The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1893-10-18
LEATHER AND RAW MATERIALS.

denim him for his bad ones.
LEATHER AND RAW MATERIALS.
One of the most striking instances of
the benefits of free raw materials for
the manufacturers Of this country is the
leather industry. In 1872 the duty was
taken off from hides. and since then there
has been remarkable growth In the pro-
duction of leather and leather goods. In
1872 our exports Of leather were 81. 1884,
500, and of leather goods $S19. 400. making
total Of $3.6S4, 2O9. For the fiscal year
1893 the exports of leather were S1O.51S.-
500, and of manufactures of leather 81
311.59O, making a total of SO, 500. 1893 The
statistics of the progress may be TO some
extent judged from the exports, but il
is to be remembered also that the in
dustry supplies also the home consump-
ton, which has grown largely in that
time. The figures for the last census
have not been published. but i'm 1880 the
industry had already developed to won
derful extent. In that year the boot and
shoe industry employed 111O52 hands.
and on a capital Of s42. OPS paid out
$4,000, 43S in wages. Leather tanning
employed 23,s12 hands, and paid 50 .204.-
24S in wages. Curried leather employed
H. 53 hands. and paid S4S45.5l3 in wages
Dressed skins employed 1896 hands. and
paid s2.441.372 in wages This is un-
questionably one of the Industries in
which we can compete with foreign ma
tons i'm the markets of the world, il
are not held back by duties on raw
materials.
There have been numerous efforts
made to secure a duty on hides in the
alleged interest of farmers, but they
have not succeeded. The republican pro-
tectionists, however, have struck several
blows at the industry by increasing
duties on raw materials. For example,
the duty on ground sumac was raised by
the Mckinley bill from $40 cents per
pound to 4-10. for the benefit of the
sumac grinders OF Virginia and North
Carolina, and yet it does not protect
them because the American sumac can
be used only for coarse grades of
leather, and the foreign sumac does not
compete with it. The duty on degras.
or wool grease, was also raised by this
bill from 10 per cent to Il cent per
pound, which on last years importation
was equal to 22.31 per cent. This in
crease was unwarranted. and was made
f0r h. Of
Massachusetts. The history of the af-
fair is thus stated BY Mr.. Frederic w.
Clarke of Boston:
Three years ago when the Mckinley
bill was being framed it was proposed
TO put wool degras on the free list, and
1 think it was so voted in the ways and
means committee, but Senator Aldrich of
Rhode Island, expecting that some Of
the wooden mills in his state would put
In plants to make 1t. proposed specific
duty OF l cent per pound, which, as de-
gras was then worth about 215 cents a
pound, exporters value, would have
Quadrupled the duty on this product.
Mr.. Andrew c. Webster of Boston went
with me to Washington, where we had
hearing before the senate finance COM
mittee in regard to this matter, Senator
Aldrich Of Rhode Island being the strong
advocate of the duty, and abetted there
in by Messrs. Jerome Marble & Co. of
Worcester, Mass, who at that time made
the most extravagant and unwarranted
statements as to their ability to supply
the tanners Of the United States in event
Of the duty being placed on the product.
We were able to show that where one
workingman would be employed in pro-
ducing this product one hundred work
ingmen who handled it in connection
with the production of leather would be
adversely affected, say nothing about the
increased cost to the consumer of leath-
ers in which this article was used. We
were also able to show that all degras
which had been produced by this con-
Germ had not been Of good merchantable
quality. and that many of their safe
ments could be readily controverted. In
spite of the strenuous efforts of Mr..
Aldrich in the committee his associates,
after hearing the evidence which we pro-
duced. recommended that instead of put
ting q duty of l cent per pound on de-
gras, that they offer us a compromise
OF one-half cent per pound, which COM
promise we subsequently accepted, be-
lieVing that Ii was better to have saved
for the leather fraternity one-half cent
per pound on the great amount of degras
which they were using than to refuse
this concession. The history Of the pro-
duction of degras in this country has
been a marked failure. Although the
duty was increased from 10 per cent up
to one-half cent per pound. or say
doubled. as the law now stands. the
price has steadily fallen, and American
producers have fallen out of the race;
Messrs. Marble. in particular. who we
understand. after making this savage
fight for the duty, and adding to the
price Of degras I'm this country, have
withdrawn from the manufacture of the
same altogether.
This statement ought to be enough to
put degras on the free list, for degras,
fish oil and taIlow are the principal oils
or greases I'm making leather. The duty
on fish OIL otherwise known as cod OIL
an oil made from the ohfal Of Goldfish and
allowed to become ranci6-was raised by
the Mckinley bill from % per cent. to
an average of over 30 per cent. The
duty on tallow is a farmers duty" and
practically amounts to nothing. as this
country Is a large exporter Of tallow.
1t would unquestionably be an excellent