producing cigar labels or bands, and those, with one or two exceptions, are located in New York City. Among this dozen we question whether there are more than two or three firms who advocate a change in duties, much less would think of higher rates.

The really principal firm advocating the exclusive rates on labels and bands, not directly but through the National Association, is the American Lithographic Company, New York. This company is and has always been known throughout the United States, not only by their competitors but among the cigar manufacturers and cigar box makers, as "the trust," and any increased rates would mainly be of benefit to this company and not to the lithographic trade in general.

While the small importation of these goods is confined to four or five firms, fully 90 per cent of the product is almost exclusively made in New York City.

The national association comes to your committee with a general statement asking for higher duties, with nothing specific to substantiate their claim, showing not one specimen of a label or band of German make or what it is sold at and what their relative selling price would be for a similar article produced here, but simply relying upon one thing, the difference in scale of wages, which has already been pointed out by others as incorrect. On the other hand, we beg to refer to our testimony before your committee November 21, 1908, and the various samples then submitted, showing that their cost in Germany is practically the same and in some instances even higher than the same designs and workmanship are produced in New York and sold by the domestic lithographer. These figures have since then not been refuted, nor can they be, so it is self-evident that even without any duty at all, larger editions can not be imported anyway. And what applies to these particular designs applies to all others under similar conditions and quantities.

The unfortunate part of it is we have absolutely no protection on our designs. Each and every one can be copied here, and it is done to a great extent, for sole reasons given in our testimony November 21, 1908.

Apart from the stupendous rates, the national association or, properly said, the American Lithographic Company, goes even further and suggests another 10 cents a pound for embossed designs. They might properly have added this 10 cents originally to their other rates, as all bands, without exception, and 95 per cent of all imported labels and flaps are embossed.

We are not at all interested in lithographic prints on which the present duties are an ad valorem equivalent of from 20 to 27 per cent, while on our imports, labels and bands, and more especially labels, it is double and treble.

In our separate testimony added to this we have compiled the total imports of our firm alone from June 30, 1906, to June 30, 1907, showing their ad valorem equivalents which, on all grades of labels are now so excessively high that only small amounts can be imported and the major part of these represents first editions. The lowest rate is on bronze bands and we particularly refer to this. As shown in our statement annexed, and admitted by the domestic lithographers, they sell these very bands to the cigar manufacturers at 30 cents per 1,000, which is the lowest cost of German goods, including present duty.

Although both lithographic prints and labels are produced by the same process yet there is this vast difference in rates of duty. For the information of your committee we will state how they came about originally in the Wilson bill. The statement of E. P. Dutton & Co., book 43, page 6301, reports that the rates were agreed upon at a meeting between the importers and domestic manufacturers at the instigation of Chairman Jones; true, and just at this particular conference cigar labels and bands were, for the first time, taken out of the lithographic schedule and provided for separately at higher rates. Mr. Louis C. Wagner then, as now, was an importer of labels and bands, but was in Europe at that time. He now makes the positive assertion that his representative was not permitted to attend that meeting; that no other firm importing labels did appear excepting one, large im porters of lithographic prints, and who, at that time, also imported cigar labels, but evidently found this line not profitable, so sold their entire stock soon after the Wilson bill became a law to the American Lithographic Company. They, the American Lithographic Company, at that time were mainly instrumental in framing the schedule, and to enable them to get the importers of prints to agree to high rates on labels, compromised by accepting lower rates on prints. And this very firm comes along again now and asks for still more.

We believe the time has come when the duties on our goods should be in conformity with those of similar manufacture by reducing them, especially the 20 cent, 30 cent, and 50 cent rates on labels.

Since we have clearly shown in our first brief and in this summary that domestic goods are made and sold to the trade at a profit as low and in some instances lower than the cost in Germany, excluding any duty, we respectfully ask your committee that the rates suggested by us November 21, 1908, be adopted. They were made with all fairness and with more than ample protection to domestic industry, and would enable us to redeem the repeat orders which rightfully belong to us and increase the revenue to the Government.

Respectfully,

LOUIS C. WAGNER & Co.

HON. JOSEPH V. GRAFF, M. C., SUBMITS LETTER OF C. E. WHEELOCK & CO., PEORIA, ILL., RELATIVE TO INCREASING DUTY ON LITHOGRAPHIC PRINTS.

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE,

WASHINGTON, D. C., January 9, 1909.

Chairman Ways and Means Committee,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. PAYNE: Inclosed please find a letter from C. E. Wheelock & Co., of Peoria, Ill., who is a large importer of china and, it seems, also of souvenir or view postal cards, who are opposed to a raising of the duty from 5 to 35 cents per pound, claiming that will exclude all importations and cut off revenue to the Government. I submit the letter for the consideration of the committee.

Respectfully,

JOSEPH V. GRAFF.

Hon. Jos. V. GRAFF,

Washington, D. C.

PEORIA, ILL., January 7, 1909.

DEAR SIR: It is reported that an effort is being made before the committee having in charge the new tariff schedules, by American lithographers and manufacturers of souvenir or view postal cards, to increase the present rate of duty from 5 cents per pound to 35 cents per pound.

As you are probably aware, we are large importers of German souvenir postal cards and during the past year have brought in many millions at a duty of 5 cents per pound. American manufacturers are already offering very sharp competition. As a matter of fact, American manufacturers quote practically the same prices on similar cards as the European cards now cost delivered in America after having paid the duty and transportation charges. To advance the duty from 5 to 35 cents, however, would be equal to an ad valorem duty of from 100 to 150 per cent and would make imported souvenir or view postal cards cost practically twice what they cost now. This, of course, would shut out entirely imported cards and, naturally, destroy business which we have built up with considerable effort and expense and which now is of great importance to us. Not only would this destroy this business for us, but, of course, it would just this much reduce the imports at the local port. Considering the amount of business we have done on imported postal cards during the past year, the difference of a duty from 5 to 35 cents per pound would make a difference to us of between $15,000 and $20,000; but, we repeat, the new proposed duty would prohibit the importation of foreign cards.

If it is practical for you to do so, and should you have an opportunity, we should indeed consider it a favor if you would take this matter up with the committee having the matter under consideration, and we desire most earnestly that you should make an earnest protest on part of one of your constituents against such an unusual and prohibitive duty being added on postal cards. If you can put us in touch with those in authority, we should be glad to have you do so so that we ourselves could write a letter of protest against the duty which we understand is proposed.

We should also deem it a favor if you could advise us what the prospects are of such a new duty going into effect.

Yours, truly,

C. E. WHEELOCK & Co., By J. H. ROTH.

REPRESENTATIVES OF EMPLOYING LITHOGRAPHERS FILE SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT RELATIVE TO FOREIGN WAGES IN

THE LITHOGRAPHIC INDUSTRY.

Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE,

52 EAST NINETEENTH STREET, New York, January 12, 1909.

Chairman Ways and Means Committee,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: In the tariff hearings of November 21, you asked us to procure statistics on wage scale. We complied with same by furnish

ing you some signed letters giving the German scale. We have also sent you the official copy of the minimum rates paid by American manufacturers.

We now desire to file with your committee copies of a German publication, called "Freie Kunste," which publication is published in Leipzig and Vienna, and is a recognized organ of the lithographic industry in both the German and Austrian Empires.

The copies of this paper that we file with the committee are the issues of the following dates: March 15, 1906; March 1 and October

15, 1907.

We have made translations of these articles. From the translation of issue of March 15, 1906, it appears that the employers proposed a minimum wage of 161 marks per week for the first year of service as a journeyman, and after that the wage to be 18 marks per week, while the workmen demanded 21 marks to 25 marks, respectively.

In the translation from the issue of March 1, 1907, it is shown that the employers and the workmen agreed upon a minimum scale of 18 marks per week in 23 cities, 18 marks per week in 2 cities, 19 marks per week in 9 cities, 19 marks per week in 1 city, and 21 marks per week in 1 city.

The translation from the issue of October 15, 1907, shows that in the city of Leipzig the wage of artists fluctuated from 28 marks 16 pfennig to 37 marks 37 pfennig.

Should it be contended that the above scale of journeymen's wage is only for the first year, you, by referring to the translation of issue of March 15, 1906, will see that all the workmen demanded as a journeyman's wage after the first year was an increase of 4 marks per week.

As this information is from labor-union sources and is addressed to the union men, it may be taken as being absolutely correct and fully bears out the contention contained in our brief, that the wages in Germany are from one-fourth to one-fifth of the wages paid in this

The board of directors of the Senefelder Union report that during the lockout from May to August, 1906, and the preceding strike, 1,424 litho artists and 2,624 pressmen were on strike. The strike extended to 38 cities, and 271 firms were concerned therein.

After an agreement with the Association of Manufacturing Lithographers to resume work, the result was as follows:

Three hundred and fifty-three lithographic artists and 362 lithographic pressmen gained a reduction in time of from one and one

half to nine hours per week. Litho artists to work eight hours per day; litho pressmen to work nine hours per day.

One hundred and twenty lithographic artists and 80 litho pressmen received concessions for holiday pay, which formerly was not allowed them.

Two hundred and ninety-eight litho artists and 405 litho pressmen were conceded 25 per cent additional for overtime during week days, and 50 per cent additional for Sunday overtime.

Two hundred and thirty-eight litho artists and 927 litho pressmen received an increase in wages from to 5 marks per week, a total of 1,676 marks per week. Minimum wages during the first year as journeymen was agreed upon to be 18 marks per week in 23 cities; in 2 cities, 18 marks per week; in 9 cities, 19 marks per week, and in 2 cities, 19 and 21 marks per week, respectively.

EXHIBIT B.

[Translation, Book 6, page 100.]

LEIPZIG, March 15, 1906.

The agreement conference of the lithographic and stone-printing trades began on the 25th day of February, in the city of Leipzig. The sessions were held in the Booktrades Building. The parties participating were composed of nine employers and nine employees and the same number of alternates. There were also present two representatives of the Proprietors' Association of German StonePrinting Establishments, and two representatives of the Senefelder Association.

Previous to the regular proceedings, those present adopted a unanimous resolution against the contemplated tax on postal-card views.

The first question to be considered was concerning working hours and minimum wages. The employers proposed nine hours per day for lithographic artists and nine and one-half hours for pressmen be adopted. The employees, in opposition, proposed eight hours per day for lithographic artists and nine hours per day for pressmen.

The employers proposed a minimum wage of 16 marks per week for the first year of service as a journeyman, and after that to be 18 marks per week. The employees demanded 21 marks and 25 marks, respectively. The vote on this question being a tie, it was laid over for a second reading.

The second day of the session Doctor Viscot, of Breslau, made the following proposition in behalf of the employers: In an agreement of at least five years, the working hours of lithographic artists and pressmen were to be nine hours per day, and from July 1, 1908, the hours for lithographic artists were to be eight hours; however, where the work hours at the present time are less they shall so be continued. The counter proposition of the employees was as follows: In an agreement, at the most to continue three years, the working hours for lithographic artists are to be eight hours per day and nine hours for pressmen. Where more hours constitute a day's work for lithographic artists at the present time, the eight-hour time must be introduced by January 1, 1907; but where shorter hours constitute a day's work at present no changes are to be made.

The vote upon these questions being also a tie, or a nonacceptance of any of the propositions, the conference was declared off.