In the same way we had to protect the public with an insecticide and fungicide act. The pull of the almighty dollar is so great that before this bill was passed there was a big traffic in worthless insecticides and fungicides. As a matter of fact, the law does not stop it all. Not long ago a manufacturer of insecticide advertised an "all bug killer." The Department of Agriculture purchased some of the stuff, took it to Vienna, Va., where it maintains an insectivary, tried it out on some of its bugs, and of course found that it did not kill all bugs, as the public was led to believe through the advertising used. The department wrote to this panacea peddler-the manufacturer of the "all bug killer"--and told him he would have to stop making such absurd claims, for his powder did not kill all bugs.

After a time the department received a reply to the effect that "I will change the name; watch for my advertisements." The department did watch with its eagle eye. A little later the insecticide manufacturer's advertisement appeared in which he displayed the appealing caption, "Some bug killer."

Now, we have the same thing in the woolen industry. The dealers in woolen commodities do not advertise "some wool cloth," but they use the term "all wool clothing" or "all wool cloth.

What does this mean to the public? Nothing more nor less than virgin wool. However, the facts are that most of the goods are not virgin wool, but contain large amounts of shoddy most of which is wool frequently picked from the gutters and reworked as many as seven or eight times. Each time the fibers become a little more brittle, there are fewer scales which cling together, and generally the shoddy becomes less desirable as a component of good clothing. In fact in this country the use of shoddy, mungo, or muck increased at a tremendous rate during the war because of the shortage of wool and the quality of the clothing which the public had to put up with at that time should have been an ample demonstration to Congress of the need for a truth in fabric bill. We use about 80,000,000 pounds of this inferior stuff every year, one-fourth of which is consumed in the concerns where it is made and three-fourths is sold to other concerns which use it as an adulterant to virgin wool. In fact the figures show that more than one-fourth of the woolen fiber is used in the manufacture of woolen goods in the United States is shoddy. ·

A very good grade of scoured virgin wool ready for weaving now sells at around $1 a pound, shoddy sells all the way from 20 cents to 60 cents, according to how many times it has been reworked and whether it can be woven with virgin wool and the public made to believe the claim that the resultant product is as good as though it were made of virgin wool. The spinner, of course, does not grow rich out of the amount of shoddy which he spins into the cloth used in making a single suit of clothes. It is the accumulative profit on 80,000,000 pounds of this shoddy used each year. The mill man's profit is nowhere commensurate with the fraud which he promotes and imposes upon purchaser and wearer of his goods. In a man's suit of heavy-weight woolen cloth there are about 9 pounds of scoured wool. In a medium-weight suit there are only 7 pounds. If the suit were made from virgin wool, the entire cost of the raw product, virgin wool, would be about $7. If 50 per cent of the cloth were shoddy, worth say 50 cents a pound, the total value of shoddy would

99564-24-21

be $1 75 and the value of the virgin wool $3.50, making the total cost of the cloth $5 instead of $7. Thus the manufacturer in order to make a little more profit himself uses $5 worth of virgin wool and shoddy instead of $7 virgin wool. He produces, of course, an inferior product and sells it to a public that believes it is getting a virgin-wool garment, for most woolen goods are sold as pure wool, and that means in the minds of the public virgin wool. Thus pure greed is responsible for the utilization of shoddy, which rots like the apple in the center of the barrel and the purchaser has no knowledge of the condition when he makes his purchase.

We have yet to hear a claim to the effect that the use of shoddy makes a better garment. Shoddy is only used because its substitution makes a greater profit. It is like taking the cream off the milk and selling the skimmed milk for whole milk. Nobody feels safe with the seat of his trousers made out of shoddy cloth.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Silver, that is not in conformity with the testimony of witnesses here. They have insisted that there are certain grades of very fine wool cloth in which they must use shoddy. They can not make it out of new wool. They agree on that, virtually.

Mr. SILVER. Mr. Chairman, I am fully aware of the fact that my testimony is not in accord with the manufacturers who use shoddy. I have not the school of thought nor the viewpoint, and my facts are not gathered from the same source from which they gather theirs.

I am, however, somewhat familiar with the woolen business personally. I have traded in wool for years and I live in a mill town where they use wool and use shoddy and reworked wool, etc.

In addition to what I have to say here, I personally have some information on it, and along that particular point, the contention is, Mr. Chairman, that certain grades of shoddy are better for a certain cloth. But nobody contends, so far as I know, that the shoddy of any given grade is as good as virgin wool of that grade. As the different grades of wool go into make different grades of cloth, there is no danger of imposition upon the public when worked as asked in the Capper-French truth in fabrics bill.

The CHAIRMAN. They do; they make the contention frankly that they can make a better cloth in some varieties and grades out of some reworked wool, which you call shoddy, than they can of virgin wool of any grade at all.

Mr. SILVER. Of the same grade?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

MR. SILVER. That is news to me. I did not know they made that claim. I think, however, less of them because they make that claim.

The CHAIRMAN. We get men here whose standing in the community is just as good as anybody's. They come here virtually under oath; not actually, but virtually and they all agree that, according to the nature of the cloth, they use new wool, or reworked wool. Your contention is to the contrary, that they can take all new wool, grade for grade, and get a better cloth?

Mr. SILVER. Yes; that is my contention, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. In all fairness, I just wanted to furnish you with the information.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. A number of witnesses have stated that a good grade of shoddy is better than a poor grade of virgin wool, and that some kinds of shoddy was better than some kinds of virgin wool. Mr. SILVER. That is true.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. But my recollection does not accord with that of the chairman-that anyone has said that reworked wool of a certain grade was better than virgin wool of that particular grade, and I do not believe the record will sustain the chairman in that regard.

The CHAIRMAN. I think, Mr. Huddleston, not only that, but some of them said they could not use virgin wool in some grades of cloth at all.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Because of the expense.

The CHAIRMAN. That is they could not use it to advantage for the quality and variety of the cloth.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. I have no recollection of any witness who stated that any kind of cloth could not be made out of virgin wool of any grade, and that it was absolutely necessary to introduce reworked wool in order to produce the cloth, not having price in view at all.

Mr. SILVER. The claim that certain grades of shoddy are better than certain grades of virgin wool can not well be disputed. The reworked wool that comes from tailor trimmings of the light grades, such as undergarments, compared with the low grade of wool made into carpets, etc., might illustrate that. It is not hard to understand that. But there is no danger of imposition on the public so far as the grades of wool are concerned, because they determine the cloth. If you go to buy carpets, and you buy a low grade carpet wool, you know you are buying a carpet wool, a low grade wool. If you buy light weight merino underwear, you do not confuse it with carpet wool. Nor do you confuse it with the kind of goods that goes into a pair of trousers.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. May I say this, Mr. Silver? I am convinced from the testimony that no protection would be given to the consumer by the bare statement that the material purchased is virgin wool, because it might be inferior to a kind of reworked wool, and yet the purchaser would feel, because it was marked virgin wool, that that implied that it was of a better grade than if it were reworked wool. But there may be other information given concerning the materials which would have great value to the purchaser.

I am convinced from the evidence we have had before us, viewed even with the knowledge that the witnesses are interested that the material being marked "virgin wool" gives the purchaser no protection and gives him no information of any particular value to him. I am wondering why those who are interested in the purchaser getting value for his money do not insist on something being put upon the material sold that will have value, instead of something that has no value and is not information which would enable the purchaser to proceed intelligently, giving him information which is of no value to him and which would not help him in any respect, but on the contrary, would tend to mislead him.

Mr. SILVER. In answer to that, I will say that I must differ from that thought, for the reason that virgin wool, the original fleece wool, is the best sort and the highest type from which we start the building of fabric. There is no other source from which to get a superior article than that of virgin wool.

be $1 75 and the value of the virgin wool $3.50, making the total cost of the cloth $5 instead of $7. Thus the manufacturer in order to make a little more profit himself uses $5 worth of virgin wool and shoddy instead of $7 virgin wool. He produces, of course, an inferior product and sells it to a public that believes it is getting a virgin-wool garment, for most woolen goods are sold as pure wool and that means in the minds of the public virgin wool. Thus pure greed is responsible for the utilization of shoddy, which rots like the apple in the center of the barrel and the purchaser has no knowledge of the condition when he makes his purchase.

We have yet to hear a claim to the effect that the use of shoddy makes a better garment. Shoddy is only used because its substitution makes a greater profit. It is like taking the cream off the milk and selling the skimmed milk for whole milk. Nobody feels safe with the seat of his trousers made out of shoddy cloth.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Silver, that is not in conformity with the testimony of witnesses here. They have insisted that there are certain grades of very fine wool cloth in which they must use shoddy. They can not make it out of new wool. They agree on that, virtually.

Mr. SILVER. Mr. Chairman, I am fully aware of the fact that my testimony is not in accord with the manufacturers who use shoddy. I have not the school of thought nor the viewpoint, and my facts. are not gathered from the same source from which they gather theirs.

I am, however, somewhat familiar with the woolen business personally. I have traded in wool for years and I live in a mill town where they use wool and use shoddy and reworked wool, etc.

In addition to what I have to say here, I personally have some information on it, and along that particular point, the contention is, Mr. Chairman, that certain grades of shoddy are better for a certain cloth. But nobody contends, so far as I know, that the shoddy of any given grade is as good as virgin wool of that grade. As the different grades of wool go into make different grades of cloth, there is no danger of imposition upon the public when worked as asked in the Capper-French truth in fabrics bill.

The CHAIRMAN. They do; they make the contention frankly that they can make a better cloth in some varieties and grades out of some reworked wool, which you call shoddy, than they can of virgin wool of any grade at all.

Mr. SILVER. Of the same grade?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

MR. SILVER. That is news to me. I did not know they made that claim. I think, however, less of them because they make that claim.

The CHAIRMAN. We get men here whose standing in the community is just as good as anybody's. They come here virtually under oath: not actually, but virtually and they all agree that, according to the nature of the cloth, they use new wool, or reworked wool. Your contention is to the contrary, that they can take all new wool, grade for grade, and get a better cloth?

Mr. SILVER. Yes; that is my contention, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. In all fairness, I just wanted to furnish you with the information.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. A number of witnesses have stated that a good grade of shoddy is better than a poor grade of virgin wool, and that some kinds of shoddy was better than some kinds of virgin wool. Mr. SILVER. That is true.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. But my recollection does not accord with that of the chairman-that anyone has said that reworked wool of a certain grade was better than virgin wool of that particular grade, and I do not believe the record will sustain the chairman in that regard.

The CHAIRMAN. I think, Mr. Huddleston, not only that, but some of them said they could not use virgin wool in some grades of cloth at all.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. Because of the expense.

The CHAIRMAN. That is they could not use it to advantage for the quality and variety of the cloth.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. I have no recollection of any witness who stated that any kind of cloth could not be made out of virgin wool of any grade, and that it was absolutely necessary to introduce reworked wool in order to produce the cloth, not having price in view at all.

Mr. SILVER. The claim that certain grades of shoddy are better than certain grades of virgin wool can not well be disputed. The reworked wool that comes from tailor trimmings of the light grades, such as undergarments, compared with the low grade of wool made into carpets, etc., might illustrate that. It is not hard to understand that. But there is no danger of imposition on the public so far as the grades of wool are concerned, because they determine the cloth. If you go to buy carpets, and you buy a low grade carpet wool, you know you are buying a carpet wool, a low grade wool. If you buy light weight merino underwear, you do not confuse it with carpet wool. Nor do you confuse it with the kind of goods that goes into a pair of trousers.

Mr. HUDDLESTON. May I say this, Mr. Silver? I am convinced from the testimony that no protection would be given to the consumer by the bare statement that the material purchased is virgin wool, because it might be inferior to a kind of reworked wool, and yet the purchaser would feel, because it was marked virgin wool, that that implied that it was of a better grade than if it were reworked wool. But there may be other information given concerning the materials which would have great value to the purchaser.

I am convinced from the evidence we have had before us, viewed even with the knowledge that the witnesses are interested that the material being marked "virgin wool" gives the purchaser no protection and gives him no information of any particular value to hìm. I am wondering why those who are interested in the purchaser getting value for his money do not insist on something being put upon the material sold that will have value, instead of something that has no value and is not information which would enable the purchaser to proceed intelligently, giving him information which is of no value to him and which would not help him in any respect, but on the contrary, would tend to mislead him.

Mr. SILVER. In answer to that, I will say that I must differ from that thought, for the reason that virgin wool, the original fleece wool, is the best sort and the highest type from which we start the building of fabric. There is no other source from which to get a superior article than that of virgin wool.