The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-09-15
THE 0LASs IND UsrRY HEARD.
Manufacturers want the Duty Retained,
Importers Want IL Removed.

WASHINGTON, Sept. H.-The tariff
hearings were continued before the Ways
| and Means Committee Wednesday, repre-
sentatives Of the glass industry having
| the floor.
Mr.. H. A. Hitchcock, OF ST. Louis,
| representing the Crystal Plate Glass
| Company, asked the committee not to
| disturb the existing rates OF duty on
plate glass. and justified the request
| by asserting that they had already ac-
| complished what was sought to be Sc
cured by reducing rates-viz., lower
prices to the consumer, which prices
were to-day less tnas one-half what they
were ten years ago, while no change or
reduction whatever had been made IN
either the tariff or the rates PAID lot
labor done. This had been brought
about by competition, caused by the
increased plants brought into existence
by the protective tariff.
Alfred Bloom, Of Bloom & Toch, New
York. importers OF plate glass for the
manufacture of mirrors, said that they
had to import 90 per cent. OF the grass
they used as it was Of small sizes NOT
made here. Manufacturers would not
take orders for it. He could not see
why n duty should be put on glass OF
this size.
ufacturer and one of a committe OF three
appointed by the National Furniture AS
ISOLATION appeared before me committee
10 ask Congress to help them gain an
export trade. The furniture industry or
this country. he said. did not need or
9sk protection. II was one Of the few In
dustries wrich could stand foreign com
petition. The industry employed about
100, 900 hands, and its product was valued
at about SIPS coo 900 a year. German look
ing glass entered largely into the compost
lion OF furniture 1t was not made In
small sizes. and he asked that IL be put
on the free list Since the passage OF
the Mckinley law the price Of this glass
had increased 80 per cent, and was con-
trolled by the German Looking Glass
Company. Of New York, a trust IL in
creased the cost OK the article TO the con-
sumner.
MIR. Reed-Then you want us to remove
a purely revenue duty.
Mr.. Bloom-Yes, sir. IL Is not a protec-
tive duty.
Mr. Reed-We are not doing this kind
Of thing. We arc here TO abolish protec-
tive duties.
Mr.. Reed called the attention of Chair
man Wilson TO the extraordinary propo-
sition.
Mr. Bloom also asked that the duty of Is
per cent. be taken off mahogany lum-
der This, he said, could not be grown
by legislation.
Mr.. Payne reminded him that this was
another revenue duty.
Mr.. Morris spoke on behalf OF Vanhorn
a. Griffin, New York, importers OF com-
mon window glass. He had no special
request to make but asked If change
was made that it be in the direction OF
lower duties.
In reply to a question by Mr.. Dalzell,
he said that the domestic manufacturer
supplied three-fourths Of the trade, but he
considered the imported article better
than the domestic. He would be salts
fed with a reduction of 80 per cent.
In reply 20 a question OF Mr.. Payne he
said he did not care for the American
manufacturer. He hated him. and would
like to see him out of business. 1t was
due TO him that the duty remained, and
he Gan importer wanted TO do business
unhampered. He regarded the manu-
facturer as a rObber baron, but a good
fellow sociaiiy.--New York sun.