1921. CONGR.ESSION AL REOOR.D~-HOUSE. 3487 1879. Also, resolution of the West Cairo. Farmers' Elevator

Co., of West Cairo, Ohio, favoring the enactment of legislation pro\iding that the United States place representatives in for­eign countl'ies to collect and transmit information regarding crop and grain conditions abroad, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture. ·

1880. Also, resolution of the Gilbert Grain Co., of Gilbert, Iowa, favoring the enactment of legislation providing that the United States place representatives in foreign countries to col­lect and transmit information regarding crop and grain condi­tions abroad, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agrieulture.

1881. Also, resolution of the Farmers' Cooperative Co., of Roland, Iowa, favoring the enactment of legislation providing that the United States place r~presentatives in foreign coun­tries to collect and h'ansmit information regarding crop and grain conditions abroad, and for other purposes; to the Com­mittee on Agriculture.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. SATURDAY, Jttly 9, 19B1.

The House was called to order at 11 o'clock a. m. by ML'. WALSH as Speaker pro tempore.

The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera :Montgomery, D~ D., offered the following pmyer :

Our Heavenly Father, Thou art the create:r of the morning light and our divine guardian through the still watches of the night season. Therefore we pause at the threshold of our labors -to give Thee praise. Thy providences are so generous in the ministries of their love. We thank Thee for Thy will con­cerning us. Teach us that life in its divinest essence is nobility of soul, purity of heart, and a zealous activity in doing that which is good. l\lay we this day walk worthily, labor justly, and hate and despise cowardice and falsehood. Through Jesus _Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday wa read and ap­proved.

HERMAN A. PHILLIPS.

Mr. IRELA.....l\ID. l\lr. Speaker, I ask consideration for the privileged resolution which I send to the Clerk's desk.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the reso­lution.

The Clerk read as follows: House resolution 59.

Resol~:ed, That the Clerk of the House of Representatives be directed to pay, out of the continge11t fund of the House, to Nellie l\Iay Phillips, widow of Herman A. Phill:ip.s, late Journal clerk of the House of Repre­. e.p.tatives, a sum equal to one year's salary as Journal clerk, and that the Clerk be further directed to pay out of the contingent fund the cxpen es of the last illness and funeral of said Herman A. Phillips, such ex~nses not to exce.ed $2.50.

The committee amendment was read, as follows: On page 1, line 5, of the resolution, strike out " one year's " and in­

sert in lieu thereof " six months'," so that it will read " a sum equal to six months' salary as Journal clerk."

l\lr. IRELAND. Mr. Speaker and gentlemen of the Hous~. this is the u ual resolution for the dependents of a. deceased employee of the House, with this exception, that the original re olution as dr'- wn provided for the payment of one year's salary to the dependents of the deceased employee, and the custom for oxdinary employees of the House has been to, pay six months' salary and funeral expenses not to exceed $250 in amount. It has been found to be the precedent, however, of the House that officers of the House and employees of the so-called Clerk's desk have been paid a full year's salary. In committee this resolution was amended to conform to the ordi­nary resolution. I gave notice before the committee at that time that I should oppose the amendment, and do so now. The family of the deceased employee we1~e led to believe while in his last illness that should he fail to recover therefrom they \-rould receive one year's full salary, and that was the impres­sion and the understanding of his associates. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois [1\lr. MANN]. _

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for five minutes. ·

::.\Ir. MANN. 1\lr. Speaker, the practice of the House has been to pay a year's salary to th~ widow or dependents of a Member of the House, six months' salary to the ordinary em­ployee of the House, and a year's salary to the widow or dependents of one of the elected officers of the House. Appar­ently the precedents are that the practice has been to pay a year's salary to the widow or depeadents of clerks at the desk,

including the Official Reporters of the House. The precedents · are not numerous. The last time an officer or clerk at the desk died was in 1887. A reading clerk died and the House prec:eeded to pay the widow of the reading clerk one year's salary. Prior to that time Mr. Hincks, one of the Official Re­porters of the House, cUed, and the Committee on .Accounts did not recommend a year's salary, but the House increased the amount and paid a year's salary to the widow of the reporter. Again, when l\fr. 1\!cElhene., one of the Official Reporters, died, the Committee on Accounts recommended that his widow be paid one year's salary, and the House so voted, and he was ~~~ .

I brought Herman Phillips here to the House nearly 24 years ago as assistant Journal clerk. Shortly afterwards he became Journal clerk of the House. From then on he was Journal clerk during all of the time e:x:eept when .the Democratic side of the House was in control o;f the• House. He bacl a long a.ml very severe illness, a very expensive illness. It was unfortu­nate for him that I brought him here. He would have prob­ably died worth considerable money if he had remained at home in Chicago, but I induced him to come down here. He was an expert man in the House, both as a Journal clerk and as an aid in parliamentary work. I think the House can afford to follow the few precedents which have been set, there being no precedents on the other side, and pay his widow as the widow of a clerk at the desk, a full year's salary; and I hope that the amendment reducing the amount to six months' salary may be defeated.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is upon the com­mittee amendment.

The question was taken, ancl the Speaker pro tempore an­nounced the noes appeared to have it.

On a division (demanded by l\lr. BLA~'l'o~} there were--ayes 7, noes 6.7.

So the amendment was rejected. The SPEAKER pro tempon~. The questi:On is on the pas­

sage of the resolution. The question was taken, and the resolution was agreed to. On motion of Mr. MANN, a motion to reconsider the vote by

which the resolution was agreed to was laid on the table. l\Ir. BYRNS of Tennessee. l\1r. Speaker--The SPEAKER pro tempore. For what purpose d-oes the

gentleman from Tennessee rise? SAJJBATH OBSERVANCE.

::.\Ir. BYRXS of Tennessee. Mr . . Speakff, I ask unanimous consent to· proceed for not exceeding one minute for the pur­pose of making an announcement. . The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ten­nessee asks unanimous consent to proceed for one minute for the purpose of making an announcement. Is there objection 2 [After a pause.] The Chair hears none .

l\lr. BYRNS of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Noah ,V. Cooper, a gentleman of the highest character and a citizen of my home city of Nashville, Tenn., is chairman of a committee which has been named to secure, if possible, the enactment of national legislation with reference to Sabbath· observance. I hold a telegram from him in which he asks me to make publie announcement of the fact that he and his committee will be iii Washington on July the 14th for the pw·pose of presenting their appeal to the Members individnally and the proper com­mittees ha'\'ing jurisdiction of the subject.

llESSA8E FROM THE SENATE~ A message from the Senate, by l\fr. Craven, one of its clerks,

announced that the Senate had passed the bill (S. 237} to con­solidate certain forest lands within the Humbol-dt National Forest, in the State of Nevada, and to add certain lands thereto, and for other purposes, in which the concurrence of the House of Representatives was requested.

SENATE BILL REFERRED.

Under clause 2 of Rule X...."'{IV, Senate bill of the following title was taken from the Speaker's table and referred to its appropriate committee, as indicated below:

S. 237. An act to consolidate certain forest lands within the Humboldt N'ationar Forest, ill the State of Neyada, and to add certain lands thereto, and fOl.• other pUl1)05eS·; to the Commit­tee on the Public Lands. EXROLLED RILJ" PRESE~TED TO THE PRESIDENT FOR HIS .APPROVAL.

~lr. RICKETTS, from the Committee on Enrolled Bill~ , re­ported that July 8 they had presented to the President of the United States for his approval the following bill :

H. R. 562:?. An act providing fo1· the appraisal and sale of the \ashon Island l\lilitary Resen-ation, tn. the State of Washing-ton, and for other purposes. '

3488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9,

CALL OF THE HOUSE. 1\lr. FI~LDS. 1\fr. Speaker, I make the point of order that

tl1ere is no quorum p·resent. Tlle SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will count. [After

counting.] A quorum is not present. l\lr. CAl\IPBELL of Kansas. l\1r. Speaker, I move a call of

the House. A tall of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the following Members failed

to answer to their names : Ansorge Freeman Kreider Rose Anthony Frothingham Kunz Rouse Bell Funk Langley Rucker Bb:IN' Gahn Lee, Ga. Ryan Bond Gallivan Lee, N.Y. Sabath Britten Ganett, Tex. Lehlbach Sanders, Tex. Brooks, Ill. Gorman Linthicum Scott, Mich. Browne>, Wis. Gould Lyon Sears Burdick Graham, Pa. McLaughlin, Mich. Sinnott Burke Green, Iowa McLaughlin, Pa. Sisson Burroughs Greene, Mass. McSwain Slemp Burtness Griffin Maloney Snyder Cannon Hammer Mead Sproul Carew Haugen ·Michaelson Stafford Chalmers Hawes Mills Stevenson Chandler, N.Y. Hicks 1\loore, Ohio Stiness Clark, Fla. llimes 1\lorin Strong, Pa. Clas ·on Houghton l\Iott Sullivan Codll lludspeth J\!udd Sumners, Tex. Connally, Tex. Husted I";elson, A. P. Tague CoopN·, Ohio Hutchinson Nelson, J. 1\l. •.raylor, Ark. Ct·nmton Jacoway O'Brien Taylor, Colo. Crisp Jefferis, Nebt·. O'Connor Taylor, Tenn. Dale Jeffers, Ala. Olpp Thomas Dallinger Johnson, Ky. Paige Thompson Deal Johnson, Iiss. Parker, N.Y. Tinkham Dempsey Johnson, S. Dak. Patterson, N.J. Upshaw Dickin on Jones, Pa. Perkins Vaile Drin•t' Kahn Perlman Vare Dunn . .Kendall Petersen Volk Dupre Kennedy Rainey, Ala. Ward, N. Y. Echols Kiess Rainey, Ill, Wason Edmonds Kindred Ramseyer Williamson Fairchild Kirkpatrick Ransley Winslow Fenn Kitchin Reed, W . Va. Wise Fish h.'leczka Riddick Wyant Fisher Kline. N.Y. Riordan Focht Knight Rogers

The SPEAKER pro tempore. On this vote 280 Members han' responded to their names, a quorum.

Mr. CAMPBELL of Kansa ·. 1\fr. Speaker, I move to dis­pense with further proceedings under ·the call.

The. motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Doorkeeper will open the

door~ . · TIME FOR GENERAL DEBATE ON TARIFF.

l\lr. FORDNEY. 1\fr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the general debate run on until a little later, when a rule will be brought in. It will be announced soon when that rule will he presented. I also ask that the time be divided equally between the two sides of the House, and that I be permitted to control one-half of the time and the gentleman from Texas [l\lr. GARNER] the other half.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from 1\lichigan asks unanimous con ·ent that general debate upon the bill H. R. 7456. be equally divided and controlled . by himself and the gentleman from Texas [1\Ir. GARKER]. Is there objection?

1\lt·. FORD:NEY. That takes into consideration time already used on this side.

l\lr. GAR~~R. In this unanimous-consent reque t, do you expect to be charged with the time already occupied?

l\lr. FORD~~Y. Yes, sir. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? [After a

pause. j The Chair hears none. REPRINT OF TARIFF RILL.

l\Ir . FORDXEY. Mr. Spraker, I present the following reso­lution. which I nsk to have read.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from 1\Iichigan offers a re ·olution, which the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read as follows: House concunent resolution No. 23.

Re ol~:e£l by the House of Representati1:es (the Senate cotw"rring), That the uill (II. R. 7456) to provide revenue, to regulate comm~rce with foreign countries, to +>ncourage the indu tries of the Umted State ·. and for other purposes, be printed as a House document with an index, and that 15,000 additional copies be printed, of which 9,0(J0 ~>hall be for the use of the House. 4,000 for the Senate.t 1,000 for the Committee on Ways and Mean. of the House, and 1,00u for the Com-1nlttee on Finance of the Senn te .

l\lr. FORD~~Y. Now, 1\lr. Speaker, we ha\e recei\ed esti­mates as to the cost of printing, and to print the bill in the size of the print that has already appeared, will cost in round number $3,000. I a k to ha'e the size reduced to the ordinary document size, which will reduce that cost to $1,398.

Mr. HUMPHREYS. Can we get this through the document room or the folding room?

1\Ir. FORD1\"'EY. Whatever is usual. 1\Ir. HUMPHREYS. It does not state. As written if will go

to the document room. · Mr. FORDNEY. The document room, I think, is the proper

place. 1\Ir. HUMPHREYS. I think it ought to go to the folding

room. 1\.Ir. FORDNEY. All right; to be placed in the folding room

at the disposal of the Members of the House. ' The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from 1\fich­

igan ask to modify his resolution? l\1r. FORDNEY. I ask that such change be made. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will Teport the reso­

lution as modified. The Clerk read as follows : Resolvea by the House of Rep1·esentatives (the Senate concur1•ing)

T!J.at the bill H. R: 7456, "To provide revenue, to regulate commerce w1th foreign countrH:>s, to encourage the industries of the United States, and for other purposes," be printed as a House document with an index, and that 15,000 additional• copies be pl'inted, of which 9 000 shall be for the use of the House, to be distributed through the folding room 4,000 fot· the Senate. 1,000 for the Committee on Ways and Means of the House. and 1,000 for the Committee on Finance of the Senate.

1\fr. BLA.NTON. Will the gentleman from Michigan yield? l\1r. FORDl\'EY. I y.ield to the gentleman from Texas. l\1r. BLANTON. The forms of the print of the present bill

are already in existence and can be used if this same type is used.

1\Ir. FORD:l\~Y. Yes; but it will cost $3,000 to print it in that form and less than $1,400 in this form.

1\Ir. BLANTON. Has the gentleman taken into consideration that if the size of the type is reduced e\ery word of these 34G pages will ha\e to be reset? Has the gentleman taken that into consideration?

l\Ir. FOH.Di\'EY. It does not take so much paper or press work; it would be set in good large type in document form, and -n·oul<l be just as agr&able, in my opinion, and would save $l,GOO in printing. .

1\lr. BLANTO"N. Has the gentleman takeu into consideration the cost of haYing the linotype reset all this matter?

1\Ir. FORD~"'EY. Yes. 'l'hose estimates were given to us by the Printing Ofli~e.

1\Ir. G.A.Ri\TER. Mr. Speaker--The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Mich­

igan yield to the gentleman from Texas? 1\Ir. FORDXEY. I will. 1\Ir. G.AHXER. Reserving the right to object, I want to make

a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro temr.-JI'e. The gentleman will state it. l\1r. GARNER. I do not know what is customary under the

rules, but heretofore when bills were read the first time they were printed in the RECORD, and I was wondering why this bill was not printed in the RECORD as it was read to the House. I present that inquiry to the Speaker.

Ir. MANN. Bills that are read the first time are never printed in the RECORb.

The PE.AKER pro tempore. The Chair is of the opinion that when a bill is read the first time in the House it is not printed in the RECORD, but it simply sets forth' that the Clerk has read the bill.

1\Ir. 1\I.A.:l\'N. A bill that is read a second ti:Oe is not printed in the RECORD except when an amendment is offered.

l\1r. GAR. JER. I understood that the object of the reading of the bill was to convey the information to the public which the gentleman from Michigan is now seeking to conyey.

1\Ir. 1\IANN. I assure the gentleman from Texas that the public would ne,er read a bill in the fine type in which it would be printed in the RECORD.

l\lr. GARNER. I am not as able to speak for the public as is the gentleman from Illinois.

The SPEAKER ,pro tempore. The Chair is advised by one 9f the Official Reporters of the Honse that the practice was fol~ lowed in this instance "\vhich has been e tabli heel for some time, that wh~n a long bill bas been read in the Committee of the Whole it is not printed in the RECORD.

1\ir. FORDNEY. 1\fr. Speaker, I moYe the adoption of the re olution.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the resolution offered by the gentleman from Michigan, as modified.

The resolution as modified was agreed to. 1\Ir. CAMPBELL of Kansas rose. The SPEAh.'"ER pro tempore. For what purpose does tlle

gentleman from Kansas rise?

1921. ~ooN~GRESSION AL RECORD-HOUSE. 3489 Mr. CAl\lPBELL of Kansas. I ask unanimous consent to pro­

ceed for one minute. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kansas

asks unanimous consent to proceed for one minute. Is there . objection?

There was no objecticn. 1\Ir. CAMPBELL of _Kansas. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, after

the disposition of privileged matters on the Speaker's table, I shall call up a rule for the further consideration of the tariff bill.

THE · T~IFF.

The SPE.A..KER ·pro tempore. - The gentleman from :Michigan [1\lr. ForuJNEY] moves that the Hou. e resolve itself into Com-_ mittee of lthe Whole House on 'the ·stat-e ·of the 'Union for the further consideration of the tariff ·bill. The question is .on agreeing to that motion. ·

The motion was agl'eed to. . Thereupon the House resolved itself into Committee of the

Whole House on the tate of 1the Union for the further con­sideration of the bill H. R. 7456, the tariff bill, with 1\!r. CAMP­BELL of Kansas in the chair.

The CHAIRMAN. The House is in Commitree of .the Whole House on the ·state of the Union for the further consid~ration of the bill H. IR. 7456; which the Clerk will report by title.

The {Jlerk read as follows : A bill (H. R. 7456) to provide revenue, to regulate commtu-ce with

foreign countries, to eneomage the indu tries of the United States, and for other purposes.

1\lr. FORDNEY. 1\:Ir. Chairman, '1 ask that the gentleman from Texas [1\Ir. GAI:NER] now use some time.

The OHAffiMAN. The gentleman from Texas is recogni2ed.· Mr. GARNER. Mr. Chairman, I ask ·unanimous consent to

revise and extend my remark-s in the RECORD. J

The CHAIR1\IA1~. The gentleman from Texas asks unani­mous consent to revise and extend his remarks in the RECORD. l Is theYe objection?

There was no objection. 1\Ir. FORDNEY. That privilege will be given, l\1r. Chairman,

to everybody in the rule, ·r believe. 1\Ir. Chairman, I yield 30 minute to the gentleman from New

Jersey [1\fr. BACHARACH]. The OHAIRl\1AN. The gentleman from New Jersey is recog­

nized for 30 minutes. Mr. BACHARACH. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the com- '

mittee, it was ..my purpo e mainly to read an address that I had prepared regarding the taFiff, but I can not allow to go un­challenged the statement of my colleague from Texas [1\lr. GARNER] concerning the American valuation on the straw hat that he showed us here to-day. I want to call attention to it, and I will do so in just a moment. If his statement was cor­rect as to th-e foreign valuation of the hat and the American valuation of the hat, then there would be no straw-hat industry in this country under the present bill.

The ~entleman from Texas made the statement that traw hats :were taxed $10 per .dozen. Straw hats have ·no specific cluty and the gentleman from Texas must have. drawn upon his imagination to find a specific ·duty in tllis bill. For the infor­mation of the committee I ·will read the exact language of the item pertaining to straw hats:

modity as straw hats to any great extent would be allowed to come into this country from abroad, and it is a noteworthy and additional fact, of course, t11at in straw hats the trade-mark, particularly in this country, amounts to a great deal. We can go to ·one store and huy a ha.t bearing one trade-mark for $8 and go into another -store and buy a hat, apparently of equal value, bearing another trade-mal'k for $5 or even less. The query .of the .gentleman from Texas would not .hold good, be­,cause certainly under the conditions he recites the indu£h'y in this .country would go ·.out of business.

The gentleman from Texas stated that he did not see any l'eason why at this time we should have a tati1I bill, and my; e.olleague "from Texas is as well informed a man as theTe is in the House. He knows that as to the silk indnstry in this country, while it has grown some, yet the imports of silk ba\e increased from $28,000,000 to $54,000,000 in less than fi\e years. He also knows that where a few years ago a million dollars' worth of .glass came into this country, within the past year. $10,000;000 worth has come into this country., and the glass-in­iiustry is stagnant. Be also knows of the failures "that have occuned recently in the silk business.

I want to refer also to this question of .American valuation before proceeding with my statement. I have .prepared a little memoranclum here showing the situation with regard to habutai silk. Many Members have -stated that they did not understand how we arrive at the American -valuation o~.goods that come from a 'foreign country. Habutai silk is 6i mommie, and mommie :i:s the weight. It would be 19 yards to a pound~ and the habutai silk is really the leading silk imported into this oountry from Ja.pan. It is used .for women's waists in the higher grades. and also for m-en's shirts. In the .lower ,grades and in the lighter weights it is used for the lining of some hats a.nd also for coffin linings. n is impossible for us in this ·countJ:y to produce a less weight than 6! Jnommie . . The only reason that the ·manu­factuTers have given .as to why they ·want the lighter ·weight silk kept out of this country is in order that they may be able to produce something that the ·people would use in plae-e of habutai silk.

Example: One ya:ud of babutai silk of the weight of 6-! mommie--Cost in the United States:

Per y~rd ___________________________________________ $0. 7~ Per cent duty rate, Fordney bill, American valuation __ .!. _ 31

A1nount of duty per yard---------------------­Cost in Japan:

0 .. 2325

Per yard __________________________________________ $0.45 Per cent rate of duty in Underwood laW--------------- 45

Amount .of duty per yard ___________ . ____________ ·o. 2025

By adding 23i cents to the cost of the silk in Japan of 45 cents per yard we have the effect of the American valuation; thus: -

0.45 . 2325

. 6825 cost of .Japanese habutai under American valuation.

By dividing the American duty of 23! cents by the foreign cost we have a protective duty of 51! per cent, as .against 45 per cent under the .Underwood law, showing that the 31 per cent

Straw hats valued at more than $3 per dozen, 20 per cent ad valorem ; rate under the American valuation plan is equal in this case to all other men's hats composed wholly or in chief value of any of 5H t. · the foregoing materials, whether wholly o.r partly manufactured, either :I per cen not blocked or blocked, not trimmed or trimmed, if sewed, 40 per cent This is what has occurred in the last week: As to the actual ad valorem. market price of 6~ mommie from Japan, the 75 cents indicates

'l'hat would mean that on the hat that the g€ntleman from the price in this country, and under our present valuation, the Texas states would cost in this country $2 and which would American valuation, it would mean that the duty would be· 23± cost in France ·$1, on the basis of a 40 per cent ra.te, American cents duty ,per ~ard .on the impol'ted Japanese silk. Yaluation, the duty would amount to 80 cents; tha.t is, instead Mr. MADDEN. 1\Ir. Chairman, will the gentleman yield of figuring the duty on the foreign cost or valuation we figu1·e there? it on the American valuation and ndd it to the fo1·cign cost. Mr. BACHARACH. ·Yea. In other words, it would mean that every hat which comes into Mr. MADDEN. W.bich would make it 68! cents? this country from abroad at $1.80 could hot .be produced in the 1\ir. BACHARA.O.H. Yes; making a total cost of 681 cents ·united States for less than $2. Without the duty imposed by on the Japanese habutai silk, which compares with the 7.5 eents this bill, computed ·upon the American valuation, it would mean in this country. that the tremendous straw hat industry. in the United States, ' However, what l wanted to ~plain pru·ticularly to the ~lem­which employs approximately 7,000 people, representing a cap- . bers of the House was how they arrive at the diffet·enee between ital investment of approximately "$10,000,000, would not be able . the American valuation and the . .foreign valuation. .A ·tate­to meet the competition from the Orient, from which countries : _ment that has been made heretofore both in committee and here nine-tenths of our imports in straw hats come; and American ' -is that the American valuation is about 50 _per ·cent more fuan workmen, were jt not for the adequate .protection .afOOrde.d by the foreign valuation. I think that is generally true. It i:s the this bill, would be forced to live in the style c:ff the Chinese purpose of this committee not to keep the merchanui. e out of and Japanese if their indu try would continue in existence and

1 this country but .to make it eompetitive. Of com·. e that i tbe

enueaYor to meet the competition of the cheap ~abor markets policy of the "'Republican Pa.rty . . of the Orient. Of com· ~e, as a matter of 'fact, neither the Unller- Mr. GRA:HA1\1 of Illinois. Will the genUemau yielll? wood bill nor ·the Payne bill ever intenfle{l that suCh .a com- Mr. 13ACHA:RA.CH. 'I \Yield to the .gentleman f1·om Illinois.

·-

I •

3490 CONGRESSIONAL· R,ECORD-' HOUSE . .

Mr. GRAHA .. l\1 of Illinois. Will the gentleman tell us whether there are any factories that are producing habutai silk in the Uniteu States now? ·

1\Ir. BACHARACH. I rather think probably there may be fa•:::tories that are producing it, -and I want to say why~ There are certain factories, the same as in all other merchandise lines, in which they have standardized goods. For instance, the gen­tleman himself, probably, when he goes to buy a shirt or col­lar goes and asks for some particular kind and pays more f.or it because he wants that kind and knows that it is satisfactory, and they are the only people who are manufacturing that class of silk in this country,

Mr. GRAHAl\1 of Illinois. I do not know whether the gen­tleman can tell me about this or not, but during the war this habutai silk was found to be about the only kind that could be used in the preparation of certain cartridge cases.

Mr. BACHARACH. The silk used in the manufacture of cartridge bags is not exactly a habutai silk; they ·are made from what is kno,vn as Japanese peignes or combed silk.

1\Ir. GRAHAM of Illinois. And -vast quantities were used by the Government, all of which, I assume, were imported, or a large part. Now, if by a tariff of this kind that sort of a busi­ness can be built up in this country, it seems to me it would be very advantageous. I h-now of the vast quantities that were purchased by the United States during the war. Does the gen­tleman know whether they were imported?

l\Ir. BACHARACH. The business of supplying cartridge bags for the United States Government developed a large importa­tion of this Japanese peignes, which material, up to that time, was not imported into the United States in any appreciable quantity.. This silk was also extensively used in the rnanu­factQ.re of airplane~, parachutes, et cetera. We are a great silk manufacturing country. At the same time there are certain classes of silks on which we do not compete. This habutai silk, made in Japan, is one that we do not compete on. This habutai silk is a pure silk. Japan was in such poor favor so far as its merchandise was concerned that it was compelled to standard­ize it, and now the Japanese stamp the silk that comes into this country, showing not only that it is pu~·e silk but also the grade, showing whether it is first, second, or third grade.

1\fr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? 1\fr. BACHARACH. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. I wi h to ask the gentleman about the

American valuation. It is all right so long as the price in the United States remains 75 cents, but suppose some Daniel J. Sully should create a monopoly in the silk market, and instead of having the American valuation at 75 cents it should be in­creased 300 per cent, to $2.25. Then, this 31 per cent would amount to three times 231, .or 69i cents duty, which duty alone comes within a few cents of the real American value of 75 cents, hence would make a prohibitive rate.

1\fr. BACHARACH. No ; it would be just the other way. Mr. COPLEY. I will · give the gentleman the exact figures

in a moment. Mr. BACHARACH. l\ly colleague, the gentleman from Illi-

nois [1\fr. CoPLEY] is now figuring it. 1\fr. COPLEY. It would be $1.14i cents. Mr. BACHARACH. I thank my colleague. .l\1r. BLANTON. But as the American valuation went up or

down, this duty would go up or down, of course. 1\lr. BACHARACH. It would be added to the $2.25, as the

gentleman stated, and my friend from Illinois has figured it, and makes it $1.14. . Mr. TREADWAY. 'Vill my colleague yield? , l\Ir. BACHARACH. I yield to my colleague on the com­mittee.

Mr. TllEADW AY. I was not quite sure when the gentleman began his explanation whether he told the House where the 31 per cent in the fir t column came from.

l\Ir. BACHARACH. The 31 per cent rate in this bill on woven good. . •

1\lr. TREADWAY. I do not think the gentleman made that plain. ·

1\Ir. BACHARACH. I probably neglected to state that; but the ilk indu try is one great industry where there will prob­ably never be a monopoly. It is Tery easy to get into the silk bu iness, and to-day there are about 1,200 factories work-ing part of the time on silk. In other words, the silk industry is not like any other industry. It is not very affluent.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. 'Vill the gentleman yield? Mr. BACHARACH. Yes. Mr. CHTh"'DBLOl\1. May I ask with reference to the figures

made by my colleague [1\Ir. CoPLEY] ? Assuming what the gentleman from Texas [Mr. BLANTON] said, that the manufac· turers of this silk should treble the price and make it $2.25,

then, I understanu, according to the figures on the chart, the Japane e article with the duty could be laid down in the United States for $1.14.

Mr. BACHARACH. Yes. Mr. CHINDBLO~I. And, of course, that would kill off the

American product. Mr. BACHARACH. Absolutely. There is this much about .

the American valuation and the foreign Taluation. Per~onalls I was not a very earnest convert or advocate of the American \"aluation; but when we heard the testimony which was laid before our committee, in which it was absolutely shown that importers would come and make misstatements as to valua­tion, the necessity for it was made apparent. In fact, the best evidence, to my mind, that this is a good proposition is that the only people who have objected to it are the importers and the people who handle the greatest amount of imported mer­chandise. T\ e had one large concern loc..1.ted in New York that made the statement before the committee that they sold 90 per cent of American-made goods, and I do not believe there is a man in the country who is engaged in the mercantile business but knows that they use approximately 90 per cent of foreign­made goods . ..

Now, if there are any further questions to be asked on thi subject I shall be glad to answer them. If not, I 'Yill proceed with my remarks.

l\11'. FORD:NEY. I would like to ha-ve the gentleman cor· rect the gentleman from Texas as to the duty on straw hats.

Mr. BACHARACH. I did explain that when I began. 1\Ir. CHTh"'DBLOM:. Will the gentleman yield? · Mr. BACHARACH. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois. l\Ir. CHINDBLOl\I. Will the gentleman make a brief state-

ment of the operation of this American valuation srstem show­ing just how it is going to operate, so that anyone knowing the foreign value and the American value may figure out the tariff?

1\lr. BACHARACH. That was the purpose I had in prepar-ing this chart.

1\lr. CHINDBLOl\1. That is not in the RECORD. l\fr. TREADWAY. Will my colleague yield? 1\fr. BACHARACH. I yield to the gentleman from 1\Ius a­

chusett . Mr. TREADWAY. If I understoood the que tion of the

gentleman from Illinois [1\fr. CHL~DBLOM] he would like n copy of the table of comparative relations between American and foreign values. We have that, and it should be inserted in the RECORD, either in the remarks of the gentleman from New Jersey or of some other 1\Iember.

1\fr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? ·Mr. BACHARACH. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. The gentleman has helped me out on one

proposition very materially, and if he will permit, I want to ask him what he means by "American valuation? " Is it the wholesale price at which the goods are listed, or is it the total expense that it costs the manufacturer to produce it?

Mr: BACHARACH. I would say that it is the competitive price. If we take the cost of merchandise abroad you would compare the cost of the merchandise here, but if you are going to take the wholesale price abroad you would take the whole-sale price here. , · Mr. BLANTON. If it is not the list price or cost of produc­tion, is it a value definitely ascertainable?

Mr. BACHARACH. Oh, I would not say it was the li t price. Prices differ, prices Tary, as the gentleman kno"·s.

l\Ir. TREADWAY. Will the gentleman yield? 1\~r. BACHARACH. Certainly. Mr. TREADWAY. In reference to the table of comparison

in the American and foreign valuation, the chairman informs me that he intends to insert that table as a part of his re­marks.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. Then that will answer my inquiry. Mr. TREADWAY. The gentleman from Texas inquired

what the American valuation is. If he will carefully read section 402 on page 240, he will have a comprehensive idea of it.

Mr. BLANTON. I have rend it and I henrd the Clerk read it.

Mr. BAJ\TKHEAD. 'Will the gentleman yield? Mr. BACHARACH. I will. 1\lr. BANKHEAD. I want to ask the gentleman one qnes·

tion. He has taken the item of silk as an illustration. Mr. BACIJARACH. Yes; and the reason I did that was be­

cause I was on the subcommittee. Mr. BAl\TKHEAD. Under the existing Underwood tariff law

there is a certain duty. on silk, and does the gentleman take into consideration the present tarit! in fixing the American valuation?

1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 3491 l\Ir. BACHARACH. On imported silk I did figure it. The

present duty is 45 per cent under the Underwood law. Mr. B .... lliKHEAD. Upon what intrinsic basis is th"e Ameri­

can valuation fixed? I would like to know how a revenue agent would undertake to figure out the American valuation; upon what basis would he figure. it?

Mr. BACHARACH. In this particular case the sillr manu­facturers are contending that we are not giving them enough duty. Several silk manufacturers were in my office and they seemed to be under the impression that I would not favor as mucl1 protection as they thought they required. That is where I received the .figures of 75 and 45, which I stated was the American price of the habutai silk.

1\Ir. BANKHEAD. Suppose within six mont)ls the prices changed. Are the I'evenue officials to keep track of the differ­ent prices from month to month and be charged with the re­sponsibility?

Mr. BACHARACH. They can find out the American valua­tion very much easier than they would be able to find out the foreign valuation six months from now. Incidentally the wages will go up in Japan and other countries.

Mr. KETCHAM. Will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. BACHARACH. I will. Mr. KETCHAM. I have been much interested in the state­

ment of the gentleman from Texas that we might-develop our foreign trade by buying in foreign markets, and I am inter­ested in the interpretation of the gentleman from New Jersey of that argument. Has the gentleman from New Jersey any opinion as to the relative costs of labor invol\ed in the produc­tion of goods here and abroad?

1\fr. BACHARACH. There has been a statement compiled, which the chairman of the committee will file, of the wage scale in all countries. I want to say for the information of the gen­tleman from Michigan and others that in my district there are a great many glass factories, and not one of them is run­ning on account of the large amount of goods coming in from abroad. r know that those laboring men can not afford to buy merchandise.

Mr. KETCHAM. I thank the gentleman from New Jersey. I was wondering if he shared the opinion of the gentleman from Texas, who seems to be solicitous about procuring work for the foreign workmen when there are millions of our own workmen lying idle.

Mr. WOODS of Virginia. Will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. BACHARACH. · Yes. Mr. 'VOODS of Virgiilia. The gentleman is familiar with

the silk business? l\Ir. BACHARACH. Somewhat. Mr. WOODS of Virginia. I happen to know that artificial

silk is manufactured from wood fiber in two plants in this country, and there is another one being built. I do not think they need protection, but there are several plants abroad, and I do not think in the bill there is any provh;;ion for a tariff on this silk.

1\Ir. BACHARACH. Oh, yes; there is a provision for arti­ficial silk. It is slightly higher than 31 per cent.

l\fr. WOODS of Virginia. I thou-ght it might come in and stipplant the genuine silk.

1\Ir. DOWELL. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. BACHARACH. Certainly. Mr. DOWELL. 'Vill the committee present in the RECORD a

comparative statement of the price of labor for the manufac­ture of certain articles in other countries and the wages in this country ?

Mr. BACHARACH. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. FoRD~"EY] has that information, and I have no doubt be will print it in the RECORD.

Mr. FORD~~Y. I would like to say to the gentleman that we h:we a printed document of the wages in all counh·ies of the "\\Orld, together with the American wages, and I will print it as a part of my remarks.

Mr. DOWELL. Is-that in a comparative form? Mr. FORD1\TEY. It gives the wages of the various indus­

tries. and whether skilled ·or common labor. Mi·. HAWLEY. If the gentleman from New Jersey will per­

mit, I "ill say in answer to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WooDs] that the provision with reference to artificial silk will be found in p::tragraph 1215.

Mr. BACHARACH. I state for the bepefit of the member­ship of the committee on bot.h sides of the aisle with reference to American valuation, that 1\Ir. Hoover came before our com­mittee. and I know a gre..'lt many people value his opinion· irrespective of pnrty. This is the inquiry which was made of Mr. Hooy-er and his answer thereto:

LXI--220

..

Mr. CRISP. Mr. Secretary, I would like to ask you a question. Of course, I do not car~ to have you answer unless you see fit to do so. I do not think there is any man in -the country that is more familiar with world-wide conditions than you. I would like to kno"~ your opinion as to whether it would be advisable for the united States to change its policy of levying duties, to American valuations, as proposed in the bill which the committee is considering?

. Secretary HOOVER. I have given that some thought. My impres­Sion is that with the unstable currency and exchange situation that we have in a large part of Europe to-day there is practically no other alternative.

The Ways and Means Committee in presenting this tariff bill to the House is offering a measure which, in the best judg­ment of its members, will assist materially the early restora­tion of business prosperity throughout the country. Early in the hearings which were begun by the committee last Januarv it became very evident that the Underwood bill would in no wise protect our indush·ies from the onslaughts of the European manufacturers, who have been looking with en\ious eres upon the prosperity of America and beginning to formulate cam­paigns to bring back to their nati\e lands some of the huge quantities of gold that have come to us in our heretofore enor­mous trade with the world.

The business interests of the country through their repre­sentatives who appeared before the committee, and the masses of the people of the country through their \Otes in the last elec­tion, made it very plain that they wanted American business protected from European and oriental onslaughts. We secured . a great deal of information and data from the witnesses who appeared at the hearings and from the petitions that literally flooded us at all times, and, separating the wheat ·from the chaff, we have drawn up rates and provisions that will sene to equalize conditions and still not debar goods from abroad. .

-It would not be difficult to .cite a huge number of indus­tries that are actually threatened by foreign competition to a point where extinction must follow. We have just passed through a period of strife that showed us we should never in the future permit ourselves to be dependent upon any foreign nation, be it for coal-tar medicinals, dyestuffs, optical and surgical instruments, and other commodities to assist us in warfare, or the little celluloid toys that serve to amuse the little children of the land at all times.

Personally I believe it would have been better had we first taken up the reYision of the revenue laws, for these need over­hauling and have a wider effect on our people than the tariff. Internal taxes hit all classes of people, from the great captains of industry, through all the various professions and \Ocations, down to the urchin in the street, who must pay his penny to Uncle Sam before he can buy a 5-cent ice-cream cone. Many of the large commercial institutions of the country begin their fiscal years, as does the Government, on July 1, and it would have had an extremely beneficial effect on business if Congress­had made it so that the merchants and manufacturers would be able to begin their new fiscal year with a definite knowledge of what they will be expected to pay in the way of Federal taxes.

With the United States holding the o-verflowing money bags and Europe owing to us $10,000,000,000 from loans made to om: -allies, our markets will be sought more and more as the one place able to absorb the surplus products of all the countries. Germany, in particular, looks to America as the fertile field from which she will draw sustenance in the future.

It is true that there has been a fair increase in the wages paid the German workmen, but with this increase in pay the German masters have also adopted intensive methods of shop practice. This increased efficiency has progressed to a point where the higher present-day wage scales, as compared with prewar wage scales, have more than been offset.

World conditions are changing almost daily. However, im­mediate action is necessary ; and, as we are firmly convinced that with the exception of coal-tar dyes, which are subjected to a different form of legislation in this bill than other com­modities, no foreign products will be debarred from import into the United States because of the rates we have proy-ided, this bill should be adopted.

I have heard a great deal of talk about a "scientific" revision of the tariff law, but I must confess I do not under­stand the relation of the term " scientific " in its application to the preparation of tariff legislation. What your committee endeavored to do was to prepare for your consideration and ap­proval a '-'business" revision of the present tariff laws. 'Ve have endeavored to giy-e to the country a tariff which will, first of all, assure to the country the continuous employment of our people at wages commensurate with their labors. To do that, it is necessary for us to giYe to the manufacturers of tlie land that degree of protection which will enable them t<J

.

CONGRESSiONAL('REcbRD-· ]IOUSE.\ compete in our home markets with the products of Europe and the Orient produced with labor employed at wages that would not suffice in our own country.

We can not guarantee the one without affording the other. Employment and protection must tra\el hand in band. And when we complete the revision of the tax laws-a. matter that will be undertaken .almost immediately after the conclusion of the tariff legislation-we will ha\e wen-balanced tax laws on our statute books. It is estimated that the new customs levies provided in the bill which we are to-day considering will in­crease cu~toms receipts $300,000,000.

l\lr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield. right there?

1\lr. BACH~ffiACH. Yes. l\lr. BI. .. 4.>\.NTON. ~'he gentleman read a statement of Mr.

Hoo\er on American Taluation. Mr. BACHARACH. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. Did the gentleman's committee. follow the

opinion and the inference that should be properly drawn from 1.lre unbiased statement of facts recently made in a rEport on .American Yaluation by the Tariff Commission?

lli. BACHARACH. I do not lmow how the rest of the members felt about it, but personally I have a very high re­gard for the Tariff Commission.

Mr. BLANTON. Does that report warrant the provision in ·this bill fixing American valuation?

Mr. BACHARACH. I do not believe that tile Tariff Commis­sion would make any recommendation.

Mr. BLANTON. They gave the figures and facts. l\Ir. BACHARACH. They may have; I will not say they uiu

not, but I do not recollect it now. Mr. BL • ..A..NTON. I think that is one of tlle main proposi­

tions now before the House. M.r. MOORE of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, wm the gentleman

yield? Mr. BACHA.RA.CH. Yes. Mr. l\IOORE of Virginia. The fact is that the bulletin con­

tains a very complete historical statement. It sl10ws that this subject has been under consideration since the beginning of the Go-vernment. A variety o.f opjnions has been expressed about it, and I think it is fair to say that the majority of opinion has been against it. It has been tried for only a va·y brief period during the existence of the Go\ernment.

Mr. FORDNEY. 1\fr. Chairman, will the gentlemtm from X ew Jersey y ielo ?

l\Ir. BACHARACH. Yes. Mr. FORDNEY. Let me say to the gentleman from Texas

[1\.Ir. BLANTON] that the Tariff Commission prepared a written Etatement, copies of which we have over in the 'Vays and l\Ieans Committee, showing the benefits of American valuation. They refrained always from recommending rates.

~1r. MOORE of Virginia. May I interrupt further? l\lr. BACHARACH. Certainly. l\Ir. MOORE of Virginia. The law unfortunately does not

allow tile Tariff Commission now to make any recommendations aml it has refrained from doing that in this bulletin to which I referred. I do not know anything about private expressions of op-inion tbnt members ma.y have made.

l\Ir. BACHARACH. I would say that I think probably that would be the better method, aml l lmve something to say in re~pect to why I opposed the Tariff Commission as far as their recommending rates is concerned. I am in favor of the work that they haYe been doing.

Mr. LONGWORTH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. B.ACHA.RACH. Yes. l\Ir. LONGWORTH. · I think the gentleman from Virginia

[1\Ir. l\looRE] misapprehended the gentleman's answer. The Tariff Commission did not make a recommendation in favor of American valuation, but at the request of the committee, who desired to put such a provision in this bill, the Tariff Corn­mission helped us to draft it.

Mr. l\IOORE of Virginia. I think that is an exact statement, but the gentleman will bear me out that they did furnish a very illuminating statement on the subject.

Mr. LONGWORTH. They did, but they did not on their own initiative make any recommendations.

Mr. MOORE of Virginia. Quite true, and one of my diffi­culties has been that we are without a recommendation from the Tariff Commission.

1\lr. LONGWORTH. Absolutely, and may I also add that the gentleman from Virginia, I think, stated correctly that possibly the majority of opinion has been against American valuation. It has been tried only a little while, bo.t never before has the occasion arisen due to the falling of foreign ex-

change which made it so ab olutely necessary now, as Mr. Hoover says it is.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New Jersey has expired.

l\Ir. FORDNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yielU the gentleman five minutes more.

Mr. CHINDBLO~l. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? l\11·. B~<\.CHAR.ACH. Yes. Mr. CHINDBLOM. I want to ask this question with ref­

erence to the Tariff CoiDilliBsion : Is the Tariff Commission favornble to our Republican doctrine of protection? The gen­tleman says that we have no recommendation from them.

l\lr. BACHARACH. I would say this. In what I am about to say I shall give my own personal views and not the views of tile committee 1·ega1·ding the Tariff Commission.

There has been many murmurings around the halls of Con­gl:ess, coming sometimes from Members, sometimes from busi­ness men, that the writing of tariff legislation should be left to an unbiased board, such as the Tariff Commission. I want to say at the outset that the committee was indeed fortunate in having available the many experts employed by the com­mission, as well as the advice and suggestions of the very able commissioners themselves. .At first. before we got very far into the writing of the bill itself, I held the opinion that per­haps it would be better to give the commission greater leeway in this particular work, and I contemplated offering a pro­vision that would enlarge their powers ~nd authorities.

It was the practice of the committee, in seeking information on which to · base rates, to call in for conferences leaders in the various trades. The subcommittee members would sit around the table with these business men and the experts of the Tariff Commission having a knowledge of the particular com­modity under conside1·ation. It was the result of one of theNe conferences that completely removed from my mind any desire to delegate any of the constitutional rights of Congress to any othe1· branch of the Government.

The commission's men and these business men debated the question at considerable length, and the subcommittee drew from their discussion its conclusions on which rates were actually based. Then carne the information that these very same business men had gone to the commission and complained of what the latter's experts had told us, using vatious methods in an effort to have the testimony changed that higher rates might be afforded the industry. It so happened that these men remained steadfast, but there is no assurance that where appointive positions are involved the occasion may not some­times arise where attaches of the commission may not fall victims to intimidation to retain their jobs.

In my judgment the action of these business men was ex­tremely I"eprehensible. Their complaints should have been lodged with the Ways and Means Committee. We found them endeavoring to influence the promulgation of rates that would have resulted virtually in embargoing the foreign competing products. The Ways and l\Ieans Committee had no desire to take any such action. In fact, it has gone about its work with the idea always before it that rates should be as low as would guarantee the healthy continuance of American business, a reasonable return of revenue to the Government, and still per­mit healthy competition from abroad.

During the hearings held by the Ways and l\Ieans Committee there appeared before us interested persons from every section of the country. Some, as I have intimated, gave us informntion and suggestions that were very valuable. Others, as I have stated, gave us information and statistics that were not in har­mony with facts gathered by the experts of the Tariff Commis­sion and other governmental agencies. We had to be able to · discriminate between the various classes of information pre­sented.

We have dependable statistics to show that there has been a very rapid increase in the amount of imports coming into the United States from Europe and the Orient since the close of the war, and evidence was produced to show that these imports were so interfering with the sale of American-made goods that many manufacturers were forced to close down their plants.

The members of the Ways and Means Committee, representing all these various sections of the country, have digested and dis­cussed every bit of evidence presented to them from every a.ngle upon every item on which there was any show of disagreement. Therefore it is only fair to assume that they must have reached conclusions which, until proven otherwise, must be for the bene­fit of American industry and consequently for the benefit of the American workingman.

In writing this bill we have tried to guide ourselves along a safe course, using the Payne-Aldrich and the Underwood laws

1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 3493 for comparative purposes, bearing in mind always the condi­tions confronting us by reason of the war. These two laws, I l>elieve, offer a very good criterion as between the Democratic principles of tariff for revenue only and the Republican doctrine of tariff for protection. We have tried not to erect around our industries a wall of protection so high as to utterly exclude for­eign products, particularly those offering no hurtful competition. In many instances these rates are below those of the Payne­Aldrich law, although it was contended throughout the hearings that even the Payne rates would prove inadequate protection for our industries against the products made with the cheap labor of foreign countries.

We have thought it proper to give to the manufacturers in the so-called key industries every possible, reasonable chance to compete with foreign-made goods. These key industries are tho e which were created in the United States during the war upon the urgent solicitation of our own Government for the manufacture of those things which were absolutely necessary for our succes ful participation in and prosecution of the war, and which the country should never again be without. By " key industries " I mean particularly the chemical and the optical-glass industries, and a number of other$ whose prod­uct were so greatly needed during the war not only for our own use but for the use of our allies. It is absolutely neces­sary for the future safety of this country that these industries 8hall be available at all times for any emergency that might arise. We should never again be placed at the mercy of a for-

•eign country for the supply of merchandise of any kind which we are perfectly competent to manufacture here.

The bill is designed for the purpose of giving aid to American industries, so that the workingmen of the country may have ample opportunity to . make a decent living wage that they can properly cru·e for their families and give to their children a good education. This latter is theirs by right, ·and it is some­thing they must have if we propose to maintain our place as the first Nation in the world, the only .inheritance that has come to us from our participation in the war.

There is another thing we must bear in mind; education and radicalism are not friends, and if we want to eradicate the feeling of discontent and the economic evils which we have in­herited during the past few years we can do it in but one way, by assuring to every man who works for a living that America offers him an opportunity to make a decent wage, that he may own his home and bring up his family in a manner befitting his station in life. [Applause.] ·

Mr. FORD~"-EY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. LAYTON].

Mr. LAYTON. Mr. Chairman, the only reason that I am appearing upon the floor of the House in this debate is because of the duty that I feel . imposed upon me as a member of the medic.al profession. There are only five Members of that pro­fession in this House, and in view of the to me tremendous value of the chemical schedule as it relates to modern medi­cines it has seemed to me that some one at least among those five Members should make a presentation of the value of that schedule.

Before I begin upon that, practically, I desire to make a small confession of faith and creed as a Republican, as far as the tariff is concerned.

I have been for a long lifetime a firm believer in the policy of the protective tariff. It has been to my mind the one funda­mental national policy. It has not only developed our great natural resources, increased Ol:lr population, augmented our wealth, established our incomparable industrialism, but con­served our highest welfare, safety, and independence, making us in effect the mighty continental Nation that we are. The protective policy was wisely the first national policy to be inaugurated by om· fathers-the tariff of 1789 being the first legislative measure passed by the Federal Congress. Although from the beginning it was made the football of politics and the excuse for sectionalism, it became the established policy, and with few intermissions has been practically maintained until sectional lines are broken to such an extent that the advocates of this national principle are found not only North, East, and West, but South as well. There are still, however, advocates of a free-trade policy-fatuous followers of a principle long since condemned by experience. They are the modern survivals of Ephraim, who remain joined to their idol, historically, and whom no reason or experience can affect. Cotton was the foundation of most of the opposition to this splendid national policy, this opposition at one time eyen going to the limit of an attempt at nullification. The southern grower of cotton in the early days of the country, recognizing that he possessed prac­tically a monopoly of this agricultural product so necessai·y to the world at large, and therefore possessed the power to fl:x: the

price thereof, inspired solely by a selfish interest, longed for and sought to secure by free Hade the libert~· of selling his product in whateYer market would giYe him the highest price therefor and which afforded him the cheapest articles of manu­facture he desired to obtain in return. He wanted the maxi­mum price for his product and a minimum price for eyerytbing he sought to buy with his product.

Of course, such a policy was narrow, selfish, sectional, and wholly lmpatriotic, and on.e which, if pursued, would haye Jeft this country in a condition of undeYelopment of its na tionnl re ources, with a much-lessened population, a much-lessened wealth, and, in time of warfare, largely helple s by reason of a crude and an imperfect indu trialism. To-day the condition!'l haYe changed. The cotton grower is asking for a protective tariff on his cotton, for his monopoly i. · gone and he is feeling the pinch of competition from foreign lands.

There is no reason to spend any further time, nor shall I do so, in lauding the result of this policy of protection to Ameri­can industries, for it has spoken for itself throughout the whole wide world in such tones of power that ·there is no lan<l nor any people who do not bear witness to the magnificent eyolYement it has brought to us in wealth, in art, in science, in industrial­ism, in eYery form of national deyelopment beyond that of any other people in the same space of time. It was this policy which found us at the beginning of the late unparalleled --con­flict possessed of a giant's strength. In spite of a lack of espe­cial militaristic preparednes ·, it was tllis most highly differ­entiated industrial power and development that enabled us to exert _such a tremendous influence upon that conflict. We had the wealth, the mechanical ~nius, the industrial equipment, the food-producing power, the men, and the spirit of battle for such a conflict, and the rapid coordination of these powers was fairly marvelous and incomprehen ible to the rest of the world and wholly beyond it· expectation.

But it is not my intention or desire to speak of these things at any greater length. My real purpose is to speak in adYocacy of Schedule A of this bill and in suCh a way that I may im· press upon the 'House the necessity-I may say the urgency-of this legislation so as to give to coal tar and its synthetical products that fostering care commensurate with the magnitu<!e not alone of its actualities but of its pos ·ibilities, as it relates in all certainty to its influence upon the future of our country.

I am minded at this point to make the declaration that t11ere is no schedule in this bill of greater importance than the chemi­cal schedule. I will go further and say that in all our past history there has been no schedule. not excepting that of iron and steel, that so intimately concerns us as a people, for this schedule embraces not only those products of the laboratory required in the manufacture of textiles and the colorings re­quired in all other forms of our industrial life but a schedule through the mastery of which we will combat diseases, ~on­serye the health of the people, and adequately defend tht!tt.l in time of war. EYery epoch of ciruization has been characterized by some new discovery which stamped it with a special signifi­cance. Sooner or later this will be styled the chemical age. Geological history itself is differentiated into ages by reason of some prevailing and predominant characteristic, either in at­mospheric or animal or vegetable existence. The Carboniferous age made it possible for us millions of years afterwards to enjoy the potencies created by the tremendous growth of the Yege­table matter which characterized it, and which ~aYe us those inestimable possessions such as coal, gas, coal tar, and thou­sands of resultant products from these raw materials. When one)ooks at the crude, ill-smelling stuff, and remembers what has been produced already therefrom, the mind is apt to regard it as some magic thing of illi.n:!itable and amaZiing potentialities. I wish to say again that my firm conviction is that there is nothing in this whole tariff bill so pregnant with influence upon the future progress, power, and safety of om· country as this schedule which relates to coal tar and· the synthetical chemistry which it has largely developed to the high plane it now occupies in science. I believe that we should giYe every fostering care to the things comprehended in this schedu!e in order to develop the highest synthetical chemical knowledge of any nation in the world. The acquisition of this knowledge means the acquisition of the greatest modern power. Loath as I am to involve Government intervention in what should be individual enterprise, I am not sure but what the Government itself in this matter would be wholly justified in appropriating money for the purpose not only of securing the greatest chem­ists of the world but in. developing them as well out of our own genius, so encouraging the work of synthetical chemistry as to J.nsure its own supremacy among the nations of the world­notwithstanding the German mitid laughs at this, claiming that we l~ck devotion and t~e necessa1·y enthusiasm for such work.

3494 CONGRESS! ON .A.L RECORD-HONSE. JULY 9,

I say this because I believe that just as the strength and influence of every nation in tlie past has been measured by its production of coal and iron, so will the power, the safety, not to say the welfare and happiness of our country be measured in the future by its knowledge of synthetical chemistry. The iron man has been the commanding figure of our civilization up to this time. In the future it will be the chemist who sits quietly in his laboratory and shifts his molecular combinations obtained from coal tar from one angle of the hexagon to an­other, thereby changing at will the essential qualities of his product, and so, by an almos t inexhaustible permutation, make an infinite Yariety of things so comprehensive in their useful­ness and need that health, road building, housing, textile manu­facturing, physical adornment, objects of art which delight the senses, agriculture, photography, national defense, and an indefinite number of other things are included within the scope of its power. When one reflects that the first patent granted for "making pitch and tar out of pit coale" was in 1681, the rear that marked practically the first attempt to grapple with the mysterious heritage of the Carboniferous age, and that the value of this tar was not recognized really until two centuries later, we can see how slow the scientific world was in compre­hending the ine timable and essential potencies of this wonder­ful substance, compared to which there is nothing like it in the world. It must not be forgotten that the analytical chemist is now standing only on the threshold of a storehouse of inex­haustible possibilities-on the borderland of a vast domain of infinite discovery. The elements with which he is now becom­ing familiar afford innumerable vistas of beneficent and endless actualities. There seems to be in truth no end to what may reasonably be expected from his efforts in the future, as he gets more and more familiar with a substance that apparently possesses in large measure all the energies of the earth.

Up to this time the work of the synthetical chemist has been chiefly known through his relation to the discovery of dyes used now so generally by our textile and other establishments. While I do not mean to minimize the value of dyes, or the un­told value of the chemist's work in war in the manufacture of defensi\e and offensive deadly gases nor the benefit it has con­ferred upon the agriculturist by utilizing a by-product of the coal-tar industry for fertilizing purposes, or the i:lelights it brings to those for whom paints and powders and perfumes are indispensable agents, especially in our day, nor the great serv­ice rendered to the photographer in his ofttimes priceless work, but I do desire to emphasize again with all my power the indis­pensable -value of this industry in its relation to the science of medicine, in the alleviation of pain, in the preservation of life as it concerns all our people. The relation of the synthetical chemist to the public health in the way of prophylaxis of etiology, in the alleviation and the cure of diseases, is of infi­nitely more importance and of far greater economic value than his relation to all the rest combined. Let us not forget that when we are \Yell health is taken as a matter of course. Its inestimable beneficence is rarely appreciated except in illness. But in the hour of suffering, when pain and weakness grip us with a grim clutch, and when the fading light of life seems about to leave our eyes, what an incomparable blessing to any human being, whether rich or poor, if there be found a remedy that takes away the pain, restores the strength, and brings a

· new day of hope to replace the black vision of death. Most industries have a sequential relation. Iron ore is taken

f1·om the ground. Another industry melts it and runs it into "pigs." These in turn form the raw material for the maker of steel and all the other products of iron. These chemical in­dustries are likewise so correlated that they are interdepend­able and reciprocally valuable the one to the other. As one writer puts it: -

Unlike other industries, all phases of the organic chemical industry are so closely related that it is difficult to -single out a specialty for emphasis. The finished products of one group of industrial plants are -very apt to be the raw material for still another group, and what iS more i.Q'Jportant, many specialties which have become necessities would be impossible but for the assistance of the organic chemical industry as a whole. In no other way could the necessary raw materials be provided.

I shall not speak upon the question of imports or exports of chemical products, their values or amounts, nor upon the value and the amount of the products of the plants now en­gaged in manufacturing coal-tar products, nor upon anything else pertaining to Schedule A. I shall leave this part of the subject to others, who will do so, doubtlessly, far more specifi­cally than I can do or desire to do.

The particular branch of this discussion, therefore, to which I addre s myself is the one in which, as a physician, I natu­rally have the most interest, namely, the synthetical coal-tar products which are of use in the practice of medicine.

It may be properly said in this connection that every form of chemistry, whether of the crude alchemies of the past or the more modern and, therefore, the more scientific chemistry of the present, has always been a faithful and zealous hand-· maiden to the physician. In the beginning pharmacy was founded largely on superstition, charlatanism, and witchcraft, always, however, with more or less of a germ of truth and efficacy in the crude prescription, as was seen ill that of a cultivated English physician of another century who used powdered crabs' eyes as a remedy for diarrhea, the real cura­tive agent being the carbonate of lime obtained therefrom. It must not be forgotten that medicine in some form, however crude, has been instinctively sought for and used since the coming of man. Remedies for pain and illness were as in­stinctively and naturally sought for as food and drink and shelter and clothing, for we know that animals themselves hunt eagerly for cur~s for their disorders. St Paul was by no means the first to philosophize on the subject of life and death. The earliest caveman saw that since by man came death by man must come also some preparation against death.

Before the discovery of the medicinal values to be found in the synthetica) products obtained from coal tar the physician depended entirely upon the mineral world; upon roots, herbs, blossoms, barks in the vegetable world; and the glands of rep­tiles and parts of other living things. Gradually specialists in the roots, herbs, insects, and the like laid the crude foundation of preventive and curative medicine. The source of supply of these agents against disease were natural products, which could ' not always be found of standard purity or in sufficient supply. After this came a long and more or less successful pursuit on the part of the early workers in organic chemistry in their attempt to secure greater purity.

The next step in progress was the discovery of alkaloids from vegetable substances which gave a still greater degree of assur­ance and certainty in the treatment of diseases than had ob­tained before, because these alkaloids were of fixed purity and strength and could therefore be more accurately measured as to their therapeutic value, thereby leading to a more scientific study and knowledge of pathology. Following this has come the age of synthetic medicine, in which, out of coal tar and its products, the chemist sits in his laboratory and makes m.edi­cines at will--curative agents far exceeding in value those that are found in nature, and to the production of which in an infinite variety there seems to be no limit. I venture the prophecy at this point that the time will come, and is not far distant when the physician will be enabled to select out of a single large group of synthetical medicines possessing substan­tially one chief characteristic for his therapeutical use with the same meticulous facility that the essayist employs who chooses the proper synonym for the expression of his thought. Without bringing to your attention all of the synthetical prod­ucts now known to possess medicinal value, I will state that there are more than 200 of them, and to some of these I desire briefly to call your particular attention. Before doing so, however, let me say in passing that these products of the labo­ratory possess properties which cover practically every use that disease calls for, embracing alteratives, aperients, purgatives, germicides, anesthetics, soporifics, antipyretics, heart stimu­lants, heart depressants, emetics, and a large number of other uses for medicinal purposes. For the general purpose of antiseptics-the most beneficent of all agencies either in medi­cine or surgery-the coal-tar products have opened up a field of wonderful resource. This was amply demonstrated in the surgery of the late war.

I will take a few moments to speak specifically of some of the most important of these compounds. Phenacetin is a typical and one of the best of antipyretics. It has special value in all forms of influenza. It was found to be of almost priceless value in the treatment of the late epidemic of influenza. The people suffered beyond measure by the lack of this drug, it being at that time manufactured chiefly in Germany and its importation restricted by war.

Aspirin is another coal-tar product and of such universal favor for rheumatism and other ailments as to be used lit­erally by the ton. Benzyl benzoate has been found by experi­ments at Johns HopkillB University to be a fine substitute as a soporific for morphia without any d111g-habit tendencie . Cincophen, known under the proprietary name of atophan, is used largely and satisfactorily for rheumaUsm. Barbital­veronal-is used as a soporific, and possesses especial qualities as such. Luminal, to which a great deal of medical research work has been given and which up to this time is looked upon as the very best remedy, we have for epilepsy. I need not men­tion the salvarsans, a group of laboratory products so effi­cacious in the treatment and cure of syphilis as to merit the

1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE. 349~

encomium of a Divine blessing. Dr. Abel, of Johns Hopkins UniYersity, has made an important addition to this list through the discovery of supra renin, which is identical with the active principal of the supra renal gl:l.nd, and is of the utmost im· portance in bloodless surgery-especially in the surgery or the eye, where its use is practically imperative. When it is un· derstood that it takes the glands of 30,000 sheep to make a pound of supra renin, one gets a competent idea of the saYing value of synthetic chemistry~ A new dental anresthetic of coal-tar derivation has just been announced by Dr. Josei>li A. Kline, of New York City. It is a liquid in form,. and used in dental and oral surgery with the very happiest effect, especlillly in the dental surgery of children. I. will not take the time to mention all these synthetical and medical products and de· scribe them one by one. Let me say, however, that they em­brace in then· medical qualities remedies for practically ali of the demands made for the treatment of diseases.

Let me again remind you that we are only beginning. to com­prehend the amazing possibillties for the preservati-on. of hu­man life found in coal tar and its products. It is impassible to conceive that an intelligent Congress can fail to recognize the relation which tile development of synthetical chemistry bears to the health and happiness of the people in time of peace, and now its supreme necessity in time of war. There are few who realize the vast scope of usefulness and employ­ment these products enjoy. We use them to save the infant's life, and we use them to embalm the dead. In some. way, they enter into all employments hardly witJrout exception.. When the recent war in Europe broke out we were practically de­pendent upon foreign nations, especially Germany, not enly for dye and medicines but for all the rest of these synthetical products. Germany had so develo.Qed this varied industry as to furnish more than three times as much of these products to other nations as all the other nations put together. Through what is known as the intermediates, she practically monopolized this· industry. In vi~w of this fact, it will be perhaps interest­ing to give the prices not of the dyes but of some of these medicines which we imported.

Phana.cetin, largely used during the infi·uenza epidemic of 1890, was valued at our customhouses at a little unde1· $2 a pound. It was sold, however, to the retail druggist at $16 a pound. What it cost the American consumer when it .finally passed out of the druggist's hands needs neither imagination nor computation on the part of any Member of this House. It is now made by American manufacturers and sold in our marl.--ets at $1.65 a pound. Antip-yrin was sold at $20 a pound. The American manufacturer now sells it at $4.50 a pound. Aspirin cost us over $10 ·a pound. American aspirin now brings_ $1 a pound. Salvarsan cost $3.50 a dose before the war r Six American concerns are now manufacturing the very best sal­varsan, and it can be obtained for 36 cents a dose. These com­parisons constitute a. fair sample of how the American people are mulcted when they are at the mer:cy of a foreign manu­facturer. I assume th.at there can be no question of the value of our independence in this in.dustry, an independence which can be surely secured by enacting this schedule into law. If synthetical chemistry produced neither dyes, war gases, fer­tilizers, nor any one of the thousand and one things for which it is used, from the decoration of tfie lady irr her boudoir to the construction of pavements and roadbeds, the faet alone that it means so much to the life of the people, and will un­doubtedly mean more and more- as time goes by, would make this schedule worthy of the support of every Member oi' this body. In conclusion, I venture the prophecy that the must exalted panegyqc that shall be uttered over any Member of this House, when hereafter his memory is sought to be eulo­gized by a reminiscent people, will be found in the words, " He voted to establish synthetical chemistry, to inspire the synthetical chemist, and to make the synthetical laboratory one of the great institutions of the land."

It must not be forgotten that no adequate protection can be giyen the medicinal _part of the chemical schedole, without giv­ing adequate puotection to the whole~ The intermediates as well as the dyes are the sine qua non-the- indispensable pre­liminary products to the manufacture of all of the eoal-tar medicinal synthetical products. They stand or fall together .. The country can not be independent in its medicinal supplies unless it is independent in the other coal-tar products as well. The intermediates and the dyes are to coal-tar medicines what the pig iron is to finished steel.

Our commanding position in the industriaL world, and there­:(ore our power as a Nation, has been due to the protection thrown around all our industries, especially iron and steel. In this day of scientific chemistry we mu:st not fail to recog­nize the influence which this f01·m of knowledge will exercise

over our futme. .We shall be blind anu rec.ceant to our duty unless we make the United States the greatest country in the world by reason of its attainments in the knowledge of syn­thetical chemistry.

In conclusion, it must not be forgotten that after the out·. break of the war we found ouselves almost wholly depri-ved of many useful and imperatively necessary medicines, for the supply of which we depended practically upon, Germany. t would not like- to put In words the pain and su::tiering. our people endured during the epidemic ot the '~ flu" by reason of. a lack in these coal-tar medicines so aimlicabie to the treatment of that terrible scourge, much Iess to say how many who­actually died by reason of this. lack. .f can say that, in my judgment, haVing liaa an e:x;tensive: exnerien.ce· in that epidemic~ the extent of the fatalities were far- g1·eater in number than is generally Itnown. It is cteariy the lesson of common sensa that this great- Nation should be independent, not alone for iron or steel or ,copper or deadly gases but as well for the things that eoncern the life of all our people, even though for a short time s.ome: of our industries su:ffe.r a: hardshi-p until we are independent of foreign nations for the entire product of the coaf-tar industry. [Applause.]

M1·. Chairman, I append herewith to my address two classi­fications of coal-tar medicines. <:>ne is by Heyie,. and for this classification I am indebted to Maj. H. S. Kimberly, connected with the Carnegie· Foundation, which, together wi.th the Rocke­feller Institute, is making researches of inestimafile value along the line of synthetical medicinal chemistry. The other is by the Banett Co., of New York City.

Heyle ~ves the foll<?"!ing: classification of medicinal dyes.: A. For mternal stenllzation but not c.oming into. d:irect contact with

the blood: Methylene blue, aniline blue, and acrifiavine, for mn.ln.rla, gonorrhea, antiseptics for urinary, biliary, and intestinal disorders.

B. Dyes used externally for septic condition of the mammalian tlS"­sue : l'llet;hyl violet and !!DfStai violet, as astringents and antis.eptics for suppura~ng wonnds; brilliant' green and Pyoktanin. Y., for g.an.,."Tene and suppuratmg gunshot wounds; acri.tla...-vine, same; a:nd also propbylactie f~r gunsW?t wou!!ds (of gre!l-t success during- the. late wars) ; methylene 'VlOl~t. dismfectant in vetermary surgery; chinoline yellows, local anti~ sepbc.

C. Dyes which sterilize certain. path.ogenic organisms, but which are not. applicable_ to the humn.n body either intravenously nor instramus~u­Ia~ly: Tryp~ red' Cl and naga r~. sleeping sickness; pa.ratuchsine.. chicken spir.illosa, slight eft'ect; acndin yellow, sleeping. sickness,. ·very p-owerful ; acridine orange, same, but weaker ; pyromine and methylene blae, same, negative. •

D. Pri?cipal dy~s use-d for staining pa~hogenic bacteria for the pur­pose of Hlentifica?on: Methylene plue (Zlllc free) and fuchsine, gono­coccuS': gentian -vwle~ tubercle bacillus ; dahlia violet~ streptococcuS' and staphylococcus; methyl violet, Bismar·ck brown, and methyl green used in combination. strain. _ '

Barrett Co:, of New York City, gi'n~- the following classifi· cation:

S¥XTHETIC DRUGS, OTHER THAN D1ES.

A. A.NTIPYnETTCS.

To reduce the temperature in fevers. Antipyrine. PyramiU.on. Antlfihrin. (acetanilid). Benzenllin. Salicyf-anilid. Phen.ae.etrn. Therm<:>din. Phenoeol and Salocol, for rlienmatic fevers. Anti-pyrine and ca.ffein citrate, known as migra.inin hoechst, is a woridertul head­ache cure.

B. A..'TIS&PT.rcS.

This list is far too long for this report. A_ tew only m·e given. as: examples. Phenol (carbolic acid). Cresols ( 3) ( cresylic acid). Lysol. Thy:mol, for worms and tapeworms. TrL-chlor-phenol, twenty-fi-ve times as strong as phenol. Tri-broni-phenof, forty-sb! times as stto.n <>' as phenol. Penta-brom-phenol, fi-ve hundred times as strong as phenoL ',I'eta-brom-cresols, most active germicides kill diphtheria. germs. in two minutes. Salicylic acid, lowers. temper-ature and diminishes pain in rheumatism and checks gastric fermentation. Aspirin., acelyl salicylic acid. Salicin. Saliginin. Salol, phenyl salicylate. Partial salols, two types. Gulaceols. Formaldehyde· compounds : Dextroform with. ~tarcb: and sugar; fonnanint, with sugar· o11 milk; cheek septic cond1tion& m the mouth and. throat. ~xa-methyl,-tetramine; largely used under the names hexamme. urotropm, cystogen, and cystamine for la:cyngitls and pharyngitis. Chlotmnine T, or t~lamine, th~ sodium fggtg~~nd of para-toluene-sulfon-chlor amide. Aristol, di-thymol -di-

c. PURGATIVES AND A.PERIE"TS.

Derivatives of alpha-methyl-anthra-quinone--chrysophanie acid. chrysophan, emodi~-phenol-phthalein, called pergen· and laxin ; acctyf­valery, called a];leritoL

D. LOCAL AN..ESTHE-TI€S_

Holocain; stovain ; slypine; orthoform; new orthoform ; an~sthesia.. or subcutln, for hypodermic iniection; cy:cloform.; no>ocaine, one of the most valued local a.n.resthetics.

E. OTHER. fMPORTA.l'iT SY~TIIETIC DRUGS.

Adrenalene, called also epinephrine anli suprarenine, first obtained in crystu.lli.ne form from the suprarenal glands o.t oxen by Takamine, now :groduced synthetically, is a wonderful agent tor contracting the blood -vessels, regulating blood pressure, and curing hay (ever, and arresting bleeding. It is known chemically as laevo-methyl-a.mino­ethanol-catechol.

AROMATIC ARSE"XIC COMI?OU"XDS.

These recently disco-vered compounds are used. for the treatment of 1 sleeping sickness, syphilis, etc.: Atoxyl,. soamiu, ar a min., arsace'tin or aetbyl-atoxyl; Ilectine.

3496 CONGRESSIONAL R.EOOR.D-HOUSE. . JULY 9, Acriiluvine and its homologues for general septicemia, ulcerations,

suppurated wounds. Pyemia. Salvarsan " 606," kharsivan, arsphenamine, for sleeping sickness.

syphilis, anemia. Neosalvarsan. Galyl.

NAME A 'D USE OF COAL-TAR MEDICINALS, Acetanilide, analgetic-antipyretic. Acetyl salicylic acid (aspirin), analgetic-antipyretic. Alumnol (aluminum beta-naphthol sulphonate), antiseptic. Alpin (hydrochloride of benzoxy-dimethyl-amino-metbyl-dimethyl

amino butane), local anresthetic. Ammonium benzoate, internal antiseptic. Amyl salicylate, local and internal antirheumatic. Anasthesine (para-amido-eth:yl-benzoate), local anresthetic. Antinnonin (sodium ortbo dmitro cresylate), fungicide. Antipyrine (phenyl-dimethyl pyra.zolone), analgetic-antipyretic. Animalgeslne, analgetic-antipyretic. Antiprine salicylate (phenyl-dimethyl pyrazolone salicylate), an-

algetic-antipyretic. . Antitussin (ointment difiuordiphenyl, vaseline lanoline), remedy for

whooping cough. Antramel (resorcin, taraxici, ulmre jambol, tannigen, thymol, methyl

violet), intestinal remedy. Anusol (anusol suppositories, bismuth-iodo resorcin sulphonate),

hemorrhages. • Apiol (dimethoxy methylene ether of allyl tetraoxybenzene), men-

strual troubles. . Arhovin (diphenyl and thymol benzoic acid), urinary antiseptic. Asaprol (calcium beta-naphthol sulphonate), antiseptic. Aspit·in and caffeine, analgetic-antipyretic. Aspirin and phenacetine, analgetic. Atophan (phenol-quinolin-carboxylic acid), antiarthritic. .Atoxyl (sodium amino phenyl arsenate), syphilitic remedy. Benzosol (guaiacol benzoate), internal antiseptic. Beta-naphthol benzoate, internal antiseptic. Bismuth salicylate, intestinal antiseptic. Bismuth subsalicylate, intestinal antiseptic. Cichonidine salicylate, antimalarial. Colchicine salicylate, · gout remedy. Cycloform (isobutylester of para amido benzoic acid), local an-

resthetic. . D'eclat sirup (glycol carbolate), remedy for whoopmg e?ugh. . Diatussin (difluordiphenyl ·n vaseline and lanolin), _antituberculosis. Diplosol (salicylsalicylic acid) cry~tals, antirh_eum~tic.. . Diuretic (theobromine sodium sallcylates), dmrebc-kidney dlSeases. EJbon tablets ( cinnamoyl para oxyphenylurea), remedy for tuber-

culosis. . Enesol (mercUI"y salicylo arsenate), a.ntisy_Philitlc. . .. Epicarin ( oxynaphthyl ortho oxytoluyiC acid), _paras1bcrde. . Epmephrine (dihydroxy phenyl ethyl methylamme), heart strmulant,

stops hemorrhages. . Eumictine ( santalol-hexa methylene tetramine and salol), urmary

antiseptic. . . . Euresol (resorcinol monoacetate), remedy for skin diseases as dand-

ruff. . . t• d Europbon (di-isobutyi-cr·esoliodide), local antiseptic dus mg pow er. Fibroylsin (solution thiosinamine sodium salicylate), absorption of

scar tissues. . Fructoid laxativ.:! (phenolphthalein sugar coated), laxative. Galyl ( tetr:lOxydiphosphamino-diarseno benzene), antis;y-phililic .. Glycosal (monosalicylic acid glycerin ester), local antuheumatic. Hectine pills (benzo-sulphone paraamino phenyl arsenate or soda),

antisyphilltic. . . . Helmitol (hP.xametbylenamine methylene citr~te), ur~nary ant~sept~c. Hexalet (sulphosailcylate of hexamethylenamme), urmary antiseptic. Holocuin hydrochloride (paradieth oxyethenyl diphenyJ.-amidim hydro·

chloride), local anresthetic. Kryofine (methyloxy-paraacetphenetedine) analgetic-antipyretic. Lactophenm powder (lactyl phenetidine), analgetic-antipyretic. Luminal (phenylethyl barbituric acid), hypnotic. Magnesium salicylateh intestinal antiseptic. Melubrin (sodium p enyldimethyl-pyrazolon amidomothane sulpho-

nate), analgetic-antipyretic. Mercury benzoate, antisyphilitic. Mercury salicylate, antisyphilitic. Mesotan (methyl oxymethyl ester of salicylic acid), loc:::l antirheu-

matic. l\fethyl saJicvlate, analgesic and antirh-:umutic. Migrainine (antipyrine caffeine citrate), antipyretic. Neosulvarsan (sodium diamino dibydroxy arsenobenzene menthanal

sulphoxalate), antisyphilitic. Ninhydrin (triketohydrindenhydrate), testing reagent. Novaspe:-in, antirhetrmatic. Novatophan tablets (methyl phenyl quinolin carboyxlic-acid ester),

gout remedy. . . Novocain (pa1·a amino benzoyoyl-dlethylammo ethanol hydrochloride),

local an:esthetic. Orexin tannicum (tannate of phenyldihydroquinazoline), remedy for

stomach trouble. Novocain supmrenin (para amino benzyol dietbyl amino ethanol

hydrochloride suprarenin), local anresthetic. Orphol (bismuth beta-naphtholate). intestinal antiseptic. Orthoform (meta amino para methyl oxybenzoate), local anmsthetic. Pageol ( sanatol bicampho cinnamate and dioxybenzol and the active

principles of Fabian:1. imbrirat.:1. and hysterionica baylabuen), urinary antiseptic.

Paramido salicylic acid, analgetic-antipyretic. Phenacetin (para acetphenetidin), analgetic-antipyretic. Phenocoll (aminoacet phenetedin), analgetic-antipyretic. Phenolphthalein, purgative. Probilin pills, remedy for gall stones. Phenosal (ac~tosalicylate of phenetidin}, anal~etic-antipyretic. Pyramidon (dimethyl amido phenyl drmethyt-pyrazolon), analgetic-

antipyJ·etic. Pyramidon salicylate, analgetic-antipyretic. Pyrazolene (phenyl methyl pyrazolone), analgetic-antipyretic. Pyrazolon (phenyl methyl salicylate), analgetic-antipyretic. Pbysostigmme benzoate, eye remedy. Physostigmine salicylate, crystals, eye remedy. Quinine salicylate (salochinin), crystals, malaria remedy. Salicylic acid, antiseptic-antirheumatic.

Salit (borne~! salicylic acid ester), local antirheumatic. Salol, intestmal antiseptic antirheumatic. Salol santa! compound, urinary antiseptic. ~aloph~n (acetylparami!losalol), antirheumatic. Saloqmnone (salley! qmnine), malarial remedy. Sa,':"a.rsan (hydrochloride of diamimo dihydroxy arsenobenzene)

syphthtic remedy. ' Sanoform (iodozon, di-iodo-salicylic metbl ester) antiseptic dustin"'

~w~~ , ~

Santa! salicylate, urinary antiseptic. Sa_ntol, extra (sanatol preparation containin"' salol) ur1"nar·y tl septic. ~ ' an -~antyl (san~alyl salicylate), urinary antiseptic. Soa~in (~odmm para amino P?enylarsenate), syphilitic remedy, Sodium cmnamate, tuberculosis remedy. Socl!um luiJ?..inol (sodill:m phenyl ethyl barbiturate), hypnotic. Sodmm salicylate, antirheumatic. Sodium sulphophenate, antiseptic. S~irosal (salicylic m_onoglycol ester), local antirheumatic.

an~s~b~~;. (benzoyl-dimethyl amino propanol hydrochloride), local

Styracol (guaiacol cinnamate), tuberculosis remedy. ;r'h~ob.romin~ sodium b~zoate, diuretic. ~h.lOsianamme. (allyl-thlo .urea), absorption of scar tissues. ,:rr~bro~hydro.cmnamin !1-Cid (A~am_son tablets), tuberculosis remedy. Tn,gemm (dimethl.ramido- antipyrmbutyl chloral) analgetic- anti-pyretic. ' Xeroform (bismuth tribromphenylate), antiseptic dusting powder. Zinc sulpho carbolate, intestinal antiseptic.

DEFI~ITIONS.

.Analge~c--o-Of, Pel:t~~ing to, o~· tending to cause analgesia. Ana~gesia:-Insensibll!tY to or mability to feel pain.

..A~tlpyretic-Preventive or alleviative of fever. Dim·etic-Etficacious in stimuluting the secretion of urine Parasi~cide--Etficacious for destroying parasites. ' Ilypnoti<;-An agent efficacious in producing sleep. Antiseptic-Preventing putrefaction, fermentation etc Anrestbe~c-Pertaining to or producin~ anresthesia. ·

. Anresthes1a-Loss of sensation, especwlly of feelin.,. produced by disease or by some drug, as ether. ~·

Fungicide--Anything that lrills fungi or destroys their germ Antiarthritic:--checldng the actio_n or growth of bacteria. · · Local-Meamng external as applied here.

lion. CALEB R. LAYT0:\1', NEW YORK, Jttue 28, 1921. House of Rep1·esentati-r;es, Washington, D. 0.

HONORABLE S;'ll: We attach a writ~ .UP Which will appear in the Drug and Chemical :Markets shortly, g1vmg an outline of our organi­zation.

There is ~ tenuency on the part of some of the United States Sen­ators to b~lleve. that there is. u mon?po_Iy being organized to control the dyestuff busmesa in Amer1ca. Th1s iS an impossibility due to the fact t~at there are several t~ousand separate and distinct' products to be denved from co~l tar wh1ch are classified as dyestuffs and coal-tar drugs. . There ar~ also sev~ra~ hundred individual manufacturers, our. elves mcl.uded, Wlth.out a~llation with any other corporation, who are using t~e1r own capital Without resort to public funds. It is a free field and Simply narrows down to a question of which organization can compound ~nd man~facture the most de irable dyestuffs and coal-tar drugs of the uest quahty at the lowest price.

The progress made during the past four years has been creditable an~ we are far ahead of any o.ther country, except Germany and Switzerland, who have orgamzatwns of long standin"" where they are. benefited and helped by every educational instituti~n as well as their Governments. Already the American universities technical schools, and trade schools are intensely interested in the' subject ot organic chemistJ:y, ~articularly with reference to dyestuffs and coal­tar drugs, and 1t Will probably be at least five years to the best of our ability to foresee, before America will have enhanced her po ition to such an extent that she will be independent of any other country

The elaborate preparation necessary to this end can not be ac: complish~ in a ~hort time! and i! the i~petus to research is destroyed by allowmg forelgn matertals to come m here at ruinous price!'! not only will capital be timid, but the incentive to develop ·wilt be destroyed.

At present the returns to the manufacturer are nil for the reason that all profit deriv•d. from tb~ sale of the produce is put back into new plants and operat10ns. This procedure will have to continue until manufactu~·ing schedules can be maintained, and this is controlled almost entirely by the encouragement which we expect to get from our Government in the way of protection from foreign competition.

We have been in this business for 44 years, part of the time as im­porters and part of the time as manufacturers. Our plant at ·ewark N. J., was erected in the year 1915. We feel, therefore that we arc in a particularly good position to know what will and win not protect this industry. In our opinion the levying of a specific and ad valorem duty, even if the latter is based on American values, will not alone suffice to protect the American dyestuff manufactui·er at this stage of his development. . ·

The dyestuff manufacturers in general have appealed for an emlJargo under certain conditions on such dyes as are being successfu!Jv manu­factured in the United States, with certain provisions for the licensing of imports of dyes which are not made in this country. Obviously the latter provision is in the interest of the various dye-consuming iuclus­tries. It is, however, a ju t and reasonable provision, and there is, in our opinion, no good und valid reason why the United States, Great Britain, and France should not, with advantage to our Nation, act in complete harmony and all adopt the same general principles as applied to this key industry.

We are not ilisposed to doubt or question the intent of this Congress

~~arrirf~isa~~q~~~e1loJ!1~c~~~f~Y,tobut1et~~{a~~~J;·o~ ~g~ ~~~s~:~ everY. American plant will have to close, leaving another army of over a million people unemployed. Can Congress afford to throw labor out of employment in America to-day?

Our industry is a highly technical one and sensitive to criticism. The staffs of men employed in this industry are ou edge. They all work 7 days a week, and are at. our command 24 hours out of each uay. After four or five years of the most intense etrort we find. the

1921. CONGRESSION _A_L RECORD-HOUSE. 3497 I>ersonnel of the American dyestuff manufacturers to be, as a body, completely discouraged by the nonaction of Congress.

Why .should politics have anything to do with the bnildin~ up am1 protecting of one of the country's most important and essential indus­tries ? The old feuds dating years back

1 which bear no relation to this

subject matter, should not be taken im:o consideration. This is the key industry. We talk about fostering infant industries.

Is it not a fact we must do more than this for the key industry? Why will you not help us to build rather than to destroy?

Your own son, who, perhaps, may be attending college, is interested in the study of organic chemistry. It reflects itself all through our educational system. The ramifications and complexities of the sub­jects are beyond the comprehension of a nontechnical man. Only one of high technical education under stands the danger which confronts us by the present attitude of the United States Senate simply because a certain few Senators fear a monopoly, which has absolutely nothing to do with and has no bearing on the fostering of the industry.

We have many men in our company who are capable of bringing these facts to your attention and who would only be .too glad to come before one of your bodies and give an expression of opinion which we believe might exert you to greater efforts on behalf of this creative industry.

This company has $3,000,000 invested, all its own capital. We haven't borrowed any money and there has been no stock flotation. It would be an easy matter for us to throw our influence in behalf of letting down the tariff bars and importing foreign colors. It wo1.lld cause us far less expenditure in the future and would enable us to cut down our expensive organization, but we are in the game to show that America can do more along synthetic lines than any other country.

Very truly, yours , JOHN CAMPBELL & Co., GEORGE H. WHALEY, P·resident.

Mr. FORDNEY. 1\lr. Cllairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. TINcHER].

Mr. TINCHER. Mr. Chairman, I want to IJe fair in the few moments that I shall talk here. I shall start out by saying that I do not believe the Underwood tariff law ever had a fair trial. Had it not been for the interference of the European war, I think the Underwood tariff law would have successfully closed the factories of this ~ountry several years ago.

I do not think anyone familiar with the economic situation of this countTy at the time the war started in Europe will claim that anything save and except this war and our entering into the war prolonged the operatiun of the American factories until this time. I am a protectionist because I believe in the prin- · ciple of protection. I believe if the factories in ~fr. BACHA­R-ACH's district were open to-day that the produce from my district could be sold to the men who would be laboring in the factories in l\Ir. BAcHARAcH's district. [Applause on the Republican side.] We came here last December after election, after the people had spoken, and for se\eral days we went along practically all of one accord and one opinion. Christmn.s came and with it that Christmas spirit, "Peace on earth, good will to men," and we passed the tariff law just about that time, I think immediately before or immediately after Christ­mas, an emergency ta1iff bill, in which was the best schedule for agricultural products e\er passed by an American Congress. And yet, as I say, that was before some man named White had decided that this Congress should engage in politics; that the pollcy of one of the great parties of this Nation should be a nagging policy toward the other party.; a!! a at that time we were all feeling good and we were fresh from home and our constituents, and we determined to do something in some mea'.'l­ure to correct the deplorable conditions in this country. And, my friends, I remember that day when I swelled. with pride when I heard my friend GABNER take this floor and persuade 40 Democrats on the other side to vote for a protective tariff. I wish that the rules of this House were such that this country could not be deprived of that magnificent speech, that splendid speech, that should have gone in . the Co. GRESSTONAL REcoRD on the 27th of last December, that would have contradicted very successfully and more effectively than any speaker can do to­day, the speech made by the distinguished gentleman, who represents a new influence in the Democratic Party. I regret that speech, which all of us remember quite well when GARNER bravely, nobly took this floor and made his plea for a protec­tive tariff last December. I can not even procure a typewritten copy from the reporters. There is no way that a Republican Member can ever haTe the pleasure to-day of reading that magnificent speech that was made here. Why? Why things have changed since then. They are different to-day. You did not know just then what position you were going to take and you caucu~ed. Talk about north of the Ohio and east of the :Mississippi! You caucused and you had in your midst one of the brightest, one of the keenest minds in America, a Demo­cratic Congressman from west of the Mississipp4 CABL HAY­DE. , and I am told that another Democratic Congressman from my neighboring State of Colorado made in that caucus one of the finest speeches ever made .in a Democratic caucus for CARL HA):DEN, the only Democrat west of the Mississippi who was a ­candidate for a position on the Committee on Ways and Means, a committee that would ha\e more opportunity of framing laws concerning taxation and the tru·iff than any committee of this House. But "no. There rose up in your conference, or caucus

I believe you called it, that old feeling, and the boys rallied around the old flag and decided that the policy of the Demo­cratic Party would be a free-trade policy, and with that deci­sion CARL HAYDEN went down to defeat and a gentleman from New York went on the committee who would sign minority reports against tariff bills, which reports are a disgrace to the best-thinking American l)eople to-day. [Applause on the Re. publican side.]

Talk about north of the Ohio and east of the Mississippi t What has happened since we came back last fall; what has happened since last election to change your views so mate­rially? Why you started out then and said, "We are going to help the administration to be constructive and pass good laws, laws that will do a great deal of good." Since then you have adopted a policy of hindering. The papers, the press of this

· country, do not conceal in any way and make no secret of the fact that the party organization of the Democratic Party have decided that their policy shall be one of hindering and not of. helping, of nagging, in an effort t() get the offices back. Now, we can not afford to have another world war to. prolong the life of a Democratic tariff for eight years. It costs too much money, too many lives, to try out your tariff in that way. Now, I would like to quote - the gentleman from Texas in a speech to which I have not access. I will not attempt it, though, for fear I might be inaccurate, and there is just one man in the world who could dispute me if I were inaccurate, and I do not want to engage in a personal controversy with that man. How­ever, Mr. GARNER did say before the spell was completely broken and before the change in the policy of the Democratic Party was fully agreed upon--h-e said upon the floor of this House in January, because he said his Democratic friends were abusing him for voting for the tariff, and so in the latter days of Janu­ary he did make a speech a little in · explanation of his vote, not of his speech but of his vote, and that speech was a dandy. It caused 40 men to rise in their p-laces as Democrats and walk up and vote for the tariff. It would be a great Republican cam­paign argument if we could get hold of it, because that day he forgot free trade, he forgot there were three angles, and took the position that there were but two--one was American and one was un-American, and he took the American angle that day. [Applause on the Republican siEle.] In January, as I say, he said:

I am not a protectionist, neither am I a free trader. However, I realize that whenever yon go to the customhouse to collect duties te> run the Government, that just as you levy tb:at duty through the cus­tomhouse so do you give the American producer the advantage over the foreigner.

Do you want to do that? Is it possible that that is the issue here to-day, that one side wants to give the American producer the ad\antage over the foreigner and that the other side does not want to do it? That was when he was voting for a tariff that he said that. That was in a kind of a quasi apology and justifi­cation for his quarrel with the leadership of the committee and somewhat of an answer to the distinguished gentleman that ha$ gone back to illinois, Mr. Rainey, who had chastised him severely for taking the American attitude. ·why, my friends, regardless of the sections of the country that we live in, I hope every man stands for America. How can any man advocate going on with a condition that means that the farmers of this country have a market value for their staple products that gives them a purchasing power of only 67 per cent of those products for a 5-year period immediately before the war? There never can come a time when that can be made up to the American farmer, and he can never have a 100 per cent purchasing: power from the sale of his products in America with the factories of America closed.

Mr. BLACK. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. TINCHER. I will gladly yield to the gentleman. Mr. BLACK. The gentl-eman comes from probably the largest

wheat State in the Union. Will he tell us how much wheat has advanced in price since the passage of the emergency tariff bill?

Mr. TI.l'{CHER. I will be glad to answer. I beard the gen­tleman from Texas [Mr. CoNNALLY] make a speech, and in that speech advance the same thought. That speech was to the effect that, "Vote against tariff because it will not raise the price of your products." That speech was this: "Vote against tariff because it will raise the price of all products.'' And that speech is the same Democratic tariff speech that I have been listening to since I was a little boy. I want to say to you that the price of wheat has gone down since the passage of that bill. I can not giTe you the number of cents, but it has gone down. And I say that in my honest judgment it ha.s been re­duced to about 35 cents less than it would ba"\":"e been without that tariff bilL [Applause on the Republican side.]

Mr. BLACK. Will the gentleman permit a further inquiry?

3498 CONGRESSION .AL RECORD-HOUSE·. JULY 9,

lUr. TINCHER. I will be glad to do so. Mr. BLACK. Will he give us the difference in price.of wheat

in this country and in Canada? As a matter of fact, is there any material difference now in the quotations of the Winnipeg market and the American market?

1\fr. TINCHER. That depends entirely on whether you take the American valuation or not. And right on that subject, I wonder how any man can stand before his colleagues to-day, with the condition of our exchange as it is, with an unprece­dented and unheard-of condition, and advocate that we use something other than the American valuation in a tariff bill. I did not want to interrupt my friend GARNER this morning, because I knew he did not want to use over half a day, and therefore I did not desire to take his time, but there was a time when I wanted to ask him if he would not use the American valuation what valuation he would advocate using. But he made a long speech, conspicuous by the absence of a suggestion that any other valuation should be used.

There are schedules in this bill that I think need correction. There are things in this bill on the free list that must go on the protected list. There are things in this bill on the free list that I believe, when certain men that are for protection stop to think and realize that they are keeping them on the free list, and that they know they are selfish in doing it, will not be there. I refer to hides. How any good thinking man can fight putting hides on the protected list I can not understand.

- [Applause.] Never in the history of this country did the men that produce the meat of the country need protection as they need it to-day, and the hides of this country, that are used in this country by the manufacturers, are 40 per cent imported from other countries.

1\Ir. TREADWAY. Will the gentleman yield? 1\Ir. TINCHER. I will be glad to yield, because I think you

are one of the gentlemen I want to yield to. 1\fr. TREADWAY. In view of the gentleman's information

as to the need of a duty on hides, does he go to the extent of a compensatory duty on manufactuTes?

Mr. TINCHER. Absolutely; and I will say the gentleman has gone to the extent of a duty on manufactured products,

-and that is the reason I am a protectionist. But you can not go too far with a Westerner. We want a duty on hides. We want to be recognized in this bill, and there is a product 40 per cent of which is used in the United States, but that is now imported from countries where labor has no value and that is not protected along with other products.

The balance of this agricultural schedule is not all that I think it should be. •

l\fr. TREADWAY. I want to interrupt the gentleman in order to congratulate him on his fairness.

Mr. TINCHER. And I will say to the gentleman that I want, if he votes for a duty on hides, to congratulate him on his fairness. I hope when this tariff bill is passed the message will not go out to the country that some few New Englanders stood like a rock of Gibraltar for no protection on the raw products which the farmers have.

l\fr. GARRETT of Tennessee. Can the gentleman tell us what duty will be proposed upon hides in order that we may begin looking into the compensatory duty on the manufactured products?

1\fr. TINCHER. I will say to the gentleman that I do not know. Some of us over here are talking of offering an amend­ment, as are some of you folks over there. I do not think they have fully agreed on the amount to be proposed in the amend­ment. The compensatory duties on the manufactured products need worry no one. Why? Because we are exporting the products of the bides and of the factories in this country, and we are importing the raw material. Somebody said if you put a duty on bides it will increase the •price of shoes. How can anyone say that? To-day we have free hides, the cheapest hides ever in the history of America, and the price of shoes is high. Or at least one year ago this statement would have been absolutely true, that the price of shoes is higher than ever in the history of the country and the price of hides cheaper, and hides on the free list.

Mr. GARRETT of Tennessee. Shoes are on the free list in this bill, are they not?

1\fr. TINCHER Yes; and I doubt if there is a Member pres­ent or a visitor here in the gallery or a member of any man's family in this House who believes that a tariff of $10 a pair on shoes would raise the price of shoes.

Mr. GARRETT of Tennessee. What is the use, then, of the compensatory duty?

:;.\-Ir. TINCHER. 1\fy reason for saying that I -would vote for a compensatory duty is this: I am a 'protectionist, and I

do not propose to have anyone bluff me out against standing up for protection for hides by saying that I am in favor of placing a tax on the exporting manufacturer.

l\Ir. GARRETT of •rennessee. Then the gentleman is trading. Mr. TINCHER. No. I do not have to trade to be for pro­

tection. All I had to do was to live through a Democratic tariff administration. [Applause.] · .

1\fr. GARNER. 1\fr. Chail·man, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. OLDFIELD] such time as he may -desire.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Arkansas is recog­nized, if he desires, for one hour.

Mr. OLDFIELD. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the com­mittee, I would very much prefer to proceed for a while, at least, without interruption. However, if it is the real desire to interrupt me I shall not seriously object.

I enjoyed the speech of my friend from Kansas [Mr. TINCHER] very much, indeed, and especially that part of his speech with reference to the emergency tariff law, one of the first, if not the first, bill of any magnitude which this Congress placed upon the statute books after the Republican Party came into power ; and I do not believe there is a single, solitary person in this Hall, and I do not believe there is a person in the entire country to-day, who will say that that law has been of any benefit whatsoever to the farmers of the country. We told you it would be of no benefit to them. We take the posi­tion-and I shall take that position in this speech to-day-that where any product, whether of the farm or of the mine or the factory, produced by us in great quantities for export, it is absolutely impossible for a tariff for protection to do that prod­uct any good, or to be of any benefit to that product. I believe I can convince any fair-minded gentleman in this House that that is true.

I was also very much delighted with the speech of our good friend from Michigan [1\fr. FORDNEY], the chairman of the Com­mittee on Ways ancll\1eans. He is a splendid man. Every mem­ber of the Committee on Ways an.d Means, regardless of politics, loves him. He is a kind man. He treats us all fairly and alike as members of the committee. I was much interested in his argument in regard to protection, and I was especially inter­ested in his illustration of Joseph Chamberlain, who made a fight in England for protection, I believe, in 1905, and he gave the illustration correctly. Mr. Chamberlain made that speech throughout England in that notable fight, and he went down to defeat, to overwhelming defeat, on the issue of protection, largely, I believe, because Great Britain at that time and up until the European war started was a great creditor nation, and therefore she wanted and needed to trade with the world. She had become through free trade a great trading and com­mercial nation.

The gentleman from Michigan ought to have told the House of the fight made by Sir Robert Peel and Richard Cobden away back in the forties, in the last century, for free trade in Eng­land. He should have told the story of people starving for bread in England on account of the corn laws, which were pro­tective tariff laws on food, if you please. The people of those days-the poor, old and young-were starving throughout Eng­land because of the high protective tariff on food products. They were converted to the ide_a that prohibitive tariffs were not good for Great Britain at that time, and Great Britain has taken that position ever since, regardless of the fight made by Joseph Chamberlain.

But, gentlemen, let us see what the two great parties of this country say on this tariff question. It is a great question. The question of taxation is always a great question. It touches the pocketbooks of all of the people of the country, and therefore it has always been and always will continue to be one of the great questions in this country; not only tariff taxation, but other sorts of taxation, if you please, including internal taxation.

I was also interested in the statement of the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. FoRDNEY] when he read the platform of the Democratic Party in 1892 and in 1912. You will recall that we won the election on both of those platforms. We declared in the platform of 1892 that a protective tariff was robbery of the many in the interest of the few. We declared for a tariff for revenue only in 1908, and again in 1912 we declared for a tariff for revenue only.

The gentleman from Michigan also read into his speech, I am glad to say, the platform of the Republican Party in 1908, which declared for a tariff " to equalize the cost of production in this country and abroad, together with a reasonable profit to the manufacturers of this country." You went to the country on that, gentlemen, and you won - the election. You wrote the Payne-Aldrich tariff law, and you revised the tariff upward instead of downward. That law split the Republican Party in twain. In fact, it almost destroyed your party. And yet -you

1921. CONGRESSION .._1\._L RECORD-HOUSE. 3499 come here to-day with a tariff bill, with world conditions unset­tled with the economic conditions of the world upside down, and you 'want to place a law on the statute books even higher, when you consider the American valuation scheme, than the Payne-Aldrich Act. .

Now let us see what our platform says in the last campaign, The Democratic platform of 1920 says:

We reaffirm the traditional policy of the Democratic Party in favor of a tariff for revenue only, and we affirm the P?licy of b~si~g a tariff revision on the intelligent research of a nonpartisan comm1sswn rather than on the demand of selfish interests temporarily held in abeyance.

In other. words, gentlemen, we believe this Government has no l'igb,t to tax: its citizens, or a group of its citizens, for the benefit of another group of its citizens.

That is the position of the Democratic Party, gentlemen, and I believe it ought to be the position of the country; and I be­lieve that after you have written this law and placed it upon the statute books it will be the position taken by the people of this country. .

Let us see what the Republican platform of 1920 says. As a matter of fact, gentlemen, when you met at Chicago, you had in mind what the Payne-Aldrich tariff law had done to you, and you soft-pedaled on the tariff question, and you know it. One gentleman, a clothing manufacturer, ·came before the Com­mittee on Ways and Means and advocated a low tarifi'. 1\fr. FoRDNEY, the chairman of the committee, accused him of be­in:; a Democrat. He said no, that he was a Republican. He was for a low tarifi' under present conditions, and made a splendid statement. 1\fr. FoRDNEY accused him of being a Democrat. He said, ' No; I am a Republican; but I do not agree with any Republican tarift' policy like the Payne-Aldrich tariff law, and after reading your platform adopted at Chicago, I thought you were going to be sensible about the tarift' in the future. I thought you would remember the experience you had under the Payne tariff law, and that you were going to stop, look, and listen before writing another one like it. Therefore I voted for 1\fr. Harding in the last campaign." But before be left the witness stand he said he never expected in the fu­ture to belieYe anything that he saw in a Republican plat­form. [Laughter.] I say to you that you gentlemen soft­pedaled on the . tarift' question in 1920. You did not know where you were on the tariff question. Here is what the Re­publican platform of 1920 says:

The uncertain and unsettled condition of internationai balances, the abnormal economic and trade situ.ation of the world, and the im­possibility of forecasting accurately even the near future, preclude the formulation of a definite program to meet conditions a year hence. But the Republican Party reaffirms its belief in the protective prin­ciple and pledges itself to a revision of the tariff as soon as condi­tions shall make it necessary for the preservation of the home market for American labor agriculture, and industry.

You did not say anything about a revision upward. Neither did you say anything in 1908 about a revision upward, but you are going to give a revision upward now just as you did then. You pledged yourselves to a revision of the tariff "as soon as conditions shall make it necessary for the preservation of the home market for American labor, agricultm·e, and industry." That is the position you took at Chicago in 1920. But what does the first part of that plank mean, if it means anything? It means that you knew of the uncertai_n and unsettled condi­tions of international balances. You gentlemen at Chicago knew that the world was upside down. You knew that con­ditions were such that it was absolutely impossible to get any definite, real information with regard to the difference of the cost of production at home and abroad, and you wrote your bill without that information. I say that is an improper way to write it, and I believe I can prove it to you before I get through here.

You knew also of the abnormal economic and trade situa­tion of the world. You knew then that our allies owed us $10,000,000,000. You knew that the peopl~ .of foreign countries owed our people in this country an additional $5,000,000,000, and you knew, as everybody knows, that it is absolutely im­possible for the Governments of Europe to pay to this Gov­ernment $10,000,000,000 in gold, because there is not enough gold in the world outside of this country to pay the interest on that sum. Therefore it must be paid in commodities, if the debt is ever to be paid. The same is true with regard to indi­viduals. I believe everybody in this House knows that. You certainly do not expect Canada, for example, our next-door neighbor and one of our best customers, to buy from us unless she can sell to us. You certainly do not expect that Japan, France, England, and Germany will bring their ships to our ports empty in order to pay in gold for our food products, for our manufactured · products, and for our raw materials. It is unthinkable, gentlemen. Suppose a farmer in my town or your

town should go to the merchants of the town and say, "Gen­tlemen, I have on my wagon out in the street a load of cotton, wheat, chickens, eggs, or other staple farm products. They are the products of my toil. I brought them here. I want to sell them to you and get the money, so that I may buy something for my family-clothes, shoes, hats, and so forth." Then . suppose the merchant should say to the farmer, "No, :Mr. Farmer, we do not buy farm products in this town. We have the merchan­dise to sell you, but we do not buy farm products. Ten miles from here there is a town where the merchants do buy farm products. You go over to tlmt town and sell your farm prod­ucts to those merchants and then come back here to us and we will sell you the merchandise you want." What do you tbJnk the farmer would do, gentlemen? He would buy where he could sell, and the peoples of the earth will buy where they can sell, and they will not buy unless they can sell. [Applause.] No community, no nation can live unto itself alone and prosper. We must sell to foreigu people·s the products which we can produce cheaper and better than they can and buy from foreign peoples those products that they can produce better and cheaper than· we can if we expect to go forward and prosper as a great commercial nation. It seems to me, gentlemen, that nothing could ·be plainer than that proposition. Now, you gentlemen understand that principle of. economics. Everybody in this country understands that. The man on the street unde1·stands it. These manufacturers who appeared before the 'Vays and Means Committee seeking protective tariffs, seeking to monopo­lize this market, understand that rule and that principle of economics very well, but they are so greedy and selfish that they would absolutely prevent all foreign competition and keep out all products and thereby lose all rev·enue. There can be no question about that. · Why, gentlemen, I heard these men testify, and, in the language of Sancho Panza, they were testifying for the long green. [Laughter.] They wanted to get the coin out of the consumers of America. The proof showed that they had been getting the coin unjustly, getting without earning what other !)eople had earned without getting. The hearings on this bill are full of that. But some leaders of the Republican Party do not seem to understand that. It seems that the people of the country can understand this question much better and much easier than the leaders of the Republican Party. The protected manufacturers of this country have forced the Repub­lican Party in the past, when we were a debtor nation, to permit them to plunder the people, and they can see no reason now why the graft should not be continued. [Applause.]

There are some leaders on the floor among the Republican Party who say that they want to keep the home market for home producers. That means that they want, at all hazards, the home market for the home manufacturers of the country. Some go so far as to say that if it becomes necessary you are willing to cancel all the debts owed us by European countries in order to protect and preserve the home markets for the borne manu­facturers. I am not surprised at the Republican leaders saying that. I think that is what you expect to do. I am not surprised, because that is a No. 1 Republican doctrine. Why? Because the $10,000,000,000 that we loaned our allies belonged to all of the people because it was collected by taxes. We loaned it to the Allies to help win the war. Now, if you can give all that money away and permit the manufacturers of America to profiteer to the extent of additional billions, that is good Re­publican doctrine. That is what you Republicans intend to do, but you give only one of the reasons. A great many manufac­tm·ers of this country to-day want this debt canceled, but they do not want the products of Europe to come here, because they say they can not compete with the foreigner. I deny it and de­mand proof. There is no proof in the hearings that they can not compete with the foreigner. They may not be able to com­pete in toys or something of that kind, but they can compete on the necessaries of life--food, clothing, shoes-and on steel prod­ucts and cement, and many other necessary articles. But you give only one of the reasons why you are going to cancel the debt~ I will give you another. Here is the additional reason. It will be compelling on the leaders of the Republican Party when the time comes. Th~ time is not ripe now. Here is the reason: The great investment bankers of the country are put­ting their money into reconstruction bonds of Europe by mil­lions and by billions. You can hardly pick up a newspaper, especially a New York newspaper, without seeing that the bankers ·have purchased a hundred million bonds here or a huu­dred million bonds there, and they are buying these bonds at dirt-cheap prices. A lot of them yield usurious rates of inter­est: Now, when they have bought all the bonds they want, when they have gotten through buying them, what will happen? It will be impossible for the bonds to go to par until : hose governments pay this Government what they owe us. It is im­possible for the bonds to go to par until that happens. When

3500 CONGRESSIOX .AL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9,

they have gotten through buying the reconstruction bonds you will wake up &orne morning to see the greatest wa1e of propa~ ganda that you e\er saw in this country for remitting the debts that Europe owes us. You will find a great many Republican leaders giving this reason and that reason why these debts should be canceled. You will see the newspapers controlled by the great interests of the country giving reasons why these for­eign debts should be canceled, and why the hard-earned money of tbe people of this country should be given away.

And when you get through, if you win the next election-you will say nothir.g about it, of course, in the platform and it will not be discussed in the campaign, but after the election you will put affida\it expressions on your faces and say the people elected us ; hence they want the debt canceled. Of course you will say nothing about it in the campaign, just as you said noth­ing about the tariff in the last campaign, and yet the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. TINCHER] says that the people commissioned you to write this kind of a tariff bill. Yet the tariff bill that you wrote in 1908 had lower duties than this bill, taking into consideration the American valuation, and yet after that tariff bill was passed the people almost destroyed your party; hence you will cancel the debt and these reconstruction bonds bought now will go to par overnight and the great investment bankers will pocket additional billions of profits.

Mr. KING. Has the gentleman read Col. House's new book in which he says the only way the bonds could be collected is by force?

l\fr. OLDFIELD. I do not care anything about what Col. House said. If he said that it is probably a starter for the propaganda, but he never will convince me. If there ever was a party on this earth that has absolutelsr been controlled by special interests, by the manufacturers, by the Aluminum Trust, by the Woolen Trust, by the Steel Trust, and the great invest­ment bankers, it has been the Republican Party. [Applause on Democratic sid~.] •

l\fr. KING. Was not the Democratic Party controlled for eight years by the international bankers, headed by Barney Baruch, with a close connection between the Shoreham and the White House?

Mr. OLDFIELD. No. James 1\f. Beck, of your Department of Justice has started a propaganda on the part of the adminis~ tration.

Mr. GREENE of Vermont. Col. House was not a part of the Democratic administration; he belonged in the kitchen. [Laughter.]

Mr. OLDFIELD.· It makes no difference about Col. House or anybody else. This side of the House is not going to be willing to cancel the debt.

1\fr. GREENE of Vermont. I am glad they have come to their senses after eight years.

Mr. OLDFIELD. Oh, we have had some good times in America under the Wilson administration with more villifying criticism and more mean, dirty, slimy abuse from the Republican Party than has ever occurred at any other time in the history of this country.

Mr. GREENE of Vermont. The gentleman is not being per~ sonal, iS he'?

1\Ir. OLDFIELD. No. 1\Ir. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. Mr. BLANTON. I want to ask the gentleman from Illinois

[Mr. KING] if he is in favor of canceling the debt that t11e European countries owe us?

1\.fr. KING. I am not. 1\Ir. BLANTON. Then why is the gentleman quoting Col.

House? 1\Ir. KING. I am quoting Col. House to assist the gentleman.

I agree with the-gentleman that Col. House is a propagandist, and nothing but a propagandist.

Mr. GREENE of Vermont. And always has bee-n. Mr. KING. Yes. 1\fr. OLDFIELD. You say you do not want these debts paid

in goods, for tha.t is the effect of this legislation, you do not want them paid in commodities. It is impossible to pay them otherwise and will continue to be impossible and ought to be impossible for the reason that we do not want them paid in gold. It would upset the world if all of that debt were paid in gold at one time. We want it paid in commodities if the world is to prosper and we are to prosper.

Mr. HARDY of Texas. The gentleman says we want it paid in commodities. That is the way we paid our debts when ·we were debtors.

1\Ir. OLDFIELD. Certainly. Suppose a farmer should go to a merchant in the gentleman's town with wheat and cotton pn Ws wagon nnd say to the merchant, "YQU supplied me dnr-

ing the time that I made my crops. I have two ab olutely staple products on my wagon, cotton and wheat." In the wheat section you can always get a price for wheat and in the cotton section you can always get a price for cotton, although sometimes it is very low, as . it is at present. Suppose this farmer should say to the merchant, ~' I want to pay you as much as I can on my account, but I have no gold and no cash in the bank. Go out and take this wheat and cotton and apply it on the account." What do you suppose the merchant would do? He would take the staple products at the market price and give him credit on the account. Yet that is what you do not want to do in regard to this great foreign debt.

Mr. Chairman, I have had some experience in attending these hearings before the Committee on Ways and 1\Ieans, and I want to say that if I had my way about it I would swear every witness who goes on the stand. The witnesses keep back all that they can. They say the things that they think will show the necessity for a high tariff rate. They ought to be placed on their oath, and that is not alL We ought to have a law on the statute books that when they do not tell the truth they should .be put in jail. Of course that would be an incon­venience for some of yon gentlemen, because no doubt a great many of your campaign contributors would get in jail. l\11·. Payne at one time swore some witnesses over there. We ought to have a law swearing them in these bearings all of the time. These propagandists who go up and down the country are a menace to the safety of the country. Down in my section of the country some fellow was going through saying that the Chinese and the Japanese were taking the American market for eggs by importing eggs from those countries. That is a very silly proposition, and yet the people did not know whether the man was telling the truth or not. No doubt he put an affi­davit expression on his face and told it loud and long. I did not know myself whether he was telling the truth.

Therefore, I looked the matter up. Of course, all of this propaganda happens when you are having hearings on a tariff bill. One newspaper reported that a million dozen eggs had been shipped from Hongkong, China, while we were having the hearings, shipped to Chicago, and that not a single, solitary egg was broken, and that was what was breaking the egg market ln America. I looked up the facts, and I found that 3,200,000 dozen e~os had been imported into the country during the last 11 months, and that 23,000,000 dozen had been exported during the same· time. Yet you want a tariff on eggs to protect tl1e egg producers of this country.

Mr. HARDY of Texas. They said that hundreds of carloads were being sent to Dallas, Tex.

Mr. OLDFIELD. Certainly. Mr. Chairman, if the 2,000,000 lads who went to France in 1917 and 1918 had been as big cowards as the manufacturers of America are we never would have won the war. [Applause on the Democratic side.] It would have been absolutely impossible, because they came be~ fore our committee and told us that they. could not compete with Japan on this article or that article, but chiefly it was ~in\ Germany that they could not compete. They said they coul() not compete with Germany on this article and that article, and that therefore they must have protection. As Mr. GABNER said, they wanted from 200 to 800 per cent advance in the rates. They said it was absolutely necessary in order that they might live. They said that they. were being swamped at that time with these foreign products, and it looked as though they were telling the truth. You can not tell whether they are telling tlte truth or not; they look very serious. Wben they said they were being swamped, of course the Republicans all believed them. I was a bit suspicious. That was back in January, and I now find, and everybody in this House knows, that imports hu.ve fallen off in the last six months almost half. However, right then they said they were being swamped, and they were expect­ing a terrible calamity. if they did not get this high tariff wall in the next two or three months. The imports are falling off, and so are the exports, but the imports are falling off more than the exports. Yet they said they were being swamped by these foreign products. Mr. Chairman, they ought to be sworn and put in jail if they do not tell the- truth-but why add, " tell the truth "? They do not seem to want to tell the truth about it. Suppose a man should go to a merchant and say to him, " I want to buy a suit of clothes." The merchant would say to him that be bad the suit of clothes, and the man wo-uld ask how much is it worth, and suppose the merchant would reply. $25, but would add that a merchant on the other side of the street could sell him the same suit for $15, but the cus­tomer ought to pay the $25 because he, the merchant, paid more bouse rent and paid his clerk higher wages than the man across the street. What do you think the customer would do? Of course, if he was a Republican I presume he would pay the $25._

1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-HOUSE. 3501 but I imagine that the crdinary. fellow would say, "No; I will go where the man does business on a business basis, and I will buy goods where I can buy them the cheapest."

That is what these manufacturers do. They buy their raw materials where they can get them the cheapest. They talk about labor, but they get the labor where the labor is cheapest. Then they sell their products for the highest price _POSsible. God knows they profiteered during the war to the extent of billions, and yet you want to place this law on the statute books in order to allow them to continue to profiteer. That iS what you are going to do if you pass this legislation.

I was very much interested in what the gentleman from Kansas [l\fr. TINCHER] said about the emergency tariff law. Of course, he admitted that it did not do the farmer any good; that he got no benefit from it. That is exactly what we told you when you were passing the bill and trying to fool the American farmer, and you were trying to do that in order to get the farmers in line so that they would help you WTite a tariff law in the interest of the manufacturers of the country. How­ever, I think you disillusioned the farmer when you passed the emergency tariff bill. [Applause.]

Wheat has gone down; everything else has gone down that we placed this tariff on, and I think everybody except Repub­lican leaders understand why. Everybody ought to understand exactly why that is true. Senator LoDGE, Senator Gallinger, Senator Crawford. and Senator McCu:uBER were delegated by the Senate in 1911 to investigate this very question, and here is what they say, and I think they were absolutely sound for once in their lives. Here is what they say: . Tha·t the tariff is not the cause of the present advance is conclu­

Sively shown by the fact that the greatest advance bas been made in products which are usually produced -in sufficient quantities to furnish a large surplus to other countries.

They mentioned wheat, oats, rye, corn, and barley spe­cifically.

That is true, gentlemen, of nine-tenths of the farm products of this country. That being true, according to the leaders in the Senate, this protective tariff will not help the producers of those products. That is not only true in regard to farm pr.oducts but it is equally true, as I will prove, of the manu­factured products of this country as well.

Mr. KING. If the gentleman will permit, in reference to the farm products, is there any tariff bill that will keep up the price on farm products while the Federal Reserve System is deflating the prices of farm products, as is done in the gentleman's ·district? The gentleman knows of individual cases. Now, how can you make a tariff--·

Mr. OLDFIELD. I will say that I have no control O\er the Federal Reserve Board, but your President and your party have control over it, and why you do not do something to rem­e<ly the situation to which you refer is more than I am able to understand.

Mr. KING. They have a renegade Democrat in there. Mr. OLDFIELD. Then kick him out. That. was one trouble

with our administration ; we had too many renegade Repub­licans connected with it. And the gentleman says they have one renegade Democrat. Kick him out; it will suit us on this side. [Applause.]

Mr. \VINGO. Will the gentleman permit me to remind him of the fact that the head of the Federal Reserve Board is a Republican Secretary of the Treasury, and the renegade Demo­crat who the gentleman from Illinois claims is there was re­ferred to by a leading Republican newspaper immediately after election as being sure of being retained because he was a Re­publican and had · aided in the election of Mr. Harding.

Mr. GREENE of Vermont. I think that is true of almost all administration Democrats, that they aided in the election of l\lr. Harding. [Applause.]

Mr. OLDFIELD. Now, Mr. Chairman, look at the manu­facturers oi this country when they come before the Ways and Means Committee. They say that tl1ey can not compete with Germany on this article and on that article. Why do they pick on Germany? Why do these fellows take Germany and say that they can not compete witl1 her? Why do ·not they say England, France, Italy? No; they think we ha\e so much prejudice in this country against Germany that they base their argument on that country; but the trouble is that all this is taken down in shorthand and sent broadcast throughout the world. They say we cau not compete with these foreign coun­tries, and name the articles. Now, when the German salesman or h·aveling man goes to Arg£mtina he says, ''You do not want to buy these articles manufactured in America, because we can make these articles cheaper than they can, and we can ship them to the American market and undersell Americans there. We can prove that to you." And they turn to these hearings and they read where Mr. Smith and 1\ir. Jones and

1\Ir. Wood an<l the other protectionists have said that they could not compete with Germany, that they could not coirrp.ete with the Japanese, that they could not compete with England, that they could not compete with France, and so forth, and therefore they get the h·ade, because they have said that they can not compete in our own markets with France, England, and Germany. So how could they compete with them in Argentina? How could they pay the freight to China or Japan and com­pete with them? That is the argument of these gentlemen who appeared before . the Ways and Means Committee, and these very protectionists are so anxious to have a monopoly on the home market that they are willing, perfectly willing, that everybody who manufactures for export shall be cut off from the export market.

What do they want? They want a monopoly of the home market; they want to supply the home market at monopoly prices, and after they have supplie<l that market at monopoly prices they will do then what they did under the Dingley law and under the Payne~Aldrich law. They will ship their surplus manufactured products abroaci and sell them cheaper than to their next-door neighbor. That will happen under this bill just as it happened under the Dingley and Payne-Aldrich laws. What is the next argument? It is to protect the American laboring man. Great God, protect t11e American laboring man! Why, gentlemen, the proof shows conclusively beyond any question that the industries of this country that have the greatest amount of protection pay the lowest wages. :\Ir. John Golden, a laboring man, who was engaged in the textile indus­try for 40 years, who made investigations here and abroad, who had worked himself for 30 years in textile mills, made the bald statement that the woolen milLs of this country, that the most highly protected industries of the country, paid the low­est wages to their laboring men. He sai<l he hoped that this Republican Congress would not compel the laboring men of this country to depend upon the generosity of the manufacturers, but that they would treat the laboring men properly and di­vide this tariff with them. He is a very intelligent man. Let me read to you what he says, if I can find it quickly.

Mr. HARDY of Texas. 'Vill the gentleman yield right there? Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. Mr. HARDY of Texas. I have a recollection, and I want to

know if the gentleman agrees with me, that Mr. Roosevelt at one time urged some kind of a proposition in which he said that the laboring men would get something of the tariff if it did not come too high.

Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. Just a moment. 1\lr. Golden stated this:

Consequently we are wondering, gentlemen, whether you can not secure in some way from the various manufacturers some assurance that if they are going to get the protection of our Government they would maintain American standards of living and wages.

That is what he says. Is there anything unreasonable about that? ·Gentlemen, can there be anything unreasonable about a proposition like that? If you are going to give the manufac­turers high protection in this country, would it not be wise, if you love the laboring men as you say you love them, to see to it in this law that the proper amount of the tariff gets into the pay envelopes of the laborers themselves? Do you not think it would be proper? That is what Mr. Itoosevelt said in 1912 at the Bull Moose convention. I realize that you did not think so much of Mr. Roosevelt in 1912. Then you used his name to · cuss with, and now you use his name to conjure with. But that is exactly what he said'. He said the tariff ought to show up in the pay envelopes of the laboring men, if .you please. But you all recall the speeches that CoL Roosevelt made. The chair-' man of the committee, the gentleman from Michigan [l\1r. FoRD­NEY], said when Mr. Golden submitted that proposition that it would be absolutely impossible to put it in the Jaw; that we could not put it in the law to guarantee the laboring men a fair division of the tariff graft; that it was unheard of. He has not a vocabulary sufficient to write that provision in the tariff law. He can not think of the language. All of this two­thirds majority on the Republican side of the House, and nearly that large a majority in the Senate, can not think of the lan­guage that would guarantee the laboring men of the country a fair division of the tariff taxes which the consumers of the country pay. I do not think the consumers of the country would kick so much at the tax if they knew there was a pro­vision in the law compelling the manufacturers of America to divide it fairly with their laboring men.

It reminds me of a story of Mike and Pat. · ~like was telling Pat how to keep from gettip.g drunk. He said, "The way to keep from getting drunk is, that when you get all the whisky you want, call for sarsaparilla." Pat replied, " 'Vhen I get all the whisky I want, I can not say 'sarsaparilla.' " [Laughter.]

3502 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9,

When the~e manufachu·ers and Republican members of the l 1\!r. BANKHEAD. Tbe gentlenmn is di ·cu ing the effect of Ways and Means Committee get so drunk on these tariff rates, the p:roposed tariff bill on the cost of lidng. There is a great it is impossible for them not only to say laboring men but they demand for the reduction of wages becau e of the fact, so can not even write the words "laboring men." That is a part alleged, that the cost of Uving is redu<:ed to such an extent,: of the trouble in writing a tariff law. Now, let us see. . and the Labor Board issued an order recently reducing th!i

But gentlemen on the Republican side say you want protec- wages of the railroad men about 12 per cent. Does the gentle~ tion in order to p.ay highe:r wages to the laboring J11an. You man think the .effect of this bill, if put j.nto operation, wtmld · say laborers get higher wages in this country than they do in have the tendency to increase the cost of the necessities of life England and that we ha-\e a protective tariff in this country to the extent of 12 pet· cent to these laboring men? ' and they have free trade in England; hence protec1ion is the l\Ir. OLDFIELD. I am glad the gentleman asked the ques· cause of high wages in this country. That seems to be a con- tion. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. FoRDNEY) tried to \incing argument to a Republican leader who wants to help convince the House yesterday that these tariff taxes do not the manufacturers of this country plunder the American con- increase pt·ices. Gentlemen, 1f they did not increase prices, sumers. But let us go a little further into the investigation of or if these manufactm·ers did not think they increased prices, this question. The manufacturers of Engl.and pay higher they would not be hanging around the Ways and Means Com­wage to their laborers than they do in France, and France is mittee for six or eight months at great expense. They would a protective-tariff country. If a protective tariff causes high not put up $8,000,000 or $10.0001000 electing a Republican Presi­wages for labor~ why do not the French manufacturers pay dent and a Republican Congress if they did not think the tariff higher wages than they do in free-trade England? English would increase the prices of their products to the consumers laborers get better wages than they do in Germany. They of tbe country. did before the war and they do now, yet Germany is a pro- l\fr. MORGAN. Will the gentleman yield? tective-tariff counti·y and England is a free-trade country. If l\1r. OLDFIELD. Yes; I yield. a protective tariff is the cause of high wages, why does it not Mr. MORGAN. When you <!onsidered the Underwo~d bill, did work out in practice in Germany and France? Of course, we you consider at that time the rights of labor as you -are now can not expect you on the Republican side to tell the people discussing them? the truth an.d tell them there is nothing to your claims on this Mr. OLDFIELD. Certainly. We always do con ider the proposition. That would destroy your case. I will tell you the t·ights of labor, and the laboring men have gotten better wages b·ouble wit11 yOlU' proposition that protection is the cause of under the Underwood law than under any other tarifi: law in high wages paid to the laboring men. It is not true, and no- the history of this Republic. {Applause.] body knows it better than the leaders of the Republican Party. Mr. MORGAN. Will you answer me just why soup houses Rus ia before the "rar was a high protective-tariff country, and in 1913 were opened up, after the Underwood law ·was passed, ret lower wage prevailed in Russia, Germany, and France, all as they always are under free trade? protective-tariff countries, than in free-trade England. 1\fr. OLDFIELD. That is the first time I have eYer 11eard

Let us go a step further in the argument. You say the tariff of soup houses under th~ Underwood law. But there are thou­i tl1e cause of high . wages, and yet the proof shows in the sands of laboring men out of employment to-day under the Re­hearings on this bill that the most highly protected industries publican administration, and a Congressman told me here that in this country pay the least wages. The te:x::tile industry, tbe he had four beggar in his office yesterday, and that he never woolen and cotton mills, ha\e protection, yet they pay smaller had one in his office under the Democratic administration. wages than industries that do not have protection and do not Mr. MURPHY. Does the gentlema.n say that the tariff is ask for protection. The fact is that every increase of wages not reflected in the pay envelopes of the American workmen'! has been brought about by the organized demand of the labor- Does he say that? ers themselves and not by the generosity of the protected indus- 1\Ir. OLDFIELD. I read you what l\11·. Golden said. trie ·. The manufacturers get their labor as cheaply as they Mr. l\fURPHY. Who is Mr. Golden"? can. They huy their raw materials where they can buy them Mr. OLDFIELD. Mr. Golden is a high-clas man ~nd made the cheapest and then sell their product for the highest price a splendid impression upon the committee. po ible. This i~ but human nature. They make all they .can Mr. MURPHY. Then, I call your attention to this fact, that out of their business, and God knows that during the war and what we axe asking is a differentiation benveen the wao-e of for more than a year after the armistice they profiteered to the Europe and those of this country. extent of billions, and yet they come here and want more pro- l\Ir. OLDFIELD. You do not know what tho e wa(Ye are. tection so they can continue to profiteer·. When there are two In figuring wages you must figure out what those wa o-es will laboring men looking for the same job labor is cheap, and when buy of necessities where the labor is performed. In this coull­there are two jobs looking for one wage earner labor is high; try to-day, and it has been so for years, we have the most effi­hence the price of labor is controlled by the well-known law of cient laboring men on the face of the earth. A.nd the proof supply a.nd demand. The law of supply and demand controls shows that in some parts of the world it takes as many as six what the laboring man has to sell-his labor-and the same law laborers to do the same amount of work in one day that one ought to control what he has to buy in order to live. Yes; laborer here will do. It is nearly always the case that the the e same industries that are clamoring for protection so that highest paid labor is the cheapest in the long run, becau e such they can keep up the standard of living for the labori:og man labor turns out the greatest amount of product. pay less wages than the unprotected industries. Mr. MURPHY. My dear sir, let me tell you that in the glass

Henry Ford pay higher wages than the woolen and cotton industry, of whi~ I have some J>:nowledge, they are paying mills, and yet he i not asking tariff protection in order to pay abroad ~nly one-eighth of the labormg cost that we are paying labor a fair wage. Carpenters get higher wages than the in America. laborers in the woolen, cotton, and steel mills, yet they are n.ot Mr. OLDFIELD. I am coming to that in a moment. protected. A carpenter will get twice as much per day as the Mr. 1\IORGAN. Ur. ClJairmau, will the gentleman yield woolen-mill workers in the- same town, yet there is no protec- there for a moment? tive tariff to protect him. The brick mason gets higher wages Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. tb.nn the w(}rkers in the woolen mills, the cotton mills, or the Mr. MURPHY. Did the gentleman vote for the immigration steel mills, and yet there is no protective tariff to protect the restriction bill the other day? brick mason. The painter, the man who paints houses, gets a Mr. OLDFIEL~. No; ~ voted ag~inst it. That is, I voted bigller wage than the wage earners in these protected indus- the otller day agamst the b1ll brought m here by you Republicans trie ·, ret there is no protectiYe tariff to protect the painter to suspend the immigration taws and relieve several thousand against foreign competition. The plumber gets a higher wage immigrants who had entered our· port at New York in violation in the same cities wbere these protected iudustries are located of law. than the wage earners in the protected industries, yet they are 1\fr. MURPHY. You were voting then for the laboring man, not protected by a protective tariff. Ah, gentlemen, you are were you? going to have to get up a. bette1· argument for a protective 1\<Ir. OLDFIELD. I have voted for him .at every opportunity. tariff than the high-wages argument. If the tex.tile industry I will say to the gentleman that I hav~ always voted for the an,d the other industries would spend more time attending to restriction of immigration in this country. busines , promotin..,. efficiency in their plants, cutting out waste, 1\Ir. GREEN of Iowa. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman and less time writing t.nriff bills in their own interest, they yield? would not even think th~y need protection. [Applause.]- 1\fr. OLDFIELD. Yes.

Mr . BA.NKHEAD. WJU the gentleman, before he leaves that 1\!r. GREEN of Iowa. Did I understand the gentleman to pha~e of the subject, pardon an intel'l'uption? say that he did not know anything about unemployment in

Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. America under the Underwood bill? I not the g~ntleman

•

1$)21 . CONGRESSIONAL RE_CORD-HOUSE. 3503 aware of the tact that during the fast six ])1()'J}i;hs of the year 1914 tl1e statistics show that there were 4,000,000 men out of employment in the United States, and1 the balance of trade was n•,.ainst us?

Mr. OLDFIELD. I want to see the statistics. I have heaJ.ti many statements from many sources during the last six months, and almost invariably after I had looked it up I found that those who made them either did not know what they were talking about or they were trying to mislead somebody.

1\Ir. FOSTER. l\1r. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? :;\lr. OLDFIELD. Yes . . :\I.Ir. FOSTER. I would like to submit to the gentleman some

statistics from the coal mines of Ohio. ~fr. OLDFIELD. The gentleman can put them in the RE(;ORD. Now, gentlemen, in the emergency tariff law you put a duty

on cottonseed oil, notwithstanding the fact that we ex.'l)Ol~ted in the last 11 months 269,000,000 pounds of cottonseed oil and imported only 1,269,000 pounds. In other words, you are trying to fool the farmers of America. You have done it all through this 'Dill. Of wheat in the last 11 months we imported 50,000,000 bushels. In the same time we exported 268,000,000 bushels. Yet you are trying to make the farmers of the country belie\e that they 'vi1.l be benefited by your tariff rate on wheat.

You simply try to line them up for this wool schedule ; you try to line them up for the cotton schedule ; you try to line them up for the iron and steel schedule ; and try to line tbem up in behalf of the Aluminum Trust. ;:: am sorry you ha\e been able to get away with it to some extent heretofore, but, as I said before, I believe the farmers have been disillusioned by the emergency tariff law.

l\1r. GREEN of Iowa. :Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

::\lr. OLDFIELD. Yes. l\Ir. GREEN o:f Iowa. When does my friend think the

emergency tariff act went into effect? )fr. OLDFIELD. It went into effect on the 28th of May. Mr. GREEN of Iowa. And the figures the gentleman uses

co>er a period before the emergency tariff law had gone into ffect at all.

:l\lr. OLDFIELD. It has been in effect a month and a half, and every farm product included in the bill has- gone down every day since that time.

Now take the case of corn. We imported in the last llmonths 5,000,00:0 bushels of corn and exported 20,000,000 bushels, in­cluding exports to Canada. You want to shut out imports from Canada. Then take rice. They went all through the States of Louisiana and Arkansas and neighboring States and told the rice farmers that what they needed was a protective tariff on rice, and they made some of the ·people down there believe it, and they actually made some Members of Congress believe it. We imported 86,000,000 pounds of rice in the last 11 months, and during the same time we exported 367,000,000 pounds. An attempt has been made to make the rice "farmers believe that what they need is protection for tbelr rice.

What rice farmers, and farmers generally, need is a market for their surplus products. You place a duty on meat products, yet out of every 100 pound of beef and pork p:roducts con­sumed in the United States, the home producer and chiefly the packers furnish 991 pounds, while all the nations of the world furnish one-half of a pound out of every 100 pounds consumed here. \Ve export 400 times more of these products than we import, yet you place a duty on beef, vea:l, and so fmth, for the benefit o:f the Beef Trust.

In 1920 the production of beef and veal in this country was 9,000,000,000 pounds, yet yon have the nerve to tell tl1e farmers of this cqnntry that you are goin-g to benefit them by placing a duty on these products and this is true of nearly all the farm products produced in this country.

:Mr. MORGAN. 1\Ir. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? l\Ir. OLDFIELD. Yes. Mr. MORGAN. Have you the statistics of the number of

pounds of wool and o:f beef and of mutton and hides that have come in since a year ago last April under the Underwood free­trade law?

Mr. OLDFIELD. The gentleman can put that in the REC<mD.

I take the position, as to these farm products which I have mentioned, that where we produce a great surplus for exp:ort it is absolutely impossible to benefit the farmer by imposing a protective tariff. It will not put any money in his pocket. I can prove that by the statement of Senator LoDGE, made in 191L If that is true, it ought to be equally. true with regard to mauufactures.

Let us see. Let us take the iron and steel schedule for ex­ample, gentlemen. In the last 11 months we imported under

too iiron and steel schedule $41rOQO,OOO worth of iron and steel prodl.lCts, and at the same time, gentlemen, during the same ]>etioo, we exported' $998,000,000 worth; nearly a billion dollars wortll in the last 11 m<"rntlls. Yet you put a duty on steel, on various kinds of steel, structural steel and other kinds. .And just to show you how ridiculous you make yom· elves on this proposition, let me read you something. I had it here-, but I can not put my hand on it. At any rate, gentlemen, I , mv a statement just a da'y or two ago as to steel railway axle . I find that there are no imports of steel railway axles into this country, and yet you put on railway steel axles a duty of SIX­tenths of 1 cent a pound. Just a few days ago, about the time this bill was reported, Great Brituin tried to sell to the raiL­roads in India some railway axles, and the .A .. mericau ma:nufac­turers underbid England 30 per cent on a great order for rail­way axles, and India could not buy them from the mother country becau e the manufacturers in Great Britain. could not sen them as cheapfy as our manufacturer~. Yet y u put a duty of.six-tenths of 1 cent a pound on steel axles. Whom do you benefit there except the Steel Trust? You tighten their monopoly on that product.

Now, what else is there in this bill? Take cotton manufac­tures.

1\fr. GREEN of Iowa. 1\Ir. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. l\fr. GREEN of Iowa. Before the gentleman leaves that sub­

ject o:f axles, does the gentleman remember what the rate was in the Underwood bill?

l\1r. OLDFIELD. I do not know as to that. But it does not make any difference. It might have been that 10 or 12. years ago, they could compete- in our market, but now the-y call not, because the records show it.

:\~Ir. GREEN of Iovra. They haYe been able to since the Underwood b..ill was put into· effeet.

l\lr. OLDFIELD. I am talking about thi.s bill. Do you t!1ink it i fair if they can now? You ought to amend this bill and put them on the free list. If that is true, you can find out in 24 hours ancl ean velify that statement; and if we in this coun­try ca:n manufacture axles for railroad cars and ship them to

. India and underbid Great Britain, the mother counn·y, by 30 per C('nt, you might as well put them on the free list, beeunse there are none imported here, and yon might gh·e the railror..d companies of this country the benefit o:f any competmon thut might come in. You must remember tha.t when the railroads of the country are compelled to pay monopoly prices for ma­terials, it has to be paid for by the peor>le who ride on the trains and ship their products by raiL [Applan e.]

1\Ir. FOSTER. Will the gentleman yield? 1\Ir. OLDFIELD. Yes. 1\Ir. l1'0S'TER. Before the gerrtlemarr l~a>es tbat, has lle any

figures as to the wages of employees in the steel industry as cornpru·ed with those in the woolen and cotton industries?

1\Ir. OLDFIELD. No; I have not. 1\.fr. FOSTER. That would be fair in determining "·hat be­

came of it. 1\Ir. OLDFIELD. I do not kn-ow what they getr and I do not

know what they get abroad. l\Ir. FOSTER. I am talking abo-qt what they g.et her~e as com­

pared with cotton and wool. l\1r. OLDFIELD. I do not know. Probably they get more.

At any rate, if they do get higher wage in the steel inrlustry, and if they can still export their product to the extent of a billion dollars worth of it and ship it throughout the world in competition with the world, then why put on protection nnd strengthen and tighten the monopoly of the Steel Trust in this country?

What else? Take the cotton manufacturing ~chedule. Our imports of manufac;tured cotton goods in the last 11 rnontl1s ''ere $92,631,000. That may sound big. It may smm{l Jike they ought to have protection, but let me tell you the rest of the story. How much did we export and sell abroad' in corn­petition with those people who exported to this cormtry? A.s I have already stated, we imported in 11 months Iast year $92,631,449 worth of cotton rna:nufacturel:f, but in the same 11 months we exportep $231,716,186 worth. Why is it, gentlemen, thnt you want the manufacturers of cotton goods to have pxo­tection? I think it was :Mr. Bemis who testified that tl1e manufacturers of this <!ountry eould make the courser-grade cotton cloths mot·e· chea:ply than any other manufacturers on earth.

Now, gentlemen, what else? We bad before the Ways and Means Committee a representative of Earl & Wilson, collar mannfacturel"S. '.rhat is the concern that had u suit brought against it a few years ago for fixing the retail price of their

-~·

3504. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9,

product, selling collars all over the country at the same fixed retail price, fixing the price at which the retailer should sell to the consumer. The proof showed that the domestic production of collars in this country was $35,000,000, while the importa­tions of collars were only $41,000. Yet you have put protection on co1lars in the bill.

1\ir. GREEN of Iowa. 'Ve have put a lower rate than was ever put on before. /

1\Ir. OLDFIELD. They are not entitled to any. \Vhy should they have any rate when there is an importation of only $41,000 as compared with a production of $35,000,000? If there is no competition at home, why should not the foreigner come in with his competition and let the consumer have the benefit of it?

l\lr. l\IURPHY. The gentleman would let the foreigner come in and let the American W'Ork:men be idle.

1\fr. OLDFIELD. There are going to be more of them idle when you pass this bilL

1\fr. l\fURPHY. There are 4,000,000 men idle now under the Underwood tariff.

1\ir. OLDFIELD. There will be 8,000,000 or 10,000,000 idle when you get this bill on the statute books. Now, what about aluminum? That is a trust owned by the Mellon interests, the Secretary of the Treasury. The Aluminum Trust is a real trust, It started out in1888 with a capitalization of $20,000 and is now worth $20,000,000, and last year, in 1920, it paid 12 per cent on that $20,000,000 capital. Yet you increase- the tariff rates on aluminum in this bill from 2 cents a pound to 5 cents a pound.

l\fr. MURPHY. Under the administration of the gentleman's party it was a C'rime to be a successful business man.

1\lr. OLDFIELD. I do not yield to the gentleman any further. No~r, gentlemen, in the interest of the American people I do not understand why that increased duty is necessary. Here is a monopoly. Of course, it is owned and controlled by the in­terests of one of your chief Cabinet officers, the Secretary of the Treasury. But that is no reason why the consumers of alumi­num products should contribute their hard~earned money to this monopoly.

The Aluminum Trust sent a man named Davis, who repre­sented the concern and who wanted a higher duty than in the present law. How can you expect the people to buy kitchen utensils and other products made of aluminum if you increase the prices of these products? This is a monopoly, and they charge now all that the traffic can bear. Of course they may not be making as much money as they did during the war. A young fellow in the Treasury Department told me-l will not give his name, for he might get fired-that these fellows who come down to see about the excess-profits taxes say they are in an awful fix:, that they ha\e made no money, and when you come to simmer it down if they lla ve not made as much as 100 per cent they think that they are going broke. That is the trouble with these fellows who during the war made 300 or 400 per cent. Before the war the corporations of the country made annually three or four billions in ,profits, and in 1919 they got nearly ten billions in profit, and if they can not t·un along in that profiteering way they think that they are being ruined. Now, the Aluminum Trust is not so bad off as the farmers; the farmers have lost $10 for every dollar that the Aluminum Trust has lost, and yet you want the farmers to contribute to the loss of the Aluminum Trust, the Steel Trust, and other trusts of this country.

The CHAIRl\1AN ( l\1r. MANN of Illinois). The Chair will adYise the gentleman that he has used one hour.

l\Ir. OLDFIELD. I would like 30 minutes more. Mr. WINGO. I think the present occupant of the chair was

not in the chair when the gentleman from Texas [Mr. GABNER] yielded to the gentleman from Arkansas such time as be might desire.

l\lr. OLDll'lELD. I will take 30 minutes more. Mr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. . 1\fr. BLANTON. What is the use of arguing the question

any further when an orthodox Republican like- the gentleman from Wisconsin [l\Ir: lfREAR], in his report, says that this bill contains provisions fundamentally indefensible?

Mr. OLDFIELD. I do not think there is much use of ar-guing it myself. ·

l\lr. GREEN of Iowa. Has my friend from Arkansas, who declaims so earnestly about the purchaser of kitchen utensils, figured out how much of an increase the tariff would amount to on a kitchen utensil that weighed about half a pound?

l\lr. OLDFIELD. Oh, gentlemen, I have an answer to that .which is a corker. [Laughter.] I want to read you the tes­timony at the hearings of a fish merchant who makes that same sort of argument. The position is that they spread the tariff so thinly that the consume1· doesn't know anything about it

and does not fee] it. We had a man before the committee who made the best argument on that proposition that can be made and I want to read it to you. This man, Mr. Born, was one of the most honest protectionists that appeared before the com­mittee. Here is what he said:

The CHAIRMAN. Fish or no fish brother, we need the revenue. Mr .. BoRN. And on maclrerel $2 added to a barrel would not make

t~Y w~:~r0egcce~!n~~~ consumer would never know the difference, so far as

Mr. HAWLEY. Who would pay it? l\Ir. GARNER. The dealers would pay it Mr. OJ,DFIELD. You mean the manufact~rers would pay it? Mr. TREADWAY. Your argument is tbat the rate would be practically

so low per pound that it would be absorbed before it reached the consumer?

Mr. BORN. The consumer would not know it. Mr. HULL. It would be just like the sale tax. ot· the turnover tax. Mr. OLDFIELD. They would pay it and not feel it. Mr. BORN. They probably would not. fo:!f? RAINEY. You would just submit them to a ta·eatment of chloro-

Mr. BOR N. Well, it would not be like the income tax.

He wanted to spread it along so thinly, just as my friend from Iowa [l\Ir. GREEN] says about aluminum, that the con­sumer would not feel it. In other words, if you can pick the pockets of the poor without their knowing it and put it into the pockets of the .Aluminum Trust and the fish merchant that is all right from the Republican standpoint. [Laughtet: and applause on the Democratic side.]

Is there anybody in the House who thinks that is a sound argument, to spread the tariff so thinly that the people do not feel it and yet say they ought to pay it? Nobody would aO'ree to that, but the Republican members of the Ways and :M:ans Committee not only gave $2 a barrel on mackerel, but they uave it $5 a barrel in this bill. The same is true of the sugar pegple. Why, 1\.Ir. Chaffe, from Louisiana, came here before the com­mittee and s~id that they wanted 3 cents a pound on sugar, and figured that It would put $180,000,000 in the Treasury. I said "It. i~ ~11 right to put that money in the Treasury, but it is you{. posttlon, and do you state before this committee that the pro­ducers of sugar cane in Louisiana and the growers of beets in Michigan would get another $180,000,000 and put it in their pockets?" Be said, "Yes; that i'S tlle way we figure it." Now I do not think that is fair to all the consumers of America t~

· allow the sugar growers in Louisiana and the beet-sugar growers in the Northern States to put $180,000,000 in their pockets at the expense of all the rest of the people. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

Now, the cotton manufacturers and woolen manufacturers said they '"ere not making any money. I am going to put a statement in the RECORD from a paper showing that they made more in 1920 than they did in any prewar year. They said dur­ing the hearings they were not making any money that their mills "\\ere closed down, and had been for six months. Now I want to read this article from a newspaper of June 29: ' COTTO. MILL DIVIDEXDS-OWNERS DECLARE DEPRESSION PERIOD PASSED

AND ARE OPTIMISTIC. SPARTANBURG, S. C., June 29 .

Eight~n. cotton mills .in Spartanburg County to-morrow pay semi­annual d1v1dends amountrng to $557,130. Pacolet leads with a 3~ per cent dividend on $2.000,000 common stock and 3~ per cent dividend on $2,000,000 preferred, a total of $140,000. Clifton anrl Spartan mills come next, each paying 4 . per cent en $2,000,000 capital stock. The highest dividends are paid by Arcadia, Beaumont, and Woodruff mills, ~!~~- paying a 5 per cent semiannual dividend. None fall below 3 per

Local mill men say the period or depression is passing, and they are optimistic over the outlook. Wage adjustments have l.leen made, and the mills are recovering orders for goods in sufficient volume to insure steady operations for months to come.

You will notice, gentlemen, that whenever they increase wages they speak of it in big headlines as a wage increase, but when they dect·ease them they speak of it as a wage adjustment. [Laughter.] And you want the farmers of America and the four or five million laboring men who are out of work in this country, who have no money with which to feed and clothe their families and educate their children, to pay the increased prices on cotton manufactured goods that the mills in South Carolina and the East generally may make huge profits.

Let us now take the woolen proposition. I do not suppose any l\fassachusetts man will deny that the Boston News Bureau is a reputable financial newspaper. Here is a statement tbat it makes from which I desire to quote:

Boston.-Despite all rumors and reports of shol't-time operations at the plants of the American Woolen Co., the fact of the matter is that the company is opernting its entire system at virtually as high a c.apacity as it has ever obtained.

The American Woolen Co. is a trust. Yet despi~a that state­ment which I ha\e just read, they came before our committel and tole~ us th&t they were going broke just as fast as possible, that they did not have an;rl' ody at work, that they \Yere hiring

. . .

1921. OONGRESSlON AL -"RECOR.D-~ HOUSE. 3505 men to guard their plants, as they were compelleil to shut down. Let me quote further from this same newspape-r:

The heavyweight goods season was opened late and proved such a pronounced success on overcoatings, suitiugs, women's wear, and all lines that production facilities have been taxed to get the g!Jods ~o the trade in time to be made up for the cold weather. The mills Will be busy with this work for some weeks yet.

l\Ir. Chair:~p.an, the manufacturers are in much better position tllan the farmers. ·whenever they have a hard time of it, they can close down their mills and cut the expense almost entirely off, and feed out their goods as the demand calls for them. The wheat farmer and the cotton 1;armer can not do that. There :ue six and one-half million farmers in America. Those farmers can not get together in a little back room of this town or that town and fix the price of their -various farm products,. but the Woolen Trust, the Steel Trust, the Sugar Trust, the Aluminum Trust, controlled by a half dozen men probably, can get together in some small back room and fix the prices. and they do fix them at all the traffic will bear. Do ycu know what these gentlemen wanted before our committee? Actually they wanted a tariff that would not only equal the difference in the cost of production at home and abroad, but they wanted enough to o>ercome the freight rates from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast. About the only bill that toe Republicans br::tgged about during the last campaign as having been passed by them was the railroad bill. Senator LonGE I thi.Ilk, at the co:ilvention at

_Chicago, said that that bil1 alone·was a great :.tccomplishment, and yet since that bill was passed_ they have booste~ the rates to a point more than the traffi~ will bear, and since the election it has developed that the Republicans permitted the railroads themselves to write the railroad act. To continue the rea1ing from this newspaper :

American Woolen expects to sell every yard of goods it can manu­facture in the second half year. Supplies of cloth are far lower than generally appreciated, and American Woolen could almost dispose of another fun season's output of winter good&.

Mr. BAl"fKHEJAD. l\Jr. Chairman, I will ask the gentlem-an if that is a recent issue of this paper?

1\fr. OLDFIELD. Last week's. These manufactuTers do· not fool these people up in Massachusetts, and I am going to prove it to you in the very next paragraph which I shall quote. They; may fool the 1\fembers of Congress and the people generally, but they do not fool the people up there. Listen to this :

'l'here is the usual intimation that the company is making no money on its business-

The usual intimation ! They usually intimate that, and I know they intimated that when they came before the Committee on \Vays and :Means, and I think they would really swear to it­but . the books do not reveal operating losses, nor does the balance sheet show the slightest need of urgent liquidation.

They do not have to sell the products they have on hand. Yet tlte usual information is that the company is making no money on its business, although the ·books do not reveal operat­ing loss nor does the balance sheet show the slightest need of urgent liquidation.

American Woolen is earning its $7 dividend comfortably, :md as a, result of the forthcoming big spring business will show it handsomely covered when the year ends 'next December 31.

They ru·e not fooling. this trade paper. There is another thing that I desire to call attention to. The Republicans talk about their love for the laboring man, but they will not vitalize that love by putting it in any shape in this bill and make the manufacturers divide the tariff graft with the laborers. L think that the Democrats ought to prepare an amendment-and you gentlemen ougut not to object to it or make the point of order against it-which would compel the manufacturers to divide this tariff graft with the laboring people; and if you do not object to such an amendment, we will offel' it.

I want now to call the farmers' attention to one proposition. They talk about being so good to the farmer. A man named La Roe wanted a duty on potash and fertilizers. You give the farmer a tariff of 25 cents a bushel on wheat, which does not mean anything, and so much on peanuts that does not mean ·anything, and they have so much on corn, which also means nothing to the farmer, but you certainly soaked them on fer· tilizer.

I want to read you what the representative of the potash producers themselves says. They stated that they can produce fertilizer in this country. Their own representative is talking about where the potash can be produced, out in Nebraska, Utah, and California, great lakes of potash salts. He wants that interest protected against Alsace-Lorraine. I want to quote from page 3997 of the hearings and state what their rep­resentative says. He talks about how much it costs. Of course,, out in Nebraska and in the new countries like that, they do not need fertilizer so badly, but in all of the eastern country

they must have fertilizer, as they must in the South and East, if they are to grow good cotton, cabbage , peaches, apples,. and other crops.

In. my country, we do not use much fertilizer, neither do theY, in Kansas, but they do in this southeastern section of the coun­try, where the farmers must have it if they make a living. Now, after talking about the lakes, and so forth, then he said : . The green sands of New .JerseY. constitute another almost inexhaust­ible supply, and ·a large corporation, with a capital of over $7,000,00.0 and equipped with a corps of the best cheniists and other technical experts that can be obtained, is about to begin producing potash th~re-, its plant having already been erected. It is estimated that these sands will supply the country's needs literally 1lor centuries and the sand lies right on the surface, where only steam shovels are required to dig it, and this sand is found not only in New .Jersey but stretches: in a wide belt from Sandy Hook to Washington, D. C. -

Stands right on the surface, right on the surface where you can mine it with steam shovels, and. yet they want a protective tariff on that for five years, and they get it.

1\Ir. ARENTZ-- Will the gentleman yield? .Mr. OLDFIELD. Not right now. Now, I want to read just

what this man said about the farmers. I asked a que~tion of_ Mr. La Roe, and 1\Ir. La Roe said, " I am trying to show you that the 50 cents duty will be for the cotton farmer from 25 to 30 · cents an acre." That is all. That is what they put upon the_ farmer of the So nth and Southeast. Why should they kick? Why should they complain when they build up• a great industry between here and New Jersey, where you have this stuff which you can mine with steam shovels right off the top of the groun.d-$7,000,000 all·eady invested in a great corporation'! Why should! we not tux the farmers that use fertilizer 50 cents an acre f01~ the next five years? Do you think it is fair to the farmer? Yet this is the argument, and the only argument, in favor of such a. proposition.

Mr. ARENTZ. I will tell the gentleman why_ it is fair. Mr. OLDFIELD. I wish the gentleman would. 1\lr. ARENTZ. Alsace-Lorraine produces at the present time

all the potash in the world. We do not lmow how long that potash deposit is going to last, and would not it be a good idea in this country to be safe in protecting the potash necessary for--

. Mr~ OLDFIELD. But if we can mine this potash behveen here' and New Jersey with steam shovel-s rig.bj; on the ground, how can they mine it in its present form in Alsace-Lorraine under ground, ship it to this country, pay whatever duty there is on it, pay the .freight, pay the insurance--rrby impose the duty on it?

1\lr. ARENTZ. If you want to wait 100 years after this rock is mined for it to decompose--

1\:Ir. OLDFIELD. But they have a corporation organized there that can mine it with steam shovels.

Mr . .ARENTZ. rt is absolutely absurd. It takes 100 years for this rock to decompose. It is absolutely absurd.

Mr. OLDFIELD. They have asked fo 'r a tariff for fi-ve years, and now the gentleman will want u.s to extend that for 100 years. because it takes 100 years for the rock to decompose. [Laughter and applause.]

Mr. GREEN of Iowa. This is an old story about New Jersey potash. They have never made any potash yet.

Mr. OLDFIELD. Then why in the name of common sense did they have a lawyer sent here to represent those people? Why did he come here and mislead the conimittee? That is what he said.

1\Ir. GREEN of Iowa. But he does not say they ever· made any potash.

Mr. MORGAN. Will the gentleman yielcl? 1\lr. OLDFIELD. I will .. 1\Ir. MORGAN. The gentleman referred to the farmers aiJ.d

the consideration given them by the Republican Party under the tariff schedules.

Mr. OLDFIELD. I did not say there had been any real con­sidemtion, just a make believe consideration. [Applause.]

Mr. MORGAN. I want to ask the gentleman this question. Mr. OLDFIELD. They just made out like they were given

consideration. 1\Ir. MORGAN. I want to ask the gentleman this question.;

Why is it that" farms are sold at sheriff's sale under Democratic tariff schedules. and debts are paid under Republican schedules. [Applause on the Republican side.]

1\Ir. OLDFIELD. If the. gentleman wants me to answer tha.t I will answer it. It is simply nothing on earth but Republican propaganda. They always say that. They. have the news­papers of America saying that--

Mr. MORGAN. Can the gentleman answer it? Mr. OLDFIELD. They said in this ... ,ltntry for 20 years that

the1·e was great undervaluation at the customh9'u'ses. When the proof came and those men who bad been administering the

----

3506 CONGRESS! ON AL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY. 9,

l-aw came before the committee these Republican members of the Ways and l\Ieans Committee seemed to be dumfounded, when they all-the witnesses-said that there was less than one· tenth of 1 per cent of undervaluation at the customhouse. Therefore it was only Republican propaganda. It is simply not true. You Republicans had repeated this propaganda so often that you had begun to believe it yourselves, when Y:OU knew in the beginning that it was not true. [Applause on the Democratic side.] You have gone back to specific and complex rate · in this bill.

So that when the prices of products go down these protec· tionists will still get their pound of flesh. These Republicans never want to give the public the benefit of the breaks. They

·must give the protected interests the advantage at all times and under all circumstances. [Applause.]

Mr. OOLTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. Mr. COLTON. The gentleman surely does not intend to leave

tl1e impressiou here that this bill provides for a 2! cents duty per pound for five years, does he?

1\Ir. OLDFIELD. Let me read it to you. Mr. COLTON. I will tell you what it does provide for. It

pro,vides for 2-f cents per pound for the first two years only, and then on a sliding scale, and automatically ceases to pay duty. under the provisions of this bill in five years-only long enough to get this infant industry established.

Mr. OLDFIELD. You will never get up beyond the infant stage, because when they get above that stage you can not choke them off. There was a man before our committee who

·made sweaters and knitted goods and underwear, and do you know what he said? He said they had been in business for 50 or 60 years; that they had made sweaters and sold them in 1914 for $27· a dozen, and at that time in January when he testified they were making them and selling them for $78 per dozen, and yet he had never bad any foreign competition; but he said he was expecting it. [Laughter.] He had been in busi­ness for 50 years, but had never had any foreign competition; but, "Oh, my, it is coming now. I can see it coming." And listen to what he said. He said, "We have been paying 7 per cent dividends on our common stock and 7 per cent on our pre. ferred stock, and we have issued 100 per cent in stock divi· dends." And yet he was afraid of competition.

I said, " How old are you in your business, anyWay? " He did not answer directly. They will not do that. It is awfully hard to get them to answer a direct question. I said, " How old is your business?" He said, "I did not say anything about being an infant." [Laughter.] "You have not answered the question," I said. He said, "Fifty or sixty years." And yet he asked for protection, and he gets it under this bill.

Mr. HOGAN. Is that a fair comparison to an industry that had no existence in America prior to the war and only started because of the demand in this country during the war? Is that a fair comparison? And then, further, will you also read the proYision of the bill that you started out to read ?-because the inference was given here that we were giving the duty for five rears.

Mr. OLDFIELD. According to the other gentleman over there, while we were having this colloquy, it would be a hun· dred rears before we got ready.

l\:Ir. GREENE of Vermont. Will the gentleman from Ar· kansas yield?

Mr. OLDFIELD. Yes. Mr. GREENE or' Vermont. If you are so eager in insisting

there is already plenty of material from which to make fer­tilizers in this country, why were you so anxious to develop Muscle Shoals? ·

Mr. OLDFIELD. That is an entirely different question. An­other thing, we had an understanding in the Ways and Means Committee before we brought thi;~ bill over here that our de· bate should be confined to the bill. Therefore we do not want to talk about the Muscle Shoals proposition.

Mr. GREENE of Vermont. The Muscle Shoals proposition was brought up ostensibly in the interest of the farmers for fertilizer.

Mr. OLDF lELD. Oh, yes. Mr. GREENE of Yermont. .And then you admit it was only

a camouflage; that that was only .a reason and not the real purpose?

Mr. OLDFIELD. Oh, no; I will say it was a meritorious proposition in the interest of the farmers of the country, but you Republicans killed it. -

1\Ir. GARRETT of Tennessee. I think it would not violate the agreement with Mr. FoRDNEY and the gentleman from Ar· kansas to take the time to tell the gentleman from Vermont

[Mr. GREENE] the difference between the product which 1\:luscle Shoals would produce and potash.

Mr. GREENE of Vermont. I did not mention potash specifi­cally, but I said " ingredients."

LCMBER.

Mr. OLDFIELD. Recent investigations show that we are short 1,250,000 homes in this country, yet you write a lumber schedule which, by the testimony of Republican members of the Ways and Means Committee, will increase the cost of build­ing a home in this country all the way from $200 to $500 each. Yet the lumbermen in this country can produee lumber as cheaply as anywhere in the world. You say you are going to remit the duty just as soon as Canada repeals the duty · on lumber. The lumbe1· manufacturers in this country ·can not stand to see the Canadian lumbermen I'ob the home builders of Canada without their having the same right to rob American home builders. Gentlemen, we are not concerned with tariff rates in Canada, but we are interested in the home builders of America getting lumber as cheaply as possible with which to build homes.

CEMENT.

During the last 10 months, including April, 1921, we imported $981,000 worth of cement, and during the same period we exported $6,980,000 worth of cement. Cement is a very important build­ing material. Yet you have placed protective duties on cement in this bill. Two days after you introduced your bill the -Attorney General brought suit under the antitrust laws against the cement people. Here is a trust which has a monopoly on the American market, and yet you give it protection in your bill. The workings of a protectionist mind are indeed strange. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

EARTHEN AND CHINA WARE.

The earthen and china ware people came before the com­mittee with tears in 'their voices and told us that they 'iYere being swamped by foreign competition. What are the facts? We imported in the last 11 months, including May, $11,885,086 worth of earthen and china ware. We exported during the same period $9,368,668 worth. We exported these goods to France, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, China, Japan, Australia; New Zealand, and other countries, and competed with the foreign manufacturer in those markets. Yet they tell us they can not eompete with the · foreign manufac· turer here at home. Do you not think these manufacturers ought to be put under oath when they appear before the com­mittee? Why do they want this protection? . To increase the prices of their cups, saucers, dishes, and so forth, to the American consumers. [Applause.]

WINDOW GLASS.

. I .noticed recently in the Southern Tariff Advocate the state­ment, in big headlines, " Window-glass industry demoralized by foreign competition." The article says the competition is coming from Belgium. During the last 11 months ending l\fay 31, 1921, we imported common window glass to the amount of $1,526,567. During the same 11 months we exported common window glass to the value of $2,381,7(!2, almost twice as much as we imported. Yet they say Belgium is putting our manu· facturers of window glass out of business. Now, where did we send our window glass. France, Belgium's next-door neighbor, ·Canada, l\fexico, Cuba, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, China, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. We compete with Belgium in all those countries.

The average ad valorem rate on all dutiable imports under the Payne-Aldrich Act for t;t:i.e year 1913 \W!S 40 per cent. In this bill the rate will be boosted to a 55 per cent average. It will cost the American people not less than $3,000,000,000 per year in tariff taxes. The people will not stap.d this burden long. This bill will defeat you worse than did the Payne­Aldrich bill. [Applause on the Democratic side.] I think the people are interested in our e.xPort trade, in markets for our surplus products. About 20 per cent of our production in this country is; surplus, for which we must find foreign markets if we are to have prosperity at home. For the year 1920 we had a surplus of cotton to the value of $200,000,000, wheat to the value of $450,000,000, meat products to the value of $250,000,000, and manufactured products to the value of $750,000,000.

Now, gentlemen, we can not sell these surplus products, upon which our prosperity depends, to foreign peoples unless we buy their products in return ; yet you are building a Chinese wall around this country. The testimony before the committee overwhelmingly showed that if Europe, our best customer, is to exist we must trade with them. Yet you build a tariff wall so high it will be impossible "for them to send their goods to our markets. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

1921. CONGRESSIONAL R.EOORD-HOUSE. 3507 MERCHANT MARINE.

What do you expect to do with our $3,000,000,000 merchant marine created during the war? l\Ir. Lasker, chairman of the Shipping Board, made the following statement a few days ago: ' American industry and finance can not exist on the scale to which it has been created unless foreign markets are opened and remain open. American commerce must compete successfully on the seas with the commerce of the world,

.No merchant marine can long exist unless its ships have cargo both ways, and you know this ; hence your program probably is to sell the ships to your pets at dirt-cheap prices an<.l then if they are put out of business by your tariff policy you will at least make an effort to pass a ship subsidy bill and take the taxpayers' money out of the Treasury and give it to the shipowners in order to guarantee them profits. If this bill becomes a law, the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans had just as well be oceans of fire instead of great highways of commerce as God intended. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

1\Ir. Chairman, in conclusion permit me to say that every Democrat and every independent-thinking Republican should vote against this bill written by and in Ulle interest of special privilege. Democrats should line up solidly against it. The Democratic Party was organized to combat special privilege wherever it shows its ugly head. This is a contest between the millions of the American people who do not seek special favors at the hands of Congress, on the one hand, and the rich few who promote, write, and pass legislation in their own interests on the other.

The Democratic Party has•always taken the side of the ordi­nary citizen, the masses, if you please, as against their ex­ploiters. The party has a splendid record of achievement in the past, and if we remain true to our principles we have a glorious future awaiting us. I thank you. [Loud applause.]

Mr. FORDNEY. 1\.Ir. Chairman, I yield eight minutes to the gentleman from Wyoming [Mr. l\IoNnELL]. -

Mr. MONDELL. l\Ir. Chairman, a little later I shall have time, I hope, to address the committee at some length on this bill. At the present time I desire to submit a few preliminary observations.

Mr. Chairman, the nepublican members of the Ways and Means Committee of the House have performed a great public 8ervice in the preparation and presentation of the Fordney tariff bill. No work of human hand or brain is perfect; no tariff measure dealing with a thousand schedules, affecting billions in values, can be wholly satisfactory in all its items and provi­sions to anyone. The preparation of this bill was undertaken ut a time when the trade and industry and labor of the world is in a sadly disorganized and unsatisfactory state. The diffi­culties surrounding the securing of accurate information rela­tive to the comparative costs of production have been greater than ever before. Notwithstanding all these handicaps the fin­ished product of rate and policy. set out in the 346 pages of this bill has met with a more favorable response from the country than any like measure presented within a generation. This ap­proval_ is not confined tQ any particular portion of the country, but is voiced to a considerable extent from every. section. It will, in my opinion, grow, rather than diminish, as the provi­sions of the bill are examined and analyzed.

l\1r. Chairman, while the majority has performed a great public service the minority has wholly missed-lamentably missed-a great opportunity to perform a public service. In this country, where the hvo great parties have held widely. differing views on the general subject of tariff legisllltion, there is abundant ground for legitimate criticism by the minority, whether it be Re­publican or Democratic, of any tariff measure presented by the majority, be it Republican or Democratic, and this legitimate criticism, if frankly and fairly uttered, serves a useful purpose­first, in defining the views of the opposition clearly; and, second, in pointing out and calling attention to items and provisions rel~tive to which the majority may not have been sound and wise.

Of criticism of this kind, we have had none from the minority. Neither the minority report nor the speeches so far heard from the minority side pre ent clear, concise, logical, mueh less con­structive, criticism. I do not suggest that this is due to any lack of ability on the part of the minority, for the minority has men as well qualified to present their views as any minority in the past. Is it due to the fact that the bill as a whole is a more perfect measure and less vulnerable than other tariff measures? As a Republican -favorable to the measure I am inclined to think that the bill is less subject to criticism than any tariff measure which has been presented in many years; but in that fact we can not find a full explanation of the failure of the minority.

LXI--221

. I am inclined to the opinion that the failure of the miDority to present their case as against this measure clearly, definitely, and logically is due largely to the fact that for the first time in many years the Democratic minority finds itself sadly divided both as to the rates carried and as to the policy outlined in this measure. \Ve may hear before the debate closes some voice reminiscent of the past still proclaiming the virtue of free trade.

1\fr. LONGWORTH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MONDELL. Some one on the Democratic side may still

be heard denouncing a protective tariff in any shape or form, but those voices will lack the numbers and the assurance of olden times.

Now I yield to the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. LONGWORTH. Is there not this excuse on the part of

gentlemen on the other side, that, as they stated in their re­port, they did not know that the tariff was an issue in the last campaign, and therefore they have to work hard to keep up to date and find out that it was? ·[Laughter.]

Mr. l\10NDELL. The leaders on that side still have many things to learn. [Laughter.]

Eventually, unless I am greatly mistaken, we shall find a very considerable number of gentlemen on the other side sup­porting the measure, unless at the last moment they are dis­suaded from their present inclination by the cracking of the party whip. ·

Mr. BLANTON. l\IIr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield right there?

Mr. MONDELL. I will yield if I have time, very briefly. l\lr. BLANTON. When such an orthodox Republican as t11e

gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. FREAR] denounces it as funda­mentally indefensible, why is it necessary for Democrats to attack it? [Applause.]

Mr. l\IONDELL. It always requires an exception or two to prove any good rule. [Laughter.]

The fact is that America and every section of it is to-day at heart. largely favorable to a protective policy, and Demo­cratic orators find themselves embarrassed by the protective sentiment in their section. That fact does riot, however, excuse denunciation, abuse, and extravagance or the failure to present criticism in a logical, defendable form.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield right there?

Mr. MONDELL. If I can have more time I will yield. Mr. FORDNEY. I will yield to the gentleman two minutes

more. l\lr. BANKHEAD. The ge~tleman is criticizing the minority

for not offering any. constructive help to this bill. Why is it that the gentleman's party refuses to the Democratic minority the opportunity to offer amendments to this bill? The rule cuts it off.

l\fr. MONDELL. The rule does not contain anythin(J' to pre-vent the offering of amendments. o

The CHAIRMAN (Mr. MANN). The time of the (J'entleman has expired. "' ·

l\Ir. FORDNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield two minutes more to the gentleman /rom 'Vyoming.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wyoming · is recog­nized for two minutes more.

l\lr. MONDELL. l\Ir. Chairman, from the beginning we have endeavored to maintain a high standard of living and a wide field of opportunity in America, and we have succeeded. At no time in our history has the contmst between American wages, Ameri­can rewards, American standards, American opportunities, · and those of many foreign countries with which we compete been so wide and so sh·iking as at this particular time. In no period of our history, therefore, has it been so essential as to-day that we shall safe~ard our labor and our living standards. It is that fact,. appreciated by our people all over the country, that is largely responsible for the favorable sentiment with which this carefully prepared protective tariff bill bas been received. The determination throughout the country to main­tain American standards and opportunities is responsible for the favorable sentiment toward protection in all parts of the country. The determination to maintain American standards of living accounts for the fact that this measure is welcome as an assurance that under the policies and legislation of this Republican administration the labor, the industries, and the high standards of America shall be preserv-ed. [Applause.]

l\Ir. GARl'l"ER. l\Ir. Chairman, with the permission of the gentleman from Michigan [1\Ir. FoRDNEY], I would ·like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. GARRETT).

Mr. FORDNEY. Yes.

3508 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9,

The CH.AIIt 1AN. Tlle gentleman from Tennessee is recog- power to radically reform and retrench Go...-ernment expendl-Dizecl for fh·e minute ·. tures and to embark on a rigid system of ·economy, but new

1\lr. FORDNEY. 1\Ir. Chairman, if the gentleman from Ten- offices have been created, with fat salm:ies, and -appropriations nessee will permit me, I was reque...<;;t;ed a While ago by some n.re still piled up to staggering .:figures. g-entlemen to insert in my remarks a copy of the document on Tl1e Federal reserve banking system is one of the best wJiich waf,res. It is so large that I am going to have it printed as ·a human wisdom ever created, but its p~·lme ·objects and purposes public document instead of including it in my remarks. have been perverted by the board cllarged with its execution

Mr. GARNER. That would have to be done in the House. and management and its activities prostituted to that of a mere The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is not making that request money-making machine, ami no steps ha\'"~ been taken to correct

now. ' this inexcusable abuse of power or, to be more charitable, gross ~1r. GAitRETT of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman incompetency.

from Wyoming [1\fr. Mor..-nELL] seems to think that there is a The .chaotic and -demoralizing eff.ec:ts of the war ha\e not desperate ignorance on ilie part of the leadership of the· minor- fallen more heavily 1!1pon any dass of our people than those ity. Of course, it is almost imJIOSsible for any individual to engaged in the honorable and necessary pursuit of agriculture, associate wiili other individuals without absorbing something, the basic wealth-producing indush·y of our country. and even a strong and intelleetual minority, having associated The cattle and sheep grower does not t·eceive the actual cost for the past three yearJS, almost, with such a majority -as has of getting his animals ready for market, and yet those rrho pur­been had, may possibly have deteriorated to orne extent. chase these meats at retail or consume them at the public eat­[Laughter.] ing places of the country pay a price grossly out of harmony and

I hold in my hand a rather interesting article, which I think in excess of that received by the producer; the grain farmer re­I shall take the liberty of reading just now, following the 1·e- ceives for his products less than the cost of production, but the marks of the gentleman from Wyoming, the majority leader. bread consumers are still forced to pay a comparati\ely ex­It is from the Boston Transcript. It is headed "The Repub- orbitant price for this necessary food; hides scarcely yield the lican failure." I read: producer the expense of transporting them to market, and yet

[From the Boston Transcript-Independent n public-an.] ~he ~earers _of sh<:es .and users of leathe: continue t? pay un-THE REPGBLICAN F.AILuRE. JUSbfiab1y h1g~ pnces. for these necessarres; the frmt, melon,

Already at the executive end of Pennsylvania Avenue the whispered a~d veg~table :rndustnes aT~ whaUy unprofitable to the ·~ctual admission is heard that the administration would find much eru;ier the I producers, but those who are so fortunate as to have them on job of keeping its campaign promises if the Republican majorities in the thetr table pay a price which would pay transportation charges, Senate and Hous~ were not so large. a liberal profit to the middleman and a handsome 1:eturn to the

If popular sentiment here can be accepted as a barometer of popular d · . th 1 • ! · • f . · sentiment elsewhere we think we can safely promise the President that pro ucer • e woo grower recerves starvation pnces or his the next congressio~al elections will result in a considerable reduction product, but almost inconceivable high prices, comparatively, are iJ?. the Republican majority in each House. Bnt the c~ressional elec- still exac-ted from the consumers of woolen goods; the producer tlons are more than a year away, _and the new Se~at<>rs and ¥embers of cotton is forced to sell his cotton at less than a third of the of Congress then to be elected Wlll not take theu seats until 1923. . That is too long for even a patient people to wait for relief from the actual cost of production, and yet the finished cotton goods are shortcomings of a Congress so blatantly .callous as is the pre ent House retailed at prices which justify the producer of the 1.·aw or basic to the co!ffi!ry's current nee~s. . . . . material receiv.ing a commensurate reward for his labors· the The failure of the Republlcan maJority m the House to ra1se up a . . . ' leadership eapable of doing the "\'\"ork that the Republican Party pledged consummg .masses have had but little Tehef from the unprece-itself to. do ~mnts .the. President wi.th the .o~ligation of facing the facts dented high prices they paid for necessary commodities during and ~cting m the1r ll.ght. If he IS. unWillmg or unable. through ~e the "Teater period of the World War and the farmer still pavs exerc1se of the vast mfiuence of h1s office or through the attractive o. all . . . -: amiability of his own personality, to bring order out of chaos in the practic Y war prices for unplements and necessary matermlm House, it is high time that he made a public confession to that effect. the production of his crops, for which he now ~ecei\'"es only By going ID:rectly to th<; people and telling th.em in.plain language that about one-t'hird of what he enjoyed during the war period· the Republican Party 1n the House .has failed h1m, he would -evoke ·w f 1 1 . nf . d . ' from the counh·y a popular pTotest against the record to date of the IDl ons o peop e are out of emp oyment and m e orce Idle-Republican ·Congress that would make its every Member read, ana at ness and _many working on half time and numerous manufactur-least some of them heed, "the handwriting on the wall." ing plants are o_perating at a Joss or are earning barely enough

tLaughter and applau e.] to pay operating expenses; and the profiteer is still abroad in After this is copied, I ask that it be sent to the gentleman the ·land.

from Wyoming [Mr. 1\.ioND.ELL]. [Laughter and applause.] And yet, incredible as it may seem, practically nothing has Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to b€en done to relieve these distressing conditions.

extend and revise my remarks. Mr. KING. Will the gentleman yield? The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman ft·om Ohio asks unanimous Mr. WRIGHT. Yes.

consent to revise and extend his remarks. there ob- Mr. KING. Wil1 not the gentleman be fair enough to state jection? when that situation began? Did it not begin two years before

There was no objection. the Democratic Party was out of power? 1\Ir. GARNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gen- Mr. WRIGHT. I will be frank with the gentleman and say

tleman from Georgia [Mr. WRIGHT]. that it began when Mr. Houston v; as Secretary of the Treasury Mr. WRIGHT. Mi'. Chairman and gentlemen of the commit- and Gov. Harding was go\ernor of the Federal Reserve Board.

tee, while a Democrat of the " old school •• and having nn nbid- In this connection, let me remind you that history shows ing and unfa1terlng faith in the doctrines and principles of the those nations which failed to build up and foster their indus­Democratic Party, I had ne\ertheless hoped the present Repub- tries, and especially their -aglicultm·al interests, -but neglected lican Congress and administration would accomplish something them, went to ruin and decay. for the reli-ei of our tax.!burdened people and enact some legis~ The vezy bill under consideration, wbich if enacted into law lntion of a constructi\e character which would, at least to some would not only . fail to bring relief but would place an a.ddi­extent, ameliorate the almost intolerable business and financial tiona1 inexcnsable and unjustifiable burden upon the consumers conditions so depressing to. the great mass of the people of the of this country -and make the rich richer and tlle poor 'POOrer, United States. But in this earnest, chetishro ho11e I have been is a striking illustration of the h'eatment proposed to be ac­wholly disappointed. eordecl the farmers :and wealth-producing class of this country.

For more than four long, weary months an expectant and You would largely exempt from duty the luxuries which can trustful people have awaited some fulfillment of the boastful only be enjoyed by the rich and place a heavy duty upon and campaign pledges of the arrogant -and now dominant politica1 thereby largely increase the prices of the actual necessities of party in charge of every branch of the Government, on1y to life. Why ·place a heavy duty on -potash, so essential to the meet crushing and withering disappO'intment. Relief was prom- production of crops, 11nd especial1y cotton, and practically ex­ised from the galling and unBqUal burdens of a tax measure empt many articles which can only be afforded by people justified only by the exigencies and stress of war, and which basking in ease and wealth? should have been modified more than two years ago, and -yet no But it is claimed the enactment of the pending tariff bill bill looking to this end has e en been reported to the Congress. would -p-robably praduce to the ·Go...-ernment revenue approximat~

Transportation rates which are almost confiscatory and pro- ing from -six to -seven hundred million dollars annually, but it is hibitive in their character and wbich so materially impede the overlooked that the provisions of this same bill would wring improvement of our business and ·economic -conditions, and whose from the impoverished and overburdened people of our country blighting effects are so far-reaching and general, have not been many billions annually which would not go into the Treasury reduced, and no hopeful indications cheer the American public of the United States but into the coffers of certain favored that any reduction will be made in the immediate .or near classes -and manuf cturers. Beside , th-e bill uiscriminates future. against the producers of the basic material in favor of the

In the campaign of 1920 the spol~esrnen of the now majority manufacturer. If a high uuty is good for the manufacturer, party solemnly pledged the people if it should be placed. in why not for the farmer?

1921. OONGRESSION AL. RECORD-HOUSE. 3509

Our people as a rule are conservative, forbearing, long suf­fering, and patient, but their righteous indignation can be aroused. How long will they passively and quietly endure and submit to the conditions I have detailed? No longer than they have the opportunity of reflecting their views and giving ex­pression of their just grievances at the ballot box, where those who have not been faithful to them will receive a just and stinging rebuke.

In my humble judgment the proposed legislation is ill-timed and unwise, and can not be justified under present conditions when the whole financial, commercial, and industrial fabric of the world is in an upheaval and in an unsettled condition, and when we are trying not only to reestablish but extend and in­crease our foreign trade and commerce.

Mr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. WRIGHT. Yes. . 1\fr. BLANTON. Concerning that very point that the gentle­

man has made, an orthodox Republican from Wisconsin, Mr. FREAR, in his report says there are provisions in the bill which are fundamental1y indefensible.

Mr. WRIGHT. He is eminently correct. 1\Ir. MORGAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the gen­

tleman from Texas a question. 1\Ir. BLANTOX. If the gentleman from Georgia will yield, I

will answer it. Mr. WRIGHT. I will yield. Mr. MORGAN. I \voulcl like to inquire of the gentleman why

he asked such a question when he made a speech before the Southern Tariff A sociation at which I was present in whicll he said that if he e:h:-pected to be returned to Congress he woulu have to vote for protection?

l\fr. BLANTON. The speech I made was in fa\or of the emer­eency tariff bill, in behalf of the farmers and stockmen of this country, and it is a splendid piece of legislation.

Mr. MORGA...l\1'. But it was a tariff bill. Mr. BLANTON. But not like this measure. l\Ir. WHIGHT. How can we expect to sell to the other na­

tions of the world when we levy a duty so high on the com­modities they have to . ell as to practically prohibit their pur­chase by us? The one thing so much needed to bring a revival c: business prosperity to this country is for our producers and manufacturers to find a foreign market for their surplus prod­ucts, and how can we expect to sell to tho e from whom we do not buy? How do we hope to collect the enormous debts owing to us by the Allies if we levy a prohibitive tariff on the fruits of their toil ?

As a re ult of the war this country produced ships aggregating some 30,000,000 dead-\veight tonnage at a cost of billions of dollars. If this splendid fleet is to be used to transport a large part of the commerce of the wo~·ld and be successfully operated and enrich tho e who may purchase it and engage in its opera­tion, these vessels must not only carry but bring back a cargo, and the provisions of this propo::;ed legislation will prove a seri-

- ou handicap, if, indeed, they will not prevent the successful oper­ation of our great merchant marine either by the Government, individuals, or companies.

l\1y friends, what I have said is not in a spirit of partisan­ship, but I have ventured to call your attention to some of the distressing conditions of our country, actuated by an earnest desire to make some suggestion which may be the means of accomplishing some good and bringing some relief to our glori­ous but now depressed and suffering people.

It is my cherished hope that we may all for once rise above petty partisanship and sectionalism and be actuated by a high order of patriotic statesmanship and diligently and sincerely strive to bring relief to the people of our common country: [Applause.]

l\Ir. GAR1\TER. l\fr. Chairman, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from. MaryJancl [Mr. GoLnsBonouaH].

1\lr. GOLDSBOROUGH. l\fr. Chairman, after three months of effort the American Congress is about to enter upon the final phase of its endeavor in putting into concrete form upon the statute books of the United States of America a measure which history will speak of as the "Fordney tariff bill."

In 1913 this country entered into a phase of political develop­ment more constructive, more elevated, and with more unselfish vision than probably any other in the whole history of national development. l\fen were called to the Nation's service without financial alliances and selfish predilections to obscure their angle of vision, but all of them men of sound fundamental training, men cnpable of sustained thought, and men with no tie or alle­giance except unselfish de' otion to the solving of the problems

- which concerned the teeming millions of America. Since tile Civil ·war, a period of nearly 50 years, the destinies

of tbe great American Republic had been under the control of groups, who-some of them sincerely and some of tbem self-

ishly-believed in the principle of what they called protection. When I say for 50 years I am not unmindful that during periods of four years twice the Democratic Party was in the ascendancy, but conditions prior to each instance were like those in France during the latter part of the reign of Louis XV, who, when near­ing his death, exclaimed "After us comes the deluge." Four years was all too short a time to undo and make over, and so my original proposition would seem to be sound, that in 1913, when the Democratic Party came into full power, the present majority party had been in the control of the Government for nearly 50 years. Within a little more than a year after the first inauguration of Woodrow Wilson as President of the United States the present national banking law, known as the Federal reserve act, was placed upon the statute books against the sus­tained opposition of the most powerful financial influences, and so nearly perfect did this masterpiece of econorqic mechanism work that the country withstood the shock of the altogether changed conditions due to the concentration of the country's energies and resources in financing and conducting a war, which, in cohesiveness of effort, concentration of IJlaterial and of men intensively but fully trained, and in Yalor and brilliancy of exe­cution, is the wonder of the world.

For six years the interests of all the people was the para­mount governmental consideration. For six years the serv­ants of the people at Washington did what our theory of govern­ment conceives they should do. They were in truth and in fact the servants of all of the people. Special privilege beat in vain upon the doors of the sanctuaries of the people's rights, and, defeated and sullen, they returned to their tents deter­mined to await the sadly inevitable public reaction from great mental elevation. ·

The country s achievements, participateu in alike by all of our people, irrespecti\e of creed or political alignment, reached the culmination of opportunity when all Em·ope, disgusted and sick with war, reached out across the water and asked the great Republic of the '\Vest to lead the way toward future peace, prosperity, and economic stability, and then that great instrument known as the covenant of the League of Nations was offered to the Senate of the United States for ratification. And then what happened? The stored-up venom of six years' accumulation appea:red. All those who hated tbe President of the United States because of his great intellectual capacity, because of the directness of his methods, because of his naive adherence to the simple principles of right and justice, because of his vision in seeing the opporhmity to reduce to concrete form a practical plan to bring about national tranquillity and prosperity and international political and economic peace, de­clared themselves against the world's greatest opportunity to beat its swords into plowshares and prevented the ratification of the covenant of the League of Nations, only, however, nnd not until, the object of their hatred and spleen, a man whose capacity for constructive and sustained labor was the wonder of bis time, was stricken on the field of battle.

Drunk with the opportunity of reaction, the majority party in a wild frenzy to again enthrone privilege where it had long reigned in comfort and with unction, made reckless promises of the KirYana it would create by governmental action for the people of this Republic, the boys on the Rhine were to come home immediately after 1\Iarch 4, returning prosperity was promised to the speculator and the profiteer, who during and after the war had lost the conception of achievement by hard and consistent labor; the slacker and the gouger, who during the closing years of the Democratic administration had been economically reprimanded and told to go back to honest work, were assured during this campaign of 1920 by the majority party that the glorious days of war-time loot would be re­turned for them if only the Republican Party was placed in power.

The results last fall were exactly what were to be expected. No properly informed and thoughtful Democrat was surprised at what actually took place, but the results of the election have placed the majority party in the hopeless position of being unable to carry out what it had led the people to expect, and this very tariff measure which the American Congress is now considering, and upon the disposition of which will depend so largely the welfare of 110,000,000 people, is the concep­tion not even of the legislative group which consistently fosters the interests of special privilege, but a hazy attempt to put into concrete form something, no matter how unscientific, no matter how unfair, no matter how discriminatory, no matter to what extent the people will be plundered by it, a hazy at­tempt to convince the people that something is being done to carry out the Republican promise of constructive legislation.

And what does the mass of testimony taken before the 'Vays and Means Committee of the House of RepresentatiYes demon­strate? Only this: That as soon as it was lmO\Yll that this

'

3510 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9,

Congress was going to enact tariff legislation every selfish and sordid local interest stormed the Ways and Means Committee room in order that it might be allowed to set its talons into the throat of a people prostrate in a period of war recon· struction but asking only that healthy economic conditions be restored, asking only that world trade might be resumed so that wheat and corn and cotton could be restored to normal prices and at the same time feed and clothe the starving and freezing millions across the seas, so that the products of the factory might find a market across the Atlantic, its owner be able to obtain and receive for himself a fair measure of profit for his product, and give labor to the vast body of the country's unemployed.

At a time when this country has a vast surplus of gold1 at a time when Europe, sadly in need of our products, can pay for them only. in goods, we are building up a tariff wall as a fraudulent fulfillment of a campaign pledge and in order to satisfy the pirates who again deelre to take charge of the ship of state.

Ah! how blind men are when their own personal interest is involved, political or matel'ial, how they refuse to look beyond and see what they are doing to their fellow men.

In our great cities now, and even in the country, g1·owing chil­dren show by their pinched faces and feeble bodies that they are not getting proper nourishment for their minds and their bodies ; helpless babies are dying by the hundreds because their natural protectors, out of work, are unable to provide them either with proper food or with medical attention, and I warn you, you who are again placing it within the power of the few to take the bread from the mouths and the clothes from the backs of the many, that the garments of silk which clothe the few do not come from the worm alone, but their raiment is spun from the bowels of babes.

Gen. Hancock said that the tariff was a local question. What he meant was that, as a claim of infant industry could no longer be made by the friends of protection, a tariff, when it was any­thing more than simply and purely a tariff for revenue, was an :instrument provided for -various local selfish interests and not a goT"ernmental instrument useful to the people as a whole.

It is thoroughly well known that this tariff bill would have been an impossibility except by the cooperation, based on mutual dependency, of various powerful financial and business groups who ha\'"e long since passed by "the period of infant industry," and who do not fear the competition of any country on earth, or else groups who, neither from the standpoint of the p·rotectionist nor the standpoint of the believer in a tariff for revenue only, are entitled to a tariff. Of the latter class are the lumber and oil groups.

1\Ir. HARDY of Texas. I am glad to ·hear it, and I will do it. Will I be permitted to offer it?

:.1\f.r. FORDNEY. I think the chairman will offer no objec­tion to tb.e gentleman's offering an amendment.

Mr. HARDY of Texas. I am glad to hear it, and I will offer it.

Mr. FORDNEY. The gentleman better be getting it ready. Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH. And what would be its :results? . It

will encourage the destruction of our remaining forests, instead of encouraging the importation of Canadian lumber and the consequent conservation of our present forest 1·eserves.

The abo\'"e statement alone sufficiently and fully demonstrates that a tariff on lumber is against the interest of the people of this country, but aside from a scientific discussion and get­ting down to the ver·y time when this tariff bill is to become a law, what do we find? We find that, due to a cessation of building operations during the war and due to the prohibitive cost of lumber since the war, houses have not kept pace with increasing population, so that there is a thoroughly recognized housing shortage throughout the length and breadth of the United States. This has resulted in rent profiteering which has caused untold suffering and privation and self-denial to mil­lions of our people, yet the lumber barons, one group of special privilege now ·in the saddle at Washington~ with the price of lumber ah·eady at a peak where they can make more money than they ever made before excep-t in the period during the latter part of the war and immediately after, are having placed in this tariff measure a schedule to further plunder the people and filch from their pockets the money they have· to spend in order to keep shelter over their heads and the heads of their wives and children.

OILS.

And then comes the oil group, who control a sufficient num­ber of votes on the Republican side of Congress to block the tariff bill unless they are allowed to put their fingers in the public purse. The very night before the introduction of this measure, which the chairman of the Ways and Means Com­mittee, with such grim humor, has named " the Magna. Cha.rt..'l. for the perpetuation of American standards of living and the constitution of a rmifOI:m and universal prosperity," a taiiff was placed upon Mexican oil which practically prohibits its importation and which will enable the great oil producers of this country to place an unearned charge upon the .American people of millions of dollars annually until this law is re­pealed.

Talk about protection for oil. A man who has an oil well found on his land has a mine of untold wealth in the well itself and the only conceivable purpose of a tariff of anY.

wooo A -o LUMBEn. kind on oil is to pay dividends on the watered stock of corpo-This country is about to expend $7,000,000 in the planting and rations formed to sell shares to an Unsuspecting public, the

preser\ation of national forests. This is because the Govern- value of which are based entirely on the unknown possibilities ment recognizes that within 50 years the country will suffer of production of that oil well. In other words, all this tariff can from a lumber famine unless something is done to preserve the possibly do is to foster the schemes of men who are e::<i.-ploiting remnant and to reforest the public lands. Now, what does this the natural resources of this country to extinction and who · tariff bill do? have been filching the people with a flood of unjustified issues

Timber, hewn, one-half cent a cuwc foot (Underwood, free) ; of oil stock for the last four years. log , fir, spruce, cedar, or hemlock, $1 a thousand feet (Under- Scientifically viewing the ·matter, we find that this tariff on wOO<l, free ; provision is made for exemption to countries hav- oils will result just as the tariff on lumber will result, in a de~ ing no embargo or restrictions upon exportations to the United pletion of a national basic resource, when the policy of the States during the last year) ; logs, sawed boards, and other country should be to encourage the importation of oils and forms of cedar, lignum-vitre, ebony, mahogany, and other cabinet the corresponding hoarding of a great national basic asset. woods, 15 per cent (Underwood, 10 per cent) ; wood veneers, Under this tariff bill, providing for a tariff on crude peb·oleum 20 per cent (Underwood, 15 per cent); railroad ties, telegraph of 35 cents a barrel and on fuel oil of 25 cents a barrel, both and telephone poles, 10 per cent (Underwood, same); wheel of which are on the free list under the Underwood tariff bill of woods, 10 per cent (Underwood, free); pickets, staves, and 1913, every man- or woman who runs an automobile, e-very, hoops, 10 per cent (Underwood, free); shingles, 50 cents a thou- owner of a van or tractor, every farmer who plows or culti­sand (Underwood, free); casks, barrels, and packing boxes, 15 vates with a mechanical device, every householder who lights per cent (Underwood, same) ; reeds and rattans, 20 per cent a coal-oil lamp or heating stove, will have to pay the tax: (Underwood, 10 per cent) ; blinds, shades, and screens, 25 per which is passed on to the consumer by this tariff on oil. Every cent (Underwood, 20 per cent); house or cabinet furniture, 25 railroad which burns oil and every steamer as it sails the per cent (Underwood, 15 per cent). Great Lakes or the broad reaches of ttte Atlantic and Pacific

l\fr. HARDY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman and which burns AmericUll oil will pass on the charge to the yield? American consumer in freight rates. These are the particular

l\fr. GOLDSBOROUGH. Yes. truths about this n 1\Iagna Charta for the perpetuation of Amer-lVlr. HARDY of Texas. .As I understand it, it is not proposed ican standards of living and the constitution of a mtirorm and

to giYe us any chance to vote on the lumber schedule. universal prosperity." 1\.fr. GOLDSBOROUGH. I think that is correct. AGRICULTun..A.L sTAPLEs.

1\Ir. HARDY of Texas. In other words, they will force it An attempt js made in this monstrous measure to obtain down the throat of the House or compel ns to defeat the whole support from the farmers in the customary perfectly trans-bill. parent manner of placing a tariff on agricultural products,

Mr. FORDNEJY. Will the gentleman yield? notably a tariff of 3() cents a bushel on wheat and 15 cents a Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH. Yes. bushel on corn. Everybody knows that we import practically Mr. FORDNEY. There will be nothing in the rule to prevent I no corn a. nd therefore that by no possible argument, howe\er .

the offering of an amendment. illogical and insincere, can a tariff on corn affect the American

•

1921. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. 35lli corn grower, but this duty on corn does serve to illustrate the general fraud attempted to be perpetrated on the producer of taple agricultural products by a reciprocal tariff.

Practical statesmen and economic specialists ha\e been dis­cus ilig the effect of the tatiff on staple agricultural products for the last 50 years, and of late years the Tariff Commission has written largely upon the subject, and ne\er in a single instance, except where the disciples of special interests have been trying to foist a tariff measure on the people · of the United States, has any supposedly well-informed man claimed that a tariff on agricultural staples would increase the price to the producer or do anything more than give the profiteer in food products a chance to add a fictitious price onto the bread that' goes into the mouth of the great body of consumers of this country and make almost prohibitive the cost of the garments to cove:r the backs of the great masses of the men, women, and children of the United States of America.

Even Dr. Taussig, professor of economics at Harvard Uni­\ersity, the very temple of the priesthood of special priv.Llege, has not the hardihood to claim that a tariff on agricultural staples is of any benefit to the producer. In " Some Aspects of the Tariff Question," published in 1915, on page 4, Dr. Taussig :qa this to say :

"A.. duty on a commodity which is produced within the country as cheaply as without, and sold as cheaply, ordinarily has no effect what­ever. Of such levies there has been a plenty in our tru:iff history. Thc.se on the staple agricultural products are the most familiar and conspicuous. In the logrolling which is an almost universal con­comitant of pro\ectiye tariffs the notion that a duty will surely be of benefit to domestic producers has caused our farming sections to in­sist on 'their share' of the going favors, and to accept, nay demand, du~ies on wheat, corn, meat and meat products, which yet 'have been qmte without industrial effect. There has been no more striking illus­tration of the average farmer's naive state of mind on this subject than the bitter opposition aroused by the reciprocity treaty with Can­ada which the Taft administration proposed in 1910-11. The free admission of wheat contemplated by thlft treaty was suppo e<l to por­tend disaster to the wheat growers of the Northwest. though it was known to all the world that wheat was exported both from the United • tates and from Canada and that it was the same in price (allowing for cost of tran&portation) in these two countrie anu iu England. The range of commodities subjected to duties yet not at all affected by them, has been very wide, including not only agricultural staples, but many manufactured articles."

All this would ~:?eem to be elementary, easily understood and perfectly clear, and yet in A. D. 1921, after the great E!tluca­tional experiencE's that the American people haYe had for the last eight years, a Republican Ways and l\Iean. Committee has the cynical temerity to report out a bill which, in so far as the farmer is concerned, is a fraud pure and simple. · ~ear the beginning of the majority report, on page 2, we find

the following : "During the considemtion of rates, as well as during the hea.l'ings

and previous thereto. the Tariff Commission has upplied the committee in the form of tariff surveys concise and comprehensi•e infot·matlon on various, subjects. In a'ddition to this, the staff of the Tariff Com­mi ion was placed at the disposal of the committee and has been called upon to work with the committee in the drafting of the various tariff schedules. Through these efforts the bill herein recommended pro­poses many desirable changes in an·angement and classification."

How do the majority members of the Way. and ::\Iea.ns Com­mittee reconcile this tatement in the!r report with the "Sup­plemental Information Concerning the Wheat and Flour Trade of the United States," published during the present rear by the Tariff Commission, and which contains, on page 0 and 10, the following language:

. "Aside from t;he questi~?u of price levels, h_oweyer, it may be said With some certamty that masmuch as the Uruted States is on an ex­porting basis, any wheat that is imported from Canada (aside from the que tion of special caHes to meet special needs) releases an equal amount of American wbeat for export. This being true, it is not a matter of great importance whether the Canadian wheat reaches Eu­rope directly or indirectly through the United • tates either in the form of flour or by releasing similar American wheat. Indeed, if we may assume that the European demand is controlling our market, as it does in normal times when " ' e are on an exporting basis, there is a pos. ibility that if the Canadian wheat had been thrown on tbe English market before the close of la.k:e navigation, in tead of filter­ing slowly through the United States, the world price level, and there­fore our own market, would have been depressed more than it was in the fall of 1020. From tills point of view it seems fortunate for American producers that there was a buffer between the great Canadian surplus and the Liverpool market."

The real truth of the situation is that the Republican leaders of the House of Representatives during the present Congress haYe opposed e\ery measure introduced in the interest of the farmers. I ha\e personal knowledge of what I ay because much of the proposed farmer legislation during the present Con­gre s ha come to the Committee on Banking and Currency, of which I am a member, so that it is perfectly clear that all tbe u-e the majority members of the Ways and Means Committee 11a •e for the farmer is to appease him and in adding to the great consuming public and their wiYes and their children the great burden of the fabulous enrichment of special priYileg~ the duty on staple agricultural products is in erted jn this

bill in order tO' shut the eyes of millions of the people upon whom the infamy of this legislation is about to be perpetrated.

Mr. KING. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH. I can not yield. Mr. KING. But the gentleman made a statement with re­

gard to the Republican members of the Banking and Currency Committee.

Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH. No; I did not. I said that much of that legislation came to the Banking and Currency Committee, and therefore I was familiar with the attitude of the members of the Ways and Means Committee who con titute the domi­nating factor on the Republican side.

Mr. KING. The gentleman does not mean to ·ay that the Republican members of the Banking and Currency Committee ever opposed farmer legislation?

1\Ir. GOLDSBOROUGH. I did not say that the gentleman did, because the gentleman has persistently tried to helll it.

My friends, the country has recently emerged from a great war. The spirits of men and women have been chastened by heroic sacrifice and unselfish devotion to duty. We mu ·t not lose the heritage which this vision leaves to us and to our pos­terity through all time. We must not for one moment forget that thousands and thousands of the fresh young boys who went to France believed that what they were doing would result in a better America for them if they lived, and, whether they lived or died, a better ~'llnerica for their loved ones and tho e that were to come after their loved ones and for the whole 110,000,000 of a great people.

Shortly before making the supreme sacrifice one of these boys wrote a few ver~es, but I only seem to remember the lines­

If ye break faith with us who die We shall not sleep, Though poppies grow on Flanders fields.

We lost one great opportunity when men's minds were with one accord on a policy of national cooperation and internationa1 amity, and I say to you, you of the majority party, you who are in full control of the policies of a great people, that you forget your petty jealousies and enmities; that you refuse longer to blind your elves to the great truths of the _political and economic destiny of the United States. of America as the leader of the world; that you cast aside this miserable mockery of forward­looking .'lmericanism and stand foursquare before your country on a policy of sound and scientifically fair distribution of finan­cial credits throughout the length and breadth of this broad. land, gi\ing an equal opportunity to every industry and e\ery branch of it to finance their legitimate business operations anti foursquare before the world on a policy of scientifically fair and mutual, gradual, reciprocal disarmament so that not only the dreadful burden of military establishments will be gradually lifted from the backs of the people of the world, but that also their minds may be gradually withdrawn from warlike trend and towa1·d competition between the achievements of peace.

Adopt this policy, my friends, cast aside small things, and this minority, many of whom, with many of you, stro\e faithfully and tirelessly to bring success to America in her period of great trial, will go with you and be glad to go.

My friends7 in this period of reconstruction, at this time when with world conditions daily changing it is impossible to frame a tariff schedule from the standpoint of either the protectionist or the belie\er in a tariff fo.r revenue only, you will do -n·en to withdraw your minds from a consideration of the colossal tax on the masses of our people provided for in this measure with its unheard-of duties, its drawbacks, and its A.merican Yalua­tion scheme, which will make it impossible for an importer to tell what his goods will cost him, and think of the words of a greater than I, the words of one who spoke at another great national crisis, of the words of Abraham Lincoln at Gettys-bm·g: .

It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that -cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion-that we here hio-hly resolve that these dead sliall not have died in vain-that this Nation, under God. shall have a new birth of freedom-and tbat government of the people, by the people, for the people shall n()t perish from the eartil.

[Applause on Democ1·atic side.] Mr. FORD~EY. l\fr. Chairman, I mo\e that the committee

do now rise. The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the committee rose; and l\Ir. W .AL n having re­

sumed the chair as Speaker pro tempore, Mr. llA~N, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the tate of the Union, reported that tbat committee had had under consideration the bill H. R. 7456, the tariff bill, ancl hnd come to no resolution thereon.

3512 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE. JULY 9, -

LEA IT OF ABSENCE.

By unanimou · consent, ltA>ave of absence was granted to­MI·. BRENKAN for six days, on account of official business. l\lr. ~l&..w ·for 10 days, on account of the serious illness of

1\lrs. I\Iead.

'IT AGES IK UNITED STATES AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

1\lr. FORDNEY. l\Ir. Speaker, I wish to offer the following re olution.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the reso­lution.

The Clerk read as follows: Resol"cedJ That the publication entitled "Wages in the United States

and Foreign Countl"ics," prepared for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means, be printed as a House document, and that 10,000 additional copies be printed. of which 9,000 shall be for the use of the House and shall be distributed through the folding room, and 1,000 for the Com­mittee on "IT'a:rs and Means.

1\lr. FORDl\TEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask that for this reason: There is a great demand for the document. I had stated during the day that I would print it as a part of my remarks, but there are 100 pages and I would rather not. I would like to haYe it printed as a public document. The estimate given on the number asked for is $350. I think the House should have it printed as a public document.

Mr. GARRETT of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I think we can take that up on l\Ionday morning, and I make the point that there is no quorum present.

l\lr. MANN. It only comes up by unanimous consent. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Tennessee

make · the point of order of no quorum. 1\lr. FORDNEY. l\Ir. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

when the House adjourns to-day it adjourn to meet at 11 p'clock em l\fonday.

l\fr. GARRETT of Tenue see. I withdraw the point of no quorum for .the present.

1\lr. MANN. This is a matter of unanimous consent--1\Ir. GARRETT of Tennessee. WeH, I object for the present. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Tennessee

object. · to the consideration of the resolution. The gentleman from :\Iichigan asks unanimous consent that when the House adjourns to-day it adjourn to meet at 11 o'clock on l\fonday. I · there objection? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none.

ADJOURNMENT.

1\Ir. FORDKEY. l\Ir. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 18 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned .to meet 1\Ionday, July 11, 1921, at 11 o'clock a. m.

EXECUTIVE COl\fl\fUNICATIONS, ETC.

190. Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, a letter from the Secre­tary of 'Var, concurring in the recommendation (lf the Quar­termaster General and suggesting that authority be granted by Congress for the payment of a pro rata share of $1,800 per annum of the rent of office for Chief of Engineers of the Army in charge of the park system of tl)_e Distrkt of Columbia, was taken from the Speaker's table and referred to the Committe2 on Appropriation .

REPORTS OF COl\11\liTTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS A.l~D RESOLUTIONS. -

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, bills and resolutions were sev­erally reported from committees, delivered to the Clerk, and referred to the several calendars therein named, as follows:

l\1r. ZIHLl\1AN, ft·om the Committee on the District of Columbia. to which was referred the bill (H. R. 7661) to amend the act of Congress entitl~d "An act to establish standard weights and measures for the District of Columbia ; to define the duties of the superintendent of weights, measures, and markets of the .District of Columbia, and for other purposes/' approved 1\farch 3, 1921, reported the same without amendment, accompanied hy a report (No. 255), which said l>ill and report were referred to the House Calendar.

l\It·. BARKLEY, from the Committee on Interstate and For­eign Commerce, to which -n·as referred the bill (H. R. 7208) to eA.'i:end the time for the construction of a bridge across the Roanoke River in Halifax County, N. C., reported the same with­out amendment, accompanied by a report (No. 256), which said bill and report were referred to the House Calendar.

'

PUBLIC BILLS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MEMORIALS.

Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, bills, resolutions, and memorials were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. McFADDEN: A bill (H. R. 7683) to provide for the consolidation or redistribution of the powers and duties of the several executive departments of the Government of the United States relating to the Territory of Alaska, and for other purposes ; to the Committee on the Territories.

By Mr. SWING: A bill (H. n. 7684) to authorize the Secre­tary of the Navy to acquire 1,000 acres, more or less, at or near Camp Kearny, Calif., for a site for a lighter-than-air aviation station; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. COLLIER: A bill (H. R. 7685) to amend section 90 of the Judicial Code of the United States approved 1\Iarch 3, 1911, so as to change the time of holding certain terms of the district court in Mississippi; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. NEWTON of Missouri: A bill (H. R. 7686) to amend section 9 of an act entitled "An act to define, regulate, and punish trading with the enemy, and for other purposes," ap­proved October 6, 1917, as amended; to the Committee on Inter­state and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. WINSLOW: A bill (H. R. 7687) authorizing boards of investigation of the United States Public Health Service to subpcena witnesses; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a bill (H. R. 7688) to provide for the marking of an­chorage grounds in waters of 1-:he United States; to the Com­mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. TEN EYCK: A bill (H. R. 76 9) to provide for the industrial rehabilitation of the blind; to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

PRIVATE BILJ:.S AND RESOLUTIONS.

Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. BARKLEY: A bill (H. R. 7690) granting a pension to Burnie M. Rogers; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. DRANE: A bill (H. R. 7691) authorizing the Secre­tary of 'Var to donate to the city of Lake 'Vales, Fla., one Ger­man cannon or fieldpiece; to the Committee- on Military Af-fairs. ' ·

By l\fr. FULLER: A bill (H. R. 7692) granting a pension to Charlotte E. Rockwell; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By l\Ir. HAYS: A bill (H. R. 7693) granting a pension to John Rigdon ; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

Also, a bill (H. R. 7694) granting a pension to Martha Mor­row; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. HOGAN: A bill (H. R. 7695) for the relief of James E. Connors ; to the Committee on Claims.

Also, a bill (H. R. 7696) for the relief of Tony Troncone; to the Committee on Claims.

By l\Ir. MUDD: A bill (H. R. 7697) for the relief of John Keretzman; to the Committee on Claims.

By l\Ir. REECE: A bill (H. R. 7698) granting a pension to Lillie Dixon ; to the Committee on Pensions.

Also, a bill (H. R. 7699) granting a pension to Solomon Wil­liams, sr.; to the Committee on Pensions.

Also, a bill (H. R. 7700) for the relief of William H. Nelson; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. TAYLOR of Tennessee: A bill (H. R. 7701) granting a pension to D. J. Collins; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. TEl\fPLE: A bill (H. R. 7702) granting a pension to Sarah A. Herrick; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. WEAVER: A bill (H. R. 7703) granting a pension to James P. Patton; to the Committee on Pension .

Also, a bill (H. R. 7704) granting a pension to Will Brown; to the Committee on Pensions.

PETITIONS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows":

1882. By the SPEAKER (by request) : Petition of Oolicia Young and 299 others of the eleventh congressional district of Missouri; Robert Daly and 58 others of the first congres ional district of Connecticut; Mrs. T. J. Bell and 59 others of the State of North Dakota ; Bernard J. Fahey and 299 others of the tenth congressional district of Missouri, urging recognition of the Irish republic ; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

1883. Also (by request) , petition of Alex. Albin and otl,~rs of North Dakota, P. W. Cain and 25 others of Kansas, fifth congressional dish·ict, urging recognition of the Irish repub­lic; to the Committee' on Foreign Affairs.

•

I

192]. CONGRESSIONAL RECOR.D-SENATE. 3513 1884. By l\lr. APPLEBY: ResolutionS adopted by the New

Jer. ey Pres~ Association, protesting against the repeal of amendment of the zone Jaw for mailing newspapers and magu-7-ines; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

1885. By Mr. BLAND of Virginia: Petition of citizens of Freuericksburg, Va., opposing tax on cn.rbonated beverages in clo eu containers; to the Committee on Ways and l\Ieans.

1886. By 1\lr. CHALMERS.: Petition. signed by pastor and members of the St. James Evangelical Lutheran Congrega­tion, of Toledo, Ohio, petitioning Congress of the United States to further s-uch action as may be deemed advisable to put an end to atrocities. being ·committed against the womanhood of Germany by the black soldiers of the French Republic .now occupying German territory; to the Committee on }foreign Af-fairs. • ·

1887. By Mr. DYER: , Petition of Charles Rippin, commis­sioner of the traffic bureau, Merchants' Exchange of St. Louis, urging the passage of the Robinson bill, in regard to railroad tariffs; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

1888. By Mr. FENN : Petition of Commodore Jack Barry Council, American Association for the Recognition of the Irish Republic, New Britain, Conn., seeking recognition of the .Irish republic and requesting a public hearing; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

1889. By Mr .. KAHN: Resolution of the American Legion, Department of California. opposing the importation and ex­hibition of German made and other foreign made films in the United States, and urging legislation to protect the .American moving-picture industry; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

1890. Also, resolution adopted by the California ·Homeopathic Medical Society, relative · to hospital accommodations for the diseased and disabled o•erseas veterans; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Oomme1:ce.

1891. By 1\fr. KISSEL.: Petition of the Religious Liberty League, New York City, urging immediate peace with the Central Powers, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

1892. Also, petition of the Preserved aml Salt Fish Dealers' Association of New York City, regarding tariff on mackerel; to the Committee ou Ways and Means.

1893. By Mr. KUNZ: Petition of citizens for recognition of the Lithuanian Go\ernment; to tlle Committee on Foreign .Affairs.

1894. By Mr. LA...L'UPERT: Petition of citizens of Winnebago County, Wis., urging upon the President and Congress of the Unitoo States that they do tll eir utmost to cooperate with other nations for the reduction of a rmaments at the earliest pos­sible time; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

1895. By l\Ir. LAYTON: Petition of G. L. Griffith and sun­dry citizens of Delaware., urging the uepeal of section 030 of the revenue act of 1918; t O> the Committee on Ways and Means.

189G. By l\fr. RADCLIFFE: Petition of citizens of Paterson, N. J., regarding recognition of Irjsb repuQ,lic ; to the Com­mittee on Foreign Affairs.

1897. By 1\ir. RAKER : Petition of Simon Levi Co., of Los Angeles, protesting against House bills 6215 and 6220; to the Committee on A.grlcultme.

1898. ~<\Jso, petition of Midcontinent Oil & Gas Association, of Tulsa, Okla., urging a tadff on oil imported into thi s coun­try; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

1899. Also, senate joint resolution No. 29, State of California, relative to an expression of confidence on tlle part of the Oaliforniv. Legislatme in th~ integrity and ability of Gen. AlYaro Obregon as President of the Republic of )Ie,x:ico; to the Committee on Foreign Aiiairs.

1900. By Mr. ROUSE : Petition of citizens of Boone, Kenton, and Grant Counties, Ky .• requesting the Government to ur:~e in­fl.uence to prevent Turks from carrying O\.lt threats of re,enge on the Armenians ; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

1901. Also, petition of Grand View Council, Junior Order United American Mechanics, Clifton, Ky .• by George W . Wagner, secretary, indorsing Smith-Towner bill; to the Committee on Education.

1902. By 1\'lr. SNELL: Resolutions adopted by the First Meth­oclist Episcopal Church, of Potsdam, N. Y., supporting the Vol­stead amendment; to fue Committee on the Judiciary.

1903~ By Mr. TA.GUE : Telegram, of Logan, Johnson (Ltd.), o..e Bo too.. Mass.~ protesting against House bill 7294 ; to the Com­ill ittee on the .Judiciar:y.

1904. Also, letter from Gov. Channing Cox, of Massachusetts, in opposition to the placing of a tax on Cl'tH.le- and fuel oils; to the Couunittee on Way..; au.<l leans.

100-:5. By :Mr~ Y ATSON ~ Resolutions adopted at a regular meetin~ o:f Divif·ioo. No. 1,. Bucks County, Pa .• calling upon the

President to collect money due from foreign· cotmtries; to the Committee ou Ways and Means.

1906. Also, resolutions adopted at a regular meeting of Divi­sion No.5, _-\.ncient Order of Hibernians, of Montgomery County, Pa., calling upon the President to collect money due from for­eign countries; to the Committee on 'Vays and :lleans.

1907. By ::\1r. YATES: Petition of Dr. Elmer Hagler, the Hagler Building, Springfield, Ill., protesting against the ::\Ic­Kellar amendment to the Army reorganization bill; to the Com­mittee on Military Affairs.

1908. Also, petition of Henry Eisenhart, Roy E. Gauen, Henry Schneider, Charles Maey~ and Hugo Bremser, urging a duty of 35 cents per barrel on crude petroleum and fuel oil; to the Com­mittee on Ways and l\Ieans.

1.909. Also, petition of the Rockford Trust and Rockfm·d Xa­tional Bank, requesting that tax exemption be remo'"ed and ali things be put on the same fair basis; to the Committee on 'Vays and Means.

·SEN .ATE.

~10l'-.l).o\Y, July 11, 19t21. The Chaplain. Rev. J. J. Muir, D. D.; offered the following

prayer:

Om· Father, we rejoice in Thy gracious name. Thou hast ne~er failed the trustful soul Thou hast constantly helped those who in . times of difficulty have turned to Thee, expressed their need, and appropriated Thy fullness. l\Iay we learn more and more that duty when interpreted as prtv:ilege beeomes to us more and more rela.ted to the thought of doing Thy will heartily. We ask in Jesus' name. Amen.

The reading clerk proceeded to read the Journa.l of the pro­ceedings of F1iday last, when, on request of ::Ur. ODRTrs, and by unanimous consent, the nu·tber reading was dispensed with and the Journal was appro\ed.

REPR.I~T OF T..lll.IFF DILL.

A message from the House of Representatives, by ::Ur. O•er­hue, its em·olling clerk,. announced that the House had passed a concurrent resolution. (H. Con. Res. 23) providing for the print­ing, as a House document, with an judex, of 15,000 copies of the tariff bill. ·

::\1r. i\IOSES. :llr. President. I ask the Ohair to lay before the Senate the concurrent resolution just recei\ed from the House of RepresentatiYes.

The YICE PHESIDE::\""T laid before the Senate the concurrent re olution (H. Con. Res. 23), which 'IYas read, a s follows :

Resol -,;cd l;y the Hause of Representatit:cs (tho Senate conettrt'lng). That the bill H. R. 7456, •· To provide revenue, to r egulate comtnerce with foreign countries, to encourage the industries of the United States, and for other purposes," be printed as a House document, with an index, and that 15,000 additional copies be printed, of which 9,000 shaH be for the use of the House, to be dir:.tributed through the folding room, 4,000 for the Sena.te, 1,000 for the Committee on Ways and Means of the House, and l ,O<tO for the Committee on Finance of the Senate.

:.\1r. :\lOSES. I mo"Ye that the concurrent resolution be con­cuned in.

The concurrent resolution was consillered by unanimous con­sent antl ngref'd to.

C.UL Q-]; THE ROJ. L.

~r. CURTIS. l\lr. President, I suggest the absence ot a quorUlll.

The VICE PRESIDE~T. The Secretru:y will call the roll. The reading clerk called the roll and the following Senators

answered to their names : Ashurst Fletcher Lo{lge Robinson Ball Gerry ~IcCormick :-lheppard Borah Hale :llcCumber Shortridge Brandegee Harrelu McKellar immons Broussard Harris Mc....'i"ary Smoot Bu.rsum Hanison Uoses Stanfield Calder Heflin Myers Sterling Cameron .Johnson. ~elson Rutherland Capper .iones, N.Mex. New Trammell Caraway .Jones. Wash . Newberry Underwood Culberson Kellogg Xlcholson Wadsworth Curtis Kendrick Xorrls Walsh, Mass. Dial Kenyon Oddie Walsh, Mont. Dillingham Keyes Penrose Watson, Ga. Edge King Pittman Watson, Ind. Elkins Knox Poin<le.xter Williams

,Ernst Ladd Pomerene "\Iillis Fernald La Follette Reed

The VICE PRESIDE~T. Se•enty-one Senators having an· swerecl to thcir names, a quorum is present.

ADJ"CSTED CO~IPE~S.:\TIOX FOR YEIETIA..."\'"8 OF THE WORLD W.A.R.

~Ir. WILLll.MS. .)lr. I->t·esident, I hold in my hand a com­munication from the Plirate Soldiers and SaHors' Legion of

=