ing you are making what you call first-class virgin wool cloth, on the one hand, and on the other hand making cloth of first-class virgin wool and first-class shoddy, for any style, type or grade that you may choose to illustrate by; which would cost the more to produce? Mr. WALKER. The one made of all virgin wool? Mr. WINSLOW. Are the facts in general now well enough established to tell the cost of that? Mr. WALKER. The cost of it? Mr. WINSLOW. That they cost more per yard? Mr. WALKER. Most decidedly. If one fabric is an all wool virgin fabric, and another a fabric of virgin wool and shoddy, the same relative fabric-the comparative fabric-the shoddy mixed will be cheaper. You know, there is something here that I do not think anyone understands. You take a cheap fabric and say, "This is virgin wool"; and you then take another kind of fabric, and you say, "This is shoddy," and state that the shoddy fabric is a better fabric than the virgin wool fabric. I agree with that but you should take relative fabrics. When a man goes into a store to buy a suit of clothes, as the opponents of the legislation say, he has the style he wants in his mind. He wants either a rough piece of goods or a smooth piece of goods, or a soft piece of goods of the nature of a flannel. As an example he says he wants a rough piece of goods. The salesman shows him a suit made of 60 per cent virgin wool and 40 per cent shoddy. He says, "What is the price of that?" "$50." He then says, "Now, show me the virgin wool suit." They bring him the virgin wool suit of the same character of fabric. They do not go and bring him a flannel or any other kind of goods but they bring him another piece of rough goods. It is marked, "virgin wool, $70." "Good; I will take the substitute." If it wears him all right, he goes back and gets more of that same kind. It is the same in the flannel or anything else; that applies all the way down the line. The worsteds are out of it. Mr. WINSLOW. I am going to ask you a question which I have here, for the assistance of one of the gentlemen who is not favoring the French bill. My purpose is to compare the manufacturing cost per yard, preferably on any given kind of cloth that you two agree can be compared, one having shoddy in it and the other being virgin wool. Now, my purpose is to get a comparison of the cost of production in the manufacturing. Mr. CLARK. If I understand your question, Colonel, it is this: Suppose you were going to have two cloths, both weighing 16 ounces to the yard, one all virgin wool and the other 60 per cent virgin wool and 40 per cent reworked wool—— Mr. WINSLOW. And the same virgin wool used in each. Mr. CLARK. And the same virgin wool and the same relative quality of reworked wool. Mr. WINSLOW. Yes. Mr. CLARK. The size of the yarn is to be just the same in both fabrics; the number of picks of the filling is to be the same in both fabrics; the number of threads per inch of the warp is to be the same in both fabrics. Your question is, in those fabrics made in precisely the same design and color and everything of that kind Mr. WINSLOW. Yes. Mr. CLARK. Which would be the most costly to manufacture? Mr. WINSLOW. Yes; and how much? Mr. CLARK. The principal difference between the two would be in the cost of the original materials. Mr. WINSLOW. That is what I am asking for, the manufacturing cost. Mr. CLARK. Your question applies to the manufacturing cost? Mr. WALKER. Oh! Mr. WINSLOW. Yes. Mr. CLARK. I think that the fabric with the shoddy in it would cost a trifle more-not very much more, but a little more-for the reason that I do not think the yarn with the shoddy in it would sell as well as the all virgin wool yarn, and therefore you might have to pay the spinner a little higher rate for spinning it. There would not be very much difference in the weaving of the goods. But if there was any difference to the manufacturer in cost, I would say that the one with shoddy in it would cost a trifle more. Mr. WINSLOW. That would take the finishing and everything up to the completed goods? Mr. CLARK. Up to the completed goods. Mr. WINSLOW. That would be offset on the other side by the cost of the goods? Mr. CLARK. No; the manufacturing cost. Mr. WINSLOW. I just wanted to get the manufacturing cost to operate the mills and everything above, beyond the raw material. Do you agree to that, Mr. Walker? Mr. WALKER. I think that is absolutely correct. Mr. WINSLOw. There is no variation? Mr. WALKER. I think there is no doubt about it. Mr. WINSLOW. Assuming that the virgin wool is of the same quality and the cost is the same, what difference would there be in to-day's market between the raw materials in the two instances? Mr. WALKER. It all depends on the grade of shoddy you are referring to and the grade of wool that you are referring to. Mr. WINSLOW. Take the same quality in each case. Mr. WALKER. Take 70 cent wool, $1.40 clean, a pound, and take shoddy, about 30 cents a pound? Mr. WINSLOW. What do you want to compare that with as to shoddy and wool, Mr. Clark? Mr. CLARK. I do not think it makes any difference. You can take whatever proportions you want to. Mr. WINSLOW. Mr. Walker, what do you assume would be your all virgin wool raw material as contrasting with the other? Mr. CLARK. I did not catch that. Mr. WINSLOW. I wanted to find out what it would cost for the raw material Mr. Walker purchased and what it would cost for the one you purchased. Mr. CLARK. You mean that the cloth that Mr. Walker purchases is not a very high grade of wool? Mr. WINSLOW. The very thing you are talking about. You agree that the relative cost of the raw material when in hand would be about the same? Mr. WALKER. Yes. Mr. WINSLOW. Now, I want to know what the difference would be in the cost of the raw material in each case. Mr. WALKER. It depends altogether on the quality of the raw material you select. Mr. WINSLOW. I select the best of shoddy that can be used and the best of all virgin wool that can be used; the best in both cases. Mr. WALKER. That is not fair to Mr. Clark. Mr. CLARK. A fine grade of virgin wool costs to-day in the vicinity of $1.90 a pound, and a high grade of shoddy that would be about the same grade of fiber as that, say like one of those samples I showed you the other day, my recollection of the cost of that is that it was about $1.05. The record is there. So that, if I have quoted that shoddy correctly-and I think I have-you have got a difference of almost 100 per cent in the two values. That is to say, the wool was worth almost double in value what the shoddy was. So that, of course, you have got the difference between what you used, 60 per cent. order to make it easy to figure, suppose the cost to be $2 a pound. You have 60 per cent wool at $2 a pound and 40 per cent of shoddy at $1 a pound, which is 40 cents and $1.20, and there you have a total value of $1.60 for the material in the mixed wool and shoddy as against the total value of $2 for the material in the all virgin wool goods. Mr. WINSLOW. Do you agree to that? Mr. WALKER. If there is such a thing as a $1 shoddy. In Mr. CLARK. That is the shoddy, the best shoddy, I showed the other day. That is $1. Mr. WALKER. Would you mind telling what is the average price of shoddy in the woolen market? Mr. CLARK. In those fabrics there is shoddy that runs up to 75 and 80 cents a pound, any quantity of it. Mr. WALKER. I think it would be interesting to know what is the average price of shoddy in the woolen business to-day. Mr. CLARK. There is no average price. A grade varies so that it would not be any use to speak about average price. Mr. WALKER. Mr. Francis says that it is about 40 cents. Mr. WINSLOW. Do you agree with that, that the average price of that material would be about 40 cents a pound? Mr. CLARK. Not at all. You can use $2 shoddy, and from that it runs all the way down in price. You have got to give the average price of wool as so much if Mr. Walker will agree to an average price. Mr. WALKER. I suggest an average price for wool of 70 cents in the grease, $1.40 cleaned, and then a price of shoddy at 40 cents. Mr. CLARK. I would not agree at all that the average price of wool, cleaned, is $1.40. I think it is materially higher than that. $1.40 would only pay for about one-quarter or three-eighths blood wool, and the bulk of the wool is from $1.85 to $2.10 for domestic wools, and a good deal higher than that on Australians. Mr. WALKER. I will accept Mr. Clark's statement of that, and then take an average of about 40 cents for shoddy in the market. Mr. CLARK. You would not use 40-cent shoddy with $2 wool. It has got to be a very different grade. Mr. WALKER. That is what I was saying. I was trying to give you lower-priced wool. Mr. WINSLOW. You are taking too much time on that. When you get them all made and come to the purchaser of the cloth, what would be the market price of the two cloths? Mr. WALKER. What would be the market price of the two cloths? Mr. WINSLOW. Yes. Mr. WALKER. I do not know. We did not establish any basis on which to figure it. Mr. WINSLOW. That is the reason I wanted to ask you this question. Mr. WALKER. I could not tell you. We have not any costs to figure upon. Mr. WINSLOW. It is easy enough to figure it. I can explain the confusion of the whole thing. Mr. SIMS. Is it not a fact that relatively, compared with other products of the country, the wool-producing industry has been for several years and is now on the decline? Mr. WALKER. No question about it. Mr. SIMS. On the other hand, is it not a fact that there has been during this period a material increase in the use of shoddy? Mr. WALKER. Yes. Mr. SIMS. The tendencies under the present conditions are therefore to further reduce the use of virgin wool and further increase the use of shoddy without legislation? Mr. WALKER. Yes. Mr. SIMS. So that if this committee refuses to pass the French bill or any similar bill to accomplish the same purpose, it must be because the committee is of the opinion that a further reduction in the use of virgin wool and a further increase in the use of shoddy is for the public interest? Mr. WALKER. I should say so. Mr. SIMS. Is not that the natural conclusion to be drawn from such action? Mr. WALKER. There is no doubt that that is the natural conclusion to be drawn from it. Mr. SIMs. And logically, in view of the fact that no one knows just everything that might happen, we therefore not being able to forecast every possible incident growing out of it, ought we not to conclude not to pass any legislation at all? Is that not a fair deduction? Mr. WALKER. It would seem so. Mr. CLARK. I want to speak about these questions which Mr. Sims has just been asking about, as to the production of wool and the production of shoddy. We have figures showing the production of wool in this country, and they do show that in the last two years in Washington the production has increased 14,000,000 pounds per year. Mr. SIMs. For the last two years? Mr. CLARK. Yes. Mr. SIMS. Take it for a period of 20 years. The last two years we have had war, and practically war conditions now, so far as wool fabric is concerned and everything else. Mr. CLARK. Yes. Mr. SIMS. Now, take the conditions. There seems to be no question that wool growing and sheep production have been relatively on the decline. I do not mean that there are not so many sheep now, but there are not so many as there should be in proportion to the increased demand for wool in the world, and of other products. Now, if wool has been decreasing and the use of shoddy is increasing, and that is a satisfactory condition and one that is desirable to maintain the thing to do is not to pass the French bill or anything like it. Mr. CLARK. What I would like to say is, we have figures as to the production of wool in this country, but we have no figures, until we get to a certain period, as to the consumption of shoddy. Mr. WALKER. I am willing to accept Mr. Clark's statement that the use of shoddy has been increasing. Mr. CLARK. I am rather inclined to think that it has been decreasing rather than increasing, but we have no figures, either one of us, to show which is right. Mr. SIMS. Mr. Clark, let me ask you a question on this. Mr. CLARK. Yes. Mr. SIMS. You assume that the use of shoddy is or has been on the decrease. Mr. CLARK. I will not say that, positively, but I will say it is just as liable to be that way as the other way. Mr. SIMS. What is your honest opinion about it? Mr. CLARK. My honest opinion is that it has not increased. Mr. SIMS. Is it your honest opinion that it is on the decrease? Mr. SIMS. Then are you in favor of continuing the decrease of the use of shoddy? Mr. CLARK. Oh, not necessarily. Mr. SIMS. If it has been to the public interest for it to decrease in the past, is it not to the public interest that it should continue to decrease? Mr. CLARK. I think it is an economic necessity to use what shoddy may be produced to help out the production of wool. Mr. SIMS. But if its use is on the decrease, and that decrease is to the public interest, why should we not encourage the production of material that will promote the further economic decrease of it? Mr. CLARK. I have not admitted that it was to the public interest that the percentage of it should decrease. Mr. SIMS. Then, do you claim that it would be to the public interest to have a further relative increase in the use of shoddy? Mr. CLARK. No; not necessarily so. Mr. SIMS. It seems to me that you are very much opposed to this bill, and I suppose you have some logical, public, patriotic interest to serve in being against it? Mr. CLARK. The principal thing is that it will not do the consumer any good and will not give him any information. Mr. SIMS. Inasmuch as the consumer believes that it will, why should we not give him a chance for his white alley once in a while? Mr. CLARK. But he does not know anything about it. Mr. SIMS. But if he assumes he does? Mr. CLARK. Right on that point I would like to say that these resolutions that have been referred to here, passed by these woolgrowers' associations and retail associations and farm organizations and one thing and another, and newspaper editorials, it is only natural that they should pass those resolutions, because this idea of a truthin-fabric bill-the very name helps it along-is very plausible on its face. Almost anybody that does not know anything about it would say, "Oh, yes; that is a good thing. We ought to have that kind of 177735-20-31 |