The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1911-08-02
Mill men KICK
Tariff Plan Proposed by Democrats Oh
Cotton Goods Stirs Them Up
OPPOSE LOWER DUTIES

Association Lays Statement Of
Its Views Before the Chairman OF
the Ways and Means Committee Of
the House.
The plans Of the Democrats in the
house ITO materially reduce the tariff
on cotton products has raised howl
from one end of the country to the
other from manufacturers who see
ruin staring them in the face. The
manufacturers ask among other
things why the cotton industry is
selected for tariff revision among the
first when it's products have advanced
least of all the great commodities
during the past ten years.
In order to understand thorough
ly the position the manufacturers
take, the tariff committee Of the
American Cotton Manufacturers as
sociation has Just placed the follow
ing statement before Chairman Un-
derwood of the ways and Means COM
mittee of the house:
| We are opposed to any revision
that will increase the percentage OF
importations to total United States
cotton manufactures that now exists.
In figuring percentages Of impor-
tations on manufactures we call at
tention to the fact that importations
under the cotton manufactures
schedule were II IA per cent. OF
the total cotton manufactures for
the year 1910. including laces and
other such Injuries that. are as yet
not made in great quantities in this
country, although it is interesting
to note that the manufacture OF
laces in the United States increased
in value from $3,500,000 in 1900 to
nearly s10,0oo,OOo in 1910.
We believe that any way it may
be considered that the present i'm
portation are sufficient to protect
| the consumer by regulating prices,
for there is no monopoly or restraint
of trade, but on the contrary, the
keenest competition among cotton
manufacturers Of the United States.
States.
We do not believe that anything
more regulative of prices can be Sc
cured, however much impoTattons
may be increased, for American man
ufacturers are already down to cost,
and without radical cutting Of
wages, which it is not believed would
or could be effected the chief result OF
legislating more foreign goods into
this country would only transfer that
work toforeigners, for the importers
do not usually undersell local mar
ket except enough to bring In their
goods.
We believe that the cotton sched-
ule bears its share of the customs
revenue for the support of the gov
ernment, and that there is no call
for increasing the amount collected
under it.
We are opposed to revision with
out adequate data.
We offer our assistance in obtain
ing such data.
We are in favor. of such revision as
will protect all clasifcations under
the schedule primarily in proportion
to their labor costs, and are espec-
tally in favor of simplihcation of the
schedule.
We are opposed to any revision
that does not take into account dif-
ference in other conditions as we'll
as labor costs, particularly on ac-
count of Southern mill conditions.
We are opposed to reductions Of
duty on machinery and other items
entering into the cost Of mills, ex-
cept such as will keep them on a
parity with our own industry as to
labor and ether costs at home and
abroad. We do not want our prop
erty deprecated, nor do we want
broadly to injure other industries to
help our own. Let each case rest
on it's merits and benefit equally.
We ar opposed to personal hear
ines; tco often it has been alleged
that unfair advantage has been taken
that way in making the tariffs Of the
past.
We are in favor Of publicity and
record. and of the freest and most
open discussion and consideration of
everything relating to tariff making.
We demand that the data upon
which revision is based be made pub
lie and matter of record except
with such concealmeEt of names that
good faith dictates with those fur
nishing data. If publicity is good for
other things, and we believe it is, it
certainly is desirable in such vitally
important matter as the tariff.
We also demand a definite state
ment as to just what it is intended
by it's makers that the revision shall
accomplish.
What measure of protection is it
intended to accord to American man
ufaeturers, equality in labor cost on
ly, equality in cost of production, or
what?
How much relative increase or de-
crease, is intended in importations,
which means how much more or less
competition is it intended TO impose
upon us?
If more competition, how are we
expected to meet it?
If we are expected to cut labor,
low is tha' labor to be compensated
for the reduction and what can 1t
definitely expect III lesser cost OF hv-
imp to Offset the cut?
What amount of revenue is the
new tariff on cotton manufactures ex-