Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1912-03-27

weaver the prices at which goods are
/ soil by the American manufacturer are
J as low as the prices charged by the for.
| eign manufacturer in his own market and
/ in many cases lower.
Under the existing system Of dis.
tribution. a slight reduction Of duties
would In some cases materially reduce
the price to the consumer. while In csher
cases a large reduction Of the duties
would not change the price to the Ameri.
can consumer at ALL
In the cost OF the material. the board
reports. there IS practically no ADVANTAGE
possessed by either country. Comparing
all OF the yarns selected by the board a
samples. the English labor cost was found
10 be on an average of practically seven
eighths Of the American in two mills Sc
lected.
II was not possible for the board with
the time and money at It's disposal to IN
vestigate each Of the items of the cotton
schedule and its work was confined to
yarns. threads. textile fabrics and such
spedalties as tapestries, plush. hosiery.
table damask and the like.
Item Of Wages.
Figures are presented to show that al
though labor costs IN the cotton industry
are in many cases lower In the United
States than in England. yet the actual
hourly earnings In this country are in
most Of the principal occupations much
greater. The conclusion is that on many
plain fabrics the cost Of production IN
this country is not greater.
The report gives some figures showing
the difference In cost OF cotton fabric al
the mill and the cost to the consumer.
Cloth sold at the mill at or cents 4
yard reaches the consumer at Is cents 4
yard. Some examples are given.
In 1895 a quilt sold at the mill for 62h
cents was sold TO the consumer at 81. In
1910 tho mill increased the price 10 Is
cents and the price to the consumer went
up to $40"
The board argues. however. that in
some cases a reduction in the mill price
might have no reduction for the con
sumner. A study Of comparative statistics
seems to show that the English consumer
buys cheaper because there Is less profit
between the mill man and the retailer.
In determining costs the board did not
take into consideration the item OF inter,
est upon investments. but the cost figures
do allow for depreciation.
Difference in Mills.
Taking all the mills covered by the In
vestlgation In each country, there were
wider variations In the American costs
secured than In the English costs. due
partly TO the fact that the English mills
were all In the Manchester district.
where wages and other conditions are
well standardized, while 10 american
costs were taken from. r--h covering a
much wider area. with much greater diff
ferences In labor and other conditions.
Another reason for the wider variation In
American costs is that the English mills,
for which figures are secured. are all
OF modern and efficient type. while
some of the American mills included were
old and OF low efficiency"
Discussing duties in their relation 10
cost of weaving and finishing, the re-
port says.
The ratio Of the duty TO the con-
version cost bears little relation 10 the
ratio OF the duty TO the foreign market
value. Thus, In some cases. duties
which are less than % per cent ad val
orem win be one and half times the
total American conversion cost. while
in other cases, duties OF nearly 50 per
cent adj valorem will be three-fourths