market on even terms with the foreign manufacture. We particularly feel the need of this provision at this time since applications are being made to increase the tariff and cost to us, not only upon various grades of paper, but upon other materials which we are obliged to import, for example tapioca flour not made in this country at all. These applications it is impossible for us to be advised of in time, or in many cases successfully to oppose when we do learn of them. The only safe position for our industry is one where an increase in the tariff on our raw materials will, as here requested, carry a balancing rise in the tariff on foreign envelopes. We have never asked for any discrimination in our favor, but respectfully submit that ourselves and others ought not to be discriminated against in favor of our foreign competitors. Yours, truly, THE AMERICAN PAPER GOODS Co., (The Continental Paper Bag Company, New York City, writes indorsing above letter.) THE SEWELL-CLAPP MANUFACTURING CO. ASKS A HIGHER DUTY ON ENVELOPES THAN ON ENVELOPE PAPER. CHICAGO, December 7, 1908. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Our attention has been called to the fact that by the present tariff law a higher rate is in some cases imposed upon foreignmade paper brought into this country than on the envelopes made of such paper. This is a manifest injustice to the envelope manufacturers in this country and an evident discrimination against American labor. The American manufacturer must pay the higher rate of tariff on the paper wasted in process of manufacture, while the foreign manufacturer pays a lower rate of tariff on the paper actually used in making the envelopes only. We respectfully represent that the tariff, in justice to American manufacturers of envelopes, should be so amended as to place upon foreign-made envelopes a considerably higher rate of duty than that laid upon the paper of which the envelopes are made. The increasing use of envelopes made of imported papers makes this a matter of considerable importance to envelope manufacturers, and we respectfully recommend it to the attention of your committee. Very truly, yours, SEWELL-CLAPP MFG. CO., HON. HARRY M. COUDREY, M. C., SUBMITS LETTER OF HESSE ENVELOPE AND LITHOGRAPH CO., OF ST. LOUIS, MO., RELATIVE TO THE DUTY ON ENVELOPES. Hon. H. M. COUDREY, M. C., ST. LOUIS, December 7, 1908. Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: As the Ways and Means Committee of Congress is at work revising the tariff, we think it but right and proper to call your attention to certain facts existing under present tariff, which discriminates against the American manufacturer of envelopes in favor of European competition in sections 397, 398, 399, and 402. In the past few years there has been a constantly growing demand for envelopes in this country made from certain papers which are produced only in Europe, chiefly in Germany. The chief item of cost in the manufacture of envelopes is the paper. Take, for instance, a certain transparent high-glazed paper, which is now being used to a great extent in this country in the manufacture of envelopes, admitted at present (section 402) as paper not otherwise specifically provided for at a rate of 25 per cent ad valorem, while the completed envelope (section 399) is admitted at a rate of 20 per cent ad valorem. In manufacuring envelopes it is necessary to import this paper in sheets or rolls, and in cutting the irregular shapes for envelopes there is a loss in cutting of from 12 to 15 per cent, and a further loss in waste in running through machine of about 5 per cent. On all this waste the American manufacturer pays a duty of 25 per cent, while the foreign manufacturer only pays 20 per cent on the actual amount of paper used, paying nothing on the waste, which we are obliged to figure in the cost of our product. Of course, we do not know what the revised rate on paper will be when the committee gets through with it, and without this knowledge we suggest, recommend, and urge that section 399 be amended as follows: Paper envelopes, plain, 20 per cent ad valorem; if bordered, embossed, printed, tinted, or decorated, 25 per cent ad valorem. plus an additional duty at the rate imposed on the paper used in their manufacture. We believe the above to be only fair to the American manufacturer, whose cost of labor and other expenses are much higher than in foreign countries. We particularly feel the need of this provision at this time, since applications are being made to increase the tariff on other materials used by us in the manufacture of envelopes. Tapioca flour, for instance, which is not made in this country at all and which is probably the next greatest item in the manufacture of envelopes outside of labor. This is not a luxury, and, as stated, can not and is not being produced in this country. Why, then, should a duty be placed upon it? We know the committee wants to learn the facts and will make such recommendation as will protect American manufacturers and at the same time work no hardship on the people of this great country. Yours, truly, HESSE ENVELOPE AND LITHO. CO., PERFORATED LABELS. [Paragraph 400.] THE ARTHUR C. HARRIS CO., NEW YORK CITY, ASKS FOR MAINTENANCE OF PRESENT DUTIES ON PERFORATED LABELS. NEW YORK CITY, December 1, 1908. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: We wish to lay before you the facts concerning an industry which, while not of national importance in itself, is nevertheless well calculated to represent certain phases of the tariff question. We are practically the sole manufacturers in this country of perforated silver tickets used in the put-up of fine cotton cloths. We are facing a keen competition from England and Germany, where the hand labor, which is a large factor of cost, can be had at about one-third of the American standard wages. When you consider that the raw material, i. e., silver-laid paper, has to be imported, you will readily appreciate that an average duty of 40 per cent on labor which is practically 663 per cent cheaper than ours is not prohibitory to the foreigner. The main argument which is left us is quicker deliveries and more careful attention to orders than the foreigner can give. To sum up, as it affects perforated work on silver or other metal papers, the tariff ought to be maintained at least on the finished product, while the duty on metal-covered papers might be lowered. Very truly, yours, ARTHUR C. HARRIS COMPANY, ARTHUR C. HARRIS, President. CHILDREN'S BOOKS. [Paragraph 400.] CERTAIN IMPORTERS OF CHILDREN'S TOY BOOKS REQUEST A REDUCTION OF THE DUTIES THEREON. NEW YORK CITY, December 19, 1908. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, House of Representatives. SIRS: On behalf of importers of children's toy books (Raphael Tuck & Sons Company, Kaufmann & Strauss, E. P. Dutton & Co.) I respectfully request a reduction of the duties now provided in paragraph 400 of the tariff act for children's books containing illuminated lithographic prints. The duty provided in the present act is 8 cents a pound. This amounts, as will be shown by figures subjoined, from 45 to 623 per cent ad valorem. These books were formerly imported in large quantities. The present tariff is so high that it has driven the imported article from the market, and thus deprived the United |