Unfortunately it is true, also, that there is only one place in America where the American manufacturer is protected, and that is in Canada. We have 33 per cent better duties in Canada as against the Germans, and, as a consequence of that, Canada is a better market than the United States itself. I want to call attention to this [showing sheet of cards] and to say that if a duty is made on post cards, it should include post cards that are impored in sheets, ready to print. Mr. DALZELL. Is this specifically named in the tariff bill? IMPORTERS OF LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTS URGE RETENTION OF METHOD AND FORM OF THE DINGLEY ACT. COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, NEW YORK, December 18, 1908. Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: On behalf of the leading importers of lithographic prints of the United States, I beg to submit the following brief with reference to the duties to be provided in the proposed new tariff act for this class of goods now covered by paragraph 400 of the existing law. Specifically, this brief is intended as an answer to the request made by the National Association of Employing Lithographers, through the chairman of their tariff committee, Mr. George R. Meyercord, presented to the committee on November 21, 1898, and reported in Tariff Hearings. The parties whom I represent are the firms of Messrs. E. P. Dutton & Co., Raphael Tuck & Sons Company (Limited), International Art Publishing Company, W. Hagelberg & Co., Art Lithographic Publishing Company, Kaufmann & Strauss Company, of New York City, and Wolf & Co., of Philadelphia. The American manufacturers, who admit that they now control five-sixths of the trade in this business-Mr. Meyercord admitted that the domestic production in 1905 was $25,000,000 and the total importations about $4,000,000-are certainly modest in their demands, for the increases they suggest would, as will be hereafter shown, make the duties on many of these articles 200 and 300 per cent ad valorem, and thus of course prohibitory. In this connection the following questions and answers are significant: Mr. CRUMPACKER. You want the tariff high enough so as to practically compel them to buy American goods? Mr. MEYERCORD. Give us free trade in our own home market; that is all we want and we will lick him. Mr. CRUMPACKER. If you had the increase in the schedule of tariff you ask for, it would probably prohibit the importation of any foreign product, would it? Mr. MEYERCORD. We want free trade in our home market; that is all we want. I am a free trader above the 51 per cent basis. Mr. Meyercord begins by stating: There have been numerous court decisions and great confusion as to paragraph 400. It is probably one of the most confusing paragraphs to be interpreted in the entire Dingley tariff act. It would seem that if it had been confusing, and numerous court decisions had been made under it, that the confusion would have been nearly, if not wholly, clarified. Mr. Meyercord's proposition is to introduce an entirely new and complex scale of duties, which would certainly make confusion worse confounded. As a matter of fact there is no confusion about paragraph 400 excepting in Mr. Meyercord's imagination. Prior to 1890 lithographic prints, like other printed matter, were dutiable at 25 per cent. The McKinley tariff act, which was considered a protective tariff, put all these goods on a basis of 35 per cent duty. When the Wilson tariff act was framed the paragraph corresponding with paragraph 400 (paragraph 308, act of 1894) was framed after a conference between the manufacturers and the importers held in Washington, and the draft was made under the supervision of General Appraiser Sharretts, an expert assisting the committee in the preparation of the bill. There is little, if any, difference between the provisions of the Wilson bill and the provisions of the Dingley bill. These latter provisions were also the result of an agreement between the domestic manufacturers and the importers. When Mr. Meyercord suggests there is great confusion in paragraphs which were twice agreed on by all conflicting interests, and which in the first instance were put in form by a tariff expert and a member of the Board of General Appraisers, he ought to cite some proof in support of his assertion. In answer to a question of Mr. Crumpacker, Mr. Meyercord stated that the domestic manufacturers had larger protection under the Wilson-Gorman Act and that the rates were higher in that act than under the Dingley law. One has only to read paragraph 308 of the act of 1894 and paragraph 400 of the act of 1897 to see for himself, without being an expert, that Mr. Meyercord's statement is without foundation. Mr. Meyercord states that the manufacturers of lithographic prints in Germany sell goods in this country below the market price for the same goods in Germany, and in some cases bill goods to their own branch offices in this country at less than the market price there. As the duties on these goods are specific and the duty is in nowise affected by the value, there is no reason why the foreign manufacturers should undervalue their goods, and as to how the price they sell them here compares with the price at which they sell them in Germany, it is difficult to see how the Government is concerned with it. The ground assigned by the American lithographers for the enormous increase of duties which they propose will not bear investigation, and we desire to submit the following reply to it: (1) They say that the volume of importations is constantly increasing. This would furnish no ground for their application even if it were true. As they admit the importers have only about one-sixth of the business, there would be no occasion for alarm or drastic tariff legislation even if the importers' share was increasing to one-third or one-naif, but as a matter of fact the statement is misleading. The imports of Christmas cards, calendars, booklets, and novelties are not increasing, but are decreasing. There has been a very considerable increase of rate in the importations of post cards, because the craze for these articles, which ran its course in Europe and is now dying out, has been very great in this country, especially during the past year. The importations of post cards during the past year have been $3,000,000 worth, but the demand is decreasing; the popularity of these articles is on the wane, and it is a question only of time and apparently a very short time when the demand will drop off in this country, as it has already done in Europe. (2) The argument based on labor cost is wholly misleading. The statements of Mr. Meyercord as to the cost of labor in Europe are very incorrect. Mr. Samuel Gabriel, of the firm of Raphael Tuck & Sons Company, who has been visiting Europe annually for over twenty years and knows the market conditions abroad most thoroughly, can testify that competent pen and crayon artists receive from 80 to 100 marks a week, and not from 32 to 36, as stated by Mr. Meyercord. Corresponding artists in this country earn from $30 to 335 per week. It can be abundantly shown that Mr. Meyercord's figures for foreign labor should be at least 50 per cent higher. Mr. John Macrae, vice-president of Messrs. E. P. Dutton & Co., a firm of the highest standing, which has been in business for fifty years in the city of New York, states that the wages paid in the factory in Nuremberg, which supplies this firm with goods are from 30 to 100 per cent higher than Mr. Meyercord's estimates. Moreover, the American workman is so much quicker and more efficient than the foreign workman that he can do double the quantity of work in a given time. Not only are the actual wages paid in Germany higher than as stated by Mr. Meyercord, but the owners of factories there have to pay certain insurance and hospital taxes, which further increase the actual cost of labor in the production. The correctness of our statements and the incorrectness of Mr. Meyercord's on this phase of the question are borne out by the fact that the importers are unable to compete with the domestic manufacturers on all but the highest class of goods; that the domestic manufacturers have five-sixths of the business, and finally by the fact that during the recent strike of lithographers in this city the employers made every effort to persuade European artists to come to America, offering them special inducements. These artists investigated the matter of relative wages in their own country and in this, and not a single one of them was induced to run away from the starvation wages abroad. The same was true of the transferrers and feeders. (3) In this, as in many other cases, the American manufacturer is seeking to establish rates of duty which will be prohibitory of importation on goods that are not made here at all, and thus diminish the revenues without any corresponding benefit to themselves. Such goods as Christmas cards, fancy calendars for retail stationers and booksellers, Christmas booklets, valentines, and Easter booklets, cards, and novelties have never been successfully made in this country, and the American lithographers now propose rates of duty on them from 100 to 300 per cent higher than the present rate, which would largely, if not wholly, exclude their importation. (4) The American lithographers propose that post cards shall in future be assessed as "material not exceeding eight one-thousandths of an inch at 30 cents a pound." The present rate of duty is 5 cents a pound, so they are asking to have it multiplied by six. One of my clients, Messrs. Raphael Tuck & Sons Company, are large importers of this class of goods. They cost, to make abroad, 8 marks, or $2, per thousand. The weight is 12 pounds to the thousand. The present duty at 5 cents a pound is therefore 60 cents a thousand, or about 30 per cent. The proposed rate, being six times this, would be about 180 per cent. It would amount to $3.60 a thousand. Now, it happens that the firm to which I have referred has a number of cards printed here by domestic lithographers. Two of these, the Niagara Lithographic Company and the American Lithographic Company, are members of the association represented by Mr. Meyercord. A third firm, the J. Ottmann Lithographing Company, are doing a large business in the United States. I append as Exhibit A post cards made by these domestic lithographers, with their bills for the same, which, as will be seen, are from $1.25 to $1.75 per thousand, so that without any regard to the foreign cost of these cards or the expense of getting them here, or any profit to be made on them here, the American lithographers are asking for a duty which is more than double the price at which they sell their own product. I can conceive of no more impressive proof of the outrageousness of their demands. (5) The loss of business by the American lithographers is not caused by the cheapness of lithographic work abroad, as has already been shown. It is largely caused by the fact that lithographic goods are to an increasing extent displaced by goods which are not lithographed, but which are the product of the three and four color process of printing recently invented. Formerly all fine color work had to be done by the lithographic process. This is no longer the case. Fine goods are produced by this three and four color process, and these goods are making inroads on the business in lithographic prints, both abroad and in this country. No increase of duty on lithographic prints will protect the domestic manufacturer from this competition. (6) The American lithographers propose to increase the duty on artistic calendars and Christmas cards from 5 to 8 cents a pound, according to thickness of cardboard, to 30 and 36 cents a pound. These articles are not and never have been made here. To increase the duties on them from 350 to 500 per cent means practically to prohibit their importation. They are bought by all classes of people at the Christmas season and have come to be looked on as one of the most attractive features of Christmas celebration. Why they should be utterly barred out at the behest of people who have nothing to gain by this act of vandalism it is difficult to imagine. (7) Mr. Meyercord tells us that the increase of lithography in America amounts to just 25 per cent, as against an increase of 30 per cent in that of imported lithographic prints. In view of the fact that American lithographers, according to their figures, turn out annually 25,000,000, while the imported, including every conceivable sort of lithographic prints, amount, according to their own figures, to less than $5,000,000, the increase in actual figures amounts to 25 per cent of $25,000,000, equal to $6,250,000, while 30 per cent of $4,911,102 amounts to less than $1,500,000. This increase of domestic business, (more than four times the increase of importations) was in spite of the unusual demand for post cards last year and of the enormous advance which three and four color printing has made in the United States. In conclusion, I respectfully submit that the present form and method of the Dingley Act should be adhered to in any new act contemplated by the Ways and Means Committee. The Dingley lithographic schedule is the result of years of investigation, work, and compromise of the American lithographers, the importers of lithographic goods, and of tariff experts. The specific rate of duty is preferable, because it avoids any possibility of undervaluation and removes any suspicion that might arise in the minds of the Government or of the American manufacturers that these goods are undervalued. W. WICKHAM SMITH, For Importers of Lithographic Prints. E. P. DUTTON & CO., NEW YORK CITY, URGE MAINTENANCE OF PRESENT SCHEDULE FOR LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTS. Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, NEW YORK, December 18, 1908. Chairman of Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We take the liberty of writing you regarding the statement made before your committee by Mr. George R. Meyercord, chairman of the tariff committee of the National Association of Employing Lithographers. Mr. Meyercord and his committee of American lithographers clearly intend, if given their way, to make the duty on lithographic prints prohibitive. Believing that it is your intent to get such information as is available, and to prepare a tariff schedule that will be just and fair to all interests concerned, we appeal to you regarding this lithographic schedule. The high standing of our house entitles our statements regarding this schedule to a hearing from you and your committee. Our individual imports of lithographic articles are those of the very highest order of workmanship. The lithographic goods imported by us are practically all souvenirs for Christmas, Valentine, Easter, and birthday remembrances. They consist of calendars, booklets, cards, and novelties. The class of goods imported by us are such as have never been made to any extent in this country, and it is not likely they will be made here. If Mr. Meyercord's proposals should be incorporated in your coming revision of the tariff, it would increase the rates of goods imported by us from 40 per cent to 300 per cent. The duties would range from 45 per cent at the very minimum and range to 100 per cent. We estimate the average about 60 per cent ad valorem. You are doubtless aware of the history of import duties on lithographic materials. Prior to the McKinley Act the lithographic goods were imported as printed matter, with a duty of 25 per cent. The McKinley bill separated the lithographic products and assessed a duty of 35 per cent ad valorem. The American manufacturers and the Government were continually feeling that certain importers of these products undervalued them. When the Wilson bill came up for discussion there was a long and bitter struggle concerning the lithographic schedule. Finally Chairman Jones, at the request of Senator Gorman, notified both the importers and the American manufacturers that they must come together and harmonize on an equitable rate of duty, fair to the principal interests on both sides. The Wilson-Gorman tariff was the result, and the principal parties on both sides signed an agree |