there are also some sulphides, which are the blendes which we produce from Mexican ore. Mr. UNDERWODD. I notice that the notes show that the importations in 1907 were only 59,000 tons of calamine. Mr. MITCHELL. The rest would be dutiable sulphides. The Government has been collecting a duty of 20 per cent ad valorem on the blendes. The Mineral Industry shows that about 109,000 tons of foreign ore were imported during the year 1907. They get their information from the smelters. Mr. CLARK. It is presumed that the Government gets its information from some authoritative source. Mr. MITCHELL. Let me say that the Kansas City figures show 47,000 tons imported from Mexico and the Government's report 31,000 tons. Mr. CLARK. Somebody is smuggling; that is the plain, unadulterated truth about that, is it not? Mr. MITCHELL. I do not know. The Government is collecting a duty of 20 per cent ad valorem now, and there is a case pending in the United States circuit court of appeals on the carbonates. The CHAIRMAN. The silicate the Government lets in free? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. That makes 290,000 tons that have been imported in the last three years, 40 per cent ore, which is equivalent to about 190,000 tons of our 60 per cent ore, so far as the metallic contents are concerned, and would be about 65 per cent of our 1907 production, which was 297,000 tons of ore in the Joplin district, or the Missouri-Kansas district. Mr. UNDERWOOD. These statistics do not sustain you at all on that proposition. They show the e total imports of calamine for 1907 were 59,438 tons, which came in free. The CHAIRMAN. That is the silicate? Mr. UNDERWOOD. Yes, sir. All the other ore that came in was 92 tons, which came in free, and 22,000 tons that came in paying a 20 per cent duty, which made about 81.000 or 82,000 tons, as shown by the government report. Mr. MITCHELL. I have not had the advantage of looking at the government report. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will ascertain that. Mr. MITCHELL. We have information from the Engineering and Mining Journal and also from the Mineral Industry, and the figures I mentioned are in both those publications. The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Mr. Mitchell, without interruption. Mr. MITCHELL. We are asking a tariff duty of 13 cents a pound on the metallic contents, and that would mean $12 a ton on the 40 per cent ore, or $18 a ton on the 60 per cent ore, and we think that we are justified in asking that tariff duty for the simple reason that it just about represents the difference in labor cost of production in Mexico and in the Joplin district. The gentleman who will follow me has had a great deal of experience in examining mines and going through the mines of Mexico, and he will be able to give you the actual cost of producing ore. We have reports here from three mines in Mexico, in the State of Chihuahua. The cost of mining and picking in one mine is $3.75 a ton; the cost of hauling it to the railroad station is $1.50 a ton; the total cost f. o. b. cars is $5.25 a ton. Now, taking those three mines, the cost varies somewhat at times, but the average is $4.91 a ton. Add the freight to the Kansas smelter and the average cost of those three mines is $11.82 a ton-the cost at the Kansas smelter. In fact. Mr. Cockerill, the smelter of Kansas, says that when the St. Louis price of spelter is $5 he can buy 40 per cent Mexican ore at his smelter for $18 a ton; that is, 40 per cent ore. That is $27 a ton of 60 per cent ore, because it takes a ton and a half of 40 per cent ore to equal a ton of 60 per cent ore. That would reduce the price that we would be bound to take for our ore to $27 a ton if these immense deposits of Mexican ore come in and flood our market and put us out of business. Now, the cost of producing a ton of our ore with the price of wages which we pay in the Joplin district, taking the reports from ten of the mines in the Joplin district, including the labor cost, is $17.02 per ton of concentrates and $11.60 for powder and supplies, making a total of $28.62. Now, in addition to that we charge off what we term amortization for depreciation to plant. for working out the mine, and royalty, and all our mines are worked on the royalty basis. That makes a conservative total cost of producing a ton of concentrates $37.78. Now, the ease with which Mexican mines are worked is shown by some exhibits in the brief which I will submit, and they come from smelters. I will read merely from one. He says: The ore occurs in solid veins or deposits and is blasted out. Any of the adjoining rock that may be by accident 'zisted out with the ore is sorted out by hand; afterwards the ore is broken a 1 ito a convenient size with hammers for transportation to the raisoad, when it is loaded in cars for shipment. In other words, it is a mere railroading proposition. Our proposition in the Joplin district and in the Kansas district is a mining proposition. We are mining to-day at a depth of 225 to 300 feet. It is necessary for us to build extensive plants. The records show that out of 92 mines that have been opened and developed the average cost for development and construction of the mill is over $37,000. The life of a mine is necessarily somewhat short, because after you mine for three or four years the ore body is cut out and cut away from your mill, and you either have to remove the mill or the expense of transporting the ore underground or overhead becomes so great that it does not pay to work a mine in that way. So we think, with the increased cost we have, the difficulties of our mining, and the difference in wages, that we are entitled to one cent and a half duty upon the metallic contents of our ore. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Please explain the 14 cents on the metallic con tents. Mr. MITCHELL. One and one-half cents duty on metallic contents means that the zinc ore which runs 40 per cent metallic contents shall pay 13 cents duty on each pound-that is, 40 per cent of 2.000 pounds, 800 pounds, and that would be $12 per ton on the metallic contents of the ore. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Or if it ran 60 per cent you increase it in proportion? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir; $18. Mr. UNDERWOOD. You are engaged in the business in Missouri? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. UNDERWOOD. What company do you represent? Mr. UNDERWOOD. You just appear as an individual? Mr. UNDERWOOD. Do you know of any companies that are represented or are you interested in any of them? Mr. MITCHELL. No, sir. I know of companies there which are operating more than one mine. I know of one company that is operating four mines, and I know of another company that is operating three mines. Mr. UNDERWOOD. How much capital have you invested in your enterprise? Mr. MITCHELL. Myself? Mr. UNDERWOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. MITCHELL. I am interested in one mine, and the total investment for the development of the mine and the building of the mill was about $65,000. Mr. UNDERWOOD. What is the output of that mine? Mr. MITCHELL. That one mine? Mr. UNDERWOOD. Yes, sir; the one in which there has been invested $65,000. Mr. MITCHELL. Two hundred and fifty tons of ore are hoisted from the ground a day and that ore runs about 5 per cent concentrates, making about $10 a day, $60 a week, that the mine will produce. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Sixty dollars a week is the production of the property which represents an investment of $65,000? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. UNDERWOOD. In 1907 what profits did you make in that business? I ask you about the year 1907 because that was the year before the panic. Mr. MITCHELL. That property was not running until the early part of 1908, it is a new property. Mr. UNDERWOOD. It is not one on which you could base an estimate? Mr. MITCHELL. No, sir. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Do you know of any property that you could give the detailed facts in reference to that was in operation in 1907? Mr. MITCHELL. I know one property where the investment represented. I think, about $100,000, and I think they made about sixtysome thousand dollars profit in one year, the operations in the early part of 1907, but they have cut their ground out and they have had to move their mill. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Then, it is largely a question of the amount of raw material that is adjacent to the property as to whether it is a success? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. They are large fee owners. Mr. UNDERWOOD. You have invested $65,000 without a duty on this ore and that would look like you thought the business would be profitable without a protective tariff? Mr. MITCHELL. No; we expected to get a protective tariff. Mr. UNDERWOOD. When did you start to make this investment? Mr. MITCHELL. We started to develop the ground in 1904. It was a difficult proposition to open up on account of the water. Mr. UNDERWOOD. In 1904 there was no indication of a tariff bill being written? Mr. MITCHELL. But in 1904 there were no importations of Mexican ore either. It was just one of those propositions where you begin to invest your money and you have to keep going along. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Do you know what the total production of this class of ore is in the United States? Mr. MITCHELL. The Joplin district, the Missouri-Kansas district, produced last year about 290,000 tons. We produce about 70 per cent of the spelter of the country. Mr. UNDERWOOD. So the Mexican ore comes in competition with all the 290,000 tons? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Is it produced anywhere else in the country except at the mines you refer to? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes. sir; it is produced in Wisconsin. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Do you know what the production is in Wisconsin? Mr. MITCHELL. No, sir. Mr. UNDERWOOD. You can not state the total production in the United States? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. The Mineral Industry says that the production amounts to about 902,000 tons, including the New Jersey production, and the New Jersey production is not used for smelter purposes. Most of it is turned into zinc oxide. The New Jersey production was 368,000 tons in 1907. For the year 1906 the total production of this country was 905,000 tons, and the New Jersey production was 404,000. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Exclusive of the New Jersey production, then, the importations as shown by the government statistics are less than one-tenth of the total production. Under the circumstances, if we put the duty on that you desire, would not that be a prohibitive duty instead of a protective duty? Mr. MITCHELL. No; because if the price of spelter went up ore could still be imported from Mexico and pay the duty. Mr. UNDERWOOD. But on the present basis it would be practically prohibitive, because the Mexican ore could not come in and compete with you on the present basis? Mr. MITCHELL. Possibly not. Mr. UNDERWOOD. You say the same rate of duty is on the lead ores? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Suppose we skip lead? I say that, because the iron and steel people have had a promise that they would be heard first this morning. Mr. UNDERWOOD. I do not care to interrogate the gentleman about lead ores, but he is asking for a duty on zinc ore, and I think it is perfectly fair for this committee to consider the relative positions of the two. As to whether we ought to take the duty off of lead or give it to zinc, is another question; but if the two occupy the same field it seems to me we should put them both on a fair basis. I would like to get a comparison of the value and the cost of the production of lead and zinc in the same field. Mr. MITCHELL. We mine lead and zinc ore out of the same mine. Lead comes out in the ore along with the zinc. The separation of the two minerals is merely a commercial process. You take the lead off the jig, which is the separator, which takes the gangue and rock out of the crude mineral. You take the lead off first and you take the zine off on the subsequent movement of the jig. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Do you know of any reason why there was a differentiation between the two ores in the former bill, why they should not be on the same basis? Mr. MITCHELL. I know the operators of the Missouri-Kansas district did not come here during the hearings on the former bill and ask for any tariff on zinc ore. Mr. UNDERWOOD. What is the cost of the production of lead ores? Is it any greater abroad than the zinc ores? Mr. MITCHELL. I do not know what the cost of producing lead ore is abroad. Mr. UNDERWOOD. Is the expense of lead ores greater than zinc ores? Mr. MITCHELL. I do not know that. Mr. UNDERWOOD. If you can answer those questions and supply those facts when you file your brief I shall be glad. Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir; very well. Mr. CLARK. Are you an operator yourself? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. CLARK. Are you a lawyer ? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. Mr. CLARK. Do you practice law? Mr. MITCHELL. No, sir. Mr. CLARK. How long have you been down in the Joplin district? Mr. MITCHELL. About four and a half years. Mr. CLARK. Where did you come from? Mr. MITCHELL. From Pittsburg. Mr. CLARK. This whole fuss is a contest between the zinc miners and the owners of the smelter mills, is it not? Mr. MITCHELL. I do not know that it is a contest between the zinc miners and the owners of smelter mills. It is a contest for us to get a tariff on zinc ore that will give us a reasonable profit. Mr. CLARK. I asked you a very simple question. Is not this a contest between the smelter mills and the zinc miners? Mr. MITCHELL. No, sir. There are some smelters who are in favor of this tariff upon this ore. Mr. CLARK. If the Government is only getting the small revenue from zinc that Mr. Underwood indicated and this proposition of yours would shut off some revenue, then the Government would not be getting the revenue from that source to fill up the deficiency? Mr. MITCHELL. According to our reports the revenue to the Government amounts to very little. Mr. CLARK. I asked you another very simple question. That is, if this proposition of yours would shut off any of the revenue that the Government gets, then you are not helping to fill up this deficiency in the Treasury ? Mr. MITCHELL. Possibly not. Mr. CLARK. Is anybody in the Joplin district making any money out of zinc? Mr. MITCHELL. Not very much at the present time. They made money the first part of last year and the preceding years. |