SUGGESTED ORDINANCE REGULATING THE MANUFACTURE, STORAGE, SALE, AND DISTRIBUTION OF MATCHES ADOPTED BY THE NATIONAL BOARD OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS, 135 WILLIAM STREET, New York, anD THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION, 87 MILK STREET, BOSTON, MASS.

Be it ordained by the of the city of

SECTION 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, association, or corporation, to manufacture, store, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise dispose of, or distribute white phosphorus, single-dipped, strike-anywhere matches of the type popularly known as "parlor matches; nor manufacture, store, sell, offer for sale, or otherwise dispose of, or distribute, white phosphorus, double-dipped, strike-anywhere matches, or any other type of double-dipped matches, unless the bulb or first dip of such match is composed of a so-called safety or inert composition, nonignitible on an abrasive surface; nor manufacture, store, sell, offer for sale, or otherwise dispose of, or distribute matches, which, when packed in a carton of 500 approximate capacity and placed in an oven maintained at a constant temperature of 200° F., will ignite in 8 hours; nor manufacture, store, offer for sale, sell, or otherwise dispose of, or distribute, Blazer, or so-called wind matches, whether of the so-called safety or strike-anywhere type.

SEC. 2. No person, firm, or corporation shall sell or otherwise distribute for use, any matches, unless the box or container in which such matches are packed bears plainly marked on the outside thereof, the name of the manufacturer and the brand or trade-mark under which such matches are sold or distributed.

SEC. 3. Not more than one case of each brand of matches of any type or manufacture shall be open at any time in any store or warehouse in the city of and no loose boxes or paper-wrapped packages of matches shall be kept on shelves or stored loose in such stores or warehouses at a height exceeding 5 feet from the floor.

SEC. 4. Matches, when stored, must be kept only in sound cases and not piled to a height exceeding 10 feet from the floor. No matches shall be stored within a horizontal distance of 10 feet from any heating apparatus, such as boiler, furnace, stove, etc., nor within a horizontal distance of 25 feet from any explosive material stored on the same floor.

SEC. 5. Matches shall be packed in boxes or suitable packages containing not more than 700 matches in any box or package: Provided, however, That when more than 300 matches are packed in any one box or package, the said matches shall be arranged in two nearly equal portions, the heads of the matches in the upper portion pointing in the opposite direction from the heads of the matches in the lower portion. All boxes containing 350 or more matches shall have placed therein a center holding or protecting strip, made of chip board, not less than 14 inches wide; said strip shall be placed on the top of the matches in the box and be flanged down on each end to hold the matches in position when the box is nested in the shuck or withdrawn from it. SEC. 6. All match boxes or packages shall be packed in strong shipping containers or cases. The maximum number of match boxes or packages contained in any one shipping container or case shall not exceed the following:

Number of boxes:

gross.. 1 gross.

2 gross.

3 gross. 5 gross.. 12 gross. 20 gross.

25 gross..

Nominal number of matches per box.

No shipping container or case constructed of fiber board, corrugated fiber board, or of wood, nailed or wire bound, containing matches, shall have a weight, including its contents, exceeding 75 pounds, and no lock-cornered wooden case containing matches shall have a weight, including its contents, exceeding 85 pounds.

No shipping container or case containing matches shall have an internal volume exceeding 8,000 cubic inches. Matches shall not be packed in any shipping container or case with any other article or commodity. All shipping containers or cases containing "Strike-anywhere" matches shall have plainly marked on the outside thereof the words, "Strike-anywhere matches," and all shipping containers or cases containing "Strike-on-box matches" shall have plainly marked on the outside thereof the words "Strike-on-box matches."

SEC. 7. Any person, firm, or corporation violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be fined not less than $5 nor more than $25 for each offense. SEC. 8. This ordinance shall take effect and go in force

*

* *

[Journal of Commerce, Jan. 27, 1913.]

FIRE-PREVENTION CAMPAIGN MINNESOTA GOVERNOR RECOMMENDS SUPPRESSION OF THE CRIMINAL MATCH."

66

The recommendations of the Minnesota Legislature by Gov. Eberhart included the following: "The fire-prevention campaign which has been carried on by the State fire marshal's office and the Minnesota Fire-Prevention Association during the past year has borne tremendous fruit. It is estimated by the State fire marshal that the loss to our people by fire has been reduced from approximately $5,400,000 in 1911 to $4,200,000 in 1912. Considering what the tremendous fire waste in the United States means to our people this is exceedingly encouraging. The average per capita fire tax in Europe is about 33 cents, while in the United States it is approximately $2.50. Much can be done by way of legislation to assist in this fire-prevention campaign.

"THE CRIMINAL MATCH.

"It is estimated that 10 per cent of our annual fire losses is due to our so-called parlor match. The national convention of insurance commissioners has indorsed for passage in the various States a bill which by its terms would prohibit the manufacture sale, and distribution of the so-called criminal parlor match. A similar law will be found on the statute books of a number of European countries. Your commissioner hopes that this proposed measure may have the attention of the legislature.

"OVERINSURANCE.

"Overinsurance is, beyond a doubt, responsible for a very large percentage of the fire losses in the United States. Avaricious fire insurance agents, for the sake of a few paltry dollars in commission, will induce men to overinsure their property. Too frequently we see a man of apparently good character and honest purpose who, when he finds himself confronted with financial difficulties, knowing that his property is insured for more than its actual value, yields to temptation, burns his property, and secures the face value of his policy in exchange for a poor investment.

"More frequent it is that the incendiarist, premeditating crime, secures insurance on his property for more than it is worth and then burns it. It is a notorious fact that the assured can secure in some company or other insurance in a greater amount than the value of his property.

"The evils of overinsurance are not limited to the insured alone. Numerous complaints have been made to this department that the neighbors or adjacent property owners of the complainants have their property vastly overinsured, endangering the property and lives of the community.

"The State fire marshal should be empowered to make appraisements of property insured, report the same to the commissioner of insurance, who should be clothed with authority to order the cancellation of any policy insuring property in excess of such valuation and with authority to cancel the license of the agent who placed the insurance. Where the property is found to be overinsured the expenses of the State fire marshal for investigating the risk should be charged to the company with whom the insurance is placed."

That completes the regular list, and there are three other gentlemen who desire to be heard to-night. The first name is Mr. Samuel Hoffman. [After a pause.] Mr. Hoffman is not present.

The next witness is Mr. P. H. Connolly. Mr. Connolly is here, and we will hear him.

STATEMENT OF MR. P. H. CONNOLLY.

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am one of a delegation of eight who come here in the interest of the fur felt hat industry. I come representing the men engaged in the manufacture of hats, and not as representing any manufacturer. I come, you might say, spontaneously, because I did not know until yesterday that I was to come here. I was requested by the president of the

United Hatters of North America to come here and appear for the men.

I was for 17 years secretary of the local organization of hat makers and know of the amount of work that they had in that time. I can safely state that for the past three years the men have not been engaged steadily over six months out of the year. While we have a minimum rate of wages which is scheduled at $22 a week for a 50-hour week, I am putting it high when I say that the men in the hat industry working at it at the present time have not, for the past three years, averaged $9 a week.

Statistics show that under the present rate of duty there has been imported into the United States in 1912 55,000 dozen hats. We have been informed that possibly a reduction would be made in the present tariff rates, and we feel that if such a reduction is made that instead of the men that are now employed working six months a year that they will probably work four months a year. In my community, Danbury, Conn., we are dependent solely upon the fur hat industry; that is all we do; that is all the manufacturing that is carried on in that locality.

Any other industry that is carried on there is supported by the hat industry, because they are engaged in making and manufacturing some article that is used in the manufacture of hats. Therefore I feel, and the men in my community feel, that if any further reduction is made in the present rate of duty that they are going to suffer from it. They have asked this delegation to come here before this committee and prevail upon the committee to not disturb the tariff on hats. We feel that we can not afford to have it. We know that it should remain where it is in order to give the men and women in the industry their living. I know from personal experience of one case, that of a girl, whose minimum rate of wage is supposed to be $12 per week. In 1910 her average pay for the year was $51-less than $1 a week-and if she had worked in the factory in which she was employed she could have earned that in two weeks at the work she was doing. She did not have work enough to enable her to make her wages. I know if it was not for the four factories in that district and you might say the same of Orange, Newark, and Brooklyn-if it was not for the four factories in our town, at least one-half of the people there would not be working at all. The four factories employ about one-half of the people. We have 21 factories in that community that make hats all the way through, besides several that we call buckeyes, that just finish hats. How some of the men and women engaged in that work in those factories have lived for the past three years is a mystery. I never could understand it. You might say, how do I know the amount of wages earned by these men. I was in a position to know it. I collected what we call dues from the men. They have a percentage system of 1 cent on every dollar, and I could tell from the slips that they were turning in to me. They pay that assessment from the pay envelope and not on a statement of what they might say they have earned, so that a man could not tell me he had earned $9 and at the same time have earned $15; they pay it from their pay envelopes, and they have paid as low as 8 and 9 and 10 cents a week. Of course, in the busy season it would go above that. If it was not for the busy season, when they have plenty of work, they could not possibly live.

I hope you gentlemen will look at this matter in the light that we want to have you look at it, and that you will leave the tariff at least where it is. If you could possibly do anything to bring us in that other $55,000 we would like to have it. We feel that it would start up some of those factories in those communities and give work to men who are now idle.

I want to apologize to the committee for not being present last night. We understood that this hearing was to be held at 10 o'clock this morning, and we did not come in until last night. My colleagues and I want to thank you very much for the courtesy extended to us in allowing us to appear before you this evening.

The CHAIRMAN. The next witness is Mr. Milton Dammann.

STATEMENT OF MR. MILTON DAMMANN, ATTORNEY AT LAW, 141 BROADWAY, NEW YORK CITY.

Mr. DAMMANN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I wish to speak in reference to paragraph 422, in behalf of the Straw Goods Association, comprised very largely of manufacturers of men's straw hats. I appear in the place of Mr. Vonderhoff, the president of the association, who was down here yesterday, but was taken sick with laryngitis. I am going to tell you a little bit about it. I do not know as much as he does. I may be a little bit deficient in facts, but that is going to make me a little bit shorter, perhaps, than Mr. Vonderhoff would have been, but it is growing late and I do not imagine that will be a particularly discouraging bit of information.

The particular point that we wish to attract this committee's attention to is to clear up and iron out some of the inconsistencies in the working out of the paragraph that have developed within the last three or four years. The tendency of the suggestion we make is one which will increase the revenue of the Government and also is toward downward revision.

If you will observe the paragraph you will find it is divided into three parts: First, braids which go into the manufacture of hats; second, hat bodies not trimmed; and third, trimmed hat bodies.

The class of braids which are enumerated in that particular paragraph are all braids which are not manufactured in the United States. There is not a single inch of braid mentioned in that large group of braids which is made here.

The first suggestion which we make in regard to braids is that braid which is composed of ramie, a vegetable fiber made from Chinese grass, and which is manufactured in the trade in Switzerland, and which has come into existence during the last three or four years, and which is only used for the making of hats, be placed in the other group of hat braids in that particular paragraph. It now comes in under the paragraph of vegetable fibers at 50 per cent. None of it is made here, and we suggest that it be put in the other group of braids.

Mr. HARRISON. If we do that, do you believe we can start up an industry of making braids in the United States?

Mr. DAMMANN. Oh, no; of making the hats composed of braid. Mr. HARRISON. You are not advocating putting ramie at a lower rate of duty than it now carries ?

Mr. DAMMANN. Yes, substantially; for this particular reason. Νο great quantity of ramie comes in.

Mr. HARRISON. I understand that very little of it comes in now, and it bears a duty of 50 per cent. Suppose we put it down at a lower rate of duty, could not the hat manufacturers of the United States

make their own braids?

Mr. DAMMANN. They could not manufacture those braids here at all. Mr. HARRISON. They manufacture them in Switzerland.

Mr. DAMMANN. They do. The industry has never been developed here. Perhaps if ramie grass came in here the industry could be fostered, but up to this point there are none of the braids of that character or of any other character mentioned in that paragraph which are made here.

We have illustrations here for the benefit of the committee of any number of classes of braids, many of which are more expensive in price than the remie braid, which come in at 15 per cent. Here is a chip braid, which you will see appears from a distance to be about the same. This braid is made from chips from a particular tree largely grown in Cuba, and some Oriental countries. These different braids go into women's hats, and if the remie braid is brought in under that same rate the women can get a much better hat. It is not of any particular importance to us, because if we pay more for the braid we have got to add it to our cost. We think that a reduction of the duty on this braid would allow more of it to come in and then it will be a revenue producer.

Mr. PALMER. You want to put all the hat braids under one group? Mr. DAMMANN. Yes, sir.

Mr. PALMER. And under the same rate?

Mr. DAMMANN. Yes, sir.

Mr. PALMER. And you are willing to have that rate left as it is now? Mr. DAMMANN. Yes, sir.

Mr. PALMER. Although none is produced in this country?

Mr. DAMMANN. No, sir; there is none produced here.

Mr. PALMER. It is absolutely a revenue rate?

Mr. DAMMANN. Purely a revenue rate. Under the braid paragraph last year the importations amounted to something like $5,000,000, which paid a little over $800,000 in revenue to the Government. Mr. RAINEY. How low do you want to make them?

Mr. DAMMANN. Just the same as the other braids in the paragraph; 15 per cent.

Mr. RAINEY. How much revenue do you think we would get?

Mr. DAMMANN. The whole paragraph is now 15 per cent. We simply want that included in the same group because we think that is where it belongs.

Mr. HAMMOND. Is ramie braid now under a separate paragraph? Mr. DAMMANN. No; it is not specially provided for. It comes in under paragraph 349 by virtue of similitude.

The second suggestion we make is one with regard to real horsehair. Paragraph 409 of the act of 1897 did not include braids composed of real horsehair, Cuba bark, or manila hemp. Those braids were not in existence at the time of the passage of the Dingley law. They were added to this paragraph and have been coming in under the 15 per cent rate. At the same time the Cuba bark, manila hemp, 72318-No. 24-13- -8