THE EFFECTS OF AMER’CAN TARIFF
PRACTICES C‘N SILK PRODUCTS
Thesis for the Degree of M. A.

Mei Nan Sung
1929

' "$2? .’

’\.‘ H. 3.! i;-
. " {/31 ‘9 ‘3

A

arj

I

' "714'

i
'.D

. - ‘ .‘ :‘l‘IL. ‘ .
.. “734“" 7 *7" -

.' 1'1“ \A

.0 u
‘.0
-' '2!‘ TL

‘oEA— ‘

‘
Co

 

"v’:
I
A

R?

"n;
.o‘.
.‘ ~.

~ .F

A .
px’,‘

“,‘ "N- — .-
t ‘ -‘ an
¢ 4‘ . .) ".A v

Q - ‘—'. “v: ‘

,...-n 'rr- ” '.
‘ - 4--_La
"3

V \. \ u I ' .i. ' . ' ‘. u
. I I . '. ‘i’ . . l.- '. _ ‘. _ '.I'~ “. .. ‘ V l :‘ . 0‘. --_‘ V. . . . " h.
u. fig! .f. C’- ' 2: - . ‘ vb .' IV. 1 . .- . ’ ‘ ..‘ .3 ,' . . IL :3. P3“ ‘ ' ‘ l ‘ :
gnu; g; . ‘
‘ V.’ _ a
'1'". “«' .

. x 5?; "-‘~‘..":FT-7 1- ‘9 -' , ' ~ - ' ’" 'V» x ,, ‘

' \-

v " .71 ‘L
3 Linn”)?

*”'.A .'.’| ‘
2'1. _ ‘ _

War.

um our. carom; -
\ANS'MO ML“

O.J~
I r?! ‘
I

.J‘

~‘F‘

3 . .

, -
5‘
~.' .1

'f.

5 av 94.;

‘

J
‘
hi}'-'J-..o’
. 4" .' ‘

in
.3  

‘

.1: ‘

' .‘I' .

.1 I . ’.'
"f $3..) . r.

v
,

"3

. . ‘ v
J 37-33:"
30*
‘I
fly“?!
~" affi

.V;
O
._G.

I
, .

f..-_ '7‘ 5:..." g, )' v. ":
' a: ’F‘" '. ,gc ‘ f ‘
‘ ' UM‘VEIK ‘  ‘
3 ‘ (“V $ .,‘ ’l”
3‘ ,y i .
.‘Lc‘ .h ‘ - .
L

 

 

"m “(*1 f1“ (1 *1 ‘P"‘ ‘~ "
LL; EJL‘ECTO Or A *ICJ “ TARI

“bylk

.u'

Pli'CTICES 31' SI 3: l’liODZ’CT ."

I] ’h '

mi; “DISTITTEE OF Gl'IADV‘_.TATE STIICJCJJ

‘: m ..V 1" ‘?.T a g “'17? x‘ ,—-'T' -l- T1",- 7:1
1:..1.v 1 van a.) .14.;4 'u b‘upuu‘a

FOR

TITLE DEC- BE C? ILAST‘IEJR OF. ARTS

********

ME HA IT SUIIG

AUGUST, 1929

 

”1‘71

'1’

_,_‘.:=l _‘

91”,

11 Matt"

0

 

 

 

Author's Acknowledgment.

The author wishes to eXPress his indebtedness
to Professor Wilbur Olin Hedrick, Head of Economic
Department of Kichig n State College, who has read
the manuscript and given valuable criticism and

suggestions.

hichisan State College

y—q

August. 1989. Mei Jan Sung

r4-
'4‘ .
Hal
{'4 ,\
f» 4
Est!
JJ
9- i

 

Contents

Chapter I
Introduction:
1. Purposes of this study.
2. Arguments for and against proteCtion.
3. Tariff as the largest sources of federal revenue is not
true at present time.
Chapter II
History and characters of silk industry:
1. A brief history of raw silk industry.
2. A brief histvry of silk manufacturing.
3. Nature of silk fibre.
4. Stages of silk industry.
5. Character of labor.
6. Localization of silk industry in the United States.
Chapter III
Production, Consumption, Importation, and Exportaticn of
Raw Silk and Silk kanufactures:
1. World Production of raw silk.
2. Domestic production of silk goods.
3. Importation of raw silk and silk goods.
4. EXportation of silk goods.
Chapter IV
Silk Industry in the United States and Its Tariff:
l. The Problem of raw silk and tariff.
2. The rates of duty imposed on silks by the various acts.
5. Silk industry in the United States h=s passed the age of

infancy.

 

filia—

Chapter V

The Relation of Tariff with Different Branches of Silk Goods:

1. Thrown aid sewing silk.

2. Broad silks.

5. Clothing.

4. Handkerchiefs.

5. Knit goods.

6. Manufactures of n. s. p. f.

7. Pile fabrics.

8. Spun silk.

Chapter VI

The Growth of Silk Industry in the United States Depends upon
Many Other Causes beside the Tariff:

l. Efficiency of American Fagtory System..

2. Purchasing power of the American consumers.
7 The problem of transportation and markebrqn relation to

silk industry.
4. Silk is regardJas a necessity at present time.
Chapter VII

Artificial Silk in Relation to Natural Silk:

1. Artificial silk as a competitive comrodity.

2. Artificial silk as a supplementary commodity.

 

Chapter VIII
The Effects of Tariff on Silk floods-Aron: Different Groups
of People:
1. Hanufacturers.
2. Importers and EXporters.
3. Consumers.
4

. Labor.

Farmers.

Cm

Chapter IX

Conclusion:

1. Conclusions made from other similar studies by different

authors.
2 The Growth of silk industry is not entirely due to the

protective tariff.
5. The silk industry in the United States is well established

and strong enough to compete with foreign producers.

4. There is only a limited amount of importation.
5. The public should be relieved from the burden of supporting

a well established industri.

 

Chapter I

Introduction.
I. The purposes of this study.

With the recent changes of the United States, from a debtor to
a creditor; from agricultural industry to manufacturing industry;
from a nation dependent on European manufactured goods to a lead-
ing manufacturing nation in the world; the foreign trade policy
is mostly affected. The tariff policy of the United States is so
chosely connected with its foreign trade, any changes in the
foreign trade policy the tariff policy is bound to be changed.

As a creditor and leading manufacturing nation, its foreign trade
pdlicy naturally should be the one which desires to export as
much as it can export and collect every single cent the other
nations owe her. What the other nations should do is to pay them
back by some way which is possible, and the only possible way

for them to pay is by sending to the United States the goods

they produce. If the United States refuses to take the goods, she
has to wait indefinitely. But if the United States desires to
take the goods, hen the only thing to do is to let them in and
not to prohibit them.

American industries are the products of the protective tariff
together with many other causes, but undoubtly tariff plays the
most important part. Protective tariff on the one hand means that
the foreign producers or importers make less profit, on the other

hand that the American consumers have to bear all the burdens

 

for the supporting of a new industry. Protective tariff is justi—
fied so far when the home industry is young and impossible to com-
hete with foreicn nonpetitors. It is unjust after +be industries,
which, stimulated by the protective tariff, are well established
and able to compete with their foreign competitors, yet the public
still has to bear the same amount of burden just for the benefit
of a few.

There has been an abundance of theories an arguments for and
against the principles of protection and free trade, but unfor-
tunately post of them are either too general in their statements
or without consideration of time, Space, and particular industry.
That we are going to discuss is not the question which of those
principles is valid or in—valid; but the question of when, where,
and which industry should be proterted; and when, where, and
which indue+ry the principle of free trade should be applied from
the point of view of public welfare. Such usetions may be an-
swered by an inductive study of some specific industries and their
relation with the tariff. For the reason, that the silk industry
is one of the best examples which is created by the stimulation
of protective tariff and has reached its maturity for some years
already, the author choses this particular industry as case of
study hoping that it may throw some light on such a complicated
question as the American tariff policy, and the public burden
which the public is no more needed to bear may be relieved in the
nearest future. Furthermore that the foreign trade of the United

States may be built on a sound basis.

 

2. Arguments for and against protection.

Before going farther into the concrete relation tf tariff and
silk industry, let us keep in mind some of the main arguments
by which these policies are defended and see how does these ar-
guments applied to the silk industry. In this chapter the author
merely states what the arguments are without taking into consi-
deration of their validity or given any criticism.

(1)
Arguments fro protection:

1. It promotes nationalism~— " Domestic trade, it is claimed,
draws the citizens of country together, while interna ional trade
is cosmOpolitan and tends to their separation..................
The validity of this argument, it will be noted, depends largely
upon the truth of the assumption that the development of a strong
feeling of national unity is a thing to be desired."

2. Government should foster infant industries in order to deve-
lopour natural resources and to produce diversity in industrial
pursuits.

3. National defense—- " A sufficient diversification of industry
to prevent industrial paralysis and to insure a prompt supply of
the necessaries of life in time of war is manifestly desirable."

4. Home market argument-- " That the home market is superion
because it is a surer market. A foreign market is likely to be
closed by war or by capricious changes in foerign tariffs." But

in fact it is contrary to the claim because "Vhen we takaone

(l) Ely, Outlines of Economics, pp 364. All quotations are quoted
from chapter 19.

 

home market from the foreign producer, we are likely to give an—
other houe market to some other foreign producer, or--—what is
much the same thing--- when we capture a new home market for one
domestic industry, we are likely to deprive another domestic in-
dustry of an equivalent home or foreign market which it has there—
tofore enjoyed. Thus, protection for the American manufacturer is
likely to injure the foreign market of the American farmer and
raise the later's cost of libing and expenses of production."

5. A defense against "dumping"-— " By dumping is meant the sale
of products abroad at prices lower than those charged at home."

6. To diversify industry.

7. To equalize costs of production here and abroad.

Arguments against protection:

1. Theory of comparative COStSr- " so long as there are relative,
not necessarily absolute, differences in the cost of producing
cheaply pnrtable articles in various countries of the world, so
long will there by international trade in those articles. Pro-
tective tariffs, therefore, merely divert capital and labor from
intrinsically more productive to intrinsically less productive
industries."

2. That protection is not necessary to diversify industry in a
country with such varied natural resources as the United States.

3. The weakness of the home market argument-- " But, as a matter
of fact, hOwe products will seek foreign markets, and the nation

that sells abroad must buy abroad."

 

4. Protective tariff does not necessary mean increase the wages
of labor—~ " France wants protection in order to protect her low-
paid workmen against the greater skill an~ efficiency of American
highly paid workers. The United States, on the other hand, must
have protection in order to shield her highly paid employees from
competition with the anper labor of Europe."

5. " The protective import duty, as compared with the import
duty for revenue only, is a poor tax. It is uncertain and per-
versely variable."

6. " Protection makes the temporary prosperity of influencial
classes dependent upon government bounty, protection encourages
those classes to exert a demoralizing pressure upon federal
legislation."

7. Protection fosters monopoly.

These arguments are quoted from Ely's Outlines of Economics,
considered by the writer as the most principa& arguments for
and against the protection in general. The Specific arguments and
facts that shew the unnecessity of protective tariff for silk
industry at pres nt will be shown in the followi g chapters.

3. Tariff as the most important source of Fe-
deral Revenue is not true at present time.

According to the Constitution of the United States from the
day of the Declaration of Independence up to the Civil War, the
only sources of the Federal revenue was from the custom duties.

From the Civil War up to the first decade of the Twentieth Cen

tury, the custom duties still were the largest amount of the

World War the government found plenty

Federal revenue. During the

of means of augmenting i s revenue from other sources. " In 191%

our customs revenue comprised 292 millions of dollars out of a
total government inco e of 734 millions. In 1920 the customs
brought in only 525 millions of dollars out of a t tal income

(2)

of $6,695,000,000." The custom revenue was only such a small
per cent in comparison with the total of the Federal revenue.
Let us take the amount of silk goods imported in 1921, the

amount is $48,289,000. Suppose the average per cent of the duty

on silk goods is 50s the duty paid will be $24,124,50C. If it is

compared with the total imcoue of 36,695,000,000, it almost can

be neglected.

From the facts and changes shown above, the argument of high

tariff for revenue does not need aiy further consideration. Even

though that the Governmental revenue is some what depended upon

the tariff, but a high tariff does not mean a big revenue. The

Underwood Tariff, whihh carries he lowest average rate of duty

of any enactment since the Civil War has proved its-self capable

a minimum of $182,759,000 in 1918, and maximum of
(5)
$323,537,000 in the year of 1920.

of producing

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

(2) The Nation, 125582 Ap 20'21.
(3) Annals of the American Academy, 1921, pp 95.

Chapter II
History and Characters of Silk Industry.
It is not the writer's desire to consider the history and

character of the silk industry in detail, the only reason for

having this chapter here is to give the readers a gerneral view

of the silk industry.
1. A brief history of raw silk industry:

Silk was discovered in China about 2700 B. C. by Si Ling-Chi,
(1)
Queen of Huang—Ti, the third emperor of China. We can say for

sure so far that the silk was discovered about 2700 years E. C.,
but it might have been discovered long time before the history

had any records of it. Since the discovery China has monopolized

the supply an' culture of silk until recently Japan takes he lead

in the supplying of raw silk to the western nations.

Silk was introduced to the Western nations at first by the
silk culture was still kept in secrecy
(°)

6.:

by the Chinese. In 755 A. D. silkworn eggs were taken by two Nes-

Persians, but the art of

torian Konks to their home country and then the industry was

.LAwau.

snread rapidly over Sorthern EurOpean States.

Silk culture in Amer ca was started in 1622 among the new

England colonies as Virginia, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and so
forth, even with some great governmental aid and encouragement

no success has ever been obtained. heccntly, California has attem-

pted to raise raw silk and has shown some possibility of success.

(1) a (2) n. E. Thompson, Silk, pp 170, 174.

 

 

At present, China takes the lead in the production of raw silk,

Japan takes the lead in the exportation of raw silk, and Italy
(5

takes the lead in the producing of best quality of raw silk.
2. A brief history of silk manufacturing:

China was the first one to discover the raw silk, naturally

China was the first one to manufacture the silk goods. With her

slowness to invent new labor saving machinery and to adopt the

western manufacturing processes, China is left far behind the

other natio s in the manufacturing of silks.

Japan, probably with the same weakness, is not a very strong

competitor among the silk manvfacturing countries,-although she

supplies most of the raw silk to the other countries and has plenty

for her own. Besides the proximity to the raw silk her labor supply

is much cheaper than the other competing countries.

Among the European countries, France is the leading silk manu-
(4)
facturing and eXporting nation of silk goods, next to France is
Italy. France is famous in producing high quality materials with

fashionable desigzs, that are made by skillful labors and required

a great deal of hand work.
Due to the high Civil War tariff, the American si k industry
sprang up. After 1880 up to the present time, the United States
(5)

luads all the other countries in the value of silk manufactures.

(3-5) B. B. Thompson, Silk, pp 170-80.

" Yature of Silk Fibre.

a).
Silk is produced from cocoon of an insect rsually and rath‘r

inaccurately called the "silkworm". This pppular name originates

from tie fact: that the silk—prd “in; moth before reaching na-

turity passes through a caterpillar or worm stare during uthh

it spins for itself the cocoon from Which later it emerres cc

9 true moth, closely in natr'e to the butterfly. The COCOOH.

yv

formed from an unlroken fibre secreted from the caterpillar's

body is N" Vered and the fibre unwound, furnishes the silk filre

b” JLV
(6)

of commerce.

The stafes ir the life C; a silkworm are as follows:

i
l. The egg.
s. The vorm or caterpillar.

Z. The cocoon.

4. The Chrysalis.

5. The moth.

Shortly after the mating and the laying of the eggs, the moth

(7)

dies. Its cycle of life is completed,

The properties of the cultivated silk give it preeminence among
textiles when it is pure and well manufactured, for srch silk

cleanliness, durability, high luster,
O
(O)

and beauty. Its preperties may be briefly outlined:

combines strength, lightness,

l. Finen ssz- The diameter of its outer fibre is .00058 inch, and
inner fibre is.OOOVl inch.
(6-?) P. H. Nystrom, Textiles, pp lo8.

C) 3-: . .4 ~ - ~'
(a) “Colman and reforqn, Textiles, TU ZoO W

lO

2. Softnessz— Silk, Specially after the gum is removed has an un—

ss which is of val e in the

usual degree of softnesa, nanufaeture of

SO”€ of the most exguisite materials.

r2 - m,
.. Ll? tness.

._>
4. Endurance.

5. Strength:- It is the strongest of “ll fibre in relation to its

size when the gum has not been removed.

6. Elongationz- This quality is hirh in silk which has been "boiled

off" and a thread may be stretched from o e—seventh to one—fifth

of its original length.

7. Electricity:- It is a poor conductor of electrici y, but a

a;

good generitor.

8. Heat conductivityz- It is not a good condrctor of heat, eon-

sequently even when it is wet it feels warm in contact with the

body.

' — _ Silk sheds dnst.

lO. TranSparencyz- T‘e transparency of some of the woven material

lends attraction.

Of the naturally produced textiles, silk is the

ll. Luster:—

lustrous.

12. Hygroscopicityz- The power of absorbin; water, dye, or other

substances in solution ’8 Very great.

ll

4. The Stages of Silk Industry.

There are three distinct stages in the silk 'ndustry, that will
be briefly dis ussed in the fell wing. They will show us why some
of the stares can not thrive in the United States.

3. Raw silk stage;- This stage includes frim the raising of silk—
worms, collection of cocoons, an? the process of reeling, then it
is marketed as raw silk for manufacturing. This stare requires a
great deal of labor and patience, and the most important thing

is that the cost should be law. This stage is of arch long pro—
cesses, that most of the work must be done y hand, no machinery
has ever been invented to replace the man labor to handle such
pTCCGSTGS as nicklny mulberry leaves, feeding, mating, and so
forth, except those machines have b en used for the unreelinj of
the si k fibres from cocoon. Even though, the reeling process
also requires a fireat deal of hand work. Therefore this stage can

be done 0H1? in the COUHfiTJ Where laior is extra—ordinary cheap.

L4

II. The manufacturinr stage:- There are so nany irocesse: used in
the manufacturing of finished silk goods from raw silk, it is im-

:le for us to discuss here all of the processes and besides it

y- J

possi
is not within the SCOpe of this paper to discuss them in detail.

Therefore the writer merely discusses some of the most important

processes as brief as he can.

A. Silk Throwin :- Throwing is essentially a process of cleaning,

doubling, and twistinfi the single fibres as they co 6 iron the

filettre after the process of reeling. These processes are done

mostly by automatic machines and these machines can be eaSily

handled by unskilled labor, so at present tize tie throwing manu-

V)

facturi g is largely done in the state of lennsylvania, where a

large amount of women and child labor can be obtained.
B. Weaving:- It is a process of weaving different silk fibres
into different finished goods as ribbons, broad goods, pile fa-

3. an .0. . ' I .
biics, sh~ including such nrocesses as cloth making or tailor ng.

L. _

It has to be near to t’e markets and requires more skilled labor.

(9)

C. Dyeing-— The process,s of throwing and dyeing are usually

carried on in different mills bv entirely different concerns,

but some of the larger mills complete all the processes.
1. Yarn—dyed goods, which have been dyed in the skein before

weaving. The dyeing process consists of three separate processes,

“31 r.

they are; beilin~ off, weighting of silk, and then dye'hb.

4-7

2. Piece—dyeingz- Piece-dyed goods are woven with the gum in
the silk; this gum must first be boiled out of the goods and then
they are either dyed in the giece or prepared for printing.

III. The distribrting stage:— This stage does not belong to the

')
silk industry inclusivelV, it is a senersl stsse of every coro—

dity. It requires the same kind of marketing facilities as tie

other commodities. The general channels of nsrketinfi is conSIsted

of wholesalers, importers, eXporters, retailers, then the goods

are distributed to the consumers.
5. Character of labor in the silk industry.
m ' L '“ "‘°” ” thr “est 1art calls for labor of
lhe raw Silk industiy, ior no m s ,~ ,

a manual sort exactinfi only s moderate degree of intelligence,

0

(9) E. E. Thompson, Silk, pp 5p.

except in the processes of mating n7 reeling, they require 9
little bit more of skill. Since these processes are done in t
raw silk producing countries, its labor condition is out of the
scope of this paper, The process of throwine is m stly done by
women and children, and this industry is centered in the state
of Pennsylvania, there the question and evils of women and child
labor arise. In the silk industry as reported by the Twenty Second
Report of the Industrial Statistics of Rhode Island in 1908, the
average wage is from 7-8 dollars, and 92.8% of the employees is
foreign born and only 7.2% is American. This shows that although
the silk industry is located in the United States, almost all of
the labor is supplied by the foreigners. The argument that the
silk industry needs high tariff to protect high paid labor is
without any true foundation.

The followinj statistics will Show the importance and serious—

ness of the women and child labor in the silk industry in compare

(10)
with men.

Year Hen Women Children
7 I 'C 5 566
lifleo 00000000000000 9,000 10,39‘.) ,
1890 ..............17,coo 28,914 2,862
1900 0000000000000 24,206 542,800 6"}:ch
27,0c9 45,198 7,06b

1905 ,............

O...
.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

y and the Tariff. PP
(10) he

The Silk Industrv

U)

on,

 

 

14

6. Localization of Silk Industry.

We have gone through the general nature and pTOCeSS’S of silk
industry and its labor conditions, it is next for us to take up
the topic where are these factories located. "The location of
the silk manufacturing center is a factor of vital importance
to the success of the industry, for closely connected with it
are he questions of labor supply, power, ground rent, taxes,
and accessibility to raw silk and markets. The ability of our
manufacturers to compete with those of EurOpean countries de-
pends largely on their advantages or disadvantages in these im—

(11)
portant factors." "There are new upwards of twenty-five differ-
ent states in,¢hich silk manufacture is carried on in some form
or other, but the amount produced in most of these states is in-
eonsiderable. The five states; Pennsylvania, New Jersey, NEW
York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts are the main Sites 0f the

American industry." We will take up these five states separately

and see how these factors have influenced them.

‘ l f" I», H . - H
1. Connecticut:— With the advantase oi the early start due to

. . 1 no . - Tf un-
ss of silk supply which in turn has stimulated b, be

Connecticut held the lead

the hearts

ties given to the ra'sing of raw silk,
for many years. Another fact which distributes to it was that
there was plenty of labor skilled in the manflflaoturing of SCW1ng
thread. The unsuccess of raising raw silk in Connecticut and later

was supplied by t Oriental countries

° I he
on most of the raw Silk t. t w S
L ' icu a
‘ Tex York the silk industry in Connec
.: 1 l "‘1‘" ’

(12)
areatly decreased.

00
Q00000oo0000000

mph silk Industry an

imnorted throng

.‘0 .
. n ’ "".'.;0 ‘3
d the Tarlfl, ?P 41 T( ‘

15

2. New York:- New York City has the advantages of nearness to the
marhets of both the raw silk and silk goods and with plenty of
labor. It is only limited by he eXpensive land and high taxes
that only the manufacture of trimmings, braids, tassels, fringes,
which don not take up much space, comes to the fore, The same
conditions obtain in Boston, and Philadelphia, and many other
(13)
establishments were started in these three cities.
3. Nev Jersey:- Those factors that limited the New'York City to
the manufacture of trimmings, naturally the problem leads to the
finding of a place where land is cheaper and taxes are lower, yet
near enough to the City to be sure of a large labor supply and
the aanntages of proximity to the raw material and the selling
market. Paterson, New Jersey, a town of moderate;size only seven
miles from h w York City is the place to be desired for the sew-

(14)
ins and ribbon industry.

4. Xassachusettsz- The silk industry was Spread to hassachusctts,
first was due to the enterprise and ingenuity of the manufacturers
of that state. A number of clever ideas in preparing Spool thread
for the market made their product attractive to prospective buyers.
At the same time some of the firms made and introduced to con—
sumers measuring and strength-testinf devices. Improvements in
dyeing, making the thread stronger and purer, were introduced and
widely advertised, which added greatly to the repuatation of

1'

hassachusetts silk thread. Second factor is that due to plenty of

:5)

water power.

0.000000000000000000000

(13-15) Mason, The Silk Industry and the Tariff, pp iZ-éo.

5. PeM'i ylvania:- With introduction of automatic throwing machine,
there was constantly less need for strong and skilled labor. Con-
sequently vomen ahd cildren began displac ing men at the throwing
machines. Then the problem comes where those manufacturers can
obtain a plentiful supply of the cheap unskilled labor they re-

0”*“°d. The has? reviews of Pennsvlvenia seemed to cffcr'ed”"n-

'1.“ J.
tages unexcelled by any other locality. The miners' wives and

children were then practically unemployed, and could furnish
(16)

r“ _ “ ‘V‘ -. ‘ ‘u .- 1 __ "i “ o n -

asundant supply of cheap labor. The following statistics will

Show how much the si k industry center was moved to Pennsylvania.

(17)
Silk Production in 1880 by ”tates.

New Jerse $l2,95l, 0 5

New York 9 ,268, 025

Connecticut 5,158,075

lass achus etts 3,4 1,095

lennsy lvania 3 8 3,185
(18)

Silk PrOdi ZCtiOn bf] States.

1090 1900 . 1905
hew Jersey $50,700,000 359, 900, 000 042,800,000
Pennsvlvania 19,500,000 51, 000,000 59,5:0,000
New Ybrk 19,400,000 12,700,000 20,100,000

00 ‘._:‘n F'. flu
m.e.5ilh Industrv and the Tallll, pp 00,

OOOIOOOOOOOOOOCO

(lo-118) hason,

From the production of silk goods by st tes in the year of
1905 we find out that Pennsvlvaniq has crown to be the center of
silk industry in the United States because of women and child
labor. Pennsylvania took t e second place in the production of
silk goods and was very close to New Jersey who took the first.
The production of tnc later years shows that Penns v 1vania began
at 1914 is the largest silk manufacturin; state in the United

States up to the present time

Silki anufactures in the United States by States.
(19) (30)

1009 1911 1919 19‘ 5 192‘
Penns; lvania $02,051 586,9?9 5251, 711 3206, 075 ‘C‘ ,121
New Jersey 65,450 75,706 215,051 1R5, (£9 190,712
New York 26,510 29,261 81,685 105,019 112,156
Connecticut 21, 065 50,592 68,055 74, 674 55,000
Lassachus etts 8,012 10,677 51,194 55,617 16,590
( _T_v1 thousands of dollars )

.0000 ( ~ 1. x, 17p 2160
the U. S. , 1930 g; 314.

(19) 1‘0 ul—Jgeentn Census oi nufactures, 1985
T‘ ACHSLLS OJ. 1.
(20) biennial 0

 

18

Chapter 111

Production, Consuugtion, Intertatitn, and bxgor-
tation of Raw Silk and Silk Lanufscturcs

China is supposed to be the greatest raw silk producing coun-
try, teca"”e of lack of any adequate infer ation, the amount of
total production can not be obtained.'Japan supplies more than
half or Haw silk which the Un1ted States imports and She is the
leading raw silk eziortin' country. The United States is the lar-
gest consuming, importin , and: a-u1actu11 3 country of silks.
The consumptio1 of silk in the United States is about as much as
the amount op nrodvction ( 975 of domestic urodrction is consumed
at home) or may be more because the amount imported is twice as
much as UXporte1.The average of the imports of silk goods is
about 550,000,000 and engorts in recently years amount to 515,
000,000. The total consumption will be the total amount of pro—

duction in the United States and added to it the amount of $15,

.11.u

000,000 or a little more

France is tl‘.e lee adir1: source or United States i.ports of silk

0..

manufactures, its 0came in the trade increased from $15,810,000

mn 1926 to 318, 5o5, 090 in 1997 or fro ‘ 595 of tie total importa-

(1)
tion of these co modities to 115

In 1987 silk1::anuiectuics valued at 315, 000, 000 were eXported

' . v- ~ -‘ r An
Pmbm the “Mi+nfl S+q+pq, n9 fhws total hosiery accouLtCl f0? ,1,
000 000 b O'd silVS'tor $9,000,000, and wearing spearel for La.
, , .L. 1.... as.

Cuba, Australia, and Lexico,
C")
(1)

were the laigest darkets for American silks.

000,000. Four countries; Canada,

)U U. S. Deuartment of Commerce, Commerce heports, Je 18‘2. p 780.
) " " " " " " 1‘11) 9'28, 1: 10.5.

J

 

l9

\W\.n\Qx .nmsmohunukxkxfib $0th NEG,“

«KN\\.\}\ E W R!

bmxnusxnw V

\OW\BR\.\XHM QNm.\IW\M\ KOK CDQVDEOKQM
XVQQ \KOKRW N

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KQEQ‘QNQ \

Mmem. mws‘fim umhmfl R mamk QMQ wk Mun mm was mm mxm mm \hxfi
Q \ \ QNM NMN MVN 3i QNN Q \ \ VD». 3S5
Bu \ V3 Mg Vh\ QNK \N\ \w\ 33 UMBRM
\m.“ \Mm. \Mn - \MM \MM wQQJT wNN QCVQVW

\hh; \ k w m. D Vin. NMV .“va _ QMVN MN Q 8%U nMuQBKK
“raw \ mNN M nme Q N w a NV @Nw hum N whmvw. xtfixmu
Qmm N MVQ V Nam“ .w. u \M w me N % fin 6 \hm \mu MN.“ ‘mu m bst.
bu m 3 WAN mu\ 3 v .3 kwN N\ 393 Mk V .3 Qmfi M \ whw N \ Bthb
$65» @3va 3% Na w& 5» Nmm 8v Noam}; miw QR «mm WQQKWNJ
\me smmx mxmx 3 mx m\m\ mxmx hxm\ mummmuw mwmw mmtxtsqb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ru WEQQQQCE bfitfifixfifix Xx \NM\ I “QWV \QM;
MQNB WKODQN khmx my?“ KQ\ Xxfi. éSnV \% Q0.\xub\DQKQ\ \%\.\Q\\\\

N NNQRR

 

N. \0\ \VNWV \XQQQ KQMX MUKMKRQQM \V\

Qmmx mwmx EN? kw? w \ N

    
     

\VDQx \Q nfixD.\\\.\>\ Q\ I hdxnwx NW. QD.\\U\V\©Q.\R\
\c a8 BACK \28 «3% 33¢ \oxksxvx «Fm,

MNNVMWR

 

21

.xkx .nxK \fimxxxxOQkxkxob \BMKQ MEG“ nxnwxxxyx xx N \H\

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

xeVV WWNNN Qnmfixv xxm NM. ‘ hmm WWlekQNm QMQWN MK w NM nxxmKBN \mxx
VQV WWK R Q». ND“ VQM. k %x Wm x k Nx kanQvfi -mm
hbnhx. hubs GWJMQWW-MWNWMMWNM R 0 MM Rs wN w? MM xbxwk
hum 9x .fix w M J x x -J 3 [I MN! J QMN th§®§§
mmVQ Mm. Bun, V [Wlwm KNx Qua; QMN WMQQKK
hvam. xxx x Q 3% m x mw wthJ[NwWJMQmN \xQxN
xhhw wanfi mus m J Rx W .Istx QMVNIJIxNPW Ixfixhfi bthb
“Sm xh xfix NN x Nx NMJ .39 NM . Nun 6N: hxm NVJIR N nxj thlmx { Q6983
«Vuxxxfix “KR.“ :
mex QNoQ 0.x Mx muxmx xxmx mxoxx iflxoux V xfi x m x nmxxxtbsb

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\N. mvxmx .xQWx Kbxuxxmxhb m
xcnxcnfik m xx xm

a S EMS

.honxVQQVS SQSQQSQx xxN

Qx \anbkxn mex 39% KQQ \Qumex mx\x :xQ.\ mwxcxxxxxxxbh
nmibxh. \Omxkxb mxx Bxxnxx xxx“ xxbnvxxo QXKOkaxN.

Yearly

1871-80 *3*
90
-l900
1901-05

18(1-

1891

(is)
(7

SLVGI'ag'Z'B

Fiscal
Eigures

Commerce Year
) Ioodg's Industrial, 1928.

 

1‘0
2‘0

(6)
Table IV

Imports of Unmanufacture8
* :LLi.
wnantity
1,000 pounls.
1,31

5,328
, .— H
?,do.u
10,798

[0,20
mn’lofl
45 ,641
GS ,030

SilJ:S 0

Value
1,000 dollars.

6,390

.16,775

26,865
45,968

7,414
82,705

0 .r -".".‘7
filZ‘)’C)L/)‘5J
:C n ,
guo,a87

39,660 201, 058
52,C58 264 ,7‘5
58,467 371,629
01,904 101, DOD
bO,603 030,0il
76,790 408,386
77,666 403,676
86,514 399,088
year to 1915 inclusive, Calendar
reprerent raw Silk on y.

(7)
Table V

Per round.

average)
54.10
5.50

Silk Trice
(yearly

1914

1916

.-\ 1

191.9 K.'o‘:
102 9024
192 6.11

19:31:: 7.‘-J:

92: 8.18
324 6.65
1986 6.47
1926 6.22
1927 5.é8
£00k, 1928, vol. I,

‘7'

c}

6 ill“

0
u

thereafter.

Table VI

Proauction of Silk Ianufactures in the United States.

1870 3 12,700,000
1874 16,300, 000
1875 21,300,000
1876 A 81, 200, 000
1880 (3) 38,500,000
1899 107,25 6, ’

13 ‘09 196,911,667
1014 254,011,257
1910 538,459,525
1981 585 ,QJE),7 56
1925 761,523,119

(9)
195.5 808 ,979,39
E81 106....786O611;.1606;try and the Tariff, pp 21

(7) Commerce Yeer Book, 1920, vol. I, pp 512.

 

.bxh‘kxh KR \ Ex QNQ \tonV .Sfi \Afistfiob Qt

MNQ\ QNm\ .n.\®\ Q\m.\ hdi QQmV MWQ\ Qm%\ .“8\ QQQ\ .hNQ\
\Nm.\ w\m\ \\m.\ QQQV \Qm.\ m Q\ \NQ\

 

5 N3 3% MNQ um? 33 wwmx

        

 

Q Q

Q Q\

QM QM

0% R.

4. cw aw
2

Sn, 0.“.

ow 0m

R SN

Qnu Q9

“\b\\0\u \Q \\&\\\R«\ m.\\
hw\b\u®x§bh\.\ yxxAW \0 \kaRV fi \KQQNQN
\Q\\ \\\~ W flmvfim

 

25

774545 W// {H}

Impor/ & Expo/'7‘ 0/ M00 afar/cred .57/k
x'n gill/'6 [n 7%01/5 and: . 0/02fl/0/15.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yea/:4! fire/“dye Impor/J {Z} Expor/j
0/- yea/'0)
/07/— 00 #32063 5.3
/6d/- .90 3% /6 Z <53
/09/-/900 :9, 775 266
/90/ —/900' .32, 2/5 42.5
/906 — /9/0 33, 72.7 035
/9// - /9/.5 to, 306 Z, 2/ 0
/9/0 —/920 4 Z /2/ /, 6, 7.35
/92/- /9z0‘ 40,9 4/ /z,‘ 992
/920 754/9 26,02/
/93/ 46, 276 .9, 6 72
/BZZ 3291/} II, 624
/923 44.597 xx, 0‘0
/904 .32699 /4, #0
/925 36, 7/9 /0, /02
A926 40,570 /Z7&5
A927 42, A56 A2296

 

 

 

{I} Esta/fear: f0 /.9/.5' /nC/UJ/V6, Co/eno’or yea/:5

f/zema/Ver.

{Z} I'm/port‘s 0/ rayon are x'nc/uo’ea’ )0 7‘0 fa/ 0/
5///\' many/ac/a/‘e5 Pr/or f0 /.9/ 7.

(/0 CommerC/a/ )éax- 500k, $25 70/ /PF 077- 5/0.

26

%k\ a? WmfixqukaxBU \QMKQ “03th

(Mix: E .N \N\\
QQQ m. Qhfix “hm V \t

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wVN mVV Q3» RN wk w Vin thfim MNMQV 3% NM MNQIMW 1 18m NM! NM, \Qx SK
Q hw 5 MN \\ MN“ \xm. \ MM: MWN‘WWWWR 1+] NWIWETIE
RE Q Q s mmsfiinwfimwwkml] {1&4 im “m ES
hmm \\ \hw \\ 5 m6 hhw Gm mu V mwlmuli 1.“in me Ti \ka‘
whu \N «8m. V Mw w m. wwh \\ hmm N \N\N \ww w «Nw \N Wm§x§§x§ ,
5N VN mhmhn Qmfih Qw w wk 5 Wm \\ WEN w {wwwvt 1! RN W1 r? QORQJ
593M 93$ “3% m V SN“ m, WWW, mu Qihmm 1‘ anWNM mm». M IWQQKMNEQ
NNQ V ®\k \\ QM \Q mellflixmw W VlnlezlelijlummwaEKMQ
RRWQ Mm \mxh WQQ fix“. wk.“ Wm. QNNNQ «6 Q3“ w mVNwQL ---.N.w1w NAM .- bwtbkk
C3 QNm \ 33 913; I Nymv. ,, 93 , .33 $-39 nmthgm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\hKQ\\®B \Q thhuSQQx RC \NN\ Bx Q\m\
“$933. KQEQQQU \RR» R \m\ - Q\M\ 950 m\\buh\\ MK\\ Kb\ WM.\.\\Q§QQ
\B KG EEK \Q wmexflhmx R3 mfix 33x DUKbxuhoSQQS \VxanxQ “\KQKSN

S; \.\\ NVQR

 

\3

Chapter IV
Si k Industry in the United States and its Tariff.
I. The Problem of Raw Silk and its Tariff.

Who most sprints nrohlem fir America si h manufacturers to
solve is how to get tTe kind of silk thread which can stand the
processes of power machinery. The silh thread must be strong, and
uniform in thickness. In the early dags, the raw silh supplied b;
the foreign countries was mainly for hand wearing and not fitted
for power aachines. Iaturally the first step of improvements was
for the manufactu‘ers to invent the better manhines fer reeling,
then send them abroad to the silk producing countries to use them
for producing a strong and uniform silk thread. Due to the slow-
ness of the Chin se to adopt the reeling machines, then the Emeri-
can silk nanufa turers turned to other countries for better mater—
ial, Japan was so ambitious to capture the silk trade, she answered
the demand, Tn 197% the United States inverted $240,000 of raw
silk from Japan Which was increased to $4,37l,886 in 1877; China
on the other hand, decreased from $4,386,523 to $233, 390 in the

(1)
same period.

Due to the hurriedness of producing such enormous amounts of
silk in Japan, Japan failed to maintain the standard quality which
the manufacturers required; and Chinese silk is always cheaper
than the Jayanese; further more such enournous demand for silk is
far beyond the Japanese capacity to produce at that period; there-
fore in the later part of the Nineteenth Century a considerable
amount of raw silk was imported from China again. The amount in

")
aberage was uqual to the Japanese extorts of raw sigh?

OOOOOCOOOOOOIOOOOOOOO

-0 r- Fv-r— ': .- . ~- -:: - - c n
(l e) mason, ine Silk Industry and the Tarifi, up e0,23.

The years from 1880 to 1884 marked tle beginning of several
changes in the factors of the consumption of raw silk in the Unite
States. The difficulties eXperienced with both sources of supply
from the Orient naturally turned the eyes of the manufacturers
to the Burepean supplies. In 1887 the imported ‘aw silk(from Fr nee
and Italy amounted to $1,340,000 and $4,622,000 respectively.

The proportion of raw silk 'mported from different countries
to the United States had remained fairly uniform before the War,
at about one fourth of the total imports from Europe, a little
more than a half from Japan and a lttle less than a quarter came
from China.

During the War the European sources were cut off, and tie supply
of raw silk was mainly come from t‘e Orient. Even after the War,
the tendency of silk supply is increased in the Orient and espe-
cially Japan, while the European countries tend to decline every
year. At present time Japan supplies two third of the raw silk
fer the Unitel States, China about one fifth, and the rest is im-

(5)
ported from the European countries.

The United States is no longer depended upon the other coun—
tries for silk goods, but the silk industry itself is entirely
depended on the supply of raw silk, and the Unitei States does
not produce any considerable amount by herself. From this point

of view the silk industry in the United States is not an indepen-

dent industry.

0
) mason, The Silk Industry and the Tariff, Up 20, 30.

29

The early efforts had be*n attemrted, as to the bounties given
to the grogueers, or even a lSfi of duty was levied in the years
before 1857 proved to be unsuccessful. The facts are that the
raising and reelin’ of cocoons can be done only when the Amer can
labor is is low as the other silk froducing countries or the duty
on raw silk should be raised to a thousand per cent or more. either
way can not be practically appliei because the standard of American
labor can not be lowered and the 1000 per cent of duty will close
down all the American silk factories. In such a case, tie American
silk industry will have to depend upon the foreign countries to
the end for her raw silk.

The national defense argument for he protection of the American
silk industry is entirely deféated in the case of raw silk supply,
because the protection of silk industry is for the benefit of a
few but burdens the whole public. Yet the industry itself can never
become independe nt in the sense required by national defense even
if the silk is a product necessary for war supply. With almost a
hundred years of protection, the industry itself fundamentally has
to depend upon the foreign countries for raw silk.

It might be a pos ible thing at present for some part of the
United States to raise raw silk, if sufficient aid is given. It
is claimed by Guy Wilkinson, President of the Beriterre 00.,
Orovile, California, the the best silk in the vorld can be pro-
duced in California. And that silk production in California can
be made an eminently successful industry, independent of outside

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

(6) Mason, The Silk Industry, pp 36.

 

70

competition and without tariff protection. His views are the re-
sult of six years' of tine devotel wholly to the production of
cocoons and raw silk on a small scale. Ha asserts that he can
make silk under $5 per pound, and believes, exclusive of overhead,
(7)
production costs will not exceed $5.50. If hr. Wilkinson's claim
is true then the possibility of raising raw silk in California is
very hopeful.

We suppose that Kr. Wilkinson's statement is some what too ex-
aggerated and assume that the raw silk industry does need some
kind of aid at the beginning. What will be the result if l5» or
20% of a duty was levied upon raw silk imported? Consequently
within a few years, California will be a great silk producing
state an: will supply a considerable amount of home consumption.
It vill be a heavy burden for the silk manufacturers to bear im—
mediately the first few years after the 15% or 20$ of a duty is
levied on rrw silk imported if the duty can not be shifted.

If the burden imposed upon the public for the support of the
silk industry is justified, why should not the manufacturers bear
the burden for the support of raw silk industry.

Ky conclusion on the probleu of raw silk; it is that the silk
industry will have to depend upon the foreign country for raw silk
as long as the manufacturers want to produce silk goods. Second,
if the national defense principle is sound and justified, there
is a possible way to raise raw silk in the United States by govern-
mental aid. Thirdly, if the national defense principle is invalid
because at present time it is impossible for nation to close her

door, then let those peeple in the foreign countries produce those

51

thiwwq which thev are most fitted, and let the American people do
the same thin ;.

II. The rates of duty imposed by tie various acts and their results.
" The protective principle was introduced in 1816, it was ex-
panded and strengthened until 1828, after which rates were graduall:
lowered until the outbreak of the Civil War and hen again raised.

Since that time rates have never returned to the level of the

middle of the last century. Under the present law, enacted in 1922,
(8)

the rates are the highest in our history." This short quotation

gives us a general idea of the history of the American tariff

policy. Now let us go to the detail of the different acts in re-

gard to the rates of duty imposed on silk.

1. The Acts of 1864 to 1883:

" The Tariff Act of 1864, which imposed a duty of 60 per cent
on silk goods; was instituted entirely for purposes of revenue.
The absence of any protective sentiment is proven by the fact
that sewing silks, twists, and spun silks, which alone constituted
the itexs of domestic manufacture at that time, were set‘ in 1884
at 40 per cent -nd 35 per cent, simply as an article less calcu-

9
lated to yield a satisfactory revenue if put at a high rate."
After the Civil War was over, naturally, the rate should have been
reduced, but another factor came in to the problem of reduction
that due to high Civil War tariff a new industry had been started
and whose very life depended on a continuance of the high duties.

Conenqpantly, the tariff act of 1883, as might have been errected,

had a reduction in the rates, but a reduction of so slight a nature

as not materially to harm the principle of trotectien. The general
Ad Valorem rate on silks was reduced from 80 to 50 per cent. The
industry was growiig so rap uidL in ei3htiee, so there was no com-
plaint against the reduction, and naturally the price is lower
than before. The only complaint was that id Valoreu systeni which
was used in the levyin3 of duties on silk was subject to many
serious evils of evasion. Thereferc the movement for a snecif.ic
duty was started. is both of the two systems are subjected to
seue kind of evils of ex sien, the only consequence for it was
to use both of them and applied the one which is most fittel for
certain 3 ods

2. The Act of 1890.

In the back of this act is the fact that the neoublicens and
silk manufacturers stood fer specific schedule; the Democrats and
the con ervative ele e:1t in the Senate were handed to3ether to
uphold the Ad Valorem system. In whole bill as preserlted by the
House, the duties on different kinds of silk were raised to a con-
siderable dejree in averzi3e some what ever 60 per ce . In the

car“ of pile ”avrific five to tte inilreme of J. (3: J. Dobsen ’70.,

“’9
who were the sole beneficiaries of tie new rates, were given a
duty that would raise the rate on them from 180 to léi per cent,

ace cordiu3 to their prevailin‘ prices. On the passa3e of the bill

in the House, the J. & J. Dobson Co. raised their prices 10 to

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOCOO

(7) Literary Di3est, 78:58 Sept. 1, 1923.
(8) Patterson, As liconoist Faces the Tariff, Independent, hay, 1926.
(9) hason, TLe Si k Indust y, pp 56.

r I '7
1’.) t)

(10)
per +ent. The House BLll was cut out deliberately by the Senate,

1

0 .
I

J

(J

every single duty in its elaborate Specific silk schedule was re-

duced to the previous rate, 50 per cent Ad valorem. The Bill came

out from the Conference Committee with all the important items

as the Senate had left them, but its pile fabrics schedule showed
(11)

the powerful influence of Kr Dobson and his friends.

In 1897 there was abundance of evidences that a large propor-

tion of manufacturers were satisfied with tFe existing duties, and
(12)

were surprised the rates have been raised. Their testimonies were

that 50 per cent was sufficient. This shows that the congress

during the control of the protectionists frequently seems to have

given domestic producers more than they asked for, and admittedly

more than was necessary to keep the industry on its feet. This

in turn shows that tariff schedule was drawn up by the House for

the benefit of the few influential persons who made the public

to bear the heavy burden a burden in fact which was not needed by

the majority of the manufacturers.

The Act Of 1890 shows a marked extension of the protective sys—
tem, more than that the manufacturers needed.

3. The wilson Bill of 1834.

The Democrats came to the power in 189%, it was natural then
that the party of free trade should look eagerly forward to the
repeal of the obnoxious act of 1890. The rates were from 40 to
50 among different kinds of silk. Because of the high tariff on
pile fabrics, this line of industry naturally increased abnormally,

and then the crisis came,evident1y, from this example,

to give a young industry too much protection is to Spell its ruin.

The high tariff ’s followed by high prices and big profits, com-

petition then sets in, prices are lowered, and worse still, the

goods become cheaper and trashier until the whole industry falls
(15)

into discredit.

The Act of 1894, tie percen age of duty on silk may be consi-
dered as having answered the need of the manufacturers, even it
is lower than the previous acts, beca“se they claimed that 45 per
cent to 50 per cent were dufficient.

d. The Dingley Tariff of 1897.

The business depression of 1897, the blame naturally fell on
the low tariff of 1894, and consequently the tariff bill of 1897,
passed by both he House and Senate, embodied in the main the
idea of the advocates of high protection. In the bill all the im-
portant items had been switched over from the simple Ad Valorem
to a complicated specific system,.Due to a deficit in the treasury
and consequent need of an increase in the revenue, the rates of
duty were raised in many cases with little regard to the needs
of the protected industry, or even of the wish s of a majority of
its representatives. The schedule on silks was so framed that those
on cheap silk goods were levied excessively in comparison with
those on high quality silks. An illustration as showed by Senator
Jones of Arkansas, that some wild Chinese silk cloth only worth

eight cents a yard, weight per yard is 4 oz. and duty per vnrd is

U;b

(10415) hason, The Silk Industry an The Tariff, pp 68, 70, 77.

K14)

62% cents, a 770 per cent of duty was levied.

Following the Act of 1897 there were a great increase in con-
sumption and production of silk goods in the United States, byt
its imports stayed statiojary. The recent imported silk goods
have tended more and more to run to costlier and finer silks,
heavy chasubles, and draperies of exquisite workmanship. These
goods which the imerican manufacturers do not care to produce.

In the specific system of the Act of 1897 lower grade silk was
entirely prohibited, because they were levied upon by a duty of
so;e what near 200 per cent. The goods paying the highest propor-
tion of duties are of the smallest value per piece or the poorest
quality.

5. The Act of 1909;

The old rates of the Dingley Act were accepted and passed by
the Lower House. It went through the Senate without much changes.
In the spun silk the rate was changed from 57 per cent Ad Valorem
to Specific amount, its Ad valorem equilibrium is about 50 per cent.
It is significant that the chief manufacturer of these fabrics was
the Chairman of the Revenue Laws Committee which prepared the
schedule. Sewing silk and thrown silk were changed from the pre-
vious 50 per cent Ad valorem to a Specific duty, which is about

(L5)
58 per cent,

The rates on pile fabrics and handkerchiefs were lowered, The
silk rates have been widely considered as the most conspicuous ex-

00000000000000.0000...

(14,15) hason, The Silk Industry, pp 91, 105

 

ample in the act of 1909 of general increase of duties applied
(16)
over an entire schedule.

The tendencv is to increase the amount of protection in the
direction of those industries which suffer more or less from com-
petition with similar foreign products, and reduction to the non—
competition articles of hu very expensive variety.

6. The Acts of 1915 and 1922.
The Democrats was in power again in 1915 and while Republicans

got back in 1922, the tariff policy of these acts can be easily

understand. Comparison of the following rates of duty ( Table X )

1

Q}

amen: the acts of 1909, 1915, and 1922 will show us that the 191
was the lowest among the three and 1922 was the highest among
all. The high rates given to silk industry in 1922 looks like
that silk industry become younger every day so it needs more and

more protection. nut in fact the silk industry in the United St

ates
had passed the age of infancy long time ago.

To make the conclusion of the history of the rates of duty on
silks and their effects in brief, the writer sums them up in the
following outline form:

a. The protective tariff on silks after the Civil War was framed
by the influences of a few large manufacturers.

b. Civil war tariff was framed for revenue.

6. Protectionists carry the protective tariff too for, more than

00.000000000000000...

(16) hason, The Silk Industry, pp 108.

)

)7

Tab/e X
brfiea’U/e /7 ”f” 5x/k 0/70’ 5///r 6000/5 (/7)

 

firaa

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . E a f 85 of pug}
C/055/79C //0/7
9/27/05 a 022 /909 /.9/3
/20/ 517k 8 Off/0%]; 35 ‘70 35 76 [anger/é
mom/foc/urea’
2'06 Haffe/‘b plus/7 60 96 /o 0/; /0 92
/Z 06 Ve /Ve/ 60 9b ,fi’ffi’a/a 50 9b
/20 7 Fab/7'0 5 Irv/#7 .525 % f0 79 45%
7905/ edges
/Zoc5 A’s/7‘ Fab/7'65 1.5% 50 9/0 45 %
209 Handkerchiefs
/. Hammad 60 % .70 56 407:.
Z. fiemaflc/mo’ 6 0 75 60 70 50 %
3. No/ flew/779d 550/0 50% 4&%
/Z/0 C/of/My 50% 5070 ins
/Z// 4// 0777a“ manu— 60 % .50 % ¢j %
{ac/are 0/5/7/v
/Z/3 firf/fl'C/OAS/Y/v /0 % /0 0/0 /g 70
V45 fe

 

 

 

 

 

 

fl) Par/ 0/ #7:? scbedu/e.

{/7} C/Q'J/I‘Ofl F. Moore, Comparison 07“ 7arff/',4cf5 01"

/.909, /.9/3 and AQZZ, page .96.

 

 

’\
1,4 g

the manufacturers' needs.

d. Poor crude of needs navs more than the hi“h quality anode, so

those peeple who can not affcrd to buy high grade silk bear
the heavier burden. A

e. Protectit e tariff was framed without the consideration of
the public welfare.

f. With the alternative changes of low and high tariff, but the
imports of silk goods stayed stationary. This show hat tariff
is in a nature of entire prohibition that those imported are
only thos e th9t are not competitive to those of domestic pro—
drxrticul.

III. Silk Industry has pass ed the a3e of infancy.
The United States is the 3Ieatest manufacturyg; nation in the

world at present time. The strength of the American manufactrring

industry is proved by the enormous eXports Cf nam1 matured goods.

These are sold at a profit in what are c9 M11 d neutral markets,

where they must overcome the competition of similar nurOpcan goods.

If they can overcome the competition in neutral markets, after

tranSportation eiar<e_ have been added to the origi nal cos can

they not defy the same competition here at home, even eithout
protection, where the handicap of ocean freight ch arges is in
(18)

their favor? The stren3th of the American manufacturing industry

is shown in the following table on next page.

We admit without any doubts that the United States is the great—
est m9 nuiacturiub nation, now let us 30 the silk indtstry alone.

OOOIOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQO

(18) The Independent, July 13, l9lén vol. 79 pp 523.

 

7575/6 X/.

70f0/ o/fmpor/j & Expo/7‘5 /}7 a 5 /30/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I m/DOP/ 5 Exp «or/.5
L936 /9Z7 /92'6 /937
{/27 m////'0/7_§ o/doflarjj
fl / 3311 #4}
Crude MCI/677015
L_i
0 05
54 j 335 43/
D 0710/: FoodjfU/rf'j I i
03
4/5 45/ 5 463
t—T [j Mdflu/a’c/w‘ed/‘ood I
i fife/246
605 750 656 7 00
D D 56/77/1/Vanu/dcfz/xzes ‘ D
(2.7 fl—fi/
c3 77 6 7&
HMS/78d Many/'0“
fares

 

 

 

 

 

 

(80/ 7776 754/777 Bey/8W -— February, / 926.

 

Silk manufactures in 1914 were six time as much in value as in

H

879; cotton goods three And one hald times 9 much; and woolens

only twice as much as in 1879, these fi3ures bein3 in all cases
(19)
factory valuations of out—turn, supplied by the census reports.
The oilk industr' ' t? " d ‘ t '+ v - ~
u » 1es in he Unite btates, it says, are now
turning out products valued at approximately $800,000,000 in
1925, against $100,000,000 in 1900, and $250,000,000 a year at
the beginning of the War. Equally interestin; is the gr wth in
the exportation of silk which in 1900 amounted to only a quarter
of million dollars, and in 1918 was approximately $20,000,000.
mi.

1ne silk manufactures are exported from the United States to all

part of the world, the 1917 record showing eXports to more than

(21)
seventy countries. The per cent of increase of silk manufactures
(22)
may be shown in the following:
1899-1904 28.0p
1904—1909 55.8
1909-1914 22.9
1914-1919 17”.8

With such increase of production, and eXportation, its only
conclusion is that the industry has been well established and

no more protective tariff is needed.

(19) Literary Digest, Ap. 27, 1918, vol. 57 “p 96.
(21) " n n 5, 1919, H 61, pp 146.
(22) Fourteenth Census of the U. 8., 1920, vol. r pm

33
H
C)
O

 

1?)-
IL.)

Chapter V

The Relation of Tariff with Different Branches of Silk Godds.

At the present time the silk industry in the United States
reaches a position that there is not any kind of foreign silk
goods which can compete with the American products except those
fancy mater’als which required mostly hand work and only small
quantity is produced. Automatic throwing machines and power looms
are +be most efficient machines in comparison with the machines
used by the other countries in the silk industry. The cost of
production, due to the efficiency of power machinary and intro-
duction of women and child labor in the silk industry, is low r
in the United States than anywhere else in the world.

The silk floods imported to the United Dtates are the kind which
the American manufacturers do not produce or do not care to pro—
duce. A protective tariff on such goods is not justified because
it does not give any protection to the silk industry any way. As
to those goods which the American manufacturers care to produce
and produce in big quantity, in these groups of goods no other
nation can compete with the United States. A high tariff on these
groups of silk floods is absolutely unjust because the government
discriminates against her own citizens for the reason that the
foreigners in the foreign countries can buy the American goods
cheaper than the American themselves in their own country.

In this chapter the different branches of silk industry will
be discussed separately and the aim is to find out whether these

need any longer protection or not.

l. Throwing and sewing silk, twist, floss, etc.

Throwing sil: is a yarn nade from raw silk by doubling and
twisting or by twisting only. The introd ction of new automatic
throwing machines in 189? marked the industry had passed the in-
fant age. The throwing industry is now in a position independent
of the tariff and not afraid of foreign competition. The averag
cost of throwinr is now from 60 to 70 cents per pound as against

(1)
34.50 before the invention of automatic machines. Imports of thrown
silk have long formed an unimportant preportion of donestic con-
(2)
sumption less than % of ii of domestic production.

Sewing silk is a thread made by winding and doubling silk,
giving it a hard twist, and doubling and twisting again in re—
verse direction under a strong tension, it is used for hand sew-
ing. Twist is a thread of two ply, it is used for both machine
and hqnd sewing, principally the former. Floss silk is a variety
of embroidery silk composed of a large number of singles loosely
twisted together. Silk thread production is the oldest branch
of the domestic industry, it has long supplied the bulk of the
domestic needs. Silk thread receives no foreign competition but
recently has been steadily superseded by cotton thread, mercerized

(3)
and unmercerized. In 1910 imports were about 2.59 of domestic
production. Since then imports have, except in 1920, been a frac-
tion of lfi of it. Export is not separately reported until 1922,
when they amounted to only $695,u29, have in recent years pro-
......................

(1) Mason, The Silk Industry, pp 117.
(2—5) Dictionary of Tariff Information, pp 670, 671.

 

 

Q

r.
9
a
\.

bably exceeded imports. With sxch a favorable situation for sew—
ing industry yet the rate of duty was increased from 15} in 1982
to 40% in 1925. Canadian statistics for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 198 , recorded imports from the United States valued

(4)

at $407,513, as compared with imports from the United Kingdom
valued at only $173,026. The fact shows that the English sewing
silk can not compete with the Americin's even in her own Dominion.
What is the logical reason for the United States to increase the
rate from 15 to 40 per cent in 1928?

(5)
2. Bread silks.

The American silk weaving industry is the largest in the world,
its output at least equals that of all European countries com-
bined, aid probably more than double that of Japan, From the Civil
War until the World War he trend of imports was downward; from
1914 to 1921 it was upward; in 1922 and 1923 it was again down-
ward.

Broad silk from European countries are chiefly plain and fancy,
metal—thread goods and high grade all-silk fabrics of novel or
elaborate designs. These as a rule, are sold in extremely small
quantities on the basis of quality. Goods from Japan and China
are cheap. The import from China consists almost exclusively
of pongees; that from Japan of habutac and pongces. In 1914, 1919,
and 1921 they were in value, exclusive of duty, about 7.2% of

domestic production. During the War the exyorting trade eXpanded

rapidly, enlarged mar ets being found in Canada, Cuba, and South

09.0000000000000000000

(4-5) Dictionary of Tariff Information, pp 670, 666.

+?»
h“;

' 0

America and to a limited extent in EurOpe. Since the War this ex—
port has been reduced by more than a half, but it is still con-

siderably above the pre-war level. Here is an example that only

those goods either required a great deal of hand labor or those

that are so poor in quality which the imcrdqan manufacturers do
not care to make are imported, yet a high duty is levied.

(6)
3. Clothing.

he tariff classification 1922 includes silk wearing apparel

ct.

In
of every description not especially provided for. Articles Specialh
provided for are garters, suspenders, b‘aces, a»d other manufacturas
of narrow wares, knit goods, handkerchiefs, and apparel ornamented
with lace, embroidery and so forth. In regard to its production,
all but a small percentage of the domestic consumption of silk

1
1

wearin: apparel is made in the United States.

Imports in 1914 were value at $2,607,596; brt decreased during
the War in 1918 $055,028, and upward again after the War to
$2,074,279 in 1920, $1,968,752 in 1923. As to the exports, a con—

.dcrdble exnort trade‘was built up during the War and after the

U)
r J.

War the eXport was almost equal to import.

Exports of Clothin :

1918 ; 5,634,916
1920 11,221,007
19x2 1,082,555
1923 1,672,873

('7)

4. Handkerchiefs.

.OOOCOOOOOOOCOOOQOOOOO

(6-7) Dictionary of Tariff Information, pp gc7.

 

Handkerchiefs may be woven in the loom, two or three to the
breadth, and then cut and finished; or they may be out from silk
cloth and hemmed or hemstitched, ironed, folded and boxed for the
t”ade. The material is chiefly Habutae, a pure, soft, plain-woven,
unthrown, washable silk. Crone de Chine, a cloth of domestic manu-
facture is also extensively used. The manufacture of silk hand-
kerchiefs is carried on in conjunction with the manufacture of
bro d silks or of other kinds of handkerchiefs. Production is

Sm 11 and varies with demand, imports supply the larger ggrt of

m

the donestic mariet. Prior to 1916 import values of sle hand—
kerchiofs remained fairly stationary, between $300,000 axd $100,
000 a year desyite reduced duties in 1915 on the principal type.

s the chief source supplyin‘ over 90% of the total imports.

'4-

Japan
This is the ase where such kind naterial is pure, soft, nthrown
which is not fitted for machinery production, therefrre the most
part of the domestic consumption is imported. The demand for Li
is so stable that even in low tariff does not increase the amount
of importation at all.

(8)

Knit Goods.

()1
0

They include knit fabrics in the piece an knit wearing apbarel
of all types, whether made from knit cloth or knitted into the
finished form.

The total prodrction of silk knit goods increased from a value
of $41,262,000 in 1914 to 392, 54,806 in 1921. The items which con—

stituted the total in 1921 were hosiery valued at déd,2$5,842;

0.0000000000000000...

(8) Dictionary of Tariff Information, ;p 666

 

under—wear, $10,000,411; outer-wear, $26,535,110; and knitted
cloth, $11,932,843.

Imports of knit goods was only a small amount in comparison
with our eXpor , it is about one tenth of our exhorts. The amounts
imported since 1914 are as follows:

Imoorts of knit goods:

Year Value Duty rate
1914 $181,135 50$
1918 14,949 "

1919 68,039 "

1920 146,869 "

192 221,117 "

192 380,624 "

1938 161,839 60%

1 23 398,013 "

EXports were not recorded until 1922 and then only for hosiery,

F'

in that year they amount to $3,368,542, and in 1923 ”4,399,038.
(9)
6. Lanufactures of n. s. p. f.
The principal items under this general classification are up-

holstery and made-up articles other than wearing apparel, composed

wholly or in chief of silk. For the years 1910-13 the average

0

t suecifically provided for

A.

annual imports of silk manufactures n
were value at $548,791. In 1914 they amounted to 51,090,411, im—
ports in later years stay stationary.
(lO)
7. Pile Fabrics.
Pile fabrics include cloths and ribbons composed of a woven
ground of silk or other material more or less comyletely con-

cealed by a covering of sh rt silk threads, or pile, which pro-

ject from it as out ends or in a few fabrics, as loops. Im the

(9-10) Dictionary of tariff Information, pp 668.

 

>15
.q

United States silk pile fabrics as a rule made with cotton back or
ground and Spun-silk pile.

Imports of pile fabrics are mainly fin all-silk velvets, pro-
dueed only to limited extent in the United States; high grade
figured specialties, WhiCh American firms generally do n-t pro-
duce. The average annual import of all types of silk pile fabrics
in the 30 years ended June 30, 1920 was valued at $2,496,817. One
interesting thing to be notdced is that during the 1:w tariff the
annual import was about from $2,000,000 to $2,500,000; but it is
increased during the high tariff in 1923, the amount was $6,567,
325. This shows tariff does not affect tertain kind of goods
which we no not produce in this country, its import depends on
the demand entirely. Ther is certain kind of Pile fabrics can be
produced quantitively is eXported to the amount of $283,424 in
1922, and $305,916 in 192?.

As to the small wares and ribbonsm changes in fashion largely
account for variations in imports, which consist cainly of extreme
novelties, in which the elemen (f hand labor is exceptional high,
These are required in quantities so szall thit American manufac-
turers do not care to concern themselves with their production.
Imports are for the most part supplementory rather than com-
petitive. Even in such a situation the eXport is almost equal to

(ll)

the import.
(12)
8. Spun silk, or schappe yarn.

It is manufactured from waste silk by a series of highly tech-

911-12) Dictionary of Tariff Information, pp 670, 671.

 

“b,

nical processes, chiefly deumm'ns dressi i, drawing, roving, and

Spinning. Imports of spun silks, which in recent years have su-

pplied less than one-third of the consumption,

are used chiefly

in the manufacture of velvets.

‘

Before the War this type of yarn was not produced in this coun—

try, bnt recently donestic spi more have to a limitel extent, un-
dertaking its production, This branch of the domestic industry is,
however, not yet entirely out of the eXperim ntal stage.

From 'he above separate analysis of different branches of silk
goods in regard to its relation with tariff, we find out that
most of th silk indistries ere in the position of self—support,
and world 1e unaffected by the abolition of the present duty ex-

cept the Spun silk industry, but it is not an important branch

of the silk industry anyhow.

 

r?‘
'3

Chapter VI

The Growth of Silk Indmstry in he United States

7‘2

henends upon fany Other Causes Teside the Tariff.

It is undoubtly that tLe silk industry is a product of the high

1
l

Civil Nar tariff and the continuance of hi;

5‘4

1 protective tariff
since then. But in fact the high tariff is not the only cause of
the growth of thy silk industry in the United States. Without the
following factors; sufficient amount of capital to finance the
industry, efficient form of factory system, introduction of auto-
matic power nachi e together with high paid labor replaced by
women and child laier, better grade of raw silk surplied by Japan,
ard the ris of a sass demand for staple bread silk of all grades
and type, the history of silk industry in the United States would
not be the same as we know today. Let us consider these factors
separately and see how important these factors are in comparison
with tariff.

l. The efficiency of the American factory system.

The first step for the American products to compete with foreign
products is to produce so.e thing which can be produced in a huge
quantity. The American factory is fra ed frr big scale production.
The backbone of the factcry system is that it needs enormous capi—
tal, good nanaqement, labor savi;3 machinery, without these things
no factory can be established. As the problem of capital, it will
be a serious thing for the poor countries to worry about. But as

to the United States, she is the richest nation in the world, any

amount of capital can be easily raised for any kind of industry.

 

50

.v

Take a country like China for instance, there is s great many

people trying to ind strialize her, but alwa s not with the pro-

blem ci‘ lack oi cavital. Of cource there are anny other reasons

why China can not be easily industrialized, but nererthless the
lack of er ough caoit.a l is the most serio 3 thing.

With more than a cant‘ry of e3<perienees of industiie lization,
and the rapid developrent of the science of modern business ad—
ministiwti on, America produces best and largest amount of able
business e: :cec tives. at present tixe American capital and men
of business ability are 83%1ead through out the whole world.

America is not the first one who invents the modern power ma-
chinery, but today America invents more machines than any other
country in the vorld. Esneeially in the silk industry, there is
no better machines made in other countries tlat can compare with
those Made in the UI lit d States.

Proved by the following facts, we will find out how adequate
the imer can Lack i1ic:ry is in t'e textile industry a1d how cheap
the labor cost is. "Two cents per dozen naris for knitinj and
$5.00 per day .ag :e on t e riece oasis, the total labor cost from
raw cotton to finishe' sock is 2 cents per pair; the lowest waSes

in the world, and tfe highest weekly earnings paid than any ho iery
(l)

peeple in the world." " A single one‘ator runs from £0 to 30 of

the newest type machine knitting wouen‘s siln hose and producing

a total of 80 to 90 dozen pairs daily. At i ents per dozen pairs

0

(l)T11e Tariff, iair Tariff League, 1988.

 

51

or onetthird of one cent per pair, she would earn $3.00 3 r day,
, <2)
almost no cost and a hifih wage."

If the above statements are true, no matter how cheep are the
Oriental and Burcpesn labor it can never exoect to compete with
4:719 Amori non Tab or.

2. The UUlCLMSllT power of the American consumers.

That the American standard of living is the hi5 est in the world
is universally seeepted. Any common labor, if he 's Morhing steadily
can afford to buy most tlose thi ' as automobile, radio etc.,

hut are regarded as extre e luxuries among the peOple all over
the world. Since the silk goods produced in the United States are
entirely ($7) of do west 0 prod ction) for het‘.e consumption, with-
out such greet TUVJIESl power of the American public in fienerel
the silk industry in the United State 98 would not hove grown so
big no matter how high the tariff is.

The high pwmr he.sing power of the American public is due to the
productiVitv of the Americen labor and enoruors smofint of neturel
resources. High productivity of labor is the result of the American
factory system and eno:meus amount of natural resources are gifts
3 new develop ed country. These tuo fs ctols ale the lunduncnu
sources of imericsn national wealth, and the American public i s
entitled to it. Any devise which try to benefit a few people by
putting the burden on he general public because they can pay it

are

or because there/plenty of natural resources is a crime.

(2) The Tariff, Fair Tsriff Leuiue 192?.

 

3. The probl m of transport sticn and msrTot in relation to

silk indiistim;v

Dis ance of mar et a d cost of trsnSportstion ire the main caisei
of the localization among di1 feient industrie . They eXplsin why
all those bulky industries as meat pecking, flour mills, cotton
mill, and so forth are moving tow-rd the direction wheie the 131;
materials ere; and why those ir dustries, which the products are
not bulky, are centered in the New Er Lglind Qtstes.

Silk as an American industry entirely dejmelds up01 fo1ei5n
countries for raw material, the trenSportstion problem of raw
silk certainly will hinder its develOpment to sore extent if the
:rotlem come up to these peeple who are not familiar Mith the
nature of raw silk. flew silk is not a bu 2y material, or at least
1t is nrt neie b.ln, than its finished *wrod cts. With less in
suisnce charges, less p9 eclii 3 ch rg s, sub ect to den-ge during
the period of trenspcrtetion is much less because it is che euper
and never out of fashion es sole ki nd of finished goods are.
With all these advantuges, the problesm of raw silh transportation
can be neglected.

United gtutes is he largest silk consuming country in the world,
tle advantage of its proximity to the ma et eXpls Ls why silk
industry is develOped so fast in the United States to some extent.

.1.
8.11

4. Silk is regsrded as a necessity present time.
A few decades ago, 81 ilk dresses or stocking and so forth are

regarded as luxury, but now it is entii ely different. In fact it

 

(.31
b]

is more than such necessities as st fir and 001196. Women new a

x)

(1358 are will ing; to cut down their grocery eXpenses, b1:_t they can

(-fi

not get along withou“ sill: dresses and sill: hosiery, and men can
“Ct 68$ along without silk neck tics or socks. It is due to the

changes 0f the PUbliC denand for silk that males tie silk industry

}-J¢

n the United States become 3 stsble ind stry much less affected
by business derr ssion then the other industries in general.

We see from tables IV, VI, and VII that the importation of raw
silh has incressed steadily, the prediction of finished goods has
incrcgsei in the same manner as raw silk, and the importation of
silk menu scturoB stays stationery Without much increasing or re-
duction. Silk industry in g nerel is never effected by business
depression as serious is others.

Silk indxs‘ry in the United States was started by the stimu-
lation of high Civil War tariff, but its success is due largely

th the above fact rs, which are more important then the tariff.

 

 

 

Chapter VII
Artificial Silk in Relatirn to Natural Si k.

The problem of artificial silk and its effects on natural silk
can be easily solved if we can make a decision as to whether it
is n gunniementary or a cornetitive commodity in its relation to
natural silk. If it is a supplementary commodity, then it will
not affect the demand fer natural silk at all. If it is a compe-
titive commodity, then the demand for natural silk will be greatly
decreased.

Artificial silk comes between natural silk and cotton. Its
quality is lower than natural silk but in some reSpeet higher
than cotton. Its value is cheaper than natural silk but some what
higher than cotton. It is a commodity for those who can not afford
to buy natural silk yet their desire will not be satisfied with-
out tne luxury of silk. If it is a commodity in such a nature,
then it is a supplementary commodity.

0n the other hand the American peonle,as a majority of them,

are buying for looks and not for wear. One pound of artificial

silk is worth $1.75 while natural silk is worth more tian $5.00.
it is three times cheaper than the natural silk. If the American
people were buying for looks, why should they jay such a high

price for nat ral silk while artificial silk looks just as good
as real one. Suppose this is the case tLen artificial silk is a

. . . ,.fl _ , a + ,’
competitive commodity and 1t Wlll give a bib blow to the natural

silk.
The above statements are just a kind of reasongng, now let us

get into the facts. The following tables Will give us txe general

30

if

50

I5

/0

 

 

 

 

C1"
01

TABLE X/ W

B‘OC/UC // b0 0/” (”artsy/702900 0/)
4r/x'zé’a/a/5/7/v ”'7 Me a 5, /9//- /922

//7 /77////én a/ xpoz/flofs

/9// /.9/2 /9/3 /.9/4 /.9/.5- /9/6 /.9/ 7 /.9/6 /9/9 [920 /.92/ /922

 

_____ Carma/77,0770” - #7 U5.
Prodac/Ibn /}7 U 5.

W A. 0 Mg] 86/ /5’23

 

 

 

7451 E X// /Z/
/4/0/'/0/3 00600/ or” x4401; '0/0/
5/72? /'/2 Pounds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/0.9/ 30, 000
A903 .570 00,000
/9/0 /5, 00 0, 000
/.9/2 20, 000, 000
/.9/4 [6,000, 00 0
/9/0 35; 000, 00 0
/9/9 40, 000, 000
A920 50, 000,00 0
/9Z/ 607000, 000
/952 79, 000, 00 0
A923 32000, 000
/924 /4/, 000, 000
A985 /7.3, 000, 000
/9Z6 £35000, 000
/927 (230, 000,000

 

/Z/ 777:? flr/x/xzcvb/ Ji/A’ #000” 500A: COMP/76d
0] #76 '5///( sjéUffld/q/pp. 36

 

57

idea of the growth or artificial silk in the world.
lry)

Table XIII

Dvodnntinn 0? Artificial Silk in the United States.

Year pounds
0 0‘; .‘J‘ "
1000 20,000,000

I924 08,750,000
0}— :' /‘/\,’\ /\
I900 al,000,000
1920 03,000,000
19; 74,000,000
r11, _ (—"k C., 'r n” - w, ~. . ~.
he taoles Vi IV, uhd VII in Cnapter III show that Since tne
rapidly growth of artificial silk in recent years, the percentage
of increasing both in raw silk and silk goods are mfich higher

than before. This evidence shows that the artificial silk does

not affect tle demand of natural silk to much extent. Another
of
fact snows tnat the Merld production/a‘tificial silk in 1927

0,1 A, ,2 . _. ‘..A .. ,.
(033.0b0.C00 pounds ) 18 three tlLCS as much as natiral Silk

‘

(100,000,000 jounds) if the demand fir natural silx has been

V D
replaced by artificia silk tha means that all the natural silk
industry should be closed entirely. 280,000,000 pounds of arti-

ficial silk natarally will take all the demand for natural silk

array .

The reason for this situation is that a new demand 's developed

4-,

for the artificial silk and which is sunplementary to the d wand

fur natural silk. The old demand for natural silk is a demand for

quality and wear and not for looks only

ooooooooooooooooooooo
.Q

(5) The Artificial Silk Hand Bock, pp 3‘

 

()1
CD

Chapter VIII
The Effects of Tariff on Silk Goods
Among Different Groups of People.

In talking of the effects of tariff on silks among different
groups of people, we will find out that due to their particular
interests, there are alway some conflicts between tem. A high
tariff in the United States will curtail tie imports frem the
other countries temp rally, consequently it will affect foreign
producers to that extent if they either can not find any other
mar st for t? eir surplus products or can not decrease their out-
put. 0n the other hand, the A  er can produc rs will increase tb eir

output because they can sell t ea at a profit right after th

h'gh t0 riff is put into effect, the d'ty will be sh lifted to the

consumers if the demand is inelastic. In t‘e mean tire the import—

ers bear a loss be ceus e tr: imports business is dcreased.

If the above case applied to tfle silk industry, then there are

.4

the Opposite intersts between the dom~stic and foreign producers,

domestic producers and importers, dcmestic producers and consumers

In this chapter we will discus tlie effects of tariff on silks

among dif erent groups of pe0ple separately; the producers, the

importers, the consumers, laberm anl farmers.

l. hanufacturers.

The effects on manufacturers may be different amon5 different

lines of silk industrg; in the sewing si k indistry, the aboli-

tion of tariff would not affect them at all; while in spun silk

industry, it might 83008 $56 output Of srtn silk entirely. It

 

__._—_—..L. ‘fi

might be different again among th se who produce mainly fer do-
mestic consumption and those who produce vainly for export. Fur—
ther more it might be different among those who make too much
profit and those who just rake enough profit or less, as the case
of J. & J. Debs on Company which indicates an abnormal raise of
duty might ruin the it branch of ind1 stry seriously.

An industry which is well established on the position of in-
dependence, as most branches of the silk industry are, yet still
protect d by a high tariff; these industries naturally net more
profit than they eu5ht to have; and the consumers pay too much
which tLey do net need t0 -ay. Think one step deeper, a high
tarif' means a high price, bit it does not necessary mean more
prodit for the pan facturers. It might be more piofita ole for the
manufacturers if they can produce in a larger quantitf and sell
them cheaper, suppose tie cost of prod ction per unit is decreas-
ing and the demand will be increased by the lower price.

Take another case like the Spun silk industry, this branch of
si k industry is recently established and still in the eXper isn-
mental stage, it will be a big bhow if the duty on Spun silk is
suddenly abolished. If we hink differently, suppose the spun
silk industry was rui nel by the abolition of tariff, it lipht
lead those manufacturers to invent srme new naci zincry in that
line of industry in order to compete with foreign producers on

the basis of low COSt Of PTOduCtiOH and not dcpendé upon the

tariff.

 

In the hosiery branch of silk industry, one—fourth of the do-
mestic product is erorted to the foreign countries and i s future
is with great possibility of eXpansion. Based on the principle of
balance of trade, the more you imported the more you will eXport,
in a long run the imports and eXports will be balanced. The aboli—
tion of duty on silk goods might increase the imports of certain
silk goods, and in t e mean time the e: :ports of a ceitain kind of
silk goods may be increasel in the sane pronortton.

A sudden in crease of duty on certain itind: of goods may result
in two different directions. If thgse tranches are already mafiing

enough 1nofits, the the case will be lihe the e se of J. & J.

.A)

Dobson Company. It stors th: foreign imnorts immediately but at
the mean time new manufacturers come in and its result will be
overniodaction theh leads to b nkruntcy. If those branches can
not mahe any profit and have to have the additional duty, an

ad ttional luty will make the industry grow ranidly, but the rublic
have to bear the DUI den of sun orting an infant industry, either
per anently or temfiorally. It mitht be jit.stifiei if it is a kind

bf industry which is necessary for national defense and tie spirit
of no tionilism is a thing to be desirable.

2. Importers and :XloltClS.

(D
Q

1 1‘1 general are carryir‘i both o the

L gorters and extort

7

7

imyorts and exports business. They are middlemen eitLer between
foreign producers and domestic eons WUIGI or between domestic pro—
ducers and foreign consu1:'e:s. Their business will be nore pros-
perous if the balance of trade is even, and decreased if the ba-

lance of ‘rade is one sided. ulTTose t eimDorts and exports are

 

even and both amount to one Lillion dollars, that means two billion

dollars of business for the importers and exporters. Again we su—

the import or

pose thvt the balance oi trade is one sided, either

‘d

-C'

the EXPOTt, it will be only one billion dollars of business ior

the importers and exporters.

Tie Trens*ry Department and the Se ste Finance Committee under—
took 3 joint investigation into the foreign value hf imnort mer-
chsidise end the retail selling prices of this inrorted merchandise
to the American consuners. They fou d that the cost, including the
value in the country of origin, the Chfir e for tr nepcrtstion,
insurance, all freight, and tie duty und r the old tariff law,
amountel fer ladies' kid gloves of a certain tine toJl.21, while
the retail price here was $6.95. That table knives from Germany

(1)
whose cost was less 4 cents retailed here at 50 cents. If etch
a case is trte tgen a high duty will give the importers or re-
tailers less profit for 'hut amount of duty imy sei. If this is
the case to all import goods, I wonder how high high a duty is
needed to nrotect the American prod cors, and the present rate of
duty will not effect the innrrtstion at all. Now suPpose that
those goods are inportei on a nrofit which the business men do-
serves thet tley ought to have that amount of profit, then an
additional amount of duty will mean that they either have to im-
port those goods with less profit or stoo doing the business.

If those goods importcl are in a such situation that the demand
'is stable, tie consumers must to have certain amount of that Com-

k.)

modity no matter how high the prices are. Then an additional amount

(1) Review of Review, 66:505 N'ZZ.

 

62

of duty will not affect the business of the importers. On the other
hand S‘pppse that the supply is not elastic, and America is th e
only market for it, then the foreign producers have to pay the
additional duty.

3. Consumers.

As a rule, the consumers want to pay as little as p ssible for
any commodity which they wish to buy. Any artificial devise to
raise-that commodity means an additional burden to them. Any ar—
gument that the increasing of tariff that will not affect the
price will never convince any body to believe it. ”On the face
of it, it sears perfectly clear thet no industry can receive(any

9
benefit from a trot ctive tariff unless its prices -re affected"
This shows that prices are alway affected by the high tariff, and
in turn the consumers is affected by the high prices.

In the United States 97? of most highly finished manufactures

(3)

as fill the stores are domestic products and only 5p imported,

u)

this is also true to the silk industry, this means that ior thesi
purchase the jeople pay $97 on account of tariff to domestic pro-
ducers for every 35 that government collects on imports. The bur-
den of tariff put upon tie public is so heavy, and yet the govern-

ment only collects a small amount of revenue.

COOOOUOIOOOOOOOCOODO
yv'qh

.0.
(2) Review of Revi ws, 66:505 n -a.
(Z) The Tariff, Fair Tariff League, 19?2.

 

The unreasonable burden the public have to bear for the support
of the domestic manufacturers after they are well established may
be evnressed in the follerirs figures. " Against this 34,743,009,
000, ( products of 29 industries making mostly the thi gs fiound
in our dej'>art..ent stores at retail prices in 1919 ) which tle
public was made liable for on these 89 products, the government
collected in 1919 $53,000,000 and 1920 $95,000,000. In other words,
the government collected $1.00 out of each $100 that it wade the
consumer liable for.2 " With Congress virtually prohibiting im-
portation by a high tariff, and our domestic manufacturers with
their heads to—gether on nriees, the pepple are paying unreasonably
for their sunnlies..............It is for Congress and the reonle
to say whether these manufacturers shall henscforth be self-support-

1

1 11 have in addition a great unnecessary grant of public

I
i)

ing or s a
fl“i$."( )
AS in the case of manufacturers and importers tley find out one
way or another to shift the duty to some body else, while the con-
sumers have to bear not only the duty collected by tne government
but the same pronortidn of duty on the domestic products, vhich
consist 97% of the domestic consumption.
4. Labor.
The argunent to win the labcr for protection is that the Americsl
high paid labor must protected by high tariff. But in fact this is
......................

(4) The Tariff, Fair T riff League, 1922.
( 5 ) n u n n n n

 

64

not true. It is true that the American labor is the most highly

paid later in the world, but the Ameircau labor is paid according

d

0 its prbductive power, in other words he is paid for what he
produces. Further more the cost of production depends upon how
much does he manufacturer pays per unit of product and not how
Much the manufacturer pays the labor a day. As we point out be-
fore that the labcr cost of throwing silk is about 60 cents per
pound and one-third of one cent per pair for hosiery, the lowest
cost of production in the world. In this case it is clear that
we do not need any tariff to prtect the labor.

"The wages in some of these industries are inversely as the
amount of protection given. When cotton, silks, and woolens were
protected as above their labor was among the low st paid in
America $7 to 89 per week of Ions hours, with free 80.5 per cent

of the workers in woolens to 92.8 per cent in silk are foreign
(6)
born." This shows that t‘e labor not only was not protected by
the tariff but inversely, and most of them in the silk industry
are foreign born.
Further more we will see how small per cent as the labor in
relation to the val e of ~roducts and how high it is prttected
in the silk industry. "In 1919 only 18.5% of the factory selling
prices of all silk products went to labor and 22.79 if we include

salaries with labor; and yet the tariff was 50.5% or two and

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO000000..

(6) H. E. Kiles, Hearings Iefore the Committee on Finance, 1922.

65

A“)

three udrters more than the total wares in the mills. In 1919

FE)

wsses were only 15.7fi with the duty sVerdge £2.6fi or still two

Log

a;d three quarters t1.es the total wages............TLe protection

give the silk mills in 1919 was $205,000,000, end the Fordney Bill

would make it upwards of $230,000,000, all of which amou.ts would

doublel on reaching the consumers. And today not s yard of ordinary

corretinq silk is inserted orcent Fabrtni, a lininf from Jonon,

and Shsntuug silk from China, both so cheap and poor our manufac—

tur rs do not care to nuke them Against this g ant to the manu-

facturers, the custom revenues brought in only about 920,000,000

in 1919, and $35,000,000 in 1920 on silks.......... A single Operat-

or at about oz per day running twenty automatic machines produces

1,800 pairs of the cheapest mens‘ sock per day, selling at 6 or 7

cents per psi", and retailing in the ten cent stores at 10 cents

per pair. The hosiery peoyle now have ZBfi or :45 protection on

the 1,800 pairs to protect a total wage cost of $36, and they are

crying for about d0¢ protection. They have no right to any for no
(7)

nation equals our low hosiery costs."

5. Farmers.

The American farmers are under s situation worse than the
general consumer and the lsbor. They sell in the chednes market
in the world, being the eXport msr.et. They buy in the dearest
market in the world.

(7) The Tiriff, Fair Tariff League, 1922.

There are two big differences between far ers and manufacturers

(8)
regarding protection:

1. "hanufacturers can add all their protection to their prices,
because tie govern ent prohibits corpetition from abroad to the
limit of protecting rate. The farmer, hjuevor, must sell most
paodxots at foreign prices."

2. ”As farmers censure half of all products, they pay half of all
duties, and half of all wholesale and retail margins added to
duties as nart of prices. They ‘ay $75,000,000 to get $00,000,000
protection in wool; but the very few owners of hosiery and knit
goods factories paid less than $500,000 towards their protection
of $192,000,000 in 19191. The farLers pay $5,000,000 to 52,000,000

Lrotection on flax seed, he gets all the duty on wool and flax

seed becasue none is imported."

(5) The Tariff, Fair Tariff League, 19V2.

 

67

Conclusion.
5 . a . _ . . .
refore the writer draws his concluSicns 1n thi* study, he wishes

7

to quote a few conclusions from similar studies; Tne silk Industry
and the Tariff, The Tariff on Wool, &J.5ar in Ielation to t c Taiijf.
According to their ccnclusirns that tiey all agree that as soon as
the industries are vell extablished and strong enough to comnete
with foreign producers, the tariff shoud be abolished.

" A considerable part of all the silk industry would probably
continue to prosper were the tariff removed entirely. Our eXports
of silk manufactures have more than doubled in the last ten years.
host of the difficulties tlat have stood in the way of successful
and independent manufacture have been removed. Some few goods,
alre dy enumerated, the production of which '3 not Stitable to
conditions in this coun ry, form exceptions to t‘e fore5oing con-
clusions. Their continued production involves an economic loss.

The spylie tion of strict economic doctrin’ to tfle silk schedule
would involve the removal altog ether of duties on fabrics of the
latter class. It "s recognized that such a course, thoujh highly
beneficial from the standpoint of national economy, could scarcely
:3; 7 lip; 34? ; W-g’;flm 37i§n~tance of vested interests.

(1)

The issue here is that of public a5airst private interest."

" It is not .advis ble per.anent1r to maintain a duty on wool.

The burden on consumers of wool goods more than counterbalances

the gain to producers. Koreover, ther is not element of tublic

(1) F. R. Mason, The Silk Industry an' the Tariff, pp 178

 

policy which dictates the indefinite reter ntion of a duty. It is

not necessary for us ional defense or because of "vested rights”
of wool-growers. sheen raisin: is not an "infant industry", nor

can the duty be said to aid materially in the diversification of
industry. In maintaining a duty we are, in the words of the old

adages ,‘rayin5 too much for our whistle.‘

Althou5h the present duty has helped American wool-grouers to
extricate themselves from the difficult position on which they
were placed by p st war depression, the emer," ency is passing away
and doubtless will hive dissrneered alt05eth or by the tine the
next general tariff revision occurs. The industry should then be
dealt with on 5Dounds of perrianent rather than temporary policy.
Therefore, when a coniweaen ive 1e1d3ust1eo‘ of tariff rates is

(2)
made, wool should be placed upon the free list. "

" The present rate(l.76) appears to be unnecessarily hi h It
will tend to raise the domestic ma r5ina1 cost and encourafe the

ineffective domestic producers who,

f-w.)

entrance into the field 0

once they have becone e't 1blis hed can cl:iim the "vestei ri5ht"

argument against a reduction of the duty. If a reduction is to be

High ran e

vnw

made the present is a favarable tine for nrrking it.

of prices, much above marginal costs, makes it possible to effect

a substantial reduction in the rate, resultirg in some relief(to
“I - r '7
v.)

. .. - - n i n
consumers without imperiling any branch of the domestic indust1y.

0.000000000000000... ,.

(2) Dark A. Smith, The Tariff on Wool, 192c. 0
.,‘ . 1 1 01 I

(3) r. G. Wrisht, Su5ar in melatlon to the Tariff, 1914.

 

The Conclusions for this study are briefly state: as follows:

The growth of silk industry is not entirely due to the pro—
tective tariff.

The silk indistry in the United States is well established
and stron5 enough to compete with foreign producers.

There is only a limitei amount of importation.

The public should be relieved from the burden of supporting

a veil established industry.

1*—__ ~.3

BibliOZraphy.
John Clarke, lulbcry Tree and Silkworm, 1839, Philadepphia.
Richard T. Ely, Outlines of Econ mics, 4th Ed., 1924, New York.
Frank R. kason, The Silk Industry and the Tariff, American
Economic Association Quarterly, Third Series,
Vol. XI, No 4, 1910.
Fair Tariff League, The Tariff, 1922.

H. E. kiles, Hearing Before the Committee on Finance, 1922.

Clayton F. Koore, Comparison of T riff Acts of 1909, 1913, and
1922; 1925, Washington, D. C.

P. H. Nystrom, Textiles, 1921, New York.
Warren P. Seem, Raw Silk, 1922, New York.

Charles A. Sheffeld, Silk its Origin, Culture and Kanufacture,
1911, Massachusetts.

Lark A. Smit , Tarifi on Wool, 1926, Eew York.
E. E. Thompson, Silk, 1922,Kew York.

h. S. Woolnan& E. B. lcgowan, Textiles, 1926, New York.

Philip G. fright, Sugar in Relation to the Tariff, 1924, New York.
U. S. Tariff Commission, Dictionary of Tariff Information, 1924.
U. S. Department of Commerce, Commerce Leports.

The Artificial Silk Hand Book, 1928, ianchester.

Fourteenth Census of the U. 3. Vol.X, 1920.

Biennial Census of hanufactures, 1925.

Commerce Year £00k, Vol. I & II, 1928.

Yoody's Indrstrial, 1928.

' f
. .
.
. .
g , . o
C 1 0
U
- r
U U
. .
. .
.
i
O
. .
I
.
'
.
u
' D n
O .
0
. .
v
C r
.
C ’ o .
I
I
‘ C

   

 

American Tariff Policies from an Internati0"a1 Joint of View,
Ann. Am. Acad. 83:115,my'19.

And Now We Are Going to have 811“ From California,
Literary Digest, 78:58 s1'19.

As to New Tariff Issues for Wool, Cotton, and Silk.
L. D. 61:146, ap 5'19

Chin se Sink Industry, Asia, 17:712. n'12.

Economist faces the Tfiriff, Indepenfent, 116:549, my 8?26.
fffects of the New Tariff, Independent, 79:523, jl 12'14.
Farm levelt Against the Tariff, L. D. :3:13, a; 2'2 .

Free Trade Against Selfishnes , Nation, 112:522 ap 20'21.
Great Increase in our Silk Importati n, L. D. 57:96 ap 27'18.

Imports, The Tariff and American Foreign Trade.
Ann. Am. Acad. 94:13 mr'21.

New Age of Silk, L. D. 97:16 je 9'28.

Silk From the East, Asia, 17:823 D'17.

Silkworms' Job in Dan er, L. D. 77:25 my 26'23.
Tariff and the Cost of Living, R of Rs 66:505 n'22.

Tariff Policy of the U. S. As A Credit Nation.
Ann.Am. Acad. 95:220 my'2l.

w. or”?

W111 the Tariff Increase the Cost of LiViLD.
L. D. 73:5 je 24'22 .

   

   

 

UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

1

MICHIGAN STAT

III II

31293

3

46 2013‘!

I
I
I

0