November 1, 1913.] 



THE INDIA RUBBER WORLD 



67 



THE TARIFF ON RUBBER FOR THE PAST EIGHTY 



YEARS. 



JUST at present the most interesting matter occupying the 

 minds of rubber manufacturers, and dealers also, is the new 

 tariff law and its possible effects. In view of the general in- 

 terest in this topic it seems quite appropriate to give a brief 

 survey of all the American tariff bills which have referred in 

 any way to rubber. 



The first tariff act that mentioned rubber was the act of July 

 14, 1832. Very naturally, that exempted rubber from duty. As 

 there were practically no rubl)cr manufacturers in the United 

 States at that time there obviously was no particular need for 

 protection. To be sure there were a number of people trying 

 to make articles out of rubber, but they had not succeeded in 

 any commercial sense. But quite a little crude rubber was being 

 imported — largely into the port of Salem — which was being used 

 by experimenters in an attempt to find some method or process 

 by which practical articles could be manufactured out of rubber. 

 The only imi>ortations of rubber goods coming into the country 

 at that time consisted of rubber shoes, clumsy and crude in shape, 

 made by the natives along the .\mazon. These shoes, notwith- 

 standing their weight and absolute lack of any approach to grace- 

 ful lines, served to keep the feet dry and had reached quite a sale 

 in New England. 



Since 1832 there have been, including the Underwood act, 

 twelve different acts referring to rubber. The last two — the 

 Payne-Aldrich and the Underwood — are mentioned in detail 

 in another article. The other ten acts are briefly outlined below. 



The act op July 14, 1832, makes first mention of rubber as a 

 dutiable article by exempting it from duty. 



The act of August 30, 1842, imposes an ad valorem duty of 

 30 per cent, on rubber "oil cloth," webbing, shoes, braces or sus- 

 penders or other fabrics or manufactured articles composed wholly 

 or in part of rubber. 



The act of July 30, 1846, Walker tariff, imposed an ad 

 valorem duty of 30 per cent, on braces, suspenders, webbing or 

 other fabrics composed wholly or in part of rubber not otherwise 

 provided for, and 10 per cent, ad valorem on rubber in bottles, 

 slabs or sheets, unmanufactured. 



The act of August 5, 1861, Morrill tariff, made the tariff 

 on crude or unmanufactured india-rubber 10 per cent, ad valorem ; 

 on rubber boots and shoes, 30 per cent, ad valorem. 



The act of July 14, 1862, imposed a SO per cent, ad valorem 

 duty on manufactures of rubber, or silk and rubber, or rubber, 

 silk and other materials, and 10 per cent, ad valorem on rubber 

 milk. 



The act of June 6, 1872, made a liorizontal reduction from 

 e.xisting rates of 10 per cent, on all manufactures of india-rubber 

 and gutta percha. 



The act of March 3, 1883, placed a duty of 25 per cent, ad 

 valorem on rubber boots and shoes ; of 30 per cent, ad valorem 

 on fabrics made wholly or in part of rubber, not specially enumer- 

 ated; on other articles not specially enumerated made wholly of 

 rubber, of 25 per cent., and of 30 per cent, ad valorem on combs 

 of all kinds. 



The act of October, 1890, McKinley tariff, placed raw rub- 

 ■ber, rubber milk, old scrap or refuse worn-out rubber, fit only 

 for re-manufacture, on the free list. A duty of 35 per cent, ad 

 valorem was imposed on manufactures of gutta percha, vulcan- 

 ized or hard rubber, or articles of which they are the chief com- 

 ponent ; and on manufactures of rubber not specially provided for 

 a duty of 30 per cent, ad valorem was imposed. 



The Wil-son T.\riff of 1894 provides for the free entry of 

 crude rubber, old scrap and waste rubber worn out by use and 

 fit only for re-manufacture; gutta percha and asbestos. It im- 



poses a duty of 25 per cent, ad valorem on articles made of India 

 rubber, or of which India rubber is the component of chief value, 

 the same duty being imposed upon manufactures of asbestos. 

 Manufactures of gutta percha and hard rubber carry a duty of 

 30 per cent, ad valorem. 



The act of July 24, 1897 — Dincley tariff, exempted crude 

 rubber, rubber milk and scrap fit only for re-manufacturing, from 

 duty. 



Par. 314 of Schedule I, which imposes a duty of .50 per cent, 

 on ready made clothing, provides that any outside garment re- 

 ferred to in the paragraph, having rubber as a component ma- 

 terial, shall pay a duty of 50 per cent, ad valorem and 15 cents 

 per pound. Wclis and webbing, wholly or in part of silk, into 

 which rubber enters, 50 per cent, ad valorem ; manufactures of 

 india-rubber or in wliich it is the chief component, 30 per cent. 

 ad valorem ; suspenders, braces, beltings, bindings, etc., in part 

 of rubber, 45 per cent, ad valorem ; manufactures of hard rubber, 

 35 per cent, ad valorem ; manufactures of silk or having silk as 

 component of chief value, containing rubber, not otherwise 

 specified, 60 per cent, ad valorem; gloves excepted. 



WORLD'S COMPARATIVE PRODUCTION OF WILD 

 AND PLANTATION RUBBER. 



IN' dealing with the general statistics of the world's rubber pro- 

 * duction, there has been some difficulty in the past, arising 

 from the want of a uniform basis for showing the comparative 

 output of wild and plantation rubber during identical periods. 

 This obstacle has been overcome in the statistical returns lately 

 pul)lished by the "Superintendencia da Defesa da Borracha." 

 of Rio de Janeiro, the location of the Brazilian Department of 

 .'Xgriculture, which now deals with rubber. 



Tliese figures (a summary of which is reproduced below) 

 show that during the first five months of the years 1910 to 1913, 

 wild rublicr has practically remained stationary, while plantation 

 rul)l)er represents an increased production during that period of 

 aliout 11,000 tons or about equal to 26.000 tons a year. According 

 to Brazilian estimates, the world's total rubber output had in- 

 creased for the first five months, from 26,632 tons in 1910 to 

 37.4.58 tons in 1913, the equivalents for twelve months being thus 

 respectively 64,000 and 90.000 tons. This last named annual 

 figure has been more or less the basis of recent English statistical 

 reports. 



With the Brazilian figures including actual shipments up to the 

 latter part of May, a standpoint is afforded for the further dis- 

 cussion of the comparative production of wild and plantation 

 ruliber. 



The details of origin and distribution of the above-named 

 quantities will be dealt with in a future table. 



WORLD'S COMP.^R.^TIVE PRODUCTION OF WILD AND PLANT.\- 

 TION RUP.BER. 



.\NALySIS OF BRAZILIAM ESTIMATES FOR FIRST 7IV1 UOMTRS Or TEARS 1910 



TO 1913. 



1910. 1911. 1912. ' 1913. 



Tons. Tons. Tons. Tons. 

 World's production of wild rubber for five 



months 24,159 22,821 23,707 22,928 



World's production of plantation rubber for 



five months 2,473 4,555 8,709 14.530 



Grand total for five months 26,632 27,376 32,416 37,458 



EQUALLING APPROXIMATELY FOR TWELVE MONTHS. 



1910. 1911. 1912. 1913. 



About About About About 



Per Per Per Per 



Tons. Cent. Tons. Cent. Tons. Cent. Tons. Cent. 



Wild S.'^.OOO 90 54.000 84 55.000 71 54,000 60 



Plantation 6.000 10 11,000 16 23,000 29 36,000 40 



Estimate 13 months. .64,000 100 65.000 100 78.000 100 90.000 100 



