from the original fibers after they have been manufactured, and in most cases repeatedly worn or used. Reclaimed wool is employed entirely as a substitute for virgin wool to cheapen the cost of the fiber content. Its use is not disclosed to the public, although it results in an inferior product which gives less wear, less service, and less protection than a like product made of virgin-wool fibers. This is against public interest and should be corrected.

Opponents of this disclosure of wool-fiber content plead that such a course will reduce the salability of wool products containing reclaimed wool fibers, because the terms "reclaimed wool" or "reworked wool" connote inferiority in the minds of the consuming public. If this prejudice is not justified in fact, it will be quickly overcome if products made of reclaimed wool provide wear or service which the public deems satisfactory. The consumer, properly informed, may be trusted to make his own decisions regarding the kind of wool product he wants to buy. Today he is denied that right.

Similar arguments of consumer prejudice were advanced by opponents of the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. Practically all of the industries concerned predicted such a law would result in their ruin. Over frantic protests, the law was enacted. It has resulted in immeasurable benefits to the public and to the industries affected. Similar benefits will accrue to the wool industry when this legislation is enacted.

Mr. Chairman, I have here copies of some hundred letters addressed to the committee from the largest and most important manufacturers of women's garments in Chicago, New York, and California. I believe they have been filed with your committee, have they not?

The CLERK. I do not think so.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand that they have not. But you may leave them with the clerk.

Mr. ACKERMAN. I will leave them with the clerk.

These, I may say, represent 90 percent of the manufacturers of what we call better qualities of more substantial types of women's garments in the United States.

The CHAIRMAN. They are in favor of the legislation; in favor of this legislation?

Mr. ACKERMAN. The letters all strongly support the passage of this bill and are addressed to you as chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. You may leave those on file with the clerk. We will not include them in the record.

Mr. ACKERMAN. I have here also letters strongly supporting this movement from the Woman's Home Companion, the McCall Magazine, and the Ladies' Home Journal. They comprise altogether some eight or nine million circulation; and a letter also from Elizabeth Hawes, who is supposed to be one of the leading American women designers.

I would like to leave these with the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

Mr. BOREN. I think that it might be well to put those last three letters in the record and the others on file, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objection, that will be done.

LADIES' HOME JOURNAL, Philadelphia, April 11, 1938.

Hon. CLARENCE F. LEA,

House Office Building in Washington:

Ladies' Home Journal strongly in favor of measure to compel woolen industry to give complete information on content of fabrics stipulating whether they contain virgin wool, reclaimed wool, or combination of both or combination of wool and cotton or synthetics. In the interests of our readers and the consuming public we believe Congress can render a much-needed service.

Sincerely yours,

Hon. CLARENCE F. LEA,

MARY COOKMAN,
New York Managing Editor.

MCCALL CORPORATION,
New York, April 7, 1938.

Chairman, Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. LEA: We have been watching with interest reports of the congressional measures for standards in the wool industry.

We are constantly investigating consumer problems and are convinced that consumers today not only want to know, but are entitled to know, what they are buying. We feel that the distinction between virgin wool and reclaimed wool should be clearly labeled on all merchandise. Such a ruling should work no hardship on any honest manufacturer, but will allow consumers to understand the quality and price of the purchase.

We are now engaged in giving to our readers a series of articles telling them "how to buy." The material for these articles is based to a great extent on the standards of an industry, or of groups of manufacturers. When standards and identification are not clearly established, we can be of little help to our readers in their buying of wool merchandise. We hope, therefore, that the Congress will be able to clarify the confusion over virgin and reclaimed wool.

Sincerely,

Hon. CLARENCE F. LEA,

HILDEGARDE FILLMORE,
Style and Beauty Editor.

Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

APRIL 21, 1938.

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: As director of the consumer division, Crowell Publishing Co., I am writing to you urging the passage of a bill to label fabrics containing wool. The Martin bill, as I have read it, includes the following provisions which seem to me very important in such a legislative proposal:

(1) That the manufacturer of the fabric label each bolt with the percentage of virgin wool, reworked or reclaimed wool, cotton or rayon, thus: Virgin wool, 50 percent; reclaimed wool, 30 percent; rayon, 20 percent.

(2) That the same labeling be carried on or into the garment by the garment maker, and that it be retained in or on the garment by the retailer.

Under existing circumstances, the consumer, man or woman, buying a coat or a suit, frequently finds no label attached thereto except the name of the manufacturer or the retail dealer, and any garment containing any percentage of wool is sold to him or her as a woolen product.

I am not questioning whether a poor grade of virgin wool is any better than a first run of a fine reclaimed wool; I am merely setting forth the right of the consumer to know exactly what she is buying.

For the past 5 years the Federal Government, through its Bureau of Home Economics, and its consumer service in the United States Department of Agriculture, and the better type of magazine for women and the home, have been educating consumers in values and better buymanship. We cannot have the latter unless we have informative labeling.

To prove this statement, I bought a sports suit, advertised in the papers and placarded in the store as "woolen sheer." When a piece of the material was analyzed in a reliable laboratory, it was found to contain less than 50 percent of wool. Any woman paying $49.95 for this suit has a right to know whether she is getting (in addition to style and finish) all wool as advertised, or wool shoddy and rayon.

As associate editor of Woman's Home Companion for 35 years, I have built up Nation-wide contacts with women and I am convinced not only that they want informative labeling, but that they are entitled to its protection. I believe that any honest manufacturer is willing to give this protection through labels. I deeply regret that previous engagements make it impossible for me to attend the hearing before your committee.

DEAR SIR: I am seriously interested in the passage of the fair-trade-practice rules for the wool industry. I am a designer and maker of high-priced, quality clothes for women. It is vitally important not only to me, as a manufacturer, but to my customers to know exactly what goes into the making of the fabrics which I use and they wear. I can imagine no legitimate reason for any manufacturer of woolen being unwilling to label the contents of his fabric. It should be the privilege of those of us who make a determined effort to give the public the best in quality, to know exactly what we are buying. At the present time, our only recourse is to buy from certain firms who are willing to tell what sort of wool they use. Otherwise, we must have every piece of fabric tested ourselves. Surely the manufacturer of inexpensive clothing may of necessity use fabrics which are not virgin wool. The buyers of low-priced clothing are undoubtedly in the same position. It is certainly the obvious right of the clothing manufacturer and of the public to know, when they buy, exactly what they are buying. I cannot too strongly urge the passing of the bill which you have under consideration.

What has happened to the pure-silk industry in the United States, that it has nearly vanished, should be of vital interest in considering this bill. If some positive protection is not given to manufacturers of pure wool and to clothing manufacturers who, like myself, wish to guarantee quality, in a few years we will have disappeared from the scene, adding more millions to the present unemployed. I very sincerely hope that the bill in question will be passed by a large majority. Yours truly,

ELIZABETH HAWES.

STATEMENT OF MRS. KATHARINE M. ANSLEY, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, AMERICAN HOME ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION, WASHINGTON, D. C.

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Ansley.

Mrs. ANSLEY. My name is Katharine M. Ansley, executive secretary, American Home Economics Association, Washington, D. C.

The American Home Economics Association is a professional organization with affiliated associations in 47 States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. Its 11,000 or more members include teachers, home economics workers in the extension service of the United States Department of Agriculture, in the employ of business firms, hospitals, and other institutions, social welfare and public health organizations, and also homemakers in their own homes. Its program of work is adopted after careful and open consideration at the annual meeting of the association.

The work of the association in the field of consumer interests is primarily educational but it also includes cooperation with business and professional groups, and the support of legislation.

For some 15 years the association has stood for the general principle of fiber identification. To confirm this stand the following resolution was passed at the 1937 annual meeting of the association:

Whereas various agencies are engaged in efforts to secure identification of fibers in fabrics and garments: Therefore

Resolved, That the American Home Economics Association endorse this movement and that its members lend their assistance in every way possible. Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be sent to the Federal Trade Commission.

A part of its program of work for 1937-38 reads:

continuation of cooperation with commercial and business world. Fostering and stimulating of interest in quality and performance specifications for consumer goods and in the increased use of grade labels on the retail market.

The American Home Economics Association has long taken the position that all consumer goods offered at retail should be labeled with sufficient accurate information to enable the consumer to select the product which best meets his need at the price he wishes to pay. It holds that the information given on the label may be in the form of specifications to which the goods conform, grade designation, percentage composition, or other descriptive terms, so long as the information is pertinent, accurate, and adequate to enable the buyer to make an intelligent choice.

We favor Federal legislation to provide for labeling of textile fabrics to indicate the percentage, within reasonable tolerances, of each of the fibers contained in the fabric.

Consumers are at present seriously handicapped by their inability to identify fabrics, or to secure such information in the retail stores. As a result of man's inventive genius, the four staple fibers, cotton, wool, silk, and linen, as well as an artificial fiber, rayon, are now obtainable in a great variety of weaves, finishes, and combinations. Each of these fibers has qualities which make it valuable for a particular purpose, but new manufacturing processes and finishing have made it difficult for consumers-even for textile experts-to distinguish between the fibers in a fabric or to identify those present without laboratory tests.

I remember well the good old days when the only thing we had to do to distinguish between linen and cotton was to moisten the finger tips and examine the goods. That was all that was necessary.

However, if the consumer is to buy intelligently she must be able to pick out the fiber or combination of fibers which will best meet her needs, at her price. If she wants the particular characteristics of wool-warmth and felting qualities; or the fineness, strength, smoothness of silk; the washability and inexpensiveness of cotton; the draping quality of rayon, she should be able to know when she has that fiber. Further, if a fabric is to give her satisfactory service she must know how to handle it properly under the needle, in wear, cleaning, and storage. Each fiber requires somewhat different handling to insure maximum satisfaction.

Furthermore, many fabrics are now woven of two or more fibers, both natural and synthetic, in various combinations and percentage compositions. For proper handling, as well as for economic protection the name of each fiber and percentage present should be plainly stated on the label. Even the most experienced housewife is unable to determine what she is buying by the old method of feeling and seeing.

That is very plainly illustrated by the samples brought in by a previous witness.

Laboratory methods are needed. The manufacturer knows what fibers are used and he is in a position and should be required to label all his goods with the percentage of each fiber in the fabric. We believe that the provisions of H. R. 9909 should be extended to include all textile fabrics.

The definition in H. R. 9909 for the term "wool" does not seem to conform to the general principle which we support, that the simplest terms in identification of goods are of greatest help to the consumers. We believe our members would favor a simple definition of wool, restricted by the layman's conception of the term; namely, fiber from the fleece of sheep, and that it would be more helpful to the buyer to have animal fibers, such as camel's hair, rabbit fur, hog bristles, mohair, and the like, definitely specified by name, as well as by percentage.

The Senate definitions in the bill are much more acceptable to us than the one which now stands in this bill.

The association has never taken official action on the question as to whether in the opinion of its members the consumer would greatly benefit by labels distinguishing reworked and virgin wool. We have attempted to get an expression of opinion on this matter from individuals and groups in the association particularly interested in fiber identification, but find that they do not consider themselves sufficiently informed about the relative value of virgin and reworked wool under different types of wear to be able at present to give a clear-cut opinion.

In this connection may we suggest that the specialists in the several Government agencies who deal with wool and wool products be asked to advise the committee on this controversial matter, as well as on other aspects of the proposed legislation. Such Government bureaus as Home Economics and Agricultural Economics in the Department of Agriculture, and Standards in the Department of Commerce, should be in a position to give an unbiased opinion on the results of research or, if further research is necessary, to point out what is needed for a fair and equitable solution of the problems involved. The CHAIRMAN. We thank you, Mrs. Ansley.

STATEMENT OF IRVING C. FOX, COUNSEL, NATIONAL RETAIL DRYGOODS ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK, N. Y.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Fox, how long a statement do you have? Mr. Fox. Why, I do not have any prepared statement. I will take very little time, if the committee desires to go on. I would prefer to be heard at an adjourned meeting and take more time if the committee is going to meet again.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we really should adjourn, but I do not know-it might be if your statement is very short, it might be satisfactory if you make your statement at this time.

Mr. Fox. Vey well, I will make my statement now.

The CHAIRMAN. You have the privilege of extending your remarks, if you like.

Mr. Fox. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.