thought is also suggested in articles I saw in the papers some weeks ago, and in Washington reports said to have leaked out in regard to the plans of the President's planning committee, where the same idea was carried out-such business as is unnecessary and inefficiently operated, of course. Who is going to state what business is to be destroyed and what business shall graciously be permitted to continue? Obviously it is not humanly possible for the President to personally investigate all the ramifications of these industrial questions. There will be as the ultimate head to this structure a superdirector, and superadministrator. Will such a man be a superman and one who, having such vast powers, can keep his feet on the ground? At this point I wish to merely refer to the fourteenth amendment, providing that no person shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Much has been said of the necessity of increasing our exports, even at the sacrifice of domestic manufactures. Again the idea is put forward that the "new deal" in foreign trade means that the imports of commodities must balance the exports of commodities. This is a challenge to experience in the old order. It is planned economy with a vengeance. If it means anything, it means the Government will regulate the total amount of our imports, control the tariffs and the power to help or hinder exports. Without this power I presume the idea of establishing a national balance between imports and exports cannot be realized. I confess, however, to lack of understanding of why an actual balance of trade is desirable. The fact remains that the United States maintains her position as the largest in export trade and second in import trade. Much has been said of the loss of trade, when, as a matter of fact, the foreign trade has held up better than the domestic trade. While I am using data for 1932, I am sure you will not find very great variations in 1933. By taking the car loadings as indicated or of the volume of our domestic business, we find they declined 25.3 percent below 1931, as compared with the quantity decline in exports of 22.4 percent, and imports, 19.4 percent. Exports in 1932 amounted to $1,364,000,000, while the imports totaled $1,164,000,000. Exports for 1933 were $1,674,893,000, and the imports $1,449,559,000, a gain in exports of $310,983,000, and a gain in imports of $285,559,000. Sixty-seven percent of the imports came in free of duty. The dutiable goods declined 36.8 percent, while the free goods declined 36 percent. Now, if it is the tariff that kept imported goods out of the country, how can it be explained that the free goods declined in like proportion with the dutiable goods? If it is the tariff that is keeping foreign goods out of the country, the foreign manufacturer or his representative here in the United States has his remedy. If he can show in any particular instance where the improper rates of duty is having this effect, it can be corrected by the Tariff Commission. The Tariff Commission is empowered in matters of that kind. Under 336 is this provision: * * * upon In order to put into force and effect the policy of Congress request of the President, resolution of both houses of Congress upon its own motion, when in the judgment of the Commisson there is good and sufficient reason therefor, upon application of any interested party— Mr. COOPER (interposing). Will you yield for a question there? Mr. DOWSING. Yes, sir. Mr. COOPER. I understood you to say the Tariff Commission could affect the rates of duty? Mr. DOWSING. The Tariff Commission can, under these powers, upon complaint properly filed with it and the case proven after investigation, can recommend to the President to either increase or reduce those rates. Mr. COOPER. And in the final analysis the President is the one who has the authority to do it? Mr. DOWSING. After an investigation of the cost has been entered into. Mr. COOPER. And in the bill here the President is given the authority, as provided in the bill. That is what you are complaining about, is it not? Mr. DowSING. No, sir; I am complaining about the pending bill giving him that authority without providing for a day in court. Mr. COCHRAN. Does the pending bill give any manufacturer or interested party a hearing before the President? Mr. DowSING. Absolutely not, so far as I can read it. Mr. HILL. What is the provision in there that does that? Mr. DOWSING. Any interested party may appear before the Commission. Mr. HILL. Does it say anything about a hearing? He can make application to have the duty raised or lowered. They do not have to give him a hearing. Mr. DOWSING. After investigation by the Tariff Commission, they shall recommend to the President of the United States. Mr. COOPER. And 336 does not provide for any hearing before the President at all, does it? Mr. DowSING. Oh, no. Neither does this bill provide for any hearing before the President or anybody else. Mr. COOPER. So there is no difference on that point. Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Dowsing, I understood you to say you represented the potters? Mr. DowSING. United States potters; yes, sir. Mr. TREADWAY. Is that rated as an efficient industry in this country? Mr. DOWSING. Yes, sir. Mr. TREADWAY. Then I do not see how you would be affected by the operation of this bill. We have been told here time and again that people that were efficient are not going to be bothered at all; it is only these other chaps who are not efficient. Another thing, I believe you are a pretty large industry. I thought you ran into pretty big figures there pretty large industries. Mr. DowSING. A pretty large industry; yes. Mr. TREADWAY. We have been told again that it is the small industries that are liable to be inefficient. In other words, are you not rather appearing as a good citizen to make a protest in behalf of your fellow man against this kind of legislation? Mr. DowSING. What I am really concerned in in the pottery industry, as well as all industries, that embody 40 or 50 or 60 manufacturing concerns owned by different people who subscribe to the association, are members of the association, that somebody should arbitrarily come along and say that that industry or that factory is inefficiently managed. Who is going to decide that? Mr. TREADWAY. Well, the language in the bill here provides that differences of rates or something, or for other reasons. You have not found out what those other reasons are, have you? Mr. DOWSING. Not yet. Mr. HILL. Well, it is a reason, though. It is not arbitrary. You have to assume that in order to make the basis for your statement. Mr. DOWSING. What the reasons are, what the reasons may be, we do not know, of course. We do not know what is in the minds of the moving powers behind this bill. Mr. WOODRUFF. Then the gentleman has not yet been informed by the powers that be-and when I say "powers that be" I speak of those powers which probably will have most to do with the administration of this bill when it becomes a law-you have not been informed yet as to whether the pottery industry has been rated an efficient industry by these powers or not? Mr. DowSING. Not as yet. Mr. WOODRUFF. While you are satisfied that the industry you represent is an efficient industry, just as the domestic sugar producers of this country believe they have an efficient industry, yet you do not know but what the opinion of the powers that be will be the same regarding your industry as it is regarding the domestic sugar industry? Mr. DOWSING. Exactly. Mr. WOODRUFF. In other words, you may expect, if you do happen to be among those that are rated inefficient, to be put into the process of obliteration just as rapidly as possible after this bill becomes a law? Mr. DOWSING. The possibilities are there. Mr. COOPER. Mr. Chairman, when I interrupted the witness he was speaking about the Tariff Commission. Mr. DOWSING. Yes, sir. Mr. COOPER. Has your line of industry had occasion to make application to the Tariff Commission? Mr. DOWSING. We have. We have a protest that has been pending before the Tariff Commission for the past 14 months. Mr. COOPER. You have a protest pending now? Mr. DOWSING. Yes, sir. Mr. COOPER. Pending before the Tariff Commission that has been there for 14 months? Mr. DowSING. Yes, sir. Mr. COOPER. And action has not been taken on it? Mr. DOWSING. Not yet. Mr. COOPER. Do you understand that the real purpose of this bill is to give speedy action and treatment to matters where adjustment should be made? Mr. DOWSING. I do. That is one of the purposes I am going to touch on. Mr. COOPER. Do you not think, in the light of your experience with the Tariff Commission, realizing that they have to enter into an investigation of this question of cost of production and so forth, that the present system is cumbersome and requires a very long period of time to reach a finding? Mr. DOWSING. That is true. Mr. COOPER. Then do you not think the method suggested here would be an improvement on that condition? Mr. DOWSING. But, Mr. Congressman, I do not see where any method is suggested at all. Mr. COOPER. I simply invite your attention to the provisions of the bill itself, which provides that the President of the United States when he finds are you willing to allow the President of the United States to reach a finding on a question affecting your interests? Mr. DOWSING. If he can make his finding and come to his conclusions after listening to our side of the story, undoubtedly. Mr. COOPER. Do you have any doubt that he will regard your interests in the matter, or do you apprehend that he will disregard your interests in the matter? Mr. DOWSING. The President himself is not and cannot handle these matters personally. We understand that. He has got to delegate it to some bureau. If it is continued in the hands of the Tariff Commission with their expert knowledge and the experts they have, doing everything in their power to further these investigations, we may get somewhere eventually, but we do not know what bureau, who arbitrarily will handle these things. There is nothing there to say. Mr. COOPER. I assume you are thoroughly familiar with every provision of the bill, or you would not be here criticizing it. Is that assumption correct? Mr. DOWSING. I have read it over very carefully. Mr. COOPER. Do you find any provision in that bill under which these matters are to be referred to a board or commission or some institution of the type of which you speak? Mr. DOWSING. There is no provision that they are to be referred; no, sir. Mr. COOPER. The provision of the bill is that the President shall find. That is the provision of the bill, is it not? Mr. DOWSING. Shall find; yes. Mr. COOPER. Now, then, you are not willing to trust the President to make that finding? Is that correct? Mr. DowSING. No; it is not a question of trusting the President. We want to know to whom it is going to be referred. Mr. COOPER. The bill provides that the President shall find, and that is what you are complaining about. Mr. DOWSING. Without having our day in court. Mr. COOPER. Well, is there anything in the bill that says you will not have your day in court? Mr. DowSING. That is it. If the bill was express and did say that we would have an opportunity, but in arranging treaties the State Department may have their own conferences on these matters and we will know nothing about it. Mr. COOPER. Do you think the President of the United States is going to disregard the interests of you industry or any other industry in this country in negotiating trade agreements? Mr. DOWSING. We have tried to see Mr. COOPER (interposing). Just answer that question. Do you think so? Mr. DowSING. If it was brought to his attention, no, but it is not going to be brought to his attention. Mr. COOPER. You have full opportuuity to bring matters to the attention of the President of the United States. Mr. DOWSING. We have not been able to up to date. I have filed three petitions myself and endeavored to get an audience at the White House. We have filed petitions with the Treasury Department and got them before the N.R.A. under section 3, but we have gotten nowhere. Mr. COOPER. Have you been denied the right to present matters to the President of the United States that were of importance and interest to your industry? Mr. DOWSING. I have been denied the right in this respect, that I have not been accorded an interview. I have gone to the White House office and conferred with both Mr. Howe and Mr. McIntyre. I wanted to bring to the President's attention these matters by some of our manufacturers who are here in Washington. Just day before yesterday I had a number of them here on the codes, and we endeavored to obtain an audience with the President through a Senator, but we could not do it. Mr. COOPER. That is a different matter. We are not talking about codes here. Mr. DOWSING. I know. I say these men were here on code business, and while here I endeavored to obtain an audience to discuss this tariff measure with the President. Mr. COOPER. And you had no previous appointment? Mr. DOWSING. No. Mr. COOPER. And you realize, of course, what a busy man the President of the United States is? Mr. DOWSING. Unquestionably. But that is in answer to your question. Mr. COOPER. And you come along here without any previous appointment and now you are criticizing because you were not given an audience with the President. Mr. DOWSING. No, you asked the question whether I had been denied an audience, and I said I had been. Mr. COOPER. Do you think that is a fair way to seek an audience with the President? Mr. DOWSING. It was done through a Senator. I do not know of any better way to approach the situation. Mr. COOPER. You think people should come on without any previous arrangement or notice and then expect to walk right in for a conference with the President? Mr. DOWSING. I did not say that. Mr. COOPER. Yes, you did say that. Mr. BACHARACH. No, he did not. I beg your pardon. Mr. DOWSING. And we have corresponded with the White House week after week to obtain an interview. Mr. COOPER. Do you have any information indicating that your correspondence is not given proper consideration? Mr. DOWSING. I got the usual answer. That is all, signed by Mr. Howe and Mr. McIntyre. Mr. COOPER. Probably you were entitled to the usual answer. Mr. BACHARACH. I would like to ask Mr. O'Brien, Chairman of the Tariff Commission, how active the Commission has been in the last 8 or 9 months regarding tariff matters. Mr. O'BRIEN. The last 15 months has not been a period of great Tariff Commission activity in the transition from one administration |