Mr. WHITNEY. Entirely to the cost of labor. I could manufacture glass unworked as cheap as Dr. Siemens could if I could have materials at the same cost. The process of the manufacture of glass itself does not differ materially.

Senator HARRIS. Do you mean the same cost of material, or the same cost of labor?

Mr. WHITNEY. I mean the same cost of materials, but based on his German labor.

The CHAIRMAN. You say the duty of 1 cent a pound is not enough? Mr. WHITNEY. Yes, sir; I do.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I understand that to be the sentiment of all these gentlemen here?

Mr. WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. They do not specifically state that. Then you not only protest against a reduction, but you think that there ought to be an increase.

Mr. WHITNEY. On bottles, yes, decidedly.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you, Mr. Bodine, to say that the reduction in 1883 was detrimental to you?

Mr. WHITNEY. That was on window-glass, but this is on bottles that I am referring to.

Senator ALDRICH. It has also been asserted to me by these same people that the equivalent ad valorem on common bottles is 300 per cent.; that 1 cent a pound is equal to 300 per cent. ad valorem.

Mr. WHITNEY. I can answer that probably better by making a statement.

Mr. BODINE. I have here a statement from the Chief of the Bureau of Statistics on that subject.

Senator ALDRICH. We have the Bureau figures here. Last year it was 56.54 per cent.

Mr. WHITNEY. I can answer better probably by stating that our cost in round figures is about 3 cents a pound manufactured.

Senator ALDRICH. So, then, it is about 33 per cent. on American goods.

Mr. WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

Senator ALDRICH. Can you tell what the cost is over there of their cheapest bottles?

Mr. WHITNEY. I judge it is somewhere about 50 per cent.

Senator ALDRICH. I do not mean that. I mean the cost per pound. Mr WHITNEY. No; I can not state that.

Mr. BODINE. I know that while Mr. Whitney is a much better manu facturer than I am, yet he has never looked at the subject, and I have got the information in better shape.

Senator ALDRICH. All right. You can make the statement.

Mr. BODINE. Here is a copy of a statement obtained at the same time from the Chief of the Bureau of Statistics, showing the effect of the change of duty in 1883 on bottles both filled and empty.

[As the schedule did not distinguish between green and flint-glass bottles prior to July 1, 1883, both are given for subsequent year.]

Bottles, empty.

With reference to the question as to the rate of duty, that table will show that the rate of duty on imports for the four years from 1884 to 1887, under the present duty, was 53 per cent. There is no separate account kept of flint and green, but practically the rate is 53 per cent. That is what invoice prices show.

Now, with reference to the rate of duty on bottles, I think Senator Aldrich remembers that it was a matter of a good deal of consideration four or five years ago, and that at that time the manufacturers represented just as they do to-day; that from 1 to 2 cents a pound, graduated by the size, was the only protection to American manufacturers; that it was the minimum which would enable us to compete with the difference in labor rates, because bottles had never received a recognition or even presentation before, on account of lack of organized industry and from lack of necessary details, everybody thinking that it was somebody else's business to attend to, and so matters drifted along. As time went on it came down to this, the duty must be increased or the manufacture destroyed. When I suggested there must be such a change in duties that there would have to be an advance, I was met by a statement that this was a bill to reduce the tariff, and that a change in the nature of an advance could not be expected. That assertion was made by a Senator whose district is largely interested in this matter. He says: "I tell you this frankly, that while I am favorable to it and anxious to see the object of the bill accomplished, it can not be changed." I said, "Well, Senator, I would like to give you the facts, and if they do not justify the change asked for, then we can not expect it." We did secure a compromise measure of 1 cent a pound, the lowest rate that had been suggested on any size. That rate is only satisfactory, and barely satisfactory, on sizes above a quart; but when you reach that small-sized vial, when 54 cents is paid for making and it is imported for 69 cents, it requires but little to show that it is not sufficient to protect. That vial will weigh about 9 to 10 pounds to every gross, I suppose. The ad valorem rate on that importation, according to invoice price, about 60 cents a gross-60 cents per gross besides the 0 cents duty addedwould be 163 per cent. That is the ad valorem rate upon that bottle. Senator HISCOCK. Does that cover unpolished crown window-glass? Senator ALDRICH. He is talking about bottles.

Senator HISCOCK. It does not cover unpolished window-glass?
The CHAIRMAN. He has given us that already.

Mr. WHITNEY. Flint and lime glass and green and amber glass might just as well be consolidated.

Senator ALDRICH. I was going to ask you whether they could not be as well but into one schedule.

Mr. WHITNEY. Just as well.

The CHAIRMAN. You say you have a schedule such as you think desirable and proper?

Mr. WHITNEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Leave it with the reporter and put it in.

The schedule proposed is as follows:

Graduated, additional duties are essential on smaller sizes, and should not be less than the following rates on

"Empty flint and lime glass, and green and colored glass bottles, vials, demijohns, and carboys (covered or uncovered), pickle or preserve jars, and other plain, molded, or pressed flint and lime glass and green and colored bottle glass not cut, engraved, or painted, and not specially enumerated or provided for in this act, holding over 1 quart, 1 cent per pound; holding 1 pint and not over 1 quart, 14 cents per pound; holding less than 1 pint, 14 cents per pound. If 'filled,' and not otherwise in this act provided for, said articles shall pay the same rates as if empty."

Mr. BODINE. I wanted to call attention to two or three other items of the tariff bill where glass is indirectly affected. One is in regard to the question of filled bottles. The rate of duty has generally been ad valorem except still wines and other liquors, where a specific rate per bottle has always prevailed, I think, clear back to the first tariff laws. There is no reason why there should not be the same duties upon filled as upon unfilled bottles. The duty is easy to be assessed, and there is no difficulty in ascertaining it. It should either be specific per bottle or per pound by sizes, graduated, just as window glass is. That is the only reasonable classification-the only thing which will cover it. In former years the import has been mainly of very large bottles. But in recent years the imports have been of beer bottles for the West, starting with the large brewers, orders from those men who use 10,000 gross a year; then those who use perhaps 1,000 gross per year, till this spring my agent went to New York City to take an order from one of our small customers, who uses a hundred gróss of bottles a year, and he saw the bottles landed in bags from Mr. Siemens's works at a cost of $3 a gross that will cost me $4 a gross to make in this country. That was about a half-pint bottle. The rate of 1 cent a pound is no protection at all on a pint bottle or less.

I would like to add a few remarks with reference to the bill in other respects. The increase in filled bottles, under the present tariff, over the previous four years has been 70 per cent. It was 75 per cent. in one year on empty bottles, and about 70 per cent. on filled. That, of course, deprives us of any opportunity to furnish bottles, or the labor of printing labels, and the contents, vegetables, etc., by those who grow them. So that it not only affects us, but affects many of these other industries. It seems strange, perhaps, that this matter has not been considered of more consequence. The bottle trade, unfortunately, has not been well organized. I do not suppose half of those in the trade to-day realize what it is that has, hurt them. But they will wake up to it. The reasons are all stated here in this book. I know of one chemical manufacturer of Philadelphia, one of the largest in the United States, who has this year ordered $100,000 flint bottles for his own use from Germany, and taken the manufacture of his bottles from a Philadelphia manufacturer, because he bought them 15 per cent. below the price that the Philadelphia manufacturer could make them for. That was a rupture of a connection of twenty-five years' standing, where the chemical manufacturer was perfectly satisfied with the bottles that he had been having, and where there was great indisposition to change; but because the Philadelphia manufacturer could not meet this German rate and get cost, the order had to go abroad on a difference of 15 per cent. Foreign manufacturers are only beginning to be aware of their opportunity, and American dealers are only beginning to notice the difference. I fear we will soon come to the condition where we will have but little trade left.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to have a clear definition of a flint-glass bottle.

Mr. WHITNEY. (Exhibiting the small white vial heretofore referred to). That is a flint glass bottle.

Senator HISCOCK. Why do you call it a flint-glass bottle?

Mr. WHITNEY. It is white.

Senator HISCOCK. Is there any difference in material?

Mr. WHITNEY. It is of about the same material except that it is refined a little more.

Senator ALDRICH. I want to ask what proportion of the trade the American manufactures have of beer bottles, for instance?

Mr. BODINE. I could not state the proportion on beer, but it would not be very large of export beers.

Senator ALDRICH. But what proportion do the American manufacturers have?

Mr. SMITH. I can not give you the exact figures. My judgment would be that nearly 10 per cent. of the export beer bottles now used in this country are of foreign make; they are known as export beer bottles.

Senator ALDRICH. You mean used in this country?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Senator ALDRICH. Are you getting a large proportion, or are the foreigners gaining?

Mr. SMITH. The foreigners are gaining on us steadily.

Senator ALDRICH. Is that true of other bottles as well as beer bottles?

Mr. SMITH. That is true of every bottle now made. For years I have known that the instant a hock wine order, a beer bottle order, an apollinaris bottle order, or a soda-water bottle order was sought by a foreign manufacturer, he could take it. But that he should also invade the province of small bottles and undersell us 30 per cent. was a revelation to me. It came to me like a thunder-clap.

Senator ALDRICH. Do they have any advantage over you in the way of material?

Mr. SMITH. Absolutely no advantage in any respect, except in regard to labor. Eighty per cent. of our cost is labor.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to ask you about that small bottle you have referred to. You say the imported cost is 69 cents per gross?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You say the cost of skilled labor upon that bottle is 54 cents a gross ?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Now you say that at the rate as now provided by existing law would be how much upon a pound of that?

Mr. WHITNEY. About 9 cents.

The CHAIRMAN. I mean what is the ad valorem duty?
Mr. BODINE. 163 per cent.

FRIDAY, June 1, 1888.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN H. BREWER, OF TRENTON, N. J.

Senator ALDRICH. You represent the National Potters' Association? Mr. BREWER. I was about to say, gentlemen of the committee, that we appear before you to-day representing the manufacturers of pottery of the United States, more particularly of New Jersey, Ohio, and West Virginia; and there are other States-Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania-interested in the white-ware trade, the same as we are. In other words, we are plain white ware and decorated ware manufacturers. We do not appear before you representing the lower grades of pottery at all.

If you will refer to the census of 1880, you will be very much misled by the figures you see there, because it takes in all grades of pottery.