Duties on yarn. ... A comparison of the cost of production in the two countries shows that in the case of the ordinary warp and filling yarns the present duty is regularly in excess of the difference in cost of conversion. If the relative costs only of the two mills having the lowest cost of production are considered, it appears that the present duty on the types of warps and filling described, ranging from 30's to 80's, is in all cases more than twice the difference in the total conversion cost, and in some cases four or five times the difference. The labor costs on these yarns is from 50 per cent to 60 per cent of the total conversion cost.

These figures, as stated, are based on the difference in conversion cost between the two mills of lowest cost. Making, however, a similar comparison between the lowest cost in England and the highest cost in the United States, in practically all cases the duty is greater than the difference in the conversion cost. . . .

A somewhat different situation appears in the case of yarns of this character which are of higher counts - on two-ply yarns and in the case of bleached, mercerized, and dyed yarns. For such yarns the ratio of the duty to the American conversion cost is decidedly less, ranging from 30 to 45 per cent. A duty which is 30 per cent of the American conversion cost would offset the difference in cost when the English conversion cost is 70 per cent of the American. . . .

Cost of weaving. In the matter of turning yarn into woven fabrics the Board was unable to secure such detailed foreign-cost figures as in the case of spinning, and the relative cost of this process of manufacture here and abroad cannot be stated in the same way. For tariff purposes, however, valuable conclusions may be drawn from a comparison of relative prices under competitive conditions in this and other countries and from a comparison of duties with domestic production costs. These are considered below.

It is necessary, however, to recognize an important difference in the methods employed in the United States and England in this branch of the industry. There seems to be no wide difference between the two countries in the amount of machinery tended or in the output per operative in the spinning of yarn. In the case of weaving the situation is quite different. English looms run somewhat faster than the looms in this country, but the number of looms tended per weaver is usually much less than here. This is in marked contrast to the woolen industry, where the number of looms tended is about the same in the two countries. In the case of plain looms (not automatic) the English weaver seldom tends more than 4 looms, while in this country a weaver rarely tends less than 6, and more frequently 8, or even 12, if equipped with "warp-stop motions." Furthermore, English manufacturers make little use of automatic looms. . . . Where automatic looms can be used a single weaver commonly tends 20 looms, and sometimes as many as 28. The result is that whereas the output per spinner per hour in England is probably as great or greater than in this country, the output per weaver per hour is, upon a large class of plain goods, less, and in the case where automatic looms are used in this country and plain looms in England it is very much less.

The foregoing statements apply to a comparison of plain looms in the two countries or of plain looms in England with automatic looms here. In the case of other methods of weaving such as dobby, Jacquard, box dobby, box Jacquard, lappet, etc., the difference in output is by no means so great. In the case of dobby looms (without automatic attachment) on some classes of fabric, the American weaver will tend 8 or more looms as against 4 in England; but with the more complicated weaves the ratio seems to be nearer that of 6 to 4, and, in the case of certain fancy fabrics, where the number of looms tended is necessarily 4 or less, the output per weaver is about the same in both countries.

As is well known, wages or earnings are not necessarily an index of the labor cost of any particular process of manufacture. The labor cost per yard depends on the relation between wages and output. An extreme illustration can be shown by figures secured by the Board in Japan. It is true that the wages of spinners and weavers per day in that country are very low, but the number of operatives employed to secure a given output is much greater than in this country. In the case of spinning, the lower wages paid are not offset by the larger number of persons employed, and consequently the amount paid to spinners per pound of yarn is materially less than in this country. On the other hand, Japanese weavers tend only one or two looms, and the lower output per weaver under existing conditions makes the amount paid the weaver per yard of cloth about 80 per cent of the amount paid in this country where plain looms are used in this country; while compared with the use of automatic looms, the amount paid the weaver per yard of cloth is greater than in this country.

It must be further noted, however, that the cost of weaving is not merely a question of what the weaver receives per yard. The ratio of other labor to weaver's labor varies greatly from mill to mill and no general statement can be made regarding it. The cost of this other labor, such as foremen, slashers, warpers, drawers-in, loom fixers, is not reduced by the fact that the weaver tends a large number of looms. Consequently the total labor cost of weaving is not reduced in proportion to the reduction of the actual weaver's rate per yard, by the fact that a larger number of looms is tended by one operative.

Keeping the above facts in mind it may be stated that, in the case of a large variety of plain goods, the labor cost of turning yarn into cloth in the United States is not greater and in some cases is lower, than in England. For cloths woven on automatic looms, this is especially the case; but on certain classes of fabrics the same holds true for plain looms due to the greater number of looms per weaver in this country. This does not necessarily indicate any individual superiority on the part of the American weaver. It is a matter of difference in industrial policy, whether determined by the manufacturer or the laborer, and it explains the difference in the methods of production which prevail at the present time. Where the automatic loom is now used in England a weaver frequently tends 20 looms, as is commonly done in the United States.

In the case of finer goods, however, especially figured goods with complicated weaves, the cost of weaving is higher here than in England. This is due largely to the fact that the difference in the number of the looms tended per weaver is less than in the case of plain goods. On a large part of these fancy goods (those requiring more than one kind of filling) the automatic loom cannot be used. Even disregarding the question of automatic looms, the difference in the number of looms tended per weaver on such fabrics is less than in the case of plain cloths. Consequently the comparatively small difference in output per weaver does not offset the higher wages paid in this country.