The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1909-01-23
SEE NO RELIEF FOR
COUNTRY THROUGH
REVISION
THIS 10 THE OPINION OF REPRE-
sENTATIvEs BEFORE COMMIT
TEe-MicHioAN WOOL DEALER
PLEADS FOR PURE CLOTHING.
(From a Special Correspondent

WASHINGTON. Jan. 2S.-EuWaru
Frensdorf, of the firm OF l.. Frensdorl
4 Sons. Hudson, Mich, the largest
dealers OF fleece woods In that state
appeared before the ways and means
committee as the chosen representa-
tive OF the wool interests OF Michigan
at the tariff hearings.
Mr.. Frensdorf shares the view OF
many who have appeared before the
ways and means committee that little
relief for the country Is to- come
through the Republican party's prom
Use OF tariff revision.
Say these representatives OF var
sous legitimate interests who come 10
the capital:
"All can say Is, God help the com
mon people. They are thought OF
once every four years. which seems 10
be often enough TO mention them. No
one appears to be taken seriously ex'
cept the representatives of corporate
interests"
Every one seems To be hurrying to
get q seat in the corporate band wag-
on. There seems 10 be feeling that
the trusts are going 10 control more
than ever before, The statesmen are
devoting their time mostly TO GUESSING
Roosevelt, knowing they will be heard
at headquarters and that they Will get
recognition in the committee appoint
ments.
President Taft will be shackled.
either willingly or unwillingly. and
Sherman and Cannon will be IT.
II look for real tears from the stat
ues of great men about Washington
during the next four years, said Mr..
Frensdorf, unless two years OF de-
bauch shall be enough 10 arouse the
people"
Mr.. Frensdorfs argument before
the ways and means committee was
for pure clothing" and even Rep.
Payne admitted there was a basis for
his contention
Mr.. Payne asked Mr. Frensdorf for
a concise statement of his position in
writing, which Mr. Frensdorf supplied
the committee and which is as fol
lows:
Michigan Is second in production
Of wool OF the states east OF the Mis-
sissippi river. Our position on this
subject is virtually that as taken by
hose presented from the state OF Ohio
AS far as comes to my knowledge
there Is little, If any. demand from any
quarter for free wool, therefore | be
lieve II unnecessary to discuss the
absolute need OF a protective tariff.
However do not wish 10 appear I'M
reasonable, and would not contend
that in some particular the present
Dingley schedules could not be cor
rected TO the mutual advantage of
both grower and manufacturer.
From my research into the subject
I am forced to conclude that the read
justment OF this schedule should be
left to non-partisan commission
made up OF experts, who, being famil-
lar with the changed condition. both
as to manufacture and production OF
wool. that has transpired since the en-
actment Of the present law. could sug-
gest alterations and corrections that
would do justice to all concerned.
The dairy interests have been
much benefited and have profited by
legislation regulating the sale OF sub
stitutes for butter in the shape OF
oleOmargerine, butterine and cottolene
and the idea suggests itself 10 me
that a pure goods law framed along
the same line. protecting the consum-
er OF goods as well as the producer OF
wool, would prove TO be of great value.
that each piece of goods as well as
each garment should bear tag slip
ulating the ingredients that are used
to produce the goods. This would, in
my opinion. prove TO the general adj
vantage of all concerned, and the
stimulation wool would receive by
such an act, would, In my opinion,
bring the value OF wool to such high
price. as to make IL one of the most
profitable industries on the farm and
ranch.
Il cannot see that II would be to
the disadvantage of the poorer OF mid
die classes In the purchase of goods
made up OF woolshoddy and cotton
or cotton and shoddy, or any kind of
combination Of these ingredients.
contend he would be able to buy such
goods for less than he Is paying for
them today. The only difference from
present conditions would be, that he
or she would know what they are pay
ing for.
Most strenuous opposition develop
ed to the enactment of law govern
ing the sale of substitutes to butter
Who today would dare TO offer legisla
ton tending to revoke that act? Those
wishing TO use butterine, oleomargar-
inc or cottolene are In no wise pre-
vented from so doing; but they buy
II knowingly and are protected from
being defrauded. What portion of the
purchasing public can Judge as TO the
merits of a piece of cloth or garment?
What portion OF the goods sold are
correctly represented?
by the exclusion of foreign rags,
waste and shoddy, and the enactment
of a law regulating the sale of substi-
tutes for wool, I am convinced the
problem as 10 increasing the size OF
our wool and sheep industry would
be solved. and We would not be de-
pendent upon wool tariff to sustain
that industry as Is necessary under
rraaapf conditione