BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SIXTIETH CONGRESS.

FIRST PRINT, No. 13.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1908.

WASHINGTON:

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE.

The committee this day met, Hon. Sereno E. Payne in the chair. The CHAIRMAN. We will take up the question of pottery this morning and the committee will first hear any gentleman who desires to suggest a change or a cut in duty. If no gentleman is here, the committee will hear Mr. Burgess. [After a pause.] Is there anyone here who wants to be heard on the pottery schedule?

Mr. JONES. Yes, sir.

STATEMENT OF MR. JEROME JONES, OF BOSTON, MASS.

The CHAIRMAN. Please give your name, address, and your business. Mr. JONES. Jerome Jones, Boston, Mass., wholesale and retailer in crockery and glassware. We are here, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, as representatives of the wholesale dealers of the United States in crockery and glassware, who have for years been dealers in both foreign and domestic pottery and glassware. I am, therefore, familiar with the merits of both kinds, and can speak of both without prejudice to the manufacturer or the importer. We have no vested interest in either pottery or glass manufacture, domestic or foreign.

Crockery is a necessity to every family in the land. None is so poor that it can do without it. We feel that relief, by means of a substantial reduction of duties, should be seriously considered on behalf not only of our industry but of the American consumer. The "high standard of American living" sounds well, but the increasing cost of living is a serious question. As dealers, we continually feel the pulse of the consuming public, and we believe that unnecessary tariff burdens are being imposed.

We believe that the domestic manufacturer is entitled to protection, but not beyond the point which he himself, during the past twelve years, has demonstrated as sufficient. We believe that the difference in the cost of production of American and foreign ware nearer 30 or 35 per cent than the 55 per cent on white and 60 per cent on decorated ware which are the protective duties imposed by the present law. This difference of about 25 per cent represents excess protection.

While the duties of 55 and 60 per cent may appear to the casual reader to be the sum of protection afforded, they do not represent the full burden levied up on the commodity. The outside packages, which are costly in themselves abroad, are dutiable at the same rate. as the contents. For example, in Staffordshire the outside crate necessary for the safe transportation of the ware is charged to us at 17 shillings 6 pence, or $4.37. Assess this also at 60 per cent and the outside package costs us $7, while empty it is worth only a fraction of that here. Yet it has raised the protection on many kinds to 70 or 80 per cent, which on many kinds of ware is prohibitive. To