LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 141, 10 March 1920, Page 8

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

SHODDY AND WOOLLEN GOODS HOW WOOL GROWERS ARE . AFFECTED.. ■", Sir—Recently in tho United States tho i National Sheep and Wool Bureau of America has been . examining minutely statistics of manufactured woollen goods. It has compared these statistics with, the sheep returns for the States, and' tome of the results obtained reveal soma startling figure's. It is now said on high authority that 80 per cent, of the raw material used in the manufacture of "all-wool". clothing is shoddy. For some time the publio has realised that woollen fabrics aro not what they used to be—that they no longer give • reasonable service. People have chafed under this condition, but have been at a loss to know the cause. The public, prior to the war, had no idea of tho shortago of virgin wool. What kept the public in the dark was tho- ever increasing number of retailers who sold only "nil-wool" clothing—tho term "all wool" to the public implying virgin wool. Had the publio known that rags—shoddy—can 'be put through ' a carbonising process that eliminates all fibres, except the wool, so that it actually is."all wool," and had ;tho publio known' that'Bo per cent, of the raw material used in the manufacture of "allwool" woollen clothing is shoddy, and had the public also known that shoddy is reworked over and* over again, even as many as six times, the publio would have understood, how it has been, and is possible, for even tho very cheap clothiers to sell "all-wool" clothing, notwithstanding the scarcity of virgin wool. . The public did not ask the question: Does the fabric contain shoddy?—though 6hoddy is more harmful in a fabric than cotton. Tho however, when it set about clothing the military forces, did what the public did not. do— Insisted on knowing, in every instance, when the fabric contained shoddy, and so confronted men with. the fact that the world's production of virgin wool was, and is, entirely inadequate to meet existing demands.

What has been the result to the sheepbreeders of this unfair competition? Farmers have been discouraged and have gone into other and more profitable branches of agriculture. We will take the United States as a striking example. In 1903, . when the population of the United States was many millions less than it is now, and consequently tho domand for wool less than it is now, there were 63,964,870 sheep in America. Now, with a population far greater than in 1903, with more wealthy people and a consequent far greater demand for wool, there are only 49,863,000 sheep Inthe country—a direct loss of 14,101,870 sheep. How is this accounted for? Only by the rapid strides the. shoddy manufacturers have been making under the camouflage of "all-wool" clothing. This is a question not only for the farmer, but for tho man in the street.. Are we in New Zealand and Australia going to allow our principal industry, and . principal source of wealth, to be throttled. by a lot of'sharks who trade on the public's ign'oranco of the term "all wool"? The National Sheop'land.Wool Bureau of America will n6ti?allbw its industry to be throttled, and i& now demanding a "truth in fabric law," which will compel manufacturers to declare what percentage of shoddy is in their cloth. Critics say this law could not possibly be put into effect. Not only is it possible, but it is also very practicable. When you walk into the great meat packing houses around the Union Stock Yards at Chicago one of the things that appeals to the man who understands the business is the fact that overy carcass is examined minutely, not by one, but by a do?en Government inspectors, so that when the purchaser sees that little U.S. stamp he knows exactly what he is buying, and that the moat is absolutely sound and right. Why. cannot the purchaser of clothing see that little 6tamp and know exactly what he is buying, and. that • the cloth is absolutely eound and.right?.-It,can only be done if we have a "truth in fabric law." If a Government inspector can inspire confldence;in meat he can in cloth also.

And I will eay this: at present English cloth has a good name in the States, though' it does contain shoddy. _ But if America pets a "truth in fabric law" English Roods will not be popular because the public will not know what it is buying from England, and will know what it is getting from the States. Therefore, it is up to the New Zealand and Australian Governments to bring pressure' to bear on the Imperial Government in order to persuade the Old Country to introduce a "truth in fabric law" and so make her good name better and put tlio woollen industry on a sound and econoniio basis.—l am, etc, G. M. TOLHUEST. Chicago, January 8.