Mr. MILES. There is no fear in particular, sir, so far as I am concerned, and I hope upon the part of no one. There are some gentlemen, with whom I have not been able to communicate, who have given me information from their cost books, and so forth, and I would like to ask their permission before giving their names to you. The CHAIRMAN. Suppose you give the names to the stenographer, who will make a note of their names. Of course, your information will not be of value to the committee unless we can call such men before us and get their testimony on the subjects. Mr. MILES. I have some of these names to-day, and I shall give them to you. The CHAIRMAN. I hope you will be able to give them all to us. Mr. MILES. I have two or three pieces of cloth here-but I will explain as I go along and shall give you authority for everything that I say. The CHAIRMAN. Please proceed. I only mentioned that so that you would not overlook giving us those names. Mr. MILES. Ten thousand pounds of wool, with a duty of 11 cents a pound, making $1,100 total duty. The superintendent of this mill in bringing that raw wool up to tops had a shrinkage down to 5,600 pounds, and the labor in bringing that to tops was $184.80; but the duty was increased from $1,100 on raw wool to $2,912 on tops, an increase in the duty of ten times the labor put in, leaving you to estimate the shrinkage. This is not a complete problem, but I think you will find it of interest-$184.80 added to labor and $1,812 added to the duty. In the next process, bringing tops up to yarn, there was a shrinkage, as shown by the table, of about 10 per cent in weight and an increase of $360.36 in labor. And against these two items of cost the tariff was lifted only $36.40, or one-tenth of the actual wages put into the stuff, with no allowance for the shrinkage in weight. These exhibits show in one operation ten times the pay roll added and in another one-tenth of the pay roll. Now, in the next process, bringing the yarn into cloth, weaving and finishing, there was a further shrinkage of a little more than 10 per cent and $942.01 in labor invested, and against all this the tariff gave only $538.01, a good less than half of the additional cost to the manufacturer. Cloth produced-4,932 pounds woven; 4,389 pounds finished. Value of product. $1.60 per yard-piece dyed, worsted serge, cross-bred wool. The tariff on tops" of this grade is 33 cents per pound, plus 50 per cent ad valorem. The 33 cents was given upon the erroneous belief on the part of the tariff-making body that it took 3 pounds of wool in the grease to make 1 pound of "tops" of this grade. This exhibit is in line with many others and shows that upon this grade of wool it takes less than 2 pounds; also, that the labor is almost inconsiderable in making tops, so that a tariff of 25 cents to 30 cents per pound would amply cover the difference in cost plus the total wage in development and greatly reduce the present duty. Mr. CRUMPACKER. Mr. Miles, there is a relative increase in cost, and substantially the same shrinkage, when this work is done abroad? Mr. MILES. Yes, sir. Mr. CRUMPACKER. Do you recommend that we increase the rate in making the cloth out of the yarn to cover the entire labor cost here, or only the difference between the labor cost here and abroad? Mr. MILES. Only the difference between the labor cost here and abroad, liberally figured, as I explained in my former testimony. Mr. CRUMPACKER. But you do not give us that difference. You give us our labor cost and their labor cost of making cloth out of yarn and say that the tariff is only about one-half of it. I understood that in illustrating that fact you thought the tariff was too low. Mr. MILES. I give this only to show the inconsistency in many respects of the wool schedule. Mr. CRUMPACKER. You make no recommendation as to what the rate ought to be in the various processes? Mr. MILES. No, sir. I only show this as giving at times one-tenth and at other times ten times the total wage cost, unreasonably high on tops, scant on weaving, and generally unscientific. The CHAIRMAN. I think, as both myself and Mr. Crumpacker have now interrogated Mr. Miles, and one offsets the other, that he had better be allowed to proceed with his statement to the finish, as our time is limited this morning. Mr. MILES. I will say that many men in the textile industry have bitterly complained at any objection made to the textile schedule. They have insisted, and I believe before you. upon the schedule being left alone. And yet some members of that industry, as this problem shows, have very little in the way of protection, for instance, those who buy the tops to weave; and members of the industry came to me and said that the rates were wrong, that they were exceedingly angry and hurt by the fact that things like this were not developed in the testimony, and they asked me to bring it in. No wonder Mr. William Whitman's memory failed him utterly, as he is one of the biggest makers of "tops" in the United States, and no wonder that other textile men who sat back of him were chagrined and declared that to stay at your hearings for a week would make rank free traders of them, although they can justify for high rates. The Dingley bill, therefore, adds $1.812 for $184 of labor and a shrinkage in weight, which I leave the committee to estimate, and then, as shown by the exhibit, for a further shrinkage of 10 per cent and an addition in wages of $360 the duty has increased only $36.40. The first increase is ten times the wage cost; the second increase is one-tenth of the wage cost. Then comes weaving and finishing and further shrinkage in weight of more than 10 per cent and an addition in labor of $942.01 and an offsetting increase of only $538.91 in the duty. Is there any wonder that some men rail at the unfairness of the textile schedules, and others insist, so far as their par ticular factories go, they can not endure a reduction in the tariff? Those who make "tops" have very much more tariff than they need; those who buy "tops" and yarn and only weave are now operating upon very close margin, and though they may not know the reason of their trouble, are to be forgiven for complaining against those who are aware of the inconsistencies of the present tariff. I give you herewith a description of Huddersfield district (England) woolen goods, as published in the Textile World Record November, 1908, an approved trade journal, which speaks very highly of the findings and the work of the author of the article, Mr. W. A. Graham Clark, United States special consular agent. This district is celebrated as having the lowest costs in the world on goods of this kind. This is a high proportion for wages, which, in these cloths, usually run one-fourth of the total cost. I also submit a Colne Valley low-grade tweed, selling price 37.3 cents, with duty 61.88 cents, or 166 per cent ad valorem, with wages only 16.7 per cent, the duty being therefore ten times the total, as the cloth is cotton, being made almost wholly of American cotton and shoddy. I hand you also sample of blue Bradford serge, the total wholesale selling price being 18.5 cents, total wage cost 13.4 cents, total duty. 111.3 cents. The duty is therefore eight times the total wage cost and about six times the total wholesale selling price. Also a red Bradford cashmere, wholesale selling price 16.6 cents, total wage cost 15 per cent of selling price, duty 89.7 per cent. The total wage cost is therefore one-sixth of the selling price; the cloth is 45 per cent cotton, and yet upon importation duty tax would be added at three times the actual weight of cotton and wool, plus 50 per cent, the tariff being nearly twice as high as need be. I hand you also a sample sheet with four samples upon it of worsted goods. Yorkshire make, the first two being about one-half cotton, the last two all wool, with both English and Massachusetts costs. The exhibit shows upon sample A a difference in cost of 67 per cent, with a difference in duty of 108.06 per cent; upon sample В a difference in cost of 67 per cent, with a difference in duty of 117.03 per cent. These two are the cotton-warp cloths worn by people in moderate circumstances, who, throughout the cloth schedule, are very severely taxed as compared with materials worn by the wealthy. Cloth C. all wool, difference in cost 127 per cent, 115 per cent duty, showing a protection that does not cover the difference in cost. It Cloth D. difference in cost 156 per cent, duty 122.06 per cent. seems to me that these exhibits show that the textile schedule, which to-day is very likely the most important on the list, is a hodgepodge. Congress put a special committee or commission at work upon the paper and pulp schedule for months. Only a special commission could work out a reasonable textile schedule, and that after many months of serious endeavor. While you were given to understand that the textile schedule could not be lowered, I have it from men very well versed in the business that it could be if only it could be done intelligently and with sufficient care and that such a revision might materially lower the cost of goods worn by the poor and lower the duty on "tops" and give to those who weave a better margin of tariff protection than they have now. The total wages paid by the textile mills of Massachusetts in a recent census was $50,000,000. The value of the output was $200,000,000, wages being 25 per cent. A leading manufacturer in New England assured me that the census report accords with his experience. And yet the duties run from 75 per cent minimum to 165 per cent, although many of the low-rated goods are nearly half cotton. One hundred and sixty-five per cent, being the maximum protection shown in the government reports, marks only the point of prohibition. I have purchased abroad in times past cloth which, if now imported, would bear a duty of 207 per cent, the cost of the cloth in England being 14 pence, the duty being 29 cents, making the total value of the cloth 43 cents, while I am buying it from makers in this country at 25 cents. A tariff unreasonably framed provokes comment, though not in this case working any injury that I know of. You were given the impression that the cotton rates could not be lowered. I am informed by capable spinners that the rates could be lowered in important particulars, more especially upon the lower grades, where poor people would be benefited. On higher and finer grades some duties might properly be advanced. I have looked over figures from foreign and domestic mills indicating that the United States is the equal of the world in the cost of production of sheetings, drills, prints, ducks, and flannelettes. These are made out of American cotton, with a total wage cost of about 25 per cent, the tariff running from 18 to 33 per cent. I have canvassed thousands of manufacturers upon their tariff rates and find no schedule upon which some are not willing to accept of a considerable reduction, while some are desirous of an increase, the increase being more especially on fine embroderies, laces, and things of that kind which have not heretofore been produced in quantity in this country. The feeling of the manufacturers who have not appeared before you is, on the whole, for a reduction in rates, and is, I believe, fairly indicated by 224 letters received by me, the writers advising as follows with reference to a reduction in their rates: This makes about 20 per cent wanting the present rates or an increase, the balance indifferent or ready to accept from 5 to 100 per cent decrease. All this being on the basis of a tariff to be estimated upon the difference of cost of production here and abroad. I asked the textile manufacturers who were dissatisfied with the presentation of their case before you why they did not express themselves freely before you, and their answer was that they had been so busy making cloth and trying to make money that they really didn't know how to advise you; that there were gross inaccuracies in their schedules; that only a commission or body of experts appointed by yourselves and subject to your authority could help them to determine the needs of their industry. The gentleman is in the city now who made that statement to me, and I think in hearing of my voice. PRESSED GLASS. The unfairness of the present tariff is fairly illustrated by the pressed-glass schedule. I have letters from several makers of pressed glass that their schedules may be reduced almost any amount. One maker of glassware says he wants no protection; another manufacturer of bottles and window glass says no protection; a third, making bottles, wants none. Pressed glass is made as cheaply in this country as anywhere in the world. President McKinley, when chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and framing the McKinley bill, knew this and recommended accordingly, and yet pressed glass bears a duty of 65 per cent, an absolutely unwarranted rate, as will be found upon any sort of fair investigation. I know a gentleman who sells a very great deal of pressed glass abroad at better prices than he charges his home consumers. Mr. LONGWORTH. Is pressed glass the ordinary window glass? Mr. LONGWORTH. You referred to window glass a moment ago. Mr. MILES. To one window-glass man; "Bottles and window glass "that is what his title is, so I put them both in. I am giving the information as I got it from other people. I understand that most grades of the pressed glass have no protection. Mr. LONGWORTH. But you do not find that with respect to most of the window glass? Mr. MILES. No, sir. Mr. FORDNEY. You, of course, do not know how reliable the information you get is? Mr. MILES. Well, these manufacturers give their information to me, and if they do not know their business, then I certainly do not. Mr. FORDNEY. They are facts as they know them. Why do they not come before us and give those facts? Mr. UNDERWOOD. The witness is giving the names of certain people to the stenographer so that we may summon them. Mr. FORDNEY. Oh, I did not understand that. I only thought it was a little queer that a man could send a messenger and not come himself, when he was advocating changes in the tariff. Mr. MILES. This is my general correspondence on the tariff, and my information comes from letters that I have received, and which I will send to you. |