November, 1929
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
plant equipped for the purpose, there is little likelihood that the local retail merchant can fool the public. But to us the incident is intriguing, for again we have an illustration of the impossible not only being accomplished but a t a price far below expectations and with a success that certainly could not have been foreseen.
Is This Industry Wanted? Tu’ DIFFERENT lands different methods for the encourIdeveloped. agement and the upbuilding of an industry have been In the United States we have generally applied the protection of our patent system plus that of the tariff whenever it was felt that an industry was worth having. Theoretically, a t least, that is one of the principal uses of the tariff,the other being to provide necessary revenue for government operation. Our t a r 8 is supposed to be a protective and not a bargaining tariff, nor one used as a threat to win home point in international discussion. If we decide that me want a particular industry, it is logical to protect it, and the discussion then centers about the question of how extensive this protection should be. The industry we have in mind is that manufacturing calcium carbide which, as is well known to our readers, is an important chemical raw material and should now be so considered, rather than exclusively as a finished product. Xo one appeared before the committee formed to hear complaints and suggestions relative to the tariff to request any change in the protection of one cent per pound enjoyed since the Fordney-NcCumber bill of 1922. For some unexplained reason the Senate Finance Committee recommended a reduction to one-half cent per pound, notwithstanding that the House bill preserved the old rate. If the rate is cut, will carbide continue to be manufactured in the United States? Frankly, this appears doubtful, if you are very optimistic, and the answer must be “no,’ if all facts are considered. The annual production in the United States approximates 225,000 tons, valued a t 820,000,000, and is produced by five manufacturers with plants in Michigan, New York, Iowa, Kest Virginia, Virginia, Minnesota, and Alabama. The competing foreign countries are Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Albania. The largest American manufacturer also owns plants in Norway and Canada and has a capacity in Norway alone great enough to produce all the carbide required in the United States. Other American manufacturers also own large plants in Canada. It is well known that wages paid to foreign labor, whether it be unskilled, skilled, or technical, are considerably below the American scale, while the power cost in Canada is about one-half that in the United States and in Norway but one-fourth our rates. Norwegian power in almost unlimited quantities is still available on deep water a t $6 per horsepower-year and in one case this low rate actually included a going carbide plant. Contrast with this the costs for hydroelectric power on new contracts in this country, which are from $30 to $35, and remember that one horsepower-year is required to produce two tons of carbide, and the answer is plain. Even old unexpired contracts a t $20 per horsepower-year put us a t a great disadvantage in the manufacture of a product which, in so far as production costs are concerned, is so largely power and labor, ’ If we reckon costs per ton of carbide, including the items of electric power, coke, lime, electrodes, labor, shipping drums, plant upkeep, and management, we arrive a t approximately $58 per ton for American. as against $29.50 for
997
European, costs. This is roughly 1.33 ceiits per pound, and we think conclusively indicates that a tariff of one cent per pound is necessary if the industry is to be saved. If it is not afforded this protection, obviously our carbide can be imported by American manufacturers from their plants abroad to a greater advantage, but a payroll of some $4,000,000 annually and the other millions expended for raw materials will be lost to us and spent elsewhere. When the present rate of duty was first proposed and granted in 1922, those who opposed it predicted substantial increases in the prices of carbide to American consumers. In 1922 carbide was selling a t $112 per ton. Under the t a r 8 the price has steadily declined until today it is sold at about $90 per ton. These facts make it clear that in this case, by the reasonable protection of the industry, men have been employed, families have been supported, and communities have been benefited, and a t the same time the consumer has met with fair treatment. When the Senate on October 23 came to vote on this item in the report of the Finance Committee, the debate was extensive and spirited. The vote retains the duty of one cent per pound as recommended by the House, but Senator King gave notice that he would ask for another vote when the bill as amended comes before the Senate for final action. The situation therefore remains in doubt as this is written. We know of no better example of the proper employment of the American tariff system. We believe it to be in the general interest that it be retained and that, since it is a chemical industry, our readers should exercise their influence in seeing that justice is done and the old rate maintained.
Edwin E. Slosson E FIRST met Edwin E. Slosson in those days more than a decade ago when a small group was devoting itself to laying the foundations of what has become the A. C. S. News Service. Doctor Slosson was then the literary editor of The Independent, and he sat in on these discussions, which centered on the task of how to persuade the daily press to put aside the temptation to print only the sensational in science and to begin the constructive work of interesting the general public in what chemistry means to it. We were also interested in the formation of Science Service, of which Doctor Slosson was director from its inception until his death on October 15, and in this capacity had the privilege of coming into frequent contact with him, of helping in any way, and of developing an acquaintance into an abiding friendship. Doctor Slosson had an amazing fund of information. He was a student and a scholar, and showed well the advantage of wide reading and many interesting contacts. His was a real culture, coupled with an amiable disposition and an unusual sense of humor, that made him welcome everywhere. Once called upon by us without notice to speak a t an important gathering, his extemporaneous talk saved the occasion from being drab and uninteresting. Small wonder that the demands upon his time were far in excess of what it was physically possible for him to do and that his fees and royalties formed a substantial part of the income of Science Service, founded to disseminate in non-technical language facts touching all the natural sciences. The name of Slosson is not associated with any fundamental chemical reaction, and no element has been named for him. He made no great discovery in science, but he-did discover something more rare-how to interest those without scientific training in the facts and accomplishments of science. This he did as no contemporary American has been able to do, and his activity greatly advanced our cause.
