New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-03-02
A SUNNY REPORT.

4 SHODDY REPORT
Mr. Snrinoer has genius for making asser-
tions which bear no relation whatever TO lactS.
Most men are restricted by some desire to retain
the espect of well-informed readers, hearers or
constituents. Mr.. Springer rises superior to all
such hampcring .cmbanassments. Thus his re-
port On the Frec-Wocl bill now pending IN the
House contains. among other extraordinary state
mcnts. the assertion that the wool manufacture
in this country consumed in 1890 1O0'ooO0oo
pounds of shoddy and only 92,OOO,OOO pounds
of secured wool. It is possible that Mr. Springer
ba, some constituents who will not know that
this assertion is absurdly untrue. But II no
cared in the least to be correct, very little IN
oury would have guarded him against An error
50 glazing.
The only calculation of the quantity of secured
domestic wool used in manufacture which has
ever been recognized Is having any value Is that
of Mr. Joseph p. Truitt, of Philadelphia, whose
reports of wool production have been regarded
as Of the highest authority since the death OF VII.
James LYNCH and are considered in the trade
mere Trustworthy than those of the Agricultural
Department. The Department makes no effort
TO ascertain the shrinkagc of wool; Mr. Truths
ing of Hecccs from different States, and the
actual shrirkage aScertaincd by manuiact-
urers in using wool from different states. His
calculation Of the domestic product alone in 1871
was 1879 G2s,2 pounds of secured wool, over
~. 900, 900 pounds more than Mr.. Springer az
serts to be the quantity consumed both OF do
nestle and foreign wool This statement In
clude,. of course, the pulled wool, which pre-
sumaby Mr. Springer ignores though even with
that omitted his estimate would be far out OF
the way
But there is to be added for the calendar year
1890 no less than $3.50, 900 pounds OF I'M
ported wool on which the shrlnkagc was prob
ably less than on the wool of domestic produc-
ton, for much of tho imported wool comes wholly
or partly secured, even when quantities are
flmdulently entered as only washed or I'M
washed But if the shrnkage was as much as
Mr.. Trutt ,,limatcs for domestic wool a little
over onc-half the actual consumption Of the
foreign product would It'll be equivalent to more
than 80 600 600 pounds secured wool, making
in all about 1s9.GOO.0O0 pounds consumed by
tho American manufacturer. against Mr. SPRING
ers assertion that only 92,O00,O00 pounds was
So consumed. The Truth being only about 100
per cent more than Mr. Sprngers assertion, he
might fairly claim the credit Of getting nearer
the facts than usual for him, but enc cannot help
wondering how n man expects 10 get public con-
fdence or support if he commits himself to state
ments - nb>lrdly untrue.
Nothing has been sail Is Yet Of the other part
If Mr. Springcr's assertion, that 100.OOO,OOO
bounds Of shoddy we're used in the manufacture
in 1890 He meant T. be understood that this
quantity was used in the manufacture oi cloth
ing for his whole argument was that duties
On foreign wool caused the manufacturer to put
moIc shoddy and less wool into the clothing
vcm hy Americans. But he ought to know
that a very large proportion OF all the shoddy
used in this country goes into hose blankets
and similar coarse wappings, into the coarSeSt
and cheapest carpets, and into hats and fcts OF
every description for betting shcahing, lining
and the like. 1t is safe to say that less than
half f the shoddy used in this country enters
into tho production Of any kind OF clothing. But
there i, no evidence known to the public that
Mr.. Springer is not As wildly in error in this
assertion As in the other already quoted.
Mr.. David A. Wells started out not long ago
10 persuade Americans that the woollcn clothing
they used was more largely adutcrated with
shoddy than the clothing produced in any other
country. At once he was so overwhelmed with
facts, conclusivcly proving that he had blum
dcrcd almost ncomprchcn>by for 4 man pre-
sumably having access TO statistics that he short
ly letIoated from his position in published let
ter, saying:
have received q motto from wool manufacturer OF
experience who says that. while have probably rot
Overcstimaici the amount Of Institutes for wool which
the tariff restrictions the imports Of wool have com
PEELED the manufacturers Of TIN, country to use am
out Of tho way IN assigning to shoddy place cf i'm
porance In substitution that belongs to cotton.
Possibly have been mistaken in this respect There
Is good deal Of evidence that shOddy IS getting TO be
too costly to he used a. a wool adultcrant
Mr.. Springer has that peculiar quality of mind
which is capable # absorbing all the plumbers
and untruthS that favor his pet theories, but
quito incapable of absorbing any of the corrcc-
tons and recantationS. That such 4 MN makes
a pitiablc object Of himself in his present posi-
ton is not surprising