PARAGRAPH 639-OILS. Such assessment of duty on raw materials is undoubtedly unreasonable, as it will place the consumers in a very disadvantageous position in buying these materials in the future. We recommend strongly to write or wire to the Representative of your district to oppose such assessment of duty and to leave them "free" as they are now, and by so doing it will protect your interest in buying of these materials, and further to insure the welfare of soap industries in this country. On page 18 of the Oil, Paint, and Drug Reporter, issued on December 23, 1912, the details are given about proposed change of duty on these commodities. Yours, very truly, MITSUI & Co. (LTD.). DUTY ON VARIOUS SOAP MATERIALS. NEW YORK, December 27, 1912. DEAR SIRS: With reference to our circular letter of the 26th instant regarding the above subject, we believe that you are quite familiar with coconut oil, palm oil, palm-kernel oil, etc., as they have been imported into this country for many years. However, when it comes to soya-bean oil, this material being quite a new article, we are afraid that you may not be well posted, and in this connection we herewith beg to attach a little information on this oil, which we hope will be of some value to you. We are, dear sirs, MITSUI & CO. (LTD.). Yours, very truly, SOYA-BEAN OIL. Soyabean oil is crushed from soya bean, which is a product of north Manchuria, China. This oil was used by soap manufacturers in extensive quantities about three years ago, when cottonseed oil, tallow, grease, and other soap materials were very high. We heard that experimental plantations were made in this country with soya bean in the past, but the result was not successful. There even might be a small quantity of soya bean raised in this country, but such quantity is used for cattle feeding, fertilizer, etc., and is not enough for crushing use to obtain oil; therefore the only way to obtain soya-bean oil is to import from foreign countries. The production of soya bean in north Manchuria averages around 1,000,000 tons, of 2,240 pounds, per year. About 40 per cent of this quantity is now exported to Japan, where it is used for soy making, or feeding purpose, as well as for crushing use to make soya-bean oil. About 20 per cent is consumed by China itself; about another 20 per cent is crushed in northern China, thereby obtaining oil and cake; about 5 per cent will be kept by farmers for sowing use for next season. The balance of about 15 per cent is for export to European crushers. In Europe soya bean is used for crushing purpose to obtain soya-bean oil and soya oil cake. Soya bean has only been introduced to European crushers since 1909. Therefore it is still quite a new product to them. There is no industry in this country for crushing soya bean; therefore the soya-bean oil used by soap manufacturers has to be imported, as above stated, from foreign countries. Below are the statistics of imports into this country: P. S.-Under present tariff there is a duty of 45 cents per bushel on soya bean, which is a prohibitive rate. If there is a small number of farmers who are raising soya beans in this country, they are well protected under the above prohibitive duty on soya beans. PARAGRAPH 639-OILS. BRIEF SUBMITTED BY ANTOINE CHIRIS CO., NEW YORK CITY, REGARDING ESSENTIAL OILS. The WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, NEW YORK, January 4, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: We beg leave to direct your attention to the radical changes proposed in paragraph 51 of the chemical bill (H. R. 20182), relating to distilled and essential oils and products, 24 of which are transferred from the free list to dutiable provision. In beginning, it is important that your honorable committee fully appreciate that all of these products are foreign to this country, and not one is capable of growth or production here in commercial quantities, and that all of them are distinctly raw products, and no one of them is suitable for use in the condition in which it is imported. All of these products are used in the manufacture of soaps, medicinal products, disinfectants, deodorizers, perfumes, tooth paste, and dental preparations, and all of which are household necessities having their therapeutic value, and the change in provision from free to dutiable list will so increase the cost of production to the American manufacturer he will be forced to increase the price of his finished product to the consumer in order to afford him a fair and reasonable return for his investment. The blanket provision for all combinations of distilled and essential oils mentioned in the last part of paragraph 51 might, and probably will, in our judgment, defeat the object of the law, as they are all commercially capable of combination in such proportions as would admit of immediate use in making any of the above-mentioned products and would thereby be subject to a lesser duty than should be paid if imported separately because of the inability of the appraiser to determine the exact proportion of the oils entering into and making up the value of the combined article. As an illustration, oil jasmin, which costs $14 per pound, origanum white, which costs $1 per pound, and oil rosemary, which costs 65 cents per pound, could be combined and shipped to this country and billed as mixed oils for soap perfume, and it would be impossible for the Government to determine the dutiable value without the honest assistance of the importer. Under such a condition a reputable importer is at a great disadvantage. The materials to which we refer have been specifically provided for as free in all tariffs since that of 1883, and, as stated, being raw products impossible of production in this country, we strongly urge that they should continue to be free. The materials to which we refer and the countries of production are as follows: Oil bergamot, Italy; oil citronella, Java and Ceylon; oil almonds, France and England; oil caraway, Holland; oil jasmin, France; oil origanum, white and red, France; oil chamomile, Germany; oil cedrat, Sicily; oil neroly, France; oil aspic, France; oil valerian, France and Germany; oil limes, Sicily and West Indies; oil thyme, France; oil cassia, China; oil lemon, Sicily; oil anise, China; oil lavendar, France; oil rose, France and Bulgaria; oil rosemary, France; oil juniper berries, Germany and Austria; musk, China; civet, Abyssinia; enflurage grease, Grasse, France. We have the honor to be, yours, respectfully, ANTOINE CHIRIS CO., BRIEF OF SPENCER KELLOGG & SONS, BUFFALO, N. Y. OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, SPENCER KELLOGG & SONS, Buffalo, N. Y., January 29, 1913. Chairman Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We respectfully request that the following communication be made a part of the hearings by your committee of the proposed changes in the free list and Schedules A and G. During the past two years we have been investigating the crushing in the United States of various oil seeds, nuts, and beans grown in foreign countries, with the idea of competing with Europe and the United Kingdom, each of which is now extensively engaged in this branch of manufacture and is exporting the oil to this country in great quantities. In our investigations we have discovered that, although none of the raw materials, with the exception of peanuts, is grown in the United States, there is under the PARAGRAPH 639-OILS. present tariff law either a sufficiently heavy duty imposed upon these raw materials and a proportionately low duty on the resultant oil, as to render economic manufacture in the United States a practical impossibility, due to the necessity of importing a dutiable raw material and manufacturing a duty-free product in competition with Europe where the raw material is imported duty free. Or there is no duty on either raw material or oil, which makes it impossible to compete with Europe owing to their cheap freight rates on raw materials, their cheap labor, and their ready market for the by-products (oil cake), almost none of which can be marketed in this country. This condition results in American consumers being forced to buy foreign oils through importers and brokers on foreign terms, paying higher prices than necessary and having little recourse in the case of inferior quality. We believe that the oils enumerated below can be manufactured in this country with the same success that they are now manufactured in foreign countries, and that the result will be the starting in the United States of industries hitherto untried, with the further result of better and cheaper oil to the consumer. Let us repeat that none of these oil seeds or nuts is grown in this country, with the exception of peanuts, which article is treated separately in the detailed explanation below. Therefore there can be no injustice done the American farmer by lowering the duty on the materials enumerated below and allowing their crushing in this country. Some of the materials, the crushing of which we have investigated, are not specifically provided for in the tariff act, thus bringing them under the n. s. p. f. clause for oil seeds, or 25 cents per bushel of 56 pounds. As this branch of manufacture has been neglected in this country up to this time, we feel that this chemical schedule of the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act has become obsolete, and that it should be changed in order to allow manufacturers to build up new oil industries in this country similar to those abroad. There has been during the last 10 years a tremendous growth in the oil-seed crushing industry in Marseille, Rotterdam, and the other centers of Europe, most of which growth has been occasioned by the increased demand for oil in the United States. It is our hope that, if the schedule is changed, the United States may be enabled to retain this large business and thereby improve the condition of both the manufacturer and the consumer. We have given this matter much study, and we respectfully submit to your committee the request that the following be the rates of duty on the following materials. We have given in this schedule a detailed description of each seed, its resultant oil, with the present and suggested duty; a record of the imports into the United States from September 1, 1911, to September 1, 1912, of each oil and, following this data, a condensed paragraph giving materials and the suggested duties: Shea nuts, present duty, n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, free); shea-nut oil, present duty, n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): This nut is a native of India and is not grown in the United States. It is inedible. The oil when refined is used for edible purposes and when raw for soap-making purposes. This oil was classed under "All other oils" in the import record. Soya beans, present duty, n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, free); soya-bean oil, present duty, free (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): A native of Manchuria. Inedible. Not grown in the United States. Oil used for paint purposes and for soap making. Imports during 1912, 26,230,061 pounds. Mowra seeds, present duty, n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, free); mowra oil, present duty, n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): This seed is a native of India. Inedible. Not grown in the United States. Resembles the peanut. Oil used for soap and, when refined, for edible fats. No imports during 1912. Niger seeds, present duty, n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, free); niger oil, present duty, 25 cents (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): Native of India. Not grown in the United States. Inedible. Oil used for soap and, when refined, for edible purposes. Classed under "All other oils" in imports. Sesame seeds, present duty, 25 cents per bushel (suggested duty, free); sesame oil, present duty, free (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): Native of India. Now grown in the United States. Oil used for soap and edible purposes. Imports during 1912 classed under "All other oils." Palm kernels, present duty, free (suggested duty, free); palm-kernel oil, present duty, free (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): Native of Africa and South America. Not grown in the United States. Inedible. Oil used for soap and, when refined, used for edible purposes. Oil imports during 1912, 29,232,889 pounds. Peanuts, present duty, shelled, 1 cent per pound (suggested duty, free); ground nuts, present duty, unshelled, one-half cent per pound (suggested duty, free); peanut oil, present duty, free (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): Native of Africa. PARAGRAPH 639-OILS. Oil used for edible purposes. Imports during 1912, 6,878,237 pounds. Peanuts are grown in some of the Southern States, but are almost entirely exported to France or used here for roasting or eating. These are of a superior quality to the African nuts, and are in consequence used for edible purposes and command a premium and are not crushed. The African peanuts, on the other hand, are used entirely for crushing purposes and do not therefore compete with the American peanuts. The American nut is grown in quantities insufficient even to supply the demand for a roasting peanut. We will suggest that the words "for crushing purposes only" be inserted in the new schedule as applying to peanuts. Candle nut, present duty, free (suggested duty, free); candle-nut oil, present duty n. s. p. f. (suggested duty, 2 cents per pound): Not grown in the United States. Used for burning and soap purposes. SUMMARY. Free list.-Shea nuts, soya beans, mowra seeds, niger seeds, sesame seeds, palm kernels, groundnuts or peanuts for crushing purposes only, candle nuts. Duty 2 cents per pound.-Shea-nut oil, soya-bean oil, mowra oil, niger oil, sesame oil, palm-kernel oil, peanut or ground-nut oil, candle-nut oil. In conclusion, may we express the hope that our requests will be granted and the chemical schedule changed according to our suggestions. Should this be done, we are sure that great benefit will result to both the American manufacturer and the American consumer. Very respectfully, yours, SPENCER KELLOGG & SONS (Inc.). BRIEF OF THE BLANTON CO., ST. LOUIS, MO. Hon. OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, Chairman Ways and Means Committee, ST. LOUIS, Mo., January 13, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. SIR: It has been called to our attention that under the proposed new tariff law that peanut oil, such as is now imported into this country, will be subjected to a heavy duty. We believe that if you and the other Members of Congress fully understood the conditions under which this oil is bought and used, you would understand that this duty would help no one, and would eventually be a tax upon the cost of living. The oil that is now brought into this country is pressed from peanuts raised in Africa. These peanuts are not anything like our commercial peanuts, and there is no nut grown in this country that will produce the same oil that is now being imported. Neither is there any oil in this country that can be substituted for this peanut oil for the use in butter substitutes. In fact, the blending of this oil with cottonseed oil allows us to use more of the cottonseed oil than would be used should peanut oil be barred from use. As probably 98 per cent of the peanut oil now introduced into this country is used in the manufacture of oleomargarine, which is a substitute for butter and is used by the people of moderate means, it can be seen that to tax this article would be to tax the food cost to these people because the manufacturer would be compelled to raise his prices in keeping with the cost of raw material. This product is now heavily taxed and is in no way able to carry any additional burden. All the above is very respectfully submitted for your consideration. Very truly, THE BLANTON Co., D. A. BLANTON, President. PARAGRAPH 640. Oleo stearin. PARAGRAPH 641. Orange and lemon peel, not preserved, candied, or dried. PARAGRAPH 642. Orchil, or orchil liquid. PARAGRAPH 643. PARAGRAPH 644-PAPER WASTE. Ores of gold, silver, or nickel, and nickel matte; sweepings of gold and silver. PARAGRAPH 644. Paper stock, crude, of every description, including all grasses, fibers, rags (other than wool), waste, including jute waste, shavings, clippings, old paper, rope ends, waste rope, and waste bagging, and all other waste not specially provided for in this section, including old gunny cloth and old gunny bags, used chiefly for paper making. PAPER WASTE. BRIEF OF THE ASSOCIATED DEALERS IN PAPER MILL GENTLEMEN: Directly representing the Associated Dealers in Paper Mill Supplies of New York, and indirectly representing the interest of a large number of paper manufacturers of the United States, we present for your favorable consideration the revision of a section of the existing tariff act, which, owing to its faulty wording has been a source of much unsatisfactory litigation and expense to the Government as well as manufacturer and importer. We make no appeal for special privileges to be derived by raising or lowering duties, but respectfully and strongly urge that the new section or sections not only be made clear and unequivocal, but that in the wording of same due regard be paid to the character of the commodities affected, with a view to avoid demanding gradings and distinctions, which the character of the merchandise itself a waste material-makes impossible or at least most uncertain. We desire to call the attention of your honorable body to the ambiguity of section No. 644 of the tariff act of 1909. This section reads as follows: "Paper stock, crude, of every description, including all grasses, fibers, rags (other than wool), waste, including jute waste, shavings, clippings, old paper, rope ends, waste rope, and waste bagging, and all other wastes not specially provided for in this section, including old gunny cloth and old gunny bags, used chiefly for paper making.' One of the judges of the United States Board of Appraisers has stated that, with the exception of "rotten fruit," the section referring to paper stock has caused more trouble and unsatisfactory litigation than any other section in the act. It will be noted that the last clause of this section, descriptive of the commodities in question, reads "used chiefly for paper making.' Paper stock is a raw material and consists of so many grades of papers, rags, fibers, wastes, etc., that it includes among its various grades some articles which are used for other purposes than paper manufacture, and when such is the case there is very apt to be litigation between the Government and the importer in order to determine its "chief" use, as specified in the section. If it can be proven that the material in question is used "chiefly for paper making" the article is passed free, otherwise it is usually assessed as dutiable at 10 per cent as "waste not specially provided for." In the acts prior to the present tariff act, the last clause of the section read: "Suitable only to be converted into paper." Inasmuch as many articles commonly used in the manufacture of paper can, to a limited degree and under special conditions be used for other purposes than paper making, the litigation was continuous and unsatisfactory. It was hoped that the new phraseology "used chiefly for paper making" would obviate most of the trouble, but experience has shown that it has failed to do so, and it frequently happens that an imaginative appraiser thinks of some use to which the commodity might be applied other than paper making and assesses the material at 10 per cent as "waste not specially provided for," causing trouble and expense to both the Government and the importer in their endeavor to substantiate or disprove the contention of the appraiser. The principal articles which have caused the trouble have been various grades of flax, jute, and hemp waste and old gunny bagging and old gunny cloth. |