New Britain herald., 1918-05-10
|ILk PORTA7ION
 1 IS NOT AFFEC,IED
E0n Increase in Price Does Not Alter the Demand

8New York May 10.-Raw silk at
 No0 per pound has apparently no
 Errors for the people of the United
 Bates or the manufacturers who sup
 Fled them the $500, 0,0O0,000 worth of
 #k goods which they consumed in
 8l7. A lecture recently delivered be-
 Ere q class in the Educational depart
 Bent of the National City Bank of Mhw York showed that the value of
 \ Sk imported into the United States
 $ the calendar year 1917 was double
 Mat of 1915 and far exceeded that of
 @y " earlier year.
 M Never before has so much raw silk Zen imported; never before has so Hgh d price been paid for it, and &ver before has so great a value of #lk manufacture been brought in 8om abroad The quantity of raw silk #1ported in 1917 was 36,500,000 Runds against 32,455, 900 pounds in M16 and 30,979.000 in 1915 and the Salue, including 6.80O,000 pounds of NWaste," $190,000,O00 against $150,- EDO, 900 in 1916 and $95, ,000, 900 in R15. The average price of the raw Elk imported in 1917 was over $500 Fer pound against $4,42 per pound 1916, the former high record year, And $3.53 per pound in 1915. During Nle second half of the year 1917 the 8nport price ranged as high as $5.T5
 &r pound in certain months.
 This importation of nearly $200,- S0O,000 worth of raw silk suggests s1at the value Of the silk goods turned Ndt by the manufacturers of the coun- Fly in 1917 was probably about $500 100000, since a comparison of the Census figures of the silk manufac- ! 8lres of the country in 1914 and 1909 al the stated value of silk imported in 81ese respective years, shows that the Kactories turned out about $2.50 worth sf finished goods for each $1.00 worth If raw silk imported. should this Belation of the value of output to the Ealue of raw material imported hold sood for the calendar year 1917, the Ialue of the silk product of the coun- Fly for that year would approximate R500, roo, 900 at factory prices against E254, 100000 in 1914; $107, 7,000O0O in R899; $S7,000,O0O in 1889; 41,000,- 100 in 1879 and $12,O0o,O0O in 1869. Ehe value of silk manufactures i'm ported in 1917 was $39, ,71S,000 and |xceeded that of any earlier year. None of the textile manufacturing Industries of the country has shown Is rapid an increase as has that of Elk, for. which the entire raw material ilapUrted. The value of the man. fractures of silk as reported grew
 rom $41,00o,000 in 1879 to $254,- 100000 in 1914, the latest census; that If cotton goods from $192, 100000 in
 879 to $701, ,000,000 in 191 and that
 f wooIens from $23S, 100000 in 1879 Q $464.000,000 in 1914. Thus silk nanufa cturcs in 1914 were six times s much in value as in 1872; cotton
 oods three and one-half times as nuch, and Noolens only twice as nuch as in 1879, these figures being n all cases factory valuations of out urn, supplied by the census reports.
 All of the raw silk used in our man.
 facturing industries is brought from
 broad, chiefly from the other side
 f the globe. Of the 36,500,000 pounds
 f raw silk imported in 1917, 29,369,-
 90 came from Japan; 6,934,00O from ,hina, and 172,000,0O from "other ountries," chiefly Italy and France. saw silk production has been dis urbed by the war, that of Europe fhich formerly produced about 20
 er. cent. of the worlds output, hay ng been practically suspended by var activities, and this is also true 0 a considerable degree of the pro
 uctiOn of Turkey in Asia. European production fell from 11,000,0O0 pounds n 1912 to a little moro than S,OOO,OO0 1916; Asiatic production, chiefly rom China and Japan, advanced from
 3.5O0,00O to 45,38O,O0O pounds; all
 f these figures relating necessarily o the silk entering international