HEARINGS ON THE TARIFF. WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 1911. UNITED STATES SENATE, The committee met at 10.30 a. m. Present: Senators Penrose (chairman), Lodge, McCumber, Smoot, Gallinger, Clark of Wyoming, Heyburn, La Follette, Bailey, Simmons, Stone, Williams, and Johnson. Present also: William D'Oench, jr., representing the FriedmanShelby Shoe Co., of St. Louis, Mo.; Milton S. Florsheim, representing the Florsheim Shoe Co., of Chicago, Ill.; Jackson Johnson, esq., representing the Roberts, Johnson & Rand Shoe Co., and W. N. McElroy, esq., representing the Hamilton-Brown Shoe Co., of St. Louis, Mo. The committee proceeded to the consideration of bill H. R. 4413. Senator STONE. My attention was called this morning to a matter that ought to be included in the Senate order of April 28 to print the tariffs of 1842 and 1846, and Senate debates thereon. I am told that the report of Robert J. Walker, Secretary of the Treasury in 1845, is ordered to be included. The CHAIRMAN. That is my understanding. Senator STONE. But there is another report of Mr. Walker1848—that is really a more important one, and it is dated February 11, 1848, and I would like to have that incorporated. The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objection, that will be included in the document. The committee is called here this morning for the purpose of suiting the convenience of those who may be in Washington and desire a hearing on pending tariff legislation. As I understand it, the hearing this morning is more particularly on the free-list measure, and it comes up in this connection, so far as it may have any bearing on the bills H. R. 4412 and 4413. Senator La Follette, you have some people who want to be heard; are they here? Senator LA FOLLETTE. There are some gentlemen here from Chicago and some from St. Louis. The CHAIRMAN. The committee is prepared to hear them in their order. BOOTS AND SHOES. STATEMENT OF WILLIAM D'OENCH, JR., OF ST. LOUIS, MO., REPRESENTING THE FRIEDMAN-SHELBY SHOE CO. The CHAIRMAN. Will you state your full name to the committee? The CHAIRMAN. Where do you live? 3 The CHAIRMAN. What is your business? Mr. D'OENCH. Manufacturer of boots and shoes. Senator SMOOт. What is the name of the firm? Mr. D'OENCH. The Friedman-Shelby Shoe Co. Senator SMOOT. What grade of shoes do you make? Mr. D'OENCH. We manufacture practically all kinds―men's and women's shoes, medium grade, fine grade. Senator SMOOT. Any children's shoes? Mr. D'OENCH. Yes, sir. These gentlemen here are all shoe manufacturers in St. Louis, Chicago, Milwaukee, Grand Rapids, and the Middle West. There are no eastern manufacturers here. This bill is House bill 4413 and it provides, in lines 17 to 24, that all leathers made from hides of the bovine species, including calfskins, shall be admitted free of duty. Senator SIMMONS. That is the free-list bill you are talking about? Mr. D'OENCH. That is the free-list bill I am talking about. However, leather made from goatskins, kangaroo skins, horsehides, japanned or patent leather, or leather made from any other animal skins, would continue to be dutiable according to the present tariff. These same leathers remaining dutiable under this measure, when cut into shoe uppers, or other forms suitable for conversion into shoes, will be admitted free. In other words, the raw material bears a duty, and the same material, when partly manufactured, comes in free. The effect of this would be to discriminate against the American workmen. To illustrate: An American shoe manufacturer can organize a cutting establishment in Great Britain, where he can cut shoe uppers from leathers such as goatskins, kangaroo skins, horsehide, or japanned or patent leather, or leather made from any other animal skins, which, under the present measure, remain on the dutiable list, and then import these "uppers uppers" free of duty. The leather itself pays a duty, but he can cut them in England and bring the cut uppers into the United States free of duty, which constitutes a discrimination. Two years ago the tariff on shoes was reduced from 25 to 15 and 10 per cent. Now it is proposed to put shoes on the free list, providing they are made of leather manufactured from cattle hides, of the bovine species, including calfskin, but it continues the duties on shoes made of goatskins, horsehides, kangaroo skins, japanned or patent leather and fabric shoes, shoes made of cloth, and fancy shoes. The average duty on wearing apparel is 60 per cent; some of the duties, for instance on hats, 50 per cent; on handkerchiefs, 50 or 60 per cent; on shirts, 60 per cent; all underwear, 55 per cent; clothing, including all kinds of garments, 60 per cent; hosiery, 55 to 60 per cent, and shoes, 10 to 15 per cent. In all fairness and justice, the duty on shoes really ought to be increased in place of being annulled. The low duty, as it stands to-day, would seem a penalizing of an industry in which, above all other industries, there has been free and open competition. |