Sen.!.~1'E. July 14

10246 CONGRESSIONAIJ RECORD-- SEN.!.~1'E. JULY 14, SENA.TE. eating that this would tend to increase the price of a suit of clothes approximately $5 and an overcoat $7. You state that FRIDAY, July 14, 19~£. this estimate applies particularly to popular-priced clothing. I have inquired into the matter most carefully and have dis (Legi.slative day of Thitrsday, April 20, 1922. ) cussed the situation with the Treasury experts and representa The Senate met at 11 o'clock a. m., on the expiration of the tives of the Tariff Commission, who have made a most ex recess. haustive study of the whole subject. PROPOSED DUTY ON RAW WOOL. The Fordney-1\IcCumber bill fixed a rate on wool which is sub Mr. CALDER.. Mr. President, I am in receipt of a letter stantially the same, if not Jes , than the duty impo ·ed under the from the New York Clothing Trade Association, of New Yo1·k present emergency tariff law, which is now in effect, dependent City, in which they complain of the duty proposed on wool in upon the percentage of shrinkage. I believe you are in error the pending tariff bill. I .referred the letter to the Tariff Com when you state that the proposed duty will increase the price of mi., ion, who made a careful examination of the whole subject all clothing; and I presume in making this statement you have and have submitted their findings to me. Their report is so in mind the rates provided in the present law and the fact that illuminating that not only the Senate, but the country, should wool was admitted free under the Underwood law, which was in have the information. I ask, therefore, that the letter from the operation previous to the emergency tariff act. New York Clothing Trade Association to me, my reply, and the As an evidence of the fact that your understanding i not Tariff Commission's memorandum be printed in the RECORD in correct, I am pleased to submit for your consideration a memo regul~r RECORD type. randum prepared for me by the United States Tarilf Commis The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it i o sion on June 29. ordered. Recently I purcha ed some clothing from one of our large and" The matter i·efened to is as foJlow : well-known clothing establishments, and I am convinced from my own experience that suits and overcoats can be purchased NEW YORK, Jm1e 8, 1922. at a cheaper price to-day under the emergency tariff act than Senator WILLIAM M. CALDER, they could in the spring of 1921, ~hen we were operating under Senate Building, Washington, D. 0. the Underwood law, which admitted wool free of duty. l\1ay I EfiTEEMED SENATOR: The members of the New York Clothing call your attention particularly to the table incorporated in the Tracie As"ociation Yiew the proposed tariff of 33 cents on raw Tariff Commission's memorandum, which demonstrates that the wool n pernicious and not in the public interest, and take this raw-wool duty in a suit of clothes weighing 2-h pound-, ex mecms of registering it · opposition to the passage of that legis clusb•e of the merchandising cost, is about 92 cents, while the lation. duty on an overcoat, exclusive of the merchandising costs, would The impo ition of prohibitive tariffs on necessaries can only he approximately $1.71. These figures have been carefully, pre be justified when dictated by dire and urgent exigency. Such pared and are authentic, ancl I believe that if you go into the condition does not exist. The burden of the proposed wool matter again you will be convinced that your understanding is tariff will fall mainly on the masses. The members of the in error, even though the duty of 33 cents a pound clean con Finance Committee well know that the woolgrowing industry tent ha~ been augmented by the several handlers' gross profits. is concentrated in the hands of but a few large growers. The It is no lloubt that this duty when carried through to the ulti approximate total production of raw wool by these grower is mate consumer will be increased to a degree. It is estimated by about Si65,000,000. the Tariff Commission that the original duty of 49 cents per The tariff proposed is, in round numbers, to yield, a Ya pound will finally cost the consumer 93 cents per pound, as indi riously estimated, between $310,000,000 and $360,000,000. The cated in the table of coi::ts incorporated in the Tariff Commis increa ed price the farmers, who sell to the large growers, sion memorandum·. would receive for their raw wool would hardly compensate Sincerely your:, them for the advanced prices of wearing apparel. The work WILLIAM l\f. CALDER. ing cla ~ ses, on the other hand, would principally suffer by the increase in price of clothes. This exorbitant proposed JUNE 29, 1922. tariff could only inure to the benefit of the few large wool Memorandum to Senator CALDER relative to a communication of the growers and manufacturers of woolens. The latter, in antici New York Clothing Trade .Association in regard to the duty on raw pation of the proposed legislation, are now raising prices, and wool. the press is teeming with news items of the increased prices The main question raised in the statement of the New York the public will have to pay for clothing this coming fall. Clothing Trade Association is whether the proposed duty of 33 _While prima facie the proposed tariff is only 33 per cent on the cents on raw wool, clean content-shown in their statement as raw wool, by the time the spinners, weavers, and manufac 33 per cent, but presumably intended as 33 cents, since this i turer· ai·e compen ·ated for their increased costs it is estimated the actual basic rate proposed-\Yill necessjtate an increa e of by experts the propo ed tariff on wool will mean an increase $5 in the price of a suit of clothes and $7 in the price of an in the price of a suit of clothes of $5 · and in the price of an overcoat. overcoat $7. This estimate applies particularly to popular It is impossible for anyone to state with certainty how much prked clothing. The higher-grade goods will not be affected a duty of 33 cents per clean pound will enhance the price of a proportionately in the same degree. suit or an overcoat, even when assuming a standard specifica If revenue must be raised, it should not be saddled on the tion of each article. That such a duty will tend to increase cla. s least able to shoulder it. If the small woolgrowing indus and certainly to check a decrease in the price of these articles try must be helped, let the Government subsidize it by bounty eems inevitable, but no exact calculation can be made because or otherwise. Moreover, increased prices in apparel will induce of the variable factors involved. It is to be borne in mind that u fal ·e ·pirit of economy and we will again witness a nation the price of wool may not be enhanced by the full amount of in tatters. the duty. To be sure, the compensatory duties on the tops, On May 23, 1922, the members and directors of our associa yarn, and cloth are based on the assumption that the duty on tion pas ed a resolution protesting against the aforesaid per the raw material will be fully effective, and if there were no nicious proposed tariff on raw wool, and we herewith inelose a competition in the domestic industry the failure of wool prices true copy thereof. to rise by the full amount of the duty would make no difference Tru,sting this communication will receive your consideration, in the price to the public. But since the duty is competitive, it we ure. may be prevented from reaping the full advantage of the com Re~-pectfuIJy yours, pensatory duties under these conditions, except in periods of NEW YORK CLOTHING TRADE As OCIATION, marked business actiYity. In such periods the duty on raw wool · By WM. A. BANDLER. is likely to be fully effective. In estimating, therefore, the effect of the duty on the price of a suit or overcoat the assumption that the 33-cent duty per pound of clean wool will enhance the UNITED STATES SENATE, cost to the weaYer, and hence necessitate an increase of his COMMITTEE TO AUDIT Al"D CONTROL THE 0oNTINGENT price by the full amount of the compensatory duty-that is, 49 ExPENSES OF THE SENATE, cents-is open to some qualification. July 6, 1922. Another set of Yariable factors arises in connection with the Mr. WILLIAM A. BANDLE.&, pyramiding of the duty as the wool passes from the raw state New York Clothing Trade Association, through the various manufacturing and distributing stages to 341 Fifth Avenue, New York City. reach the con umer in the form of wearing apparel. Consid MY DEAR MR. BANDLER: You wrote me on June 8 concerning erable latitude must be allowed in estimating such pyramiding. the proposed duty of 33 cents on clean content of raw wool, indi- One result may be arrived at by adding to the compensatory I 1922. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE. duty of 49 cents the percentage of overhead and profit, respec A. bill (H. R. 862) for the relief of Vivian Hood (Rept. No. tively, of the wool dealer, the top maker, the spinner._ the weaver, 820); the cloth jobber, the clothing manufacturer, and the retailer.

Load more