Thirty-two factories now employ 2,893 skilled workmen, 406 boys over 16 years of age, and 352 women, a total of 3,651, at average total wages for the past three years of $2,164,766. The average weekly wage for men is $14.28, for boys $6.05, for women $6.74.

Among the new factories, since 1897, are three established by German interests employing 650 workmen, representing an investment of over $500,000.

With the varied interests engaged in the industry the keenest competition prevails, and the prices to the consumer were never lower than now.

Under the present tariff law, importations of pocketknives are classified by value into five divisions, the specific duty varying on the several divisions. The American factories come into competition with the three higher classifications only, ranging in value from 50 cents per dozen and upward, the ad valorem of which averages 90 per cent, which rate is not higher than to equalize wages here and abroad.

It has been demonstrated that 80 per cent of the actual American factory cost is labor and that cutlery operatives in Germany, although not excellent in efficiency, do not receive wages to exceed one-third those paid in the United States.

Foreign and domestic competition has already reduced the manufacturing profit to a minimum of 6 per cent. Materials cost practically the same here and abroad, so that it is apparent that any reduction in the factory sale price compelled by a reduction in duties can only be met by corresponding reductions in the wages of the workmen employed in the industry.

Any considerable reduction in existing duties would result in no material benefit to the consumer, but an increased profit to the distributor, disaster to the American factories, loss of work and reduced wages to the American workman, and loss of revenue to the Government.

CHAS. F. ROCKWELL, Meriden, Conn.
C. D. DIVINE, Ellenville, N. Y.
TINT CHAMPLIN, Little Valley, N. Y.

(Representing: American Knife & Shear Co., Hotchkissville, Conn.; Camillus Knife Co., Camillus, N. Y.; Challenge Cutlery Corporation, Bridgeport, Conn.; Cattaraugus Cutlery Co., Little Valley, N. Y.; Empire Knife Co., Winsted, Conn.; Miller Bros. Cutlery Co., Meriden, Conn.; New York Knife Co., Walden, N. Y.; Robeson Cutlery Co., Perry, N. Y.; Schrade Cutlery Co., Walden, N. Y.; Thomaston Knife Co., Thomaston, Conn.; Ulster Knife Co., Ellenville, N. Y.; Walden Knife Co., Walden, N. Y.; Warwick Knife Co., Warwick, N. Y.; Napanoch Knife Co., Napanoch, N. Y.)

Comparison of wages paid to operatives abroad and in the United States.

The actual proportion of labor to factory cost of American pocket cutlery is 80 per

cent.

IMPORTS AND AMERICAN PRODUCTION.

The accompanying table indicates the effect on foreign importations and American production under the various tariff rates existing during the past 25 years, together with the revenue accruing.

JANUARY 1, 1913.

CHARLES F. ROCKWELL, Meriden, Conn.,
C. DWIGHT DIVINE, Ellenville, N. Y.,
TINT CHAMPLIN, Little Valley, N. Y.,
Committee Representing American Pocket Cutlery Manufacturers.

STATEMENT OF MR. DALLAS BOUDEMAN.

The witness was thereupon duly sworn by the chairman of the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. What paragraph, Mr. Boudeman?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Paragraph 183, I believe it is.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I will say that I represent this company as its attorney, and I will, as attorney, tell all that we can that we know, though we sometimes have to take from somebody else the facts that we present to the courts or the committees. I will have to do that in this case.

This institution is a manufacturer of gas mantles. I have prepared a short brief and filed it, and if consistent with the rules of this committee I would like to have it printed, because we have endeavored to put into it the things which we think are material on this question.

The duty that we want to speak about particularly, so far as it relates to the material that we use, is the duty upon thorium, and thorium is not manufactured in this country except by one institution I mean from mozonite sand-and that institution does not manufacture it for general sale. Thorium is manufactured in this country from scrap. I do not know that this committee recognize the real importance of this industry, as it has grown up in the United States within the last two years. We all remember the old gaslight, and the first thing that we recall about the old gaslight was the old burner that spluttered and flickered and wearied our eyes when we tried to read by it, but since the introduction of these mantles we find that gas can be used as effectually-some believe to better advantage-as electricity, and therefore this industry of manufacturing gas mantles has become so great that we very seldom see an old-fashioned

gas burner, and there are used in the United States, as near as we can state it, in the neighborhood of 65,000,000 gas mantles in a year. Now, there is only one concern that makes thorium in this country, and that is the Welsbach Co., which uses its own thorium for the manufacture of gas mantles; all the rest of us who are in the business, of which my company is one, are obliged to go somewhere else to get our thorium.

This is the third time, you might say, that this question has been up in one way or another before the committee of the House and the committee of the Senate.

There was a controversy for a while as to the question between the man or the company that was getting monazite sand from Brazil and bringing it here and manufacturing it into thorium, and those of us who had to go into the foreign market and buy our thorium, as to what the adjustment of duty should be between the two, but so far as I know that question is not involved at this time. Nobody, so far as I know, has attempted to make any distinction in that matter, and all that we ask is this, that if it should come up before your committee we would like to have the opportunity of being heard. Otherwise we have nothing to say on that question.

The present duty on thorium-and we are obliged to go to Germany to buy our thorium-is 40 per cent. The present duty on foreign mantles is 40 per cent, and what we want now to ask your committee to do is not to raise the price, not to put a higher duty, but lower duty, on thorium and lower the duty on foreign mantles. Mr. RAINEY. How would it do to lower it to 25 per cent ad valorem?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Our suggestion is 30. Twenty-five would not kill us.

Mr. RAINEY. We lowered it to 35 in the bill that passed the House. Mr. BOUDEMAN. It is 40 now. They got it up to 40.

Mr. RAINEY. The Democratic theory is it ought to be 35.

Mr. BOUDEMAN. The Democratic theory is just right on that subject.

Mr. RAINEY. As usual.

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Of course we range all the way in this country from the man who wants absolutely free trade to the man who wants the highest tariff he can get, and we are wrong there in those lines as we range ourselves.

This obtaining of thorium for our business can not be done except in one way. A great many dollars have been spent in the endeavor to manufacture this article, and it is said, and so far as our investigation goes it is true, that at the present time there are only five or six chemists in the world who are able to make a first-class thorium.

In preparing this matter-I will only refer to this brief, I do not intend to read it by any means-but in preparing this matter we have prepared for your committee, as near as we are able-and I can not testify to the absolute correctness of it, but I think we have got it practically right-a table of costs in the two countries, our country and foreign countries, in the manufacturing of gas mantles. That will be found on page 7 of this brief that I have presented. I want to talk about that for a few minutes, and then I will leave that.

It

We have taken this year's cost of thorium in the German market, because they are the great manufacturers of gas mantles. takes 5 pounds to make a thousand mantles, and the amount of thorium, together with the other things, and the amount of labor that they put in, costs the German substantially $42.50 to manufacture the grade of mantles that I am speaking about, with the 30 per cent duty off. The committee will understand that there are different grades of these mantles. Some of them are pretty good, and when they first came into the market you will remember that 25 to 50 cents apiece was paid for them. Before the general revision of the tariff was made there were substantially 90-I think 89different companies manufacturing gas mantles. They have been reduced now until there are 50 or less in the business.

There are different grades of these mantles and the price of the mantles has come down now so that they range all the way from 8 cents up-8 cents for the lower grade.

I have made, also, a table showing what it costs for the same grade of mantles, as near as we can get at it, in the United States, and it is $42.07, without any duty on the thorium, as against $42.50 on the German manufacture of the same grade. You will remember and take into account, if you please, that we not only pay at the present time a duty on thorium of 40 per cent, but we also pay a duty on ramie, which is the material-cloth, if you want to call it that-that we use in the manufacture, or 45 per cent in this grade and a little higher for the other grades, and for colodium, which is a part of the coating, we pay about 45, I think. But we are not asking a reduction on that. But I am asking, and that is the principal thing, and when we can get 40 per cent taken off of thorium it will cost us substantially that as against the German product-43 cents more than ours.

Mr. RAINEY. With a tariff of 25 per cent on thorium, what do you think it ought to be on gas mantles?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Well, I have not considered exactly that. We think this, however, that it is a fair proposition that with thorium free there ought to be a reduction on gas mantles from 40 per cent to 30 per cent ad valorem.

Mr. RAINEY. We tried to give you in the bill which the President vetoed 25 per cent ad valorem on gas mantles.

Mr. BOUDEMAN. That would not be bad. We ask that it be about 30.

Mr. RAINEY. The Democratic Party is right there, as usual?

Mr. HAMMOND. Do you think there ought to be a difference between the rate on thorium and the rate on gas mantles?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Oh, yes; certainly.

Mr. HARRISON. What proportion of the cost of production of gas mantles is the cost of thorium?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. It costs about one-fourth. This table shows it. It costs about one-fourth. That is the cost of the thorium.

Mr. HARRISON. So that the duty of 25 per cent ad valorem would be practically a duty of about 6 per cent ad valorem upon the finished product?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. I have not figured that out. about it. If you take off the duty on thorium, to make a thousand mantles, you reduce the

But here is the point which is $4 on enough duty on the foreign

manufactured mantles 25 per cent by reducing it from 40 to 30, and there is a little difference in favor of the German in that reduction. The CHAIRMAN. When we put an ad valorem duty on the finished product and the same duty on the raw material and only a fourth of the value of the raw material is in the finished product, of course you have a considerable advantage in duty between the raw material and the finished product.

Mr. BOUDEMAN. That may be true, but as it stands now, we do not think we have fair treatment.

The CHAIRMAN. Because you have a specific?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Yes; and we are paying also, you must remember, a duty on other things that we have to have in order to make our mantles in addition to the payment of a greater price for our labor

Mr. HILL. I understood you to say you were in favor of this policy represented by the bill, which was passed, which the gentleman from Illinois said the Democratic Party was always right about

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Yes; we all think that, you know.

Mr. HILL. Have you quite understood what your proposition is? Is not this your proposition, which you have just stated, that you entirely disagree with this bill, instead of being in favor of it? You want a duty of 40 per cent taken off of your raw material and 5 per cent given to you on your finished product, which they have so given in this bill, making an increase of practically 45 per cent. Is it not a fact that you can just as well protect the manufacturer by putting his raw material on the free list as you can by putting a duty on his finished product?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. That is true enough.

Mr. HILL. Do you quite agree in your own view then that you are in favor of this policy, when you come here and ask this committee to take off the 40 per cent duty from your raw material and put 5 per cent on your finished product?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. You are confusing the two, if you please, the one that is a law and the one that was supposed to become a law.

Mr. HILL. No; I am confining myself to the policy which the gentleman from Illinois said was always right, which you approved of, and you modify that by suggesting that the raw material should be put on the free list and that 5 per cent should be added to what these gentlemen suggested should be on the finished product.

Mr. BOUDEMAN. That is not the bill. That did not go through. Mr. HILL. So that you are 45 per cent off on the theory you yourself suggested? I am asking you that question. Is it not a fact that you are in favor of the policy except on everything you manufacture yourself?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. No.

Mr. HILL. Does not your own suggestion indicate that?

Mr. BOUDEMAN. I do not think so.

Mr. HILL. You are 45 per cent away from them, yet you say you are in favor of the policy.

Mr. BOUDEMAN. Let me tell see if I am not right about it. come off of thorium.

you what the proposition is, and then We say that the 40 per cent ought to

Mr. HILL. They say that 25 per cent should be kept on it. Mr. BOUDEMAN. That was the bill that did not go through, but I am talking about the one that is up now.