Evening star., 1920-03-28
HOUSE COMMITTEE
CONSIDERING LAW
ON "M|SbRAND|NG"
Hearings Given on Bills De-
signed to Promote Correct
Labelling of Commodities.
BY WILL p. KENNEDY.

BY WILL p. KENNEDY.
Hearings have been held all the
week before the House commerce
committee on the so-called mis-
branding" bills. with the likelihood
that the hearings will drag on all
this week. There u mot much hkeli-
hood that anything will result that
will alter conditions very much for
the consumer.
There are FIVE bills before the COM
mittee on this general subject. two
of which are directly for branding
articles with the ingredients they
contain-a sort of general pure-com-
modify law.
Representatives Kreider OF Pennsyl-
vania. Barkley of Kentucky and Rog-
ers of Massachusetts have introduced
bills which are in general way
against misbranding. They do not
propose to make branding of COM
modities compulsory. and are baseo
on the British marks act. Represent
ative Kreiders bill is more directly
an honest advertising measure.
Truth In Fabric Bill.''
Representative French of Idaho is
urging what is known as truth In
fabric bill" Representative H. T.
Rainey of Illinois is father of bill
which aims at the same purpose as
that of Representative French, only
it is very terse. Representative Raj
ney. in criticising the French bill,
said it was too complicated to be
worka bic and proposes the greatest
system of industrial espionage ever
contemplated in legislation" He said
that it would require a federal in
Spector in every factory.
Representative French prOpOSeS to
make compulsory the branding or
labelling Of all fabrics containing
wool. This branding would have to
carry. the percentage of fleece wool.
or virgin wool, and of shoddy, or
reworked wool, and of silk, cotton
or other ingredients The proponents
say that this will protect the public
by giving them information which
will prevent deception being prac-
ticed- They say that the popular con-
ception of ''all woor' is that it means
new wool. and the public generally
has no idea that new cloth is in a
large part made up of wool that was
previously used in cloth-torn up and
used over again, sometimes as much
as eight times.
1t is argued also that such legis-
1ation would help the sheep-raising
industry by removing shoddy as a
the price the wool growers get for
their product.
Opposed by Manufacturers.
opposed to the French bill. The or
ganized opposition includes the Ma
tional Association of Wool Manufac-
turers. the American Association of
Woolens and Worsted Manufacturers,
the Merchants Association of New
York and various business associa-
tions.
The manufacturers say that such
legislation would not be of any ben
efit to the public, as it would only
give them information that will mis-
lead the consumers
Lincoln Cromwell Of New York, a
mercantile banker, testified before the
committee for the Merchants Associa-
ton OF New York. During the war
MIR. Cromwell was with the Council
OF National Defense and the War In
ouStries Board. He was In charge Of
buying all the knit goods, of every
description, for the Army and Navy
Mr.. Cromwell told the House commit
tee that the specifications for an Army
shirt would occupy nearly a half COL
Qmn OF small type in a newspaper
but that these specifications if printed
In full on every yard of cloth would
mean nothing to the public. because
they leave out the one most important
and essential element-the skill Of
the weaver.
Gives an Illustration.
AS an illustration. Mr.. Cromwell
tolo the committee about experiences
with Army contractors for overcoats
some mad practically 100 per cent of
acceptances OF delivered goods, while
the rejection OF goods on other con-
tracts ran so high that one manufac-
turer pullt large factory near the
army depot where he would refnish
the goods TO save the cost of shipping
tnem back to his other factories
ANY specification written for the
guldance of manufacturers, Mr.. Crom-
wen explained. is for men who know
1ne business intimately. From the
merchandising standpoint he said, the
French bill is vicious legislation.
various witnesses testified that
ihere are such a large number of
grades of wool and shoddy (Which is
really re-worked wooD that 1t may
very easily happen that a piece of
cloth from virgin wool might really
prove to be of inferior grade to a
high-grade piece of shoddy cloth.
Another point emphasized by wit
nesses for the manufacturers was
mat 90 per cent of the yardage of
wool goods is worsteds. which by
their very nature cannot contain
shoddy and must be virgin wool. be-
cause long fbers are needed. The
other 40 per cent is woolens, of which
not more than one-half contain
shoddy. so that only 20 per cent OF
the yardage contains shoddy.
DIR. G. l.. Alsberg a witness.
DIR. Carl L. Alsberg, chief of the
bureau of chemistry. charged with
administration of the pure food and
drug act. was called in as a witness
He testified that the presence OF
shoddy could not be detected by 2
chemical analysis. but must be by a
microscopic analysis. 1t would be
impossible. he said, to tell the amount
OF shoddy even by microscopic analy-
Sis He suggested that the govern
ment should standardize grades OF
cloth.
In reply to this the manufacturers
said that the variations in the skill
OF weavers and other workmen, and
the variations in the standard grades
OF wool must be taken into consider
alton, and they told the committed
that standard grades of cloth would
be practically an unworkable PROPOSE.
ton.
Members of the committee are
pretty well satisfied that the French
bill Is In its death throes. Because
they have come to feel that the only
man who can tell what shoddy there
is in cloth is the man who makes the
cloth.
As a result of the hearings the com.
mittee may report out a general mis-
branding bill. providing that il good.