Hon. JULIUS KAHN, PARAGRAPH 237-MACARONI. SAN FRANCISCO, CAL., January 17, 1918. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. The undersigned manufacturers here of alimentary paste (macaroni, spaghetti, noodles, etc.) earnestly desire yours and your colleagues hearty cooperation and efforts help defeat any cut present tariff Schedule G. Agricultural products and provisions on January 20, wherein same affects our product. Irreparable injury result our industry to say nothing useless waste vast sums money expended by our Government to introduce suitable wheat into this country for paste manufacture, also retarding development great tracts arid land in West sown almost exclusively wheat suitable manufacture paste. Reduction tariff effectually kill growing industry yet in infancy that to-day constitutes one of solutions to high cost of living, taking place meat to millions people in this country. Foreign product now enjoying most favorable terms; no necessity further favorable terms expense ourselves. Tariff even now not sufficient equalize cost of production here and abroad even taking into consideration fact great quantities wheat exported Europe eventually returning as paste. This part of same wheat mentioned above as having been introduced by our Government at great expense. Million boxes imported article now sold this country, even though our product placed on market at as low margin profit as possible. No tariff or reduction same result flooding our market with foreign product expense American manufacturer. Vesuvio Paste Co.; Peidmont & Neapolitan Paste Co., San Francisco; Cali- The undersigned millers here also append their signatures and bespeak your best efforts: Fisher Flouring Mills Co.; Sperry Flour Co.; Centennial Mill Co.; Hammond Milling Co.; Albers Bros. Milling Co.; Yosemite Flour Mills; Northern Flour Co.; C. A. Hutton Flour Co. Hon. WILLIAM Reyburn, United States Congress. ABRUZZI MACARONI FACTORY, DEAR SIR: Information to the effect was received that Monday next will actually decide the fate of the American macaroni industry, with the probable "cut-off" in the tariff to satisfy the popular cry of "High cost of living.' As manufacturers we strongly protest against any change being made as same would not benefit the consumer in any way, and the ones who are to-day reaping as high as 400 per cent profits would do so under changed circumstances as well. The domestic article is now placed on the market at as low as possible margin of profit and "no tariff" would be the means of flooding the home markets with the foreign product and not only bring injury to the manufacturers but also to all others doing business with us and of which the details of our branch calls for many. Herewith attached beg to hand you a comparison of the cost and the hours of the foreign markets and also a statement of our business, and ask you to bear in mind that there are hundreds of such factories in the State of Pennsylvania and thousands in the United States; thus it is that we solicit your earnest cooperation. Trusting you will oblige one and all in this move, while advancing thanks, We remain, PARAGRAPH 239-OAT HULLS. COMPARISON OF COST AND HOURS OF LABOR. Foreign labor laws admit children to work from ages of 10 to 16, whereas, under our laws, they must be over 16. The foreign daily hours are 12 and Sunday forenoon, while our day's work averages 10 hours. Foreign skilled labor is paid from 40 to 60 cents per day against $1.75 to $2.50 paid to the American skilled labor. Common foreign labor is paid from 20 to 40 cents per day, while we pay from $1.25 to $1.75. Children are paid from 10 to 20 cents per day, while we can not employ them. Hon. F. E. HUMPHREY, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: In Schedule M hearing on Monday there will be a tendency to remove the present duty of 14 cents per pound on macaroni, the present tariff is not sufficient to equalize the cost of production here and abroad the American product is now placed upon the market at as low a margin of profit that is possible, and that the result of no tariff or a reduction of the tariff would be to flood the American market with the foreign product at the expense of the American manufacturer, besides making the cost to the Government to introduce durum wheat an enormous waste of money. Will appreciate your support in maintaining present duty. Hon. W. E. HUMPHREY, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: A. F. CHIGLIONE & SONS." SEATTLE, WASH., January 18, 1913. Understand contemplate taking duty off of macaroni and believe should this be done it would work a great hardship on macaroni and milling industry in this country, bringing them in contact with the cheap labor of Italy. Anything you do to prevent same will be appreciated. PARAGRAPH 238. Oats, fifteen cents per bushel. PARAGRAPH 239. THE CHAS. H. LILLY Co. Oatmeal and rolled oats, one cent per pound; oat hulls, ten cents per hundred pounds. OAT HULLS. IMPORTS FROM CANADA. JANUARY 11, 1913. Hon. ISAAC R. SHERWOOD, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR GENERAL: In the matter of revising the tariff, there is just one point in which we are very much interested, and that is in reference to the duty on oat hulls coming into this country from Canada, which, under the present tariff, is taxed at the rate of $2 per ton. Oat hulls are the offal of the oatmeal mills, and are made up of the hulls and fine stuff, and are used largely by feed manufacturers, as a filler or roughener, in some grades of feed. It is absolutely necessary to have them, in order to compete with some of the large cereal concerns in this country, notably the Quaker Oats Co., who practically control the oatmeal business of the country, but who refuse to sell this product to other manufacturers; for this reason, outside of a few small independent mills, it is necessary to purchase this material in Canada. PARAGRAPH 240-RICE. Under the Wilson bill, oat hulls were admitted free of duty, but when the tariff was again revised, this $2 duty was put on and remains there yet. We would earnestly urge your attention to this matter, with a view of having them include it in the free list, and if you desire any further information concerning it we will be very glad to furnish it. With best regards to you personally, we remain, Yours, very truly, PARAGRAPH 240. W. H. HASKELL & Co. Rice, cleaned, two cents per pound; uncleaned rice, or rice free of the outer hull and still having the inner cuticle on, one and one-fourth cents per pound; rice flour and rice meal, and rice broken which will pass through a number twelve wire sieve of a kind prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury, onefourth of one cent per pound; paddy, or rice having the outer hull on, threefourths of one cent per pound. RICE. STATEMENT OF HON. R. F. BROUSSARD, OF LOUISIANA. Mr. BROUSSARD. Mr. Chairman, I have no desire to take up the time of the committee. The reservation of time I made was in behalf of the individual members of the Southern Rice Growers' Association, an association of farmers consisting of a membership of 1,525 in Louisiana, 1,020 in Texas, and 404 in Arkansas. Since I made the reservation the association has, at a meeting at Beaumont, Tex., appointed a committee, consisting of S. Locke Breaux, chairman, New Orleans, La.; S. Arthur Knapp, Lake Charles, La.; and Fred. D. Gibson, Stuttgart, Ark., to present the matter to your committee. The president of the association, Mr. W. B. Dunlap, of Beaumont, Tex., is here, and I would like for him to be heard briefly in my time, and then Mr. Breaux, on behalf of the committee, will present the other part of the hearing, after which they will submit the matter. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Dunlap will be heard. TESTIMONY OF W. B. DUNLAP, PRESIDENT OF THE SOUTHERN RICE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION, BEAUMONT, TEX. The witness was duly sworn by the chairman. Mr. DUNLAP. Gentleman, I come before you this morning representing the producers, irrigators, and millers of rice of the States of Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas; I come before you as the president of the rice growers' association, an association composed of about 3,000 members, growers of rice in the States of Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas, and probably a few in Mississippi. This association was organized about three years ago for the purpose of bettering conditions in connection with rice growing. Mr. LONGWORTH. Will you not talk a little louder, please? I am anxious to hear you. Mr. DUNLAP. The growers of rice have so far found it an unprofitable proposition. At a directors' meeting held at Beaumont 30 or 40 days ago I was authorized to select a committee to get up. the necessary data and information to be presented to you at this hearing. PARAGRAPH 240-RICE. This committee was selected, has been at work, and I think has gotten everything that is necessary to be presented to you. The committee is composed of Mr. Breaux and Mr. Knapp, of Louisiana, and Mr. Gibson, of Arkansas, and they have formulated an address which will be presented to you and which, I think, will answer the purpose. I have very little to say along this line this morning, but Mr. Breaux, who will follow me and is very familiar with rice growing, will present the matter to you. I thank you, gentlemen. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be glad to hear from Mr. Breaux. TESTIMONY OF S. LOCKE BREAUX, CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEE OF SOUTHERN RICE GROWERS' ASSOCIATION. The witness was duly sworn by the chairman. Mr. BREAUX. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, the brief which I have to present to the committee is gotten up by the Southern Rice Growers' Association, a farmers' organization of the States of Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Mississippi. Antecedent to our work on this presentation committee we had various meetings in Beaumont and one or two in New Orleans, so that it is fair to say that we represent the industry in its every ramification. In this connection we beg to submit resolution of Louisiana and Texas Rice Millers' & Distributors' Association of date January 10, 1913, from J. E. Broussard, president, and J. R. Leguenec, secretary. The present tariff enjoyed by the rice industry in this country is as follows: Cleaned (our table rice). Cents per pound. Uncleaned, or rice free of the outer hull and still having the inner cuticle on.... Paddy, or rice having the outer hull on. Rice flour, rice meal, and broken rice, which will pass through a No. 12 wire sieve. 2 11 The above statement is from the general tariff law in operation, enacted by Congress July 24, 1897. Hearing was had before the Ways and Means Committee of the Sixtieth Congress in 1908, and the brief (see Exhibit B) then submitted by the Rice Association of America in all essentials applies as well to-day as it applied four years ago; the only material change being the development of the industry in the State of Arkansas and the further fact that California (see Exhibit C) is looming up potentially in its possibilities as to development. It is also a fact that Florida, Alabama, and Mississippi are experimenting with rice, advertising rice lands, and looking to raising commercial crops of the commodity. In figuring commercial rice we only figure the three States of Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas, and a study of statistics taken from the Crop Reporter (see Exhibit D) shows that in 1908 there was a total production of 655,000 acres, with an average yield of 33 bushels, and that in 1912 the acreage was 722,800, the average yield 34 bushels. PARAGRAPH 240-RICE. In other words (except for the State of Arkansas, where, in 1912, the acreage was 90,800 as against 11,480 in 1908) the two States of Louisiana and Texas maintain practically the same acreage. Compilation of cost of production of an acre of rice, derived from individual reports from farmers from Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. Plowing land, per acre... Disking and harrowing, per acre. Seed, including planting and rolling. Looking after water and crop 90 days in summer. Cutting and shocking... Thrashing, sacks, and hauling to warehouse.. Cost of loading rough rice on cars, insurance, storage, and warehouse charges.. Cost to farmer for water, about... Interest on mules, farming machinery and land. Fertilizer.. Annual depreciation on farm machinery and mules.. Average cost to cultivate and put to market an acre of rice................ $1.543 1. 218 3. 303 1. 313 2. 164 4. 567 1. 06 6. 75 3. 69 1. 52 2.32 29. 445 This table was gotten up from the membership of the Southern Rice Growers' Association in Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas as a compilation of their experience. In 1912 the yield was 34 bushels, and the average price 93 cents per bushel, which means $31.79 per acre gross to the farmer. Deducting the average cost, $29.45, it leaves the margin of profit reduced to a minimum, and if we take the average bushel price to the farmer of the past four years, 80 cents, it eliminates any profit, so that it is fair to say that the present basis of price must maintain for the industry to prosper. Rice is essentially a small farmer's crop. The total acreage divided by the number of farmers given (Southern Rice Growers' Association figures) indicates an average of about 140 acres cultivated to the farmer, of whom 99 per cent are white. Illustrative of the development due to the culture of rice, Wharton County, Tex., was assessed in 1885 at $722,845, and after the advent of rice in 1912, the assessment was $15,714,462; in Arkansas County, Ark., in 1890, the assessed valuation was $2,484,300; in 1912, $7,619,070. These are taken as typical because they are exclusively rice counties. As a further evidence of the benefit from the development of rice the following valuations on land are of interest: We The above values represent lands purchased largely on credit, predicated upon a continuance of prosperous conditions in rice. believe that the elimination of the present tariff and consequent |