476 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Jan, 3, 1889. 



THE TARIFF ON FIREARMS. 



ALTHOUGH the tariff has been the subject of so much 

 heated political discussion, we have studiously 

 avoided making any allusion to it in these columns, 

 which the reader most assuredly has a right to demand 

 shall be kept free from politics; and this has been done, 

 even though the implements of sport used by gunners 

 are directly affected by the duty. Without going into 

 any discussion of the subject, we have thought that it 

 would be interesting to learn the views of manufacturers 

 and dealers respecting the firearm tariff; and we have 

 accordingly invited all those interested to express their 

 opinion. In the first week in December a letter was sent 

 out embodying this inquiry: 



"We are sounding the gun trade for their view of 

 the bearing of the existing tariff on the trade in fire- 

 arms, and invite you to give us for publication your 

 opinion of the desirability either of maintaining 

 the present rate of duty on firearms or of modifying 

 that duty in any way. If in your opinion any change 

 should be made, will you tell us what you would re- 

 commend, and whether there should be different rates 

 on different grades of firearms? Give us the reasons for 

 your recommendation, whether it be to leave the firearms 

 tariff as it is now or to revise it, and specify in what way 

 you think the several branches of the gun trade would be 

 benefited or injured by tariff revision. You will of 

 course understand that the Forest and Stream wants 

 your opinion on this point without any discussion of 

 political parties or platforms." 



In response to this inquiry we received the letters 

 printed below. Four replies were sent us declining to 

 express opinions for publication. One declined on the 

 ground of having a great many friends among both im- 

 porters and American makers; another wrote, "We can 

 hardly see our way clear to comply with your request," 

 and a third thought it "not for the best interest of the 

 gun manufacturers of the United States to agitate the 

 tariff question, inasmuch as it is included in the Senate 

 bill and will possibly be taken care of there." 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In reply to your letter asking for our views on the 

 present attempt by the new Senate Tariff Bill to increase 

 the duty on imported guns we certainly are not in favor 

 of it, as if passed it would prohibit the importation of a 

 class of guns which are suited to the wants and means of 

 a large majority of the public. As it now is, a very good 

 breechloading double gun, in the top lever action, with re- 

 bounding bar locks and pistol stock, in good, honest, safe 

 and reliable twist barrels, can be imported and sold here for 

 $25, cheaper qualities, ditto, $20, and down to $15; still 

 lower cost double guns in other systems of action and in 

 plain twist barrels down to $10. Such guns pay a duty 

 of 35 per cent, ad valorem, and thousands of them are 

 imported and sold yearly. Now it is proposed to put a 

 specific duty of $10 with an additional ad valorem duty 

 of 25 per cent, on each and every gun imported, no matter 

 what its cost: equivalent to making an ad, valorem duty 

 on the low cost guns of about 200 per cent. , and on the 

 medium cost about 100 per cent., instead of the present 

 rate of 35 per cent. As the few American gun manu- 

 facturers that we have in this country have never off ered 

 to the public any similar quality guns at any prices ap- 

 proaching, even with the 35 per cent, duty in their favor, 

 it seems to us that passing such bills would be doing an 

 injustice to a large class of our people. We think the 

 present duty of 35 per cent, high enough and should not 

 be increased on any firearm. Wm. Read & Sons. 

 Boston, Mass. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In compliance with your request we herewith give our 

 views as to the import duties that should be affixed to 

 firearms coming into this country from foreign ports. 

 Ten years ago the gun trade of this country was almost 

 entirely in the hands of foreign manufacturers, very few 

 goods in the way of double-barrel guns being made here 

 at that time. Since then the manufacture of double- 

 barrel guns has become a matter of considerable im- 

 portance in this country, and the prices which consumers 

 now pay for these goods are at least 33J per cent, lower 

 than those ruling ten years ago. The importation of 

 double-barrel guns into this country during the year 1887 

 was equal in value to the whole amount manufactured in 

 the United States. If this volume of foreign goods 

 should have been shut out, you can see at once that it 

 would put that branch of industry in this country into a 

 very active and healthy condition. 



We are more largely interested in the manufacture of 

 revolvers than guns, and the import duty which shall be 

 established upon that class of firearms is particularly to 

 our interest. We have a protected duty of 35 per cent. 

 ad valorem, but notwithstanding this, on our cheaper 

 class of revolvers we have been forced down in the last 

 five years over 40 per cent, on account of competition 

 arising from foreign goods, more particularly of Belgian 

 make. We have met this decrease in price partly by 

 reduction in wages and partly by improvements and 

 facilities in the manufacture, but at the present writing 

 these foreign goods are sold in our market at least 10 per 

 cent, lower than our prices. Although made of inferior 

 material and of poor workmanship, they do take the 

 place with a certain class of dealers, of the better grade 

 of goods made in this country. We find upon investiga- 

 tion that the class of laborers we pay 90 cents per day to, 

 only receive in Liege what is equal in our money to 28 

 cents, and the class of laborers that we pay from $1.25 to 

 $2.50 per day receive in Belgium from 60 to 90 cents. We 

 believe that it is an utter impossibility in this country to 

 force labor down to any such point as is reached by the 

 older countries, even if it were desirable to do so. 



We believe that one great source of the prosperity of 

 this country is the fact of a great mass of working peo- 

 ple earning sufficient wages not only to buy the necessi- 

 ties of life, but to buy more or less of the luxuries, and 

 that is what, in our estimation, keeps the wheels of in- 

 dustry moving. We also believe that this country is pros- 

 perous from the fact that not only its agricultural interests 

 are large, but its manufacturing industries also. The 

 policy of free trade theoretically is correct, if the condi- 

 tions of all nations were alike, but they are not. England, 

 Ireland and Scotland are comparatively free trade, but 

 England's colonies, every one of them, are protected by 

 import duties; and India, which would be one of the 

 largest markets for our goods, is protected by a wall of 

 defense more secure than impost. Should we send a 



consignment of goods to any reputable merchant in India, 

 for the purpose of introducing them, they would be con- 

 fiscated and sold for the benefit of the Indian government. 

 This shows the stringency of their protection. The large 

 manufacturers of metallic ammunition in England, 

 France and Germany have ample facilities by steamship 

 lines to distribute the goods to any part of the world, but 

 on the other hand, if we wish to send ammunition to 

 either Great Britain or the Continent, it can only be 

 taken by one line of steamers, and the expense of sending 

 same by* that hue often exceeds 20 per cent, of the value 

 of the goods. 



Finally we believe that the import duties on firearms 

 should be increased by a specific duty on each arm, 

 besides the ad valorem duties which now exist. If that 

 does not take place, we are confident that the time is not 

 far distant when the cheaper class of firearrns made 

 in this country will be entirely driven out by foreign 

 goods of inferior quality. Merwin, Hulbert & Co. 



New York, December, 1888. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Your favor of the 6th inst. to hand. Inclosed you will 

 find tabulated statement as to how matters will stand 

 should the Senate tariff bill pass. Naturally it is not in 

 our interest to have a bill of this kind pass Congress, as, 

 you will notice, it will make it prohibitory to import any 

 cheap guns, and only the better kinds can be brought 

 over. Now, as none of the American makers furnish a 

 good gun cheaper than $20, wholesale purchasing price, 

 you will, therefore, see that they are thereby obliging 

 every one to invest much more money in a breechloading 

 shotgun than they can buy at to-day; and, in accordance 

 with our estimate, it would do a great deal of harm, as 

 only a comparatively small quantity, in comparison with 

 what is used now, would be purchased. 



BKEECHI.OADINO GUNS. 



The present tariff is 35 per cent, ad valorem. The Senate bill 

 proposes £10 per guu and 25 per cent, ad valorem, and this figures 



oux as follows 









Foreigu cost. 



Ad valorem rate. 



Foreign cost. Ad valorem n 



Per cent. 





Per cent 



$3.65 



300 



$21.90 



71 



3.89 



285 



24.33 



66 



4.14 



267 



26.76 



62 



4.38 



255 



29.20 



59 



4.62 



241 



31.63 



57 



4.87 



230 



34.06 



54 



5.48 



207 



38.93 



50 



6.10 



189 



43.80 



48 



6.70 



174 



48.66 



45 



7.30 



162 



53.53 



44 



7.90 



153 



58.40 



43 



8.50 



142 



63.26 



41 



9.10 



134 



68.13 



40 



9.73 



128 



73.00 



39 



10.95 



116 



77.86 



38 



12.17 



107 



82.73 



37 



13.30 



100 



87.60 



Mi 



14.60 



94 



92.46 



36 



17.03 



84 



97.33 



35 



19.47 



76 







The rate on "Zulus" would be 680 per cent. 



You will notice from the inclosed list that the party 

 that buys the highest priced gun and who can well afford 

 to pay a good price, will not be affected by this new bill 

 at all, while the party who has only a few dollars to in- 

 vest for a breechloader, will be forced to spend con- 

 siderably should he desire to own a fowling piece, or go 

 without. 



We give you our ideas as above, with the request that 

 our name is not to be mentioned in any of your publica- 

 tions, because we do not like to see our name in print. 



New York. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Your letter of the 7th inst. requesting our views on the 

 present tariff on firearms has been duly received. As 

 you do not desire a discussion of the different political 

 platforms or parties or the principles involved therein, 

 we will say that our personal interests would hardly be 

 affected by either a reduction or increase of the present 

 rates of tariff duties. We understand that one of the 

 bills now before Congress proposes to add a duty of $10 

 to each and every breechloading gun imported besides the 

 present duty of 35 per cent, ad valorem. As this would 

 be an increase of many hundred per cent, of the present 

 rate of duty on thousands of cheap breechloading guns 

 annually imported, Ave can readily see that such a change 

 would greatly affect the cheap and inferior firearms busi- 

 ness in this country, inasmuch as such a measure would 

 raise the price of the poor man's gun to double or 

 more of its present cost, whereas it would hardly affect 

 the price of the better grades of guns of which we make 

 specialties. Such a measure might result in a general 

 improvement of the cheapest grades of imported guns, 

 the "trash" now considerably used in this country, by 

 substituting better American-made guns. Of course this 

 would cut down the number of guns in use, and might 

 result in an increase of our present game supply, which, 

 however, would all be done at the expense of the poor 

 man's fun and recreation. As we have said before, our 

 personal interests can hardly be affected by any change. 

 Our desire is always to give the very best quality and 

 value for the money, but inasmuch as the bulk of our 

 trade is among the best and practical class of sportsmen, 

 using the best and practical articles, we will leave the 

 above knotty question for those to settle who are more 

 directly interested than ourselves. A change in the rates 

 of the present tariff duties on rifles and pistols would 

 hardly affect American business interests, because in 

 their manufacture America can beat the world, irre- 

 spective of protective tariffs. 

 New York, Dec. 11, 1888. Von LENGERKE & DETMOLD. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In response to your request asking for my views on the 

 tariff as it affects the gun trade, I suppose you expect 

 each correspondent to represent the aspect of the question 

 as it appears from the standpoint of his own trade. For 

 instance, a dealer who handles largely the cheapest grade 

 of guns would want the tariff adjusted to suit his par- 

 ticular business and so wotdd call for a low rate of duty 

 on cheap guns, and would very likely desire a higher 

 rate on the better class; while a man handling the more 

 expensive ones would care little whether there was a 

 prohibitive duty on cheap guns, so long as he could im- 

 port the higher grades so as to successfully compete with 

 high grade American guns. As I represent the latter 

 interest, svhat I shall say will be from that standpoint. 

 At the present rate of duty breechloading guns that sell 

 at $»0 and over can be imported and sold at a fair profit 

 in this market. At the same time there is a constant in- 



ducement to American manufacturers to endeavor to 

 produce a better arm than the foreign at a lower price. 

 A very material reduction of duty would result in a 

 largely increased importation, and American manufac- 

 turers would be compelled to turn their attention to other 

 branches of business. On the other hand a very slight 

 increase would result in closing this market entirely to 

 foreign manufacturers. 



Botli of the bills now before our Congress recognize 

 this position and wisely (as I think) refrain from any 

 material change of the tariff on the better grades of 

 breechloading guns. The best interests of all concerned 

 demand that the duty shall be maintained at a point that 

 neither closes the American manufactory nor entirely 

 shuts out of the market foreign skill and intelligent 

 thought; for from this quarter have come many of the 

 most valuable inventions that have made the modern 

 breechloader such a source of delight to the lover of the 

 gun. The present duty enables the American manufac- 

 turer to successfully reach out toward the production of 

 the best class of work and stimulates him to avail him- 

 self of the highest inventive genius, for which the 

 American artisan is celebrated the world over. It at the 

 same time keeps the price low enough to enable the 

 sportsman of moderate means to avail himself of the 

 skill and experience of the foreign mechanic as well as 

 the inventive genius of our workmen. 



An entirely different question enters into the discus- 

 sion of the tariff as it affects the lowest grades of breech- 

 loaders, which at present are produced by a class of 

 foreign laborers who exist on wages that the most un- 

 skilled workman in the United States would spurn as the 

 reward of the most menial service. But I refrain from f ur- 

 ther consideration of that side of the question, leaving it 

 for others more interested in that class of goods. 

 New York, Dec. 7. HENRY C. SQUIRES. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In answer to your inquiry, it is our opinion that the 

 existing tariff on firearms should be changed to a specific 

 duty, because it would be easier to adjust and also pre- 

 vent any chance for undervaluation. A specific duty, 

 however, should be varied according to the different sys- 

 tems, making this duty a protective one on these systems 

 only that American manufacturers are producing. By 

 such arrangement the cheaper systems of breechloading 

 and muzzleloading guns would not be placed in price be- 

 yond the reach of many sportsmen, and the- better sys- 

 tems, where the competition exists to-day as between the 

 American and imported makes, placed at such a rate that 

 it would protect the former, but not so excessively as to 

 limit the sale to the class of purchasers who now buy 

 these grades. We suggest the following divisions: 



Hammerless action breechloading guns. 



Top-lever action breechloading guns. 



Side-lever action breechloading guns. 



Lefeaucheux action breechloading guns. 



Single barrel breechloading guns. 



Singlebarrel muzzleloading guns. 



Doublebarrel muzzleloading guns. 



Sporting rifles. 



Kevolvers. 



We are not prepared to state without more considera- 

 tion what the specific duty should be on each of these 

 divisions so as to accomplish the purpose, but that it can 

 be so adjusted there is no doubt. Any duty which would 

 very materially advance the prices of all grades of guns 

 would seriously curtail the sale of them and the sale also 

 of other goods used by sportsmen. 



You do not ask our opinion as to the duty named on 

 sporting breechloading guns in the bill now before the 

 Senate, but we are tempted to say that we do not believe 

 the f raniers of the bill could have fully understood how 

 seriously this duty will discriminate against the poorer 

 class of citizens. ' To place a duty of 300 per cent, on a 

 cheap system of breechloading double gun and only 35 

 per cent, on say a gun costing $100, is not exactly in 

 accordance with the spirit of our age or country. 



We would prefer the existing duty of 35 per cent, ad 

 valorem, rather than have such a change as this. 



Edw. K. Tryon, Jr. & Co. 

 Philadelphia, Dec . 11. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In reply to yours of Dec. 7, will say we are not in favor 

 of any decrease in the duty on guns, but rather of a 

 slight advance, if anything. In our opinion the effect of 

 a large increase in the duties would be to induce many 

 more American manufacturers to engage in the business 

 and also bring foreign makei - s to this country, and the 

 competition of the increased number of makers would 

 have the effect of soon bringing the price of American 

 made guns down just as low as the foreign guns now are, 

 the only advantage being that the money now sent abroad 

 would remain in this country. 



Syracuse Forging and Gun Co. 



(per E. L. Baker, Prest.) 



Syracuse, N. Y„ D eo. 10. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In reply to yours of the 6th. We are not in favor of 

 any change on duties on guns. The present rates work 

 very well, and we believe that always, unless there is an 

 exceedingly good reason for a change, rates of duty 

 should be left alone. There is one item only on which we 

 consider it advisable to suggest a change, and that is, 

 that parts of guns should pay the same duty as guns. 

 At present parts pay 45 per cent, and guns 35 per cent. 



SCHOVERLING, DALY & GALES. 

 New York, Dec. 7. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



We are in receipt of yours of the 6th, asking our view 

 of the present rate of duty on firearms, and the advisa- 

 bility of any change in the present law. In reply we 

 have to say that we have very decided views of the mat- 

 ter; what we have to say, however, has referenoe to the 

 firearm manufacturers rather than to the dealers. At 

 the present time the business is in a deplorable condition, 

 owing in a great measure if not wholly to the importation 

 of the cheap and worthless trash of both guns and revol- 

 vers. This seems to be the opinion and expression of 

 most every one engaged in the business. This state of 

 affairs cannot long continue, or those engaged in the 

 manufacture of firearms will have to employ their capital 

 (what little they have saved) in some other business. 



Now what is the remedy for this ? To our minds there 

 is but one answer, if the firearm industry is to be sus- 

 tained: and that is, to place a specific duty on all arms 



