Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1920-05-17
SAYS $27.64 PROFIT
MADE ON $65 SUIT
W. lett Lauck Declares
Wage Awards Not Respon-
sibIe for High Prices.

Clothes are manufactured today for
S37.36 per suit, on an average. and
profits absorb $27.64 of the s65 paid
| for suit by the consumer. according
| to W. Jett Lauck. formerly secretary
| ent consulting economist for the rail-
| road brotherhoods. who issued a sum-
mary of survey on clothing today.
| The total cost of suit of mems clothes,
according to Mr.. Lauck. is but little
more than half the price exacted by
the retailer from the purchaser. The
! retailer is charged with making the
/ greatest proportion of profit. obtain
ing the average sum of S22.71 in the
case of a So suit.
| Alleges Price GOuging.
'The country has been made to be-
! lieve. as in every other case where the
opportunity offered, that labor's de-
mands for Increased wages have been
responsible for the soaring price s."
said Mr.. Lauck. But, as in practi-
cally every other industry where prof
lteering is rampant. it can be proved
conclusively that the guilt is ascrib-
able to price-gouging, and not to wage
, awards
I'm the case of s65 suit, the price
has increased $40, or more than five
| times the increased labor cost of $744,
which includes all labor in the manu-
facture of the cloth as well as the
| suit. Even the increase of $1S.S8 IN
4; cumulative profits is equivalent to
more than twice the increase in labor
costs
AT the present .time the labor cost
In producing a suit of clothes is only
70 per cent of the price taken from
the consumer. while ten years ago the
purchase price included a bill Of 22
per cent to labor. So it readily can
be seen that the buyer of a suit of
clothes Is paying those who labored
on the product less. proportionately.
than in 1910.
purchasers of mems clothing who
have protested against the fantastic
price jumps have been met inevitably
with the explanation that. as labor
was demanding higher wage scale,
the cost to the consumer necessarily
had to he advaHeed OF course. 1t was
reasonable to reflect increased labor
costs in the price. but it was criminal
on the part of manufacturers and re-
tailers to make wage advances the
excuse for deliberate. merciless goug-
ing. For a manufacturer in any line
OF industry to charge the consumer a
dollar or a wage advance of 20 cents
to labor is becoming an altogether
too widespread practice"
Says Makers PROFITS Heavy.
Although the retailers increases
have been huge in a monetary sense"
said Mr.. Lauck. they are much less
proportionately than those of the
manufacturing corporations"
The woolen mills profits for the
present year. Mr.. Lauck estimated,
will approximate five times those TAX
en- in 1910. while the garment manu-
facturers' profits at the present time
are $50 per cent of their 1910 average,
he said.
The largest woolen manufacturing
corporation in America, said the re-
port, increased it's annual net income
from an average of s1.600O0O in the
pre-war years to an annual average of
nearly $9.O00.000 during 1868.
'One nationally known clothing
house. probably the largest and best
known in the country. increased its
profits from an average of $S59.219 in
1912-l4 to s1.625.593 in 1868. and
s2,2Oo.21s in 1919" the report said.