New-York tribune., 1909-04-07
DEFENDS HOSIERY DUTY.
Mr. Payne Says Department Stores
InStigated OppOatiOn.

Washington. April 6.-Accusing the large depart
ment stores of having instigated the opposition OF
many women and "hystericaI men, to the increased
duties provided by the tariff bill on womens gloves
and hosiery Representative Serene E. Payne, chair
of the Ways and Means Committee, to-day. in
a statement which will be printed in The Congress
sional Record asserted that the importers who
oppose the duties are interested in firms abroad
which make gloves and hosiery. He presented vari-
arguments in effort justify the increased
rates from the Republican point of view OF protec
tIon contending that the difference in OF labor
IN the United States and abroad was not covered
by the duties levied by the Dngley Law.
Saying that the new tariff increases the duty from
2-3 to 2z cents pair. Mr.. Payne declared that
there truth in the assertion that the price
OF hosiery would be increased % cents pair to the
consumer. He ridicuIed the suggestion that the
increased duties will result in the formation OF A
hosiery trust which he said had been advanced
by the importers. Mr.. Payne quoted from a
ment. the of the author Of which he did
give. in which IL asserted that Marshall Field
& Co. Of Chicago: Brown DurreH & Co. of Bos-
ton: Lord & Taylor. Henry schif & Co. Wessen-
donck Lorenz & Co; Arnold Constable & Co.
and Rubens & Meyer. of New York; Carson. Pirie,
Scott & Co, of Chicago, and T. Victor & Achelis.
Of New York and other American concerns main
tain large establishments in Chemnitz. Germany,
with full force Of help organized to buy and OBJ
tain foreign hosiery at the least possible cost.
BY the employment of large organization and
maintaining much capital and credit in Germany
they are thus able obtain foreign hosiery al
prices considerably lower than il is possible a
concern of less magnitude and capital obtain
them" the statement continues The possibility OF
borrowing money more cheaply abroad and the
couragement given by the German government to
expectation of merchandise also cited as ad-
vantage under which these concerns work.
Mr. Payne asserted that scores of petitions have
been received by the committee asking that the
increased duties might be retained in order that the
working people Of the country may make the
stockings used in the United States. MI Payne
argued that the increased duties on womens
gloves were made justihabe for the purposes of
protection and revenue. He cited the conditions
resulting from the protection afforded the manu-
facturers Of mems gloves by the Dingley bill.
Prior to 1894 they were making or 10 per cent
OF the mems gloves. he said but they said that
the duty low that they were being driven
out OF business and statistics seemed TO back up
their assertions. To-day they demonstrate to US
that they are ma king 30 per cent Of mems
gloves worn this country, having amply re-
deemed their promise, and that the cost to the
consumer is much less than it was prior TO 1897.
They came before the committee early in the hear
ing and proved to that il cost no more and re-
| ouired no skill TO make q womans glove
than a mans claimed that If the same rate
of duty was given them in time they would make
the same percentage of women's gloves, and that
this industry would employ at least fifty thousand
persons"