Mr. BREWER. I want to say while we are talking about Mr. Schoenhof, that I am acquainted with him. He was at my factory some time ago and went through it, after having been on the other side, and he told me he went over there expressly to prove one thing-that the dif ference between the wages of the countries had nothing to do with the cost of goods, and that machinery entered into the processes so largely, and he wanted to prove that fact. I said, "Do you think that applies to our industry?" We had just been through our pottery. I said, "You see it is all hand labor." He said, "No; I think yours is an exceptional case. I do not think it applies to you at all." So far as I am concerned, I know of nothing personal between Mr. Schoenhof and our industry, and, so far as my connections and associations with him are concerned, they have always been pleasant, but the figures in regard to the difference in rate of wages between England and the United States are rather off,

We made a statement before the tariff commission, which is here reproduced in this circular. That statement refers particularly to adult labor, and does not refer to child labor. Furthermore, when a man brings us a dozen pitchers, for instance, we pay him for them, but in England they pay him for them when they come out of the oven. He has to take all the risks of bad firing and all that.

Senator JONES. Who takes the risk?

Mr. BREWER. The workman on the other side. We pay from hand. Senator JONES. The English workman gets no pay for those that are injured in the fire, etc.?

Mr. BREWER. He gets no pay until they are delivered. There are many defects that would not show before the pottery was put into the fire, but would be perfectly plain when it came out; but the workman has to lose all that is imperfect when it comes from the fire. We ourselves have to suffer loss in this country.

The CHAIRMAN. Otherwise their methods are the same as yours?
Mr. BREWER. The same methods.

The CHAIRMAN. They have no more machinery than you have?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir.

Senator ALDRICH. Do you mean to say you have absolutely no machinery?

Mr. BREWER. No; we use some machinery in making certain kinds of plates and pitchers, but no more than has been in use for fifty years. This plate is made on a whirler, you might call it; we call it a jigger. Some of those jiggers are run by hand power and some by steam. A boy turns by hand part of the time.

Senator ALDRICH. They run by steam-power abroad, do they not? Mr. BREWER. That may be. For instance, a boy is turning the jigger while the man is shaping the plate; the boy runs the mold into the stove-room and brings out another, and by that time the man has shaped the first one and is ready for another one, so that there is no time lost. It makes very little difference.

Senator ALDRICH. I was in Europe last summer and found manufacturers using steam.

Mr. BREWER. In some parts we use nothing but steam jiggers; and in other parts, where it is a long distance from the engine, we use hand power. We much prefer to use steam; but I do not know of any im provement in machinery, except in making the few small pieces of ware, which we do now with a screw-press, metal dies, out of dust. That is not very new; it is thirty years old, I guess.

Mr. MOUNTFORD. It is made on the same principle that tiles are made.

Mr. BREWER. These encaustic tiles are all made with a screw-press. in the bill they put crockery down 25 and 30, and they put tiles up 50. i do not understand it exactly.

The CHAIRMAN. They have increased the duties on encaustic tiles? Mr. BREWER. Not on encaustic tiles, but on enameled tiles.

Senator JONES. What are they used for?

Mr. BREWER. Decorations around mantel-pieces, on the top and sides, and also on floors.

Senator JONES. Are they plain or decorated?

Mr. BREWER. This refers to enameled tiles.

Senator BECK. They are the most costly of that class of work, are they not?

Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir; they are, because they require another firing. But it is merely a question of labor.

Senator BECK. And they put the duty higher than on that class of encaustic tiles that have only been used for the last few years. They are almost entirely new?

Mr. BREWER. They have only been used for the last few years; yes, sir. I do not think they are as difficult to make as encaustic tiles. These enameled tiles are made under screw-press, and then they are simply dipped. They put them through the fire once and dip them, and that is all there is to it. There is nothing expensive about it. I could dip a million a day almost. But what makes it more expensive is that it has to go through another firing.

Senator BECK. So I understand.

Mr. BREWER. There is really no excuse why that tile should be protected any more than this encaustic tile on the floor outside of this committee-room. The whole thing is a question of labor. This tile here that the Capitol is paved with came from the other side, but that kind is made here now. I think it is more difficult to make than plain enameled tile.

Senator JONES. What do you call that tile?

Mr. BREWER. Encaustic tile; I do not know why.

Mr. MOUNTFORD. It is called encaustic because the colors are inserted in the representation made, and then burned in.

Mr. BREWER. Then it is a difference in the way the color is put in? Senator JONES. Burned in?

Mr. MOUNTFORD. Burned right in.

Mr. BREWER. I want to say that the classification bill, as presented to the House, will almost ruin us. It would be a very serious detriment to us certainly, and would be ruinous to the industry in the United States. In fact, I do not know but it would ruin us entirely. It would bring wages down so low that I fear no practical person would want to see our men work down to that starvation rate. It would change the conditions so much that I do not know what would happen with the industry, and we are right on the border now. I want to bring this point to your consideration: We do not manufacture in the United States one half the goods that are used here.

Senator ALDRICH. When you speak of goods do you mean this class of goods?

Mr. BREWER. I mean white goods and decorated goods.

Senator ALDRICH. You are not talking about the cheaper class of goods.

Mr. BREWER. I am not talking about any stone-ware or gas retorts; I am talking about white ware all the time. We are white men. I want to say also that the importations are increasing. There were about

$6,000,000 worth brought in during the last fiscal year from the other side. If the amount brought in during the first five months past of this fiscal year should be continued in the same proportion during the whole year, the whole amount brought in would increase by about $4,000,000. Senator JONES. Where do the increased importations come from? Mr. BREWER. Some come from Germany, and some from France, and some from England, too. It is increasing all along the line, and we are in greater danger, in my judgment, than ever before. You need not be surprised that we are alarmed. We are in greater danger than any other industry in this country, in my judgment, just in consequence of the condition of things in France and Germany and the position those people are taking. We have never had that condition to compete with before. England herself is more protected by this Mills bill than the other nations. In other words, the rate of duty on goods that come from England is 35 per cent., and on goods that come from Germany it is 15. I do not know why that should be.

Senator ALDRICH. Is there any difference in the cost of materials used between England and France and Germany?

Mr. BREWER. We use all American materials.

Senator ALDRICH. Does it cost you more than it costs them in those countries?

Mr. BREWER. Oh, yes; just in proportion to the cost of labor in the two countries.

Senator JONES. But the natural advantages are as great here as they are there?

Mr. BREWER. They are greater.

Senator ALDRICH. There is a reserve supply?

Mr. BREWER. There is, and it is increasing all the time. There has recently been a discovery in North Carolina of a kind of earth similar to that in China, which does not require any other admixture of flint and spar.

Senator JONES. Then the danger consists entirely in the cheaper labor on the other side and not on account of natural advantages.

Mr. BREWER. That is true. The only question is whether you want to destroy our industry or want to take care of it.

Senator BECK. I do not quite understand what you have said about the rates being 45 in Germany and 35 in England.

Mr. BREWER. I will tell you, Senator. They make nothing there but vitrified china-ware; in England, however, they make the same as this kind of ware, earthenware, which is porous; and I think if you will look at the schedule you will find that china-ware is 45 cents, but in the Mills bill they propose to put the rate down to 35.

Senator BECK. This is called earthenware and the other china-ware! Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir.

Senator ALDRICH. And that pays 60 now?

Mr. BREWER. I do not know but I may as well go over the whole ground while I am on the floor, to show you how ingeniously that bill was gotten up. I may as well say that I do not think the committee were to blame; I think they were misled, and I was surprised that they did not resent it when I pointed it out to them. One underglaze print and luster is 35 per cent. under the Mills bill. I will show you one sample of that character of goods, and here is another, and here is an other [exhibiting]. All the other colors are lustered and put on top of the glaze.

The CHAIRMAN. That pitcher you have shown is proposed to pay per cent. ad valorem ?

35

Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And now it pays 60 per cent. ad valorem ? Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir; any metal might be used for that purpose; it might be platinum, or gold, or silver. That is a gold luster. We could not deny it if we were brought up before the Supreme Court. This other pitcher is not gold. You see the difference in color. We use coin gold for lustering. We take a ten-dollar gold piece, and reduce it with acid, and put it on there, and burnish it with agates, etc., and the gold luster comes out as bright as you see it now, and you do not have to rub it to brighten it. They call that lustered. It would all come in on that schedule. They must have thought we would not notice it or think of it if they would call liquid gold a luster.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you think they got at this phraseology? Mr. BREWER. I do not know. Jerry Jones, of Boston, I understand, furnished the brains. He does not sell American goods to any extent. I do not know that I can say anything more.

Senator BECK. Have you some documents?

Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Leave them with the clerk and reporter.

Mr. Brewer here submitted the following paper:

SHALL THE POTTERY INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES BE DESTROYED?

WASHINGTON, D. C., March 12, 1888.

The history of this branch of manufacture presents one of the most marvellous examples of growth in the United States among all the varied exhibits in the industrial development of the past thirty years.

Previous to 1860 the United States had practically no white ware potteries. The civil conflict and the incident high rate of exchange gave it an opportunity, and as a result it has grown into a great industry, producing yearly $8,000,000, distributed throughout the following States: Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, West Virginia, Indiana, Illinois, drawing materials from Maine, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, whose mines of coal, clay, flint, and feldspar have been developed and enriched thereby.

The importations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, were nearly $6,000,000, dutiable value, and this has been in many instances very low. We estimate that the quantity of ware made in the United States is about equal to the amount imported, taking the year ending December 31, 1887. The number of hands employed in this industry direct will number 10,000, with nearly the same number working at the mines or in transporting the material to the potteries, and thence to the markets of the country-a total of 20,000 people, two-thirds of which have families dependent upon them, averaging five to the family, making a total of 67,000 people interested directly in the industry, and affected by any legislation that tends to reduce the daties now levied, and indirectly the entire communities where potteries and mines are located.

Perhaps no industry in the country requires so much capital to do a like amount of business. There is invested in this white ware industry $8,000,000, and it annually produces about the same amount.

We can not believe that the Ways and Means Committee intend to injure this industry; but the classification and rates of duty, as proposed, would seriously cripple the business. As we understand from those who framed the bill, the whole question seems to hinge upon the relative cost of labor in the potteries of England and America. Mr. Schoenhof's figures in England and the New Jersey bureau of statistics for the year 1883 seem to have been taken as the guide.

Let us see what these authorities say. They will show that the American manufacturers pay 125 per cent. more wages in the United States than is paid in England. First, we say, that the figures given of American potters' earnings by Mr. Schoenhof, in his consular report, in April, 1836, page 77, from the report of the New Jersey burean of statistics and labor, are not correct; the presentation is unfair, because only five branches are given out of fifteen. Why these other branches were not given the figures hereafter will explain.

This report of the New Jersey bureau of statistics and labor for 1883 gave the weekly earnings of five branches of potters as follows:

The above figures purported to have been taken from the books of a leading Trenton pottery firm-this was only one firm-and probably was one of the firms that through a laxity of business management went into liquidation. We say this because if the men filling benches in our potteries did not earn more than these figures represent, we would have to employ a third more men to make the amount of ware we do. This pottery was evidently filled with men who were very slow workmen and could not obtain work in any well-regulated factory. As an evidence that these are not reliable, let us consult the same New Jersey reports for 1886 :

* A difference of over 60 per cent. as compared with 1886.

Compare columns 1, 2, and 3. No. 1 is given by the workmen themselves. No. 3 is the misguided report of 1883, and represents one pottery, as before stated. No. 2 is the report of the manufacturers, taken from the books of fifteen firms in Trenton. The above figures show that the report of 1883 was not high enough by 59 per cent., according to the report of 1886, and also the report of the manufacturers made in 1882.

This disposes of the report of 1883. Now let us take Table 2 of Schoenhof's report, page 78, where he makes an average of fifteen English potteries, the same as was presented to the Tariff Commission by the manufacturers, and we find our figures more than corroborated.