Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

The American Home Economics Association strongly indorses legislation penalizing misbranding of merchandise as embodied in the Barkley misbranding bill introduced in 1916 and in succeeding sessions of Congress, and more recently in the Rogers honest merchandise act of 1920.

We hold that the French truth-in-fabric bill will not serve as a reliable guide to the purchaser of woolen fabrics or garments. Because there is so great a variation in the grades of virgin wool and of shoddy, respectively, a label which states only the relative percentages of wool and shoddy in any fabric does not reliably indicate the wearing quality of the fabric. Even were the measure amended to require a statement of the different grades of virgin wool and shoddy used in the fabric, the average consumer could not comprehend the technical terms that must necessarily be used in designating these grades. We feel, therefore, that under certain circumstances the labeling proposed by the French bill might even tend to cause the consumer to invest in a less durable fabric containing virgin wool at the expense of more durable fabrics containing high grade shoddy. The virgin-wool supply of the world is such that a large proportion of reworked wool or shoddy must continue to be used, for a number of years at least, to supplement the inadequate supply of virgin wool, and our experience as consumers and as students of textiles has taught us that the presence of shoddy, as such, does not necessarily impair the wearing qualities of a fabric.

The insanitary conditions under which it has been found that woolen rags are sorted in many places, and also conditions relating to the wages and hours of workers engaged in this branch of the reworked wool industry should, we believe, be thoroughly inves tigated and properly regulated by State and, if necessary, by Federal law.

We approve the misbranding legislation outlined in the Barkley and the Rogers bills for the following reasons:

1. It is comprehensible, protecting consumers not only of textiles but of every kind of merchandise.

2. It is practical, as proved by the successful operation during 32 years of the British merchandise marks act on which both these bills are patterned.

3. It is comparatively inexpensive of operation.

4. By penalizing false statements it clears the way for an era of educational branding and advertising in which the consumer may feel confidence and which will serve him as a reliable guide. At present, with no machinery available for automatically and promptly bringing to justice those who through ignorance or the desire to defraud represent their wares as better than they actually are, the consumer is frequently deceived into investing his money to poor advantage, and this has naturally resulted in a tendency on his part to discount generally statements by manufacturers and merchants whose goods are not personally known to him. This skepticism on the part of the purchaser often makes him turn away in doubt from a really good investment, to his own loss and that of the merchant.

5. Misbranding legislation is particularly needed in the field of textiles and readymade clothing. The scarcity and high price of raw materials has resulted in lowering qualities in many makes of goods once standard, and in other cases in the use of substitutes less satisfactory than the material which they replace. Modern methods of manufacture can successfully camouflage the appearance of an inferior article. Most important of all, the large proportion of fabrics leaving the mill does not reach the consumer in the form of yard goods but passes into the hands of the cutting-up trade and emerges in the form of ready-made garments, having lost in the process any identifying trade-mark or symbol woven into the material. It is well known that this fact affords an opportunity for misrepresentation as to quality that the unscrupulous are not slow to improve, to the detriment not only of the consumer but of the manufacturer, who has established a trade-mark by years of honest merchandise and great expense for advertising.

6. Misbranding legislation would tend to eliminate many faults and misleading statements that now arise, not from deliberate intent, but from ignorance or carelessness on the part of buyers and advertising managers.

The American Home Economics Association contends that the passage of misbranding legislation is vitally needed at the present time

1. Because the era of industrial and commercial depression anticipated by business men will undoubtedly increase the temptation to misrepresent qualities.

2. Because the continued shrinkage of the dollar makes it more necessary than ever before that the purchaser invest his income to the best advantage, and this can only be done on the basis of accurate information as to qualities.

3. Because misrepresentation is most likely to be practiced in the cheaper grades of goods, purchased by the consumer who can least afford to invest his money to poor advantage.

As a part of its educational campaign to bring about more intelligent consumption by home makers, and especially the more intelligent selection of textile fabrics, the American Home Economics Association has during the past year actively advocated before gatherings of club women and others the passage of misbranding legislation similar to that embodied in the Barkley misbranding bill. We believe we are within the facts in saying that women consumers who have the duty of investing a large percentage of the family income keenly feel the need of such legislation and feel that it should be speedily enacted. The numerous messages of indorsement of the Barkley bill that have already reached your committee from individual women and from women's clubs in all parts of the country will bear witness to the truth of this statement.

Very truly, yours,

AMERICAN HOME ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION.
CORA E. WINCHELL, Secretary.

LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WORSTED AND WOOLEN SPINNERS.

Hon. JOHN J. ESCH,

NEW YORK, April 13, 1920.

Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. ESCH: The executive committee of the National Association of Worsted and Woolen Spinners held no meeting just prior to or during the hearings on the French and other labeling bills before your committee and were therefore not represented.

We are desirous, however, of recording with you and having entered upon the records, if it is not too late, our protest against the enactment into law of the French bill.

We object to the French bill on general principles because we are convinced that it will not serve the purpose it is intended to accomplish. Instead of aiding and assisting consumers in purchasing clothes, it will confuse and confound them, because it will set up false standards. We object to its passage specifically because

(1) Bradford yarn.-We produce in the yarn industry about 1,350,000 pounds of Bradford spun yarn weekly, and in this yarn nothing but virgin stock is ever used. It would be a burden and inconvenience to have to furnish specific guarantees and warantees every time any of this yarn was sold, when it is apparent to anybody familiar with the business that it can contain nothing but virgin wool.

(2) French yarn.-There is produced weekly about 750,000 pounds of French spun yarn. Of this from 75 to 80 per cent is always virgin wool. A percentage of cotton is used in the remainder chiefly for underwear purposes, for the reason that undergarments made of the French spun yarn in which a little cotton is employed is commonly looked upon as preferable to similar garments made of all wool. The purchaser of this yarn furnishes specifications.

(3) Woolen yarn.-We produce approximately 700,000 pounds of woolen yarn weekly, in which wool, reworked wool, cotton, silk, shoddy, and other fibers can be employed. Owing to the great variety of fabrics and style effects that may be produced from woolen yarns--these yarns are usually sold either on samples or by specications supplied by the purchaser. Therefore, we again submit that the enactment of a law whereby it would become obligatory to furnish statements, or guarantees, as to the contents of such yarn would impose an unnecessary and useless burden upon the manufacturer, thereby increasing the cost of the product to an extent wholly unwarranted by any possible benefits derived.

Permit us to state that we would willingly submit to the inconvenience of fulfilling the requirements set down in the proposed French bill, if we believed that any good purpose or end could be accomplished thereby. Instead, we are convinced that the provisions of the bill applicable to the yarn industry are entirely unnecessary and will result in no benefit or gain to any one.

We shall much appreciate it if you will cause this letter to be inserted into the records of the hearings on this legislation.

Yours, very truly,

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WORSTED AND WOOLEN SPINNERS,
J. J. NEVINS, Secretary.

LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOOL MANUFACTURERS.

Hon. JOHN J. ESCH,

BOSTON, MASS., April 17, 1920.

Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: I am in receipt of your letter of the 15th instant, also of the memorandur from the clerk of the committee covering the amendments Mr. French has suggested to his bill.

We desire to make the following comments for insertion in the record. In a general way, the amendments suggested do not in any way obviate our objections to the bill and the arguments which we have presented already stand as to the amended bill. We have no detailed comment to make except as to the following:

No. 5. "Amend section 9 so as to indicate whether the percentage of wool or other ingredients shall be upon the basis of yardage or by weight."

We do not know what this means. There is only one way by which the ingredients can be stated and that is by the percentage by weight of the ingredients put into the original blend of material. As we indicated in our testimony, these various ingredients would shrink by varying amounts in the processes of manufacture, so that even the manufacturer himself would be unable to tell the exact percentages that would remain in the finished cloth. We also testified that it would be absolutely impossible to make any test of the finished goods which would indicate the percentage of the various ingredients.

No. 12. Amend section 19 by providing that the act shall go into effect six months or eight months following approval of the same."

We repeat our assertion that it would require a very much longer period than this to equip all the mills of the country for complying with the law.

Respectfully, yours,

FREDERIC S. CLARK, President.

LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE NATIONAL SHEEP AND WOOL BUREAU OF AMERICA.

Hon. JOHN J. ESCH,

Washington, D. C.

CHICAGO, April 24, 1920.

MY DEAR MR. ESCH: The rapid and widespread development of the overall club movement which is supposed to have for its purpose the checking of rising prices a movement which numbers among its leaders leading colleges, business men's clubs, rotarian clubs, high schools, chambers of commerce, and prominent public men-is convincing proof that the people of the United States are determined that a solution for the constantly soaring prices must be found.

The National Sheep and Wool Bureau respectfully suggests that this movement is merely struggling with effect rather than attacking the cause.

A more effective way, and one which goes to the root of the matter, is pointed out in a recent editorial in Successful Farming, published by the Hon. E. T. Meredith, Secretary of Agriculture, and former president of the Associated Advertising Clubs of the World. This editorial said:

"Substitution is the thing in which the exorbitant prices of clothes and cloth, and clothes and cloth profiteering have their roots. The people pay for virgin wool and get shoddy.

"In reducing clothing costs and preventing profiteering in cloth, as in many other things, the simplest measure is the most effective. In the case of clothing, it is the high cost of substitutes which is at the bottom of the trouble, and is the key problem in getting prices to a safe and reasonable basis."

A truth-in-fabric bill was introduced in the House of Representatives January 7, 1920, by Congressman Burton L. French, of Idaho. This bill is known in the House as H. R. 11641, and is now before the Interstate Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives. The chairman of this committee is the Hon. John J. Esch, of Wisconsin.

This same truth-in-fabric bill was introduced in the Senate January 8, 1920, by Senator Arthur Capper, of Kansas. This bill is known in the Senate as S. 3686, and is now before the Interstate Commerce Committee of the Senate. The chairman of this committee is Senator Albert B. Cummins, of Iowa.

This truth-in-fabric bill, now before both branches of Congress, will, if enacted into law, immediately lower the prices of clothes.

The purpose of this truth-in-fabric bill, as stated in the bill's introductory paragraph, is:

To prevent deceit and profiteering that result from the unrevealed presence of substitutes for virgin wool in woolen fabrics purporting to contain wool and in garments or articles of apparel made therefrom."

The provisions of the truth-in-fabric bill make it compulsory to identify substitutes for virgin wool, namely, shoddy and cotton, and to give the people the knowledge of the presence of substitutes-the knowledge that is the people's only protection against those who would procure for the substitute the price of the genuine.

The truth-in-fabric bill would lower the price of clothes because of the following

reasons:

1. The bulk of the raw material now used in woolen apparel sold as all wool is shoddy. Under the truth-in-fabric bill shoddy can no longer be sold as virgin wool, and shoddy profiteering would consequently be stopped and the price of shoddy would inevitably be forced down.

Therefore, the price of all apparel containing shoddy would immediately be lowered, and this would include a very large part of all apparel.

2. The passage of the truth-in-fabric bill would also immediately multiply the production of virgin wool fabrics for the following reasons:

(a) The reason huge stocks of virgin wool are now lying in storehouses unmanufactured is because unidentified shoddy permits the fabric manufacturer to make a greater profit with shoddy than he could make with virgin wool.

With the truth-in-fabric bill enacted into law, the fabric manufacturer could no longer, as now, divert the people's demand for virgin wool to the rag and shoddy industries, and fabric manufacturers would consequently be forced to make up into fabrics the vast quantities of virgin wool now lying in the storehouses.

(b) It is estimated that, because of lack of ships to transport the wool from where it was produced to where it could be manufactured into cloth, there accumulated throughout the world during the war 1,265,000,000 pounds of virgin wool.

(c) Notwithstanding the fact that the world produces only one-third or less as much virgin wool as is needed in any one year, yet on September 1, 1919, nearly 10 months after the signing of the armistice, there was in the United States more than 700,000,000 pounds of virgin wool, an amount which exceeds by 100,000,000 pounds the United States annual consumption of virgin wool.

Furthermore, at the present time, nearly a year and a half after the signing of the armistice, it is estimated that there is more than 1,000,000,000 pounds of virgin wool in the world's storehouses, exclusive of the present year's clip, 1920, which will be available in a few weeks.

A conservative estimate of the world's clip for 1920 is 2,500,000,000 pounds. Therefore, there will be available within a very few weeks more than 3,500,000,000 pounds of virgin wool.

(d) If the truth-in-fabric bill is passed, all of this huge quantity of virgin wool would be immediately converted into cloth (instead of vast quantities of it being permitted to lie in storehouses, as has been done with great quantities of virgin wool since the signing of the armistice), and the tremendously multiplied production of virgin-wool cloth would effectively check and eliminate the rising-price menace and establish a sound economic price basis upon which business can proceed with safety and satisfaction.

The inclosed resolution passed by the New Jersey and Missouri Retail Clothiers' Association, contains the idea which has also been expressed in resolutions passed by scores of other organizations, State, national, and civic, throughout the United States, urging truth-in-fabric legislation.

Included among the organizations throughout the length and breadth of the land, which, by resolutions, or through their representatives, have definitely gone on record urging the passage of truth-in-fabric legislation, are the following:

The National Consumers' League, a southern cotton association comprising a large area of the South; American Farm Bureau Federation, with more than 1,000,000 members in 28 States; the Fleece Wool States Growers' Association, with membership in 15 States; the National Wool Growers' Association, including in its membership important States west of the Mississippi; the National Union of the American Society of Equity; the American National Live Stock Association; the Chicago Live Stock Exchange; the Agricultural Commission of the Michigan State Bankers' Association; the National Grange; the National Board of Farm Organizations; the Farmers' National Council; the National Housewives' League.

We are inclosing herewith pamphlet containing editorial comment typical of editorials that are appearing in leading publications throughout the United States urging truth-in-fabric legislation.

By promptly passing the truth-in-fabric bill Congress will right the wrong aimed at by the over-all and old-clothes clubs being formed throughout the country.

By passing the truth-in-fabric bill Congress will render the country a very great service by lowering the price of a necessity of life, and by establishing sound economic practices in connection with cloth and clothes, which will tend mightily to stabilize business and economic conditions and thus avert the danger from the unrest of the people, which now results from the exorbitant prices of clothes.

Your cooperation in the effort to secure the prompt passage of the truth-in-fabric bill, now before both branches of Congress, is, therefore, respectfully and earnestly requested in the interests of the people.

NATIONAL SHEEP AND WOOL BUREAU, By L. F. MALONY, Secretary.

LETTERS SUBMITTING INCLOSURES.

LETTER FROM THE OHIO SHEEP AND WOOL GROWERS' ASSOCIATION.

UTICA, OHIO, February 5, 1920.

Hon. JOHN J. ESCH,

Washington, D. C.

HIGHLY RESPECTED SIR: By the authority of the many owners of small flocks of sheep in Ohio, and in the interest of the French truth-in-fabric bill, I want to respectfully call your attention to the sheep status of the State.

When Commissioner of Tariff Culbertson gave us a hearing at Columbus in December, we showed him that the watershed of the Ohio River, a section with more sheep, and more sheep men per area than anywhere, was enlarging the delta of the Mississippi, and that there were a million tons of commercial fertilizer in solution in the Gulf of Mexico, from land owners growing half crops of grain where they should be growing wool.

The way he put it, "Wool growing in Ohio is an incident in diversified farming." now when we are disgraced by a national wool shortage, with sheep decreasing and population increasing, demanding more wool and more meat. This condition is the result principally of the criminal license shoddy has to pass for our good wool.

Ohio men, who have more sheep than the same size territory anywhere, are keeping a few sheep as a side line, keeping them like a town housewife keeps a few hens on her table scraps, because a junkman, not worth as much as the land owner pays annually in taxes, gathers more "wool" than the shepherd can produce. During this time, the whole population is wearing unserviceable, depraved clothing.

We are getting ready to grow enough virgin wool to clothe every American who wants it, as soon as wool sells for wool, and shoddy for a substitute. In the meantime all the associations are operating bureaus to educate the people. Many are asking at the stores already, "Is this virgin wool?" and we are determined to carry it on to a successful consummation.

I inclose a circular which explains the situation, and in the name of the sheep owners ask you kindly to push the French truth-in-fabric bill, all you can, until it is a law. There will be history following this, and credit from all the sheep men, and every one of the hundred million clothing buyers, to the Washington friends of this measure.

Yours, truly,

W. W. REYNOLDS, Treasurer the Ohio Sheep and Wool Growers' Association.

[The Ohio Sheep and Wool Growers' Association. S. M. Cleaver, Delaware, president; J. F. Walker Gambier, secretary; W. W. Reynolds, Utica, treasurer.]

CLOTHING.

The clothing situation is deplorable. If you doubt it go out and buy some woolens for yourself and your families. Multitudes are writing our association about where they can find cloth, or clothing like they formerly bought.

These conditions were billed to come, and war times only brought them a little quicker. Big business and the unrestricted use of reworked wool have been reducing the flocks, and now America produces less than one-quarter of the materials for the woolens of the people.

« ForrigeFortsett »