Mr. COBB. Not if you set five Members of Congress to work on that proposition.

Mr. FORDNEY. How about 19 Members?

Mr. COBB (continuing). With the belief that it was their life work, and with the provision that they should engage in no other business, and do nothing else, and keep them at it from now until the end of their lives, I believe that the chances are that any five members of this committee would make a perfectly satisfactory tariff board.

Mr. FORDNEY. That is not possible for Congress to do-to create a board and appoint men as life members.

Mr. COBB. That is the reason we do not think it is practical to produce the results by a committee of Congress.

Mr. FORDNEY. I say, you can not create a tariff commission and give them a life tenure. Nothing can be done by this Congress that can not be undone by the next Congress.

Mr. COBB. When I say "life tenure I mean a tenure of years. What is the provision with regard to our courts? Certainly the judges of the Supreme Court, or of our circuit courts are appointed for life.

Mr. FORDNEY. They are provided for by the Constitution.

Mr. COBB. The question whether it is for life or for a long tenure is not important, in my opinion, provided the tenure is long enough so that a majority of the members of that commission are at all times removed from the question of reappointment. That is to say, so that the question of reappointment is so far removed as not to be a factor in the situation. If you put a man at piece of work, and he feels that that is his life work, he is in a different position and the same man is a different man from what he is if he takes it up for three months.

Mr. FORDNEY. But Congress is not given the power to do that, Mr. Cobb-to create a board to exist for a long time.

Mr. CоBв. What is the basis of the Interstate Commerce Commission, for instance?

Mr. FORDNEY. I do not know enough about it to state intelligently. Mr. DALZELL. They are appointed for a term?

Mr. COBB. They are appointed for a term of years, and for a long period.

Mr. HILL. And the terms do not expire at the same time.

Mr. LONGWORTH. It is almost the same provision as that carried by the Good bill, is it not?

Mr. DALZELL. This bill provides for a term of six years.

Mr. COBB. Yes.

Mr. HILL. I would like to ask you a question. Have you ever been engaged in manufacture?

Mr. COBB. Yes.

Mr. HILL. In what line?

Mr. COBB. I have been engaged in woolen and in cotton.

Mr. HILL. Do you think there would be-

Mr. COBB. I am not engaged now, but I have been.

Mr. HILL. Do you think there would be any difficulty in a tariff board getting complete and accurate information from the manufacturers of, say, Massachusetts, for instance- as you come from Massachusetts and do you think there would be any objection on their part to throwing open their books fully and completely to the investigation of the tariff board?

Mr. COBB. Absolutely none; and I believe to-day that the sentiment has been already created to an extent that has led the manufacturers of this country to believe that this is the way to get the best results. I believe that they are to-day willing, and I believe that as time goes on they will be more and more willing. For instance, I was talking with Prof. Emery the other day about some work he has been doing-I think it was in connection with the pulp schedule and he told me that the producers of over 90 per cent of the pulp paper produced in the country had cordially received their requests for information and had taken it up with them in a perfectly friendly and absolutely open way, and that the neglect and refusals to come forward in that way had amounted to much less than 10 per cent. As I have said in my opening, I believe the success of this thing is purely a question of the sentiment back of it, and that the business men of this country think that the general sentiment would absolutely control the securing of satisfactory results.

Mr. HILL. I understand, in a general way, your idea is this: That the policy of this country is a political question, as to whether it shall be protective or revenue or free trade, and that the administration of it and that the gathering of statistics in regard to it can be made a purely nonpolitical matter?

Mr. COBB. That is my belief, absolutely; that that information, produced and made a matter of general knowledge by a tariff commission, will tend to place the tariff question in such a situation that the country can pass on the main fundamental question with confidence that its verdict will be carried out as the mandate of the country.

Mr. FORDNEY. Do you not think the present tariff board could get that information?

Mr. COBB. I think they are getting it.

Mr. FORDNEY. I do. Then why change it and put a tariff commission in ?

Mr. COBB. Because in perfecting the present Tariff Board into a permanent tariff commission our idea is that we are building to-day a permanent tariff-making system, and it is my belief that it is going to take time to get the system perfected. It can not be done in a day. Take, for instance, in the present heated condition of feeling in the country, it probably will be very difficult for that Tariff Board to do to-day the work which we hope in time it will do. If the system gets to working in proper shape in five years, it will be as soon as we can possibly expect. For instance, the agitation of the tariff question is to-day in rather an acute state. Until that acute situation is eliminated the real permanent work of this tariff commission can not be fully felt, and the greatest advantages derived from it. That is to say, we are looking not for to-day, not for to-morrow, not merely for changes and adjustments of the present bill, but for the creation of a lasting and a permanent system of applying a power which we feel is of the utmost importance and of the most vital importance to the business interests and welfare of the whole country, so that it shall be continuously worked out.

Mr. FORDNEY. Did you follow the testimony that was given before this committee two years ago in their preparation of their tariff bill; and if so, do you not believe that they got quite valuable information? Mr. COBB. Very.

Mr. FORDNEY. Just as valuable as it was possible to obtain anywhere?

Mr. COBB. I do not think it was as valuable as it was possible to obtain. I think that much more valuable testimony can be acquired if it is done under this system than under the system which was followed then.

Mr. FORDNEY. Mr. Cobb, from my recollection the men who favored free trade or lower tariff came here and advocated that very thing and the protectionists otherwise. Do you not think that that will continue just as long as time lasts?

Mr. COBB. Do you mean that they advocated a tariff commission ? Mr. FORDNEY. No; that they advocated the revision of the tariff. The free traders came and wanted lower rates, and the protectionists came and did not want lower rates.

Mr. COBB. You understand that we do not stand for lower rates, for higher rates, or for any question of rates. Let that be decided by the country. It is merely a question of policy.

Mr. FORDNEY. The country did decide it.

Mr. COBB. We assume to-day that the Republican party stands for a fair and reasonable tariff, with no execssive duties and no special privileges.

Mr. FORDNEY. That is their platform.

Mr. COBB. If that is the platform, and if the bill passed measures up to that platform, this tariff commission will be a vindicationMr. FORDNEY. Do you not think the Payne tariff bill does measure up to that condition?

Mr. CоBB. Not perfectly.

Mr. FORDNEY. In what schedule, in what respect does it not?

Mr. COBB. I would prefer not to answer that question, because you see, gentlemen, I represent 100 different boards of trade with every degree of feeling on the tariff question and of both political parties. Now, my position is such that it is not proper for me to discuss the question of schedules. I did say this morning that I thought the woolen schedule was made on a different measure of protection, a different economic theory from the leather schedule, but without suggestion as to which was the better or which was the wiser. think there are differences of that sort in the Payne bill.

I

Mr. LONGWORTH. Why should it make any difference whether a member of this proposed commission favored the Payne law or was opposed to it, so far as concerns his ability to find out facts which might be of use to future Congresses, either in the revision of all the schedules or of one separate schedule?

Mr. COBB. It should make absolutely no difference. There is no reason why it should.

Mr. LONGWORTH. In other words, the mental bias of any member of the commission does not make any difference as to his final ascertainment of the facts. It is not a question of his drawing a conclusion from those facts?

Mr. COBB. No, sir; none whatever. It is his duty to merely ascertain the facts.

Mr. FORDNEY. It has been stated, and I am not sure by whom, that if this commission is created, it was not proposed to have them make recommendations, but to submit information without recommendations.

Mr. COBB. Yes, sir.

Mr. FORDNEY. Now, as an illustration, if you put my beloved friend, Hon. Champ Clark, on that commission, and any Member on this side of the House on that commission, they are men of decided opposite views on the tariff question, yet they will both obtain reliable information and submit facts that will not differ. But if you ask an opinion, you will get opposite opinions from the two men. Is not that true?

Mr. COBB. Yes, sir.

Mr. FORDNEY. So that if you create a tariff commission and give it any more authority or power than the present Tariff Board has to-day (which would be to recommend), you are bound to have a partisan board, are you not?

Mr. COBB. We are opposed to a board which has the power to recommend.

Mr. FORDNEY. Then you do not propose, if a commission is created, to give them any further power than the present Tariff Board has now. They have all the power and authority and the money back of them to obtain all the information obtainable in the country, and submit it to the President without recommendation to Congress; and if you do not empower the commission to make recommendations, they could absolutely do nothing more than the present board has power to do now. Is not that right?

Mr. COBB. That is true to-day. What will be the condition to-morrow?

Mr. FORDNEY. You can only do that by changing your Constitution, and giving them power to make a tariff law.

Mr. COBB. No, sir. I say the statement that the tariff board has to-day substantially the powers and is doing substantially all the work that we want done by a tariff commission is a true statement. Mr. HILL. They have no powers to compel testimony, have they? Mr. COBB. They have no power to compel testimony; and that is a point that I want to speak of in going into the question of the powers of which I have a memorandum of here. But the point is, who knows what the position of our next President will be?

Mr. FORDNEY. Nobody does know, and no one can control by legislation or otherwise the actions of our future Presidents or the actions of future Congresses. This Congress has no power to control the power of the next Congress absolutely none. If they did, they would put the Democrats out and put a majority of Republicans in.

Mr. COBB. That is not the point. The point is most clearly shown in the difference between the Interstate Commerce Commission and the present tariff board.

Mr. FORDNEY. If you want to make a court of your tariff commission, then you can give them all kinds of power; but if you can not give them all kinds of power they can do no more, in my opinion, than the present tariff board can do.

Mr. COBB. Our request is that the present Tariff Board be made permanent, be independent of the Executive, and have its powers somewhat broadened. Those are practically the suggestions.

Mr. BOUTELL. Have you finished, Mr. Fordney?

Mr. BOUTELL. Right in that connection, Mr. Cobb, section 3 of the bill we have under consideration vests in the commission quite full power. Beginning on page 3, it reads:

That it shall be the duty of said commission to investigate the cost of production of all articles covered by the tariff with special reference to the prices paid for foreign labor, etc.

Continuing on the fourth page, seventh line:

Together with all other facts which, in the judgment of said commission, will be helpful to Congress in providing equitable rates of duties on any article.

Of course those words in the eighth line, "in the judgment of said commission," have no place in a bill of this sort. There should be no discretion left with the commission as to what they should withhold from Congress, should there, in your opinion?

Mr. COBB. No, sir.

Mr. BOUTELL. The powers and duties in that section 3 are quite full and complete. Reading that in connection with the power vested in them at the bottom of page 6, it seems to me that you are a little mite sanguine about the support which this bill would have, bearing in mind the powers and the duties. At the bottom of page 6, it reads:

Said commission in pursuing its investigations, as above provided, shall have the power to subpoena witnesses, take testimony, administer oaths, and require the production of books and papers for the purpose of the accurate ascertainment of the facts which it shall be the duty of said commission to investigate and report to Congress, as hereinbefore provided.

I have a sort of an idea that some of the men that we were trying to get information out of here two years ago concerning the difference between what it actually cost them to obtain the materials abroad and their final retail price might not be tumbling over themselves in support of these provisions. We had great difficulty, Mr. Cobb, in finding out what I should hope, if we ever have a commission, we could find the connection between the price of certain large lines of staple imports, particularly manufactured goods at St. Gall and Chemnitz, and the retail price asked by the importers of the same article in this country. Do you think they are in favor of those provisions?

Mr. CоCBB. You mean those particular men?

Mr. BOUTELL. That the importers at large will favor such drastic provisions.

Mr. COBB. I can simply say that I think the provision which is contained in the Lenroot bill, which I think is also before you, is a provision which would satisfy more generally and be fully as effective as the provision in the Good bill-that is the provision giving power to summon witnesses and making the penalty that the commission in case of failure shall report to Congress the name of the person so failing. That is to say, setting them up before the country as having refused to give information. That provision, I think, would be entirely adequate and would meet the objection of a great many men who would oppose it in the form of the Good bill.

Mr. BOUTELL. You understand, so far as I am concerned personally, that we can not make those provisions any too sweeping or the penalties any too strong, but I was wondering whether, when you made the statement, that all the people you represented were in favor of this