Mr. HEROY. Certainly, they would have a monopoly of the market; there is no doubt about that.

Mr. NOEL. And destroy our market altogether.

Mr. HEROY. Here are two samples of French and German beveled. Look at them, and you can see there is a very slight difference. Mr. CLEVELAND. One is beveled in this country.

Mr. HEROY. The glass is imported.

Senator ALDRICH. Was the beveling done here in both cases?

Mr. HEROY. No, sir; that, the German, is all done abroad. There is .none of that done here. A large quantity of this glass comes in framed. I was surprised to see the amount of duty paid on frames last year. I found that there was some $17,000 duty paid on frames. That shows that a large percentage of this silvered glass comes in framed.

Senator ALDRICH. That is supposed to pay a duty on the glass and the frames in addition?

Mr. HEROY. Yes; but what I want you to understand is, that a large percentage of the glass now comes in framed, and if you undertake to restrict the thickness of this, how is the examiner to know unless he takes off the frames? In fact, he himself suggested that it would be utterly impossible to examine an invoice without opening the packages, and then he said they would be unmerchantable.

Senator ALDRICH. This is the provision of law upon that point:

But no looking-glass plates or plate glass, silvered, when framed, shall pay a less rate of duty than that imposed upon similar glass of like description not framed, but shall be liable to pay, in addition thereto, 30 per centum ad valorum upon such frames.

Mr. HEROY. That is correct. But that is not the point. The point I want to get at is in regard to the large quantity of glass being imported silvered and framed, not unsilvered, like German looking-glass plate. I think the duty paid on frames last year was some $17,000. Of course this glass would have to be examined. You can not know what the thickness of the glass is in the frame without taking the frames off. There is the difficulty in adjusting the thing. They propose to adjust it, saying nothing about the injury to the manufacturers at all.

There is another point about what happened in the House of Representatives yesterday that may create some confusion. I do not know how they are going to fix it. They proposed to put optical glass for spectacles on the free list. What is optical glass, if anybody knows? Optical glass for spectacles is made out of common window glass. It generally comes cut into small pieces about the size spectacle glasses would be. I assume the fact that it is a special glass made, differing only from ordinary window glass in the fact that it is made colorless. They make blue glass, green glass, yellow glass, and they make what they call smokes. It is only a matter of color, made to suit; blue is blue, and smoke is smoke, and yellow is yellow. The question is what they mean by spectacle glass. There is optical glass in plates; that is on the free list now. I would like to have one thing more on the free list, and that is prisms. That refers only to the shape of the glass. We are importers, and represent manufacturers of glass on the other side. The tariff simply says plates and disks, but leaves out prisms, and of course it has got to pay 45 per cent. to the manufacturers. There is no more reason why they should pay 45 per cent. than any other. The amount of duty would not be very much anyway.

Senator ALDRICH. Are there any people in this country making optical glass?

Mr. HEROY. No; not in this country. There are only two or three makers of it in the world. It is a specialty by itself. The pieces of glass that are cut off for waste we get and sell for making spectacle glass out of. When that proposition comes up the question will be, "What is that and what do you intend by it?"

Senator ALDRICH. It would probably let any kind of glass in.

Mr. HEROY. That is it. At present they may say to you that it only comes in in small square pieces an inch and a quarter each way. We have imported glass in sheets as they make it originally. They have been reducing it down in various ways so as to pay as little duty as possible.

Senator ALDRICH. Would it be possible to use abroad a cheaper process of silvering, so that it could be more easily removed than this in case it was desirable?

Mr. NOEL. Perfectly so.

Senator ALDRICH. You all agree to that proposition, do you?
Mr. CLEVELAND. Yes.

Mr. HEROY. Oh, yes; of course, if you are going to put it on the free list, then it becomes a question of how much we can save by washing it off.

Senator HARRIS. Are you manufacturers?
Mr. HEROY. Yes.

Senator ALDRICH. They are silverers.

Senator HARRIS. Manufacturers of the silver that goes upon mirrors? Mr. CLEVELAND. We import the glass and the materials and then place them together, which constitutes looking-glass plates.

Mr. HEROY. We silver it and we bevel it.

Senator HARRIS. And you import your entire material?

Mr. HEROY. All the material we use is imported.

Senator HARRIS. You import this plate and you import the quicksilver that you use?

Mr. HEROY. The quicksilver and the tinfoil.

Senator HARRIS. And you simply put the quicksilver and tinfoil upon the plate after having beveled these edges?

Mr. HEROY. Yes.

Senator HARRIS. What proportion of the cost of the finished article is the material that you use?

Mr. HEROY. You mean the whole of it?

Senator HARRIS. Yes; your finished article that you put upon the market. What proportion of the whole cost is the material ?

Mr. CLEVELAND. It depends upon the size.

Mr. HEROY. It varies very much with the size of the glass that we have.

Senator HARRIS. I want to know what proportion of the whole cost is represented by the material used and what proportion is represented by labor. That is the exact object of my question.

Mr. HEROY. Mr. Noel, you ought to know.

Mr. NOEL. It is fully 100 per cent.

Mr. HEROY. How much a foot?

Senator ALDRICH. You mean, Mr. Noel, about half the cost is labor and about half is material.

Mr. NOEL. Yes.

Senator HARRIS. Do you mean to say you do not know what percentage of the cost of the article is found in the labor and what percentage is in the material?

Mr. NOEL. That depends upon the sizes. For instance, small sizes cost more in proportion for labor than the large ones.

Senator HARRIS. But in the bringing out and finishing of this article have you no average that would enable you to state about how much of it was material and about how much was labor?

Mr. NOEL. On plain it is about 60 per cent.; on beveled it is fully 100 per cent.

Mr. HEROY. Personally I can give you all the details in items when I get home, but not here, because I did not expect that question to be asked. I can tell you how much the quicksilver costs, how much the tin-foil costs, how much the labor costs, and how much all the details cost; but, of course, there is an immense deal of labor involved in the separation of these items, and I have not the information here.

Senator HARRIS. I should suppose that the manufacturer of these articles would always have that data at his tongue's end.

Mr. HEROY. If you are dealing with two thousand different sizes of glass can you have the proportion and size of each kind of glass at your tongue's end?

Senator HARRIS. I should have a very accurate idea about what the material costs and what the labor costs to finish the article.

Mr. HEROY. Let me state it in another way. There is a piece of glass 6 inches square, beveled on four sides; that is 24 inches; am I right? Senator HARRIS. I think your mathematics are very correct.

Mr. HEROY. It takes four of these to make a square. Multiply that by four, and that is 96 inches of beveling. But take a pane 12 inches square, and there are only 48 inches of beveling.

Senator HARRIS. I do not care to enter into an argument with you or to be interrogated by you in respect to this matter, but if you can furnish a statement of what the material costs and what the labor costs in finishing your article, I would be glad to have it appended to your statement.

Mr. HEROY. I will have to get that from some person who attends to that department.

Senator ALDRICH. You can give us the percentage of cost in the smaller sizes and those of the larger sizes.

Mr. HEROY. I suppose the average would probably satisfy you as well.

Senator ALDRICH. It might satisfy Governor Harris as well, but I should prefer to take it the other way-the smaller sizes and the larger sizes.

Senator HARRIS. I do not care which way you put it. You can give the average or the smaller sizes and larger sizes. I simply want an approximate estimate as to the cost of labor and material in the product of the article.

Mr. HEROY. The cost of the labor is an important item.

Senator ALDRICH. What amount of protection have you now?
Mr. HEROY. On the silver?

Senator ALDRICH. Yes.

Mr. HEROY. As I tell you, scarcely anything at all up to 5 feet. Senator ALDRICH. You have 1 cent a square foot up to sizes 16 by 24. Mr. HEROY. Yes; and 2 cents up to 5 feet, and over that 10 cents a foot; but the men who are doing the largest part of the business have no protection. On the beveling there is no protection at all, as it is now. The tariff was made before there was any beveling done, and the consequence is it was not taken into consideration.

Senator ALDRICH. In other words, beveled glass pays no more duty than plain glass.

Mr. HEROY. Beveled glass pays no more duty than plain glass.
Senator ALDRICH. And you think that ought to be remedied?

Mr. HEROY. That ought to be adjusted if you are going to regulate the tariff.

Senator HARRIS. That is, if you are going to regulate the tariff to protect a particular interest, you mean.

Mr. HEROY. To protect a general interest. Senator ALDRICH. To treat all interests equitably, you mean? Mr. HEROY. Equitably; that is what I mean. I believe in treating all alike. If you are going to put that on the free list put my articles on the free list; that is all I ask.

Senator ALDRICH. How much do you think should be added for beveled glass?.

Mr. HEROY. If I were going to do it I would simply put an ad valorem duty of 5 per cent. on all beveled glass, in addition to the present duty. I think, taking in the whole cost of the glass, the silvering and beveling, it is an equitable way of arranging it. You could arrange it by the square foot; but that increase would seem to be so great on small glass, as compared with large, that it would be unreasonable. Is there anything else the Senators desire to ask me?

Senator HARRIS. No; I do not desire to prolong the inquiry; I want the exact facts.

Mr. HEROY. It is a matter of injustice. We do not care what you do, so long as you do it equitably.

NEW YORK, July 10, 1888.

DEAR SIR: In case your committee should see fit to make any change in the rates of duty upon plate-glass as now existing, in order that they be more uniform, we we would suggest the following:

We make this suggestion, thinking that you may desire to take up this subject. If you will examine the statement showing the present ad valorem rates of duty you will find that the American manufacturers are very largely protected and should be willing to make some concession.

Yours, very truly,

Hon. JUSTIN S. MORRILL,

HEROY & MARRENNER. Per H. CLEVELAND.

Chairman Committee on Finance, U. S. Senate, Washington, D. C.

NEW YORK, July 10, 1888.

DEAR SIR: Inclosed please find the statement promised your committee, showing the proportioned cost of material used in the manufacture of locking-glass plates, as against the value of the glass. We also give the ad valorem rate of duty paid by us on the material used, this being a fair average where the cost of the glass is nearly uniform. You will, however, note the great diversity in cost between the material and labor used, this being due to the rates of duty as now established, which are very unequal as compared with the cost of the glass.

Yours, very truly,

Hon. JUSTIN S. MORRILL,

HEROY & MARRENNER. Per H. CLEVELAND.

Chairman Committee on Finance, U. S. Senate, Washington, D. C.

Statement showing proportions of material used and labor in the manufacture of silvered looking-glass plates and ad valorem rate of duty on material used.