The Washington herald., 1920-04-27
CBy n star Correspondent.)

Chicago, April &c. - Claims made
by the National Sheep and Wool Bu-
reau OF America that both wholesal-
ers and retailers in the clothing
trade are in favor of the French
Truth in Fabric Law" bill is not
entirely borne out by investigation.
The big clothing manufacturers are.
however. chary in taking part in
the. controversy between the mill
men and the wool growers. They
are fearful for the consequences of
thei rtrade- marks. which have bIa-
zoned an "all wool" fabric to the
world. '-'''
| The general manager of one of
the. biggest clothing concerns In the
world. with its headquarters in Chi
cago. insisted that the company was
not fighting the measure, but neither
was 1t enthusiastic in it's support
| The point was made that the effect
on Its business would not be marked
were the goods stamped so that the
purchasers could tell at a glance
what percentage of shoddy entered
into the manufacture of the cloth,
as the practice of the company had
always been to take back any gar
ment which did not give satisfac-
ton.
Few Hear of Bill.
Most of the retailers have never
heard of the bill, which, incident
ally, showed lack of organization.
After the provisions of the bill had
been explained the majority seemed
to dread the mechanical changes
made necessary more than the effect
the branding would have on the
customers. They were, however.
] quick to see the Importance of the
measure, and contended that IL the
word "shoddy" were not used they
/ would have no objections to it.
1t was explained by the general
manager of one large wholesale
concern that. as matter of fact, 1t
was absolutely necessary to use
what is popularity known as shoddy
| in connection with purely American
virgin wool. Native wool, he con-
tended. was unsuited for the pro-
duction of the finer qualities of
cloth, and mixture of foreign wool
principally Australian or shoddy-
had become necessity. In many
cases American wool has PROVEN too
coarse, and in others too short. In
| neither case did 1t produce the fine
texture identified with Australian
| wool.
ShOuuy Bbeu bdOrc.
1t was pointed out that "shoddy"
entering into the better grade of
fabrics did not mean that it had
ever been used in clothing before.
1t was new clip" odds and ends
remaining after Cuttig. 1t was not
denied, though, that a great deal of
''shoddy" was obtained from worn
garments nor that this wool" might
not be used over and over again.
This largely entered into the cheap
er grades of clothing, 1t was main
tanned by all.
None of the officials of the bigger
concerns visited could see any rea-
son for the cheapening OF clothing
were the French bill passed. In fact,
the majority advanced arguments
which were intended to prove that it
would be the other way.
Il cannot see how any argument
can be advanced that the passage
of the French bill will make cloth
ing cheaper" said B. j. Calm, man
ager of Kuppenheimer and Com
pany. II should think that it could
be rightly argued that an increased
use of virgin wool would make
clothing. higher in, price.
Not Interested in BiII.
I'VE are not actively interested in
the bill except in a general way,
and frankly l might say, that we
do not think 1t would be good
thing for the country were the
French or similar measure to pass.
There would be great deal of con-
fusion should goods be marked. The
retailer would have his own trouble,
1T would not affect us In the
least. as we deal in goods that are
just what We advertise them to be.
Besides, We are not manufacturers
OF cloth. The fabric would come to
us stamped. Still. I can honestly
say that do not believe the con-
sumer would benefit in the slightest
and he might be penalised.'
The claim that native wool van-
not be used In the manufacturfne