The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-12-22

as it takes one man here, with our mod ern appliances, the difference would not be so great" was his argument. The cost of producing rails at Gary wont t be half as much as in England, not withstanding the cheaper cost of labor abroad"
 MT Carnegie expressed great pleasure when Representative Calder had brought up the subject of structural steel He explained his views on the duty on struc- tural. steel by taking the construction of a modern skyscraper as a example. He explained the difficulties experienced in constructing such a building with steel imported from abroad. He stated that the long delays incident to the loss of pieces of the steel essential to the con- tinuation of building operations and the length of time required to rectify some bunder of the manufacturer made such an undertaking most impracticable when compared with the facility with which the work could be done if the steel were ordered from home manufacturer.
 "If you ever tried to send an order 5000 miles for structural steel you would never do it again." observed MT. Car negie.
 Must Stay Another Day.
 MT. Carnegie had planned to leave for New York on an afternoon train, but when Mr. Payne asked him if he de- sired to continue his testimony today or appear before the committee again to- morrow the Laird of Skibo sent word to his servant to arrange for him to stay in Washington tonight
 q consider it my duty as citizen to remain. here a week, if necessary" '" said Mr. Carnegie. Representative Bourke Cochran of New York asked MT. Car negie many question regarding his ad- vent into the steel business. In the course of his testimony about the conditions existing at that time MT. Car negie said he would not have gone into the steel manufacturing business without the tariff for protection. England made steel rails long before we did, he said, and I was not afraid of any competi- ton but of the dumping in this country of his surplus by the English manufac- turer."
 No Small Manufacturers. Representative Gaines was desrous of obtaining MT. Carnegie's views as to the needs for the tariff of the small manu- facturer of steel. Mir. Carnegie claimed that there were no small manufacturers of steel products. but MT. Gaines per sisted that there were small manufactur- CTS who make some special article from i steel.
 T don't know any small manufacturer who makes just one sort of steel and l would not regard him. I would think he had not managed well, said Car negie.
 MT. Gaines wanted to know if 1t was not possible for a man to go into the steel business to manufacture a speciality or if 1t would not be if there was nc tariff to protect him.
 ''There is always room for the enterpris- oialtr nd hnc a | he gets a high price for his article l was Carnegies comment. MT. Carnegie further admitted that the | time for the smaller manufacturer oi | steel is past, except for the man mak- | ing special article.
 Crozier on the Stand. 1 Mir. Carnegie concluded his testimony 1 shortly before o'clock and was about 1 to leave, when Alfred o. Crozier of Will l ru:ngton, Del, asked permission to bt | heard. He also asked MT. Carnegie tc
 remain and hear his remarks, explain i ins that they would be in the nature o l criticism of the former steel kings l views on the tariff. MT. Carnegie took ( seat with an evident purpose of listening l to Mr Crozier, but the latter had no ], proceeded far when Mr. Carnegie aros' l and said that he had been before thu l committee all day and that it was prett, | tiresome He begged to be excused, bu
 said that he would like to get a copy O | MT Crozier's remarks after they ar | printed.
 l .'I shall read it with pleasure" he said l "and if the gentleman criticises me I shall say, what pity that man does no know better, and if he is with me l shal l probably say what wise young maj | he is.' '
 i With few parting words of regret be | cause he could not stay, MT. Carnegi l tcok his departure.
 | MT. Crozier addressed his remarks prin l cirally to the magazine article recent, | published over MT. Carnegie's name | which he said dealt a severe blow t | the entire protective system. MT Crozie l claimed that MT. Carnegies proposition | to take the duty off of steel would hay | the effect of leaving the United State l Steel corporation forever in undispute' | possession of the American field l One of the most interesting features | of MT. Carnegies testimony was his ac
 count of his remarkable rise in the iror l and steel business. He said that hi 1 first venture was in the manuractur
 of cast iron bridges for railroads to re I place the wooden structures which the,
 then were using. Together with six other
 he invested $15O0 as capital for the ven | ture getting his share of the none. i by means of a loan from bank. MI 1 Carnegie said that his capital was in | creased through the earnings of the com pany and through the sale of Pennsyl | vania railroad bonds.
 He also told of the Edgar Thompson ] Steel Works, which he started with sev | eral partners, at a capital of $2,0Oo,0o0 O s3,O0O, GOO.
 ', was there any additional capital pu | into 1t, or did 1t expand itself by tn
 reinforcement of it's earnings?" aske MT. Cochran.
 q think the Edgar Thompson work 1 did" was the reply. There may hay
 been $5o0,OO0 or $6O0.0O0 or something 0 that kind put in
 And as the money was earned, a1te the partners took out what was neces
 sary for their support the surplus wa
 reinvested and the work expandedY'
 "Religiously," replied the witness Tn
 partners were not then millionaires, the
 had an interest in the firm, but the
 hoped for It."
 ''But they lacked for nothing inter
 rupted MT. Cochran, "and they were pu
 ting back their surplus earnings into tn
 company
 "Yes, sir"
 "Will you tell me what yon want