L I llllllill'lllllH THS A STL’DY CF TEXTILE FABRICS AND THEIR LABELS FALL 1941 Thais {cr the Degree of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Leona Mae Fisher 1943 ,wpfi ,- zit-313. - .i-S...:s§.a§. .. a. .. __-.. 1.... urn-nu...“ «' Ahkr... . , . Yul. T. L 1.- ml... awninmwinl. VII... ,.WF.AM..}.-u$.o.2r 5 I... . pl.’ 3% ‘4' ’I’nwr‘l . V ' ' . '-" ’2‘..." LL; A STUDY OF TEXTILE FABRICS AND THEIR LABELS FALL 1941 by mom 1m 35,11de A THESIS Submitted to the Graduate School ot’Mflohigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MLS‘I’EHOF ARTS Department of Textiles, Clothing; and Related Arts 1945 lemmcims m The sriter expresses sincere gratitude for the suggestions and for the frank and helpful criticism given by nerle Ford, Professor of Textiles, Clothing, and Related Arts. Acknosledgnent is made of the splendid coOperation of‘the stati‘ members and students in Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts. Appreciation is extended to those who gave time from their busy schedules to read part or all of the mnnscript and to make suggestions for revision and correc- tion. , Leona Mas Fisher Lake City, Michigan January 1, 1943 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I Related Studies CHAPTER II Purpose, Procedure, Findings CHAPTER III Deve10pment of Informative Labeling of Textiles CHAPTER IV Federal Trade Commission Regulations CHAPTER'V Conclusions and Recommendations REFERENCES BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX Record Blank Page 43 53 60 65 68 75 LIST or name IMBLE‘I Students CooPerating'in Study TABLE II Geographical Distribution of Stores TABLE III nethods Used in Labeling matches TABLE IV ‘Mbthods Used in Labeling Fabrics TIBLE'V Information Stamped on Salvages EIBLE‘VI Information Observed on Posters - TABLE'VII Information Given by Saleepersons TABLE'VIII ' Fiber Content of Swatches of Specific rubrics TABLE I! riber Content of Dress Lengths of Specific Fabrics TLBLE.I liber Content of Swatches TABLE 11 Fiber Content of Dress Lengths TABLEIXII Service Pastures of Fabrics as Indicated by Labels TABLEixIII Stores submitting Swatches and Selling Fabrics TABLE XIV’ Mbthods‘Used in Purchasing Fabrics According to Price Ranges IABLEZXI Price Range of Seatches and Dress Lengths TABLEJIII Price Range of Swatches of various Fibers and Fabrics TABLE.XVII Price Range of Fabrics of‘Various Fibers and Types TABLE.ZVIII Prices Paid for Fabrics 10 15 22 25 25 28 29 30 31 35 35 39 4O 41 42 II III VII LIST OF PLATE Typical Pin and String Tickets Typical EnveIOpes in Which Swatches were Enclosed Typical Enve10pes in Which Swatches Were Enclosed Typical Sales Slip from Telek's Slips Giving Suggestions for Handling Fabrics Included in Purchases from Relek's Imperfection Sheet and Tag Included 'with Two Purchases from Welek's Credit Policy Slip - Retail Merchants Association of Detroit 12 13 14 18 19 20 21 INTEDDIDTION MRODUCT ION m This study was-undertaken in order to determine the kind and amount of information which was available concerning the dress fabrics which were sxmnined and purchased by students in the Department of Textiles, Clothing, and Related Arts of Michigan State College during the fall of 19‘1, and to determine the extent to which desirable textile labeling’ practices were being carried on by retailers. The production of new types of synthetic fabrics has been increas- ing. Many of these are similar in appearance to fabrics made from nat- ural fibers, but are unlike them in wearing qualities and care required. Lack of information concerning these fabrics can result in their misuse by consumers. Such misuse creates economic taste, dissatisfaction, ill will, and distrust between consumers and retailers, retailers and whole- salers, wholesalers and manufacturers. Consumer and trade dissatisfaction has resulted in the promulga- tion of several trade practice rulings for the textile industry by the Federal Trade Commission. Rules were promulgated for the rayon indus- try October 26, 1957, for the shrinkage of woven cotton yard goods June 31, 1938, for the_silk industry November 4, 1936, for the cotton con- werting industry August 18, 1939, for the labeling of wool products July 15, 1941, and for the linen industry February 1, 1941. This study should show to what extent certain retail stores are using infomative labeling on yard goods. It should indicate the degree to which they are conformdng to the trade practice rulings of the Fed- eral Trade Comission. It should suggest the price range of swatches which retailers could profitably send to the college for student selec- tion and purchase. It should indicate the progress that has been made in incur! studi: Scone pure: breed accuracy and adequacy of informative labeling of fabrics since earlier studies were made by Kansas State College (1939) and by the Texas Bonn Economics Association (1939). It should portray fashions in fabrics and purchasing habits of students in Michigan State College in the period immediately preceding the entry of the United States into World War II. CHAPTER I REIATED STUDIES m RELATED STUDIB m Fabric labeling studies have been made by the Texas Home Economics Association and Kansas State College. These studies indicated a need for more accurate and more adequate labeling on both ready-to-wear and yard goods. The two year labeling study sponsored by the Texas Home Economics Association was completed in 1939 (1,2). The committee on the standard- isation of consumer goods studied labels on ready made garments to determine their adequacy and to discover whether there was any relation- ship between the satisfaction received from the article and the informa- tion given on the label. Labeling information found on 803 labels collected by high school and college students was evaluated the first year. Each label sent in was accompanied with a statement regarding the satisfaction the article had given the student, the price paid for the garment, and the informa- tion given by labels regarding color, fit, style, and size where applic- able. I . The study included 126 dresses. Of this number 88 were cotton, 18 silk, 6 linen, 1 rayon, l wool, 2 mixed fibers, and in 10 the fiber con- tent was not indicated. There were 27 unsatisfactory cotton dresses. Eight faded, 3 shrunk, 2 pulled at the seams, 4 did not fit, 4. were not durable, ‘ were poorly constructed, and 2 had unsatisfactory trimmings. Sises were given on 21 of the 126 dresses. Other information given in- cluded the trade name on 121, manufacturer's name on 35, manufacturer's name and address on 31. A few carried guarantees. Ten were guaranteed colorfast, 8 preshrunk, 1 pure linen, 1 pure silk and 1 was guaranteed to fit. Five carried guarantees which were not specific. The cotton price range was $0.98 to $5.00 and the silk price range was $9.00 to $19.75. Price was not an indication of satisfaction. Labels of 37 slips were submdtted. All bore trade names and 3 the manufacturer's name.. Five were labeled silk, 5 rayon, and 16 were not identified in regard to fiber content. Two were crepe, 5 satin, 5 knit- ted and 1 taffeta. Seven.were guaranteed against fading, 4 against ssmm slippage, and a knitted one against running. Seven_were considered un- satisfactory. Five faded, 1 pulled and split, and 1 shrunk. The prices of 5 were given. The price range was $1.00 to $2.98. live pairs of pajamas out of the eleven included in the study were considered unsatisfactory. One nightgown out of the three studied was considered unsatisfactory. The criteria for judging satisfaction were not listed. Forty-seven shirts ranging from.$0.69 to $2.50 were included in the study. Forty-one carried trade names, 13.manufacturer's names, and 5 both trade names and manufacturer's names. Fifteen were guaranteed against fading, including 4 white shirts. Seventeen were labeled regard- ing shrinkage. Thirty-eight were reported satisfactory. The 7 unsatis- factory ones were not guaranteed against any of their unsatisfactory qualities. Three shrunk and l, priced $0.98, faded when washed. Common faults of all the garments considered unsatisfactory by the students were fading, excessive shrinkage, pulling at the seams, poor wearing qualities, and inferior workmanship. Price was not an accurate guide to quality. NOne of the unsatisfactory garments carried guaran- tees. Information regarding fiber content was often 1acking and some- times.misleading'when given. A.nsed for standardisation of sises was indicated. The second year questionnaires were sent to 568 Texas manufacturers of food and textile products. Only 15 per cent of this number replied. The year the products were first marketed, the products manufactured, the trade names used, the method of labeling, and the area of distribu- tion were indicated on the questionnaire. It was found that grade differences were not indicated by 52 per cent of the manufacturers who replied. Quality variations were indica- ted in a number of ways. Twenty-six.per cent used trade names, 5 per cent had their own numbering system, 10 per cent used different colors on labels, and 8 per cent varied label wording. .L label sample was returned by the manufacturers who replied. They gave suggestions for educating the consumer to buy wisely. Their sug- gestions included: educate the consumer so that he will understand the meaning of the label, teach him to select the quality and type suitable for his purposes, and encourage him to note service qualities of the product purchased for future reference in buying. In all, 1,526 labels were studied. None of these labels gave all the information the consumer should have before purchasing the article. The articles carrying labels with the greatest amount of information gave the most satisfaction. This study points out the need for more informative labeling on ready-tedwear garments. I Available information regarding the fiber content of fabrics on the retail market was studied for accuracy at Kansas State College during .12§2_(5). .A total of 268 fabrics from.18imddwestern stores was studied. The information given on labels and given by salespersons was noted and recorded. IMicroscOpic and chemical tests were made to check the accur- acy of this information. It was feund that single fiber fabrics were most frequently labeled correctly and identified correctly by salespersons. Fifty-seven carried labels 40.‘ per cent accurate, while sales information was 31.8 per cent accurate. The least accurate information was given on the 135 synthetic fabrics studied. Thirty-four were labeled. These labels were partially accurate. Sales information on 110 fabrics of this group was 8.2 per cent accurate, 85.4 per cent partially accurate, and 6.4 per cent wrong. The percentage of fiber content was given on one label. This was in- correct. ‘Verbal percentages were accurate in one out of twelve in- stances. It was concluded that the information given was both inadequate and inaccurate for consumer satisfaction. CHAPTERII PURPOSE, PROCEDURE, FINDINGS PURPOSE, PROCEDURE, FTNDINGS m This study of the types of fabrics which were examined and pur- chased by the students in four clothing classes of Michigan State Col- lege during the fall term of 1941, was designed to determine: . s. the methods used by the students in purchasing fabrics b. the extent to which students relied upon the cooperation of stores in.various cities of the United States in order to secure fabrics which they deemed suitable c. the types, amounts, and prices paid for fabrics used by stu- dents in the classes selected for study d. the kind, amount, and form of information which accompanied fabrics e. the extent to which retailers were complying with the textile labeling regulations of the Federal Trade Commission. The author prepared a simple record blank (Appendix, p.76 ) which each student was asked to complete. In addition to the facts which the student listed, she attached any swatches which had been given to her during her preliminary search; a sample piece of the fabric purchased, and the sales slips and labels which accompanied it. The data were then compiled and summarized (Chapter II). An effort was made to draw some conclusions as to the status of textile labeling as shown by the approximately 1400 swatches submitted by retailers and wholesalers, and 245 dress lengths of yard goods pur- chased by students in the Department of Textiles, Clothing, and Related Ants of Michigan State College, East Lansing,iMichigan, during the early fall or 19410 Emphasis should be given to the fact that students are encouraged to purchase fabrics from their local stores whenever possible; that in East Lansing there are no stores which carry dress fabrics, and that frequently it is necessary for purchases to be made by mail. The fact that 21 retail stores sent more than 1400 small swatches to Michigan State College in one term,.may appear to be uneconomical and unreasone able. It should be noted, however, that one store has found it so advan- tageous to submit samples, that approximately 1200 were included in the group, fall term, 1941. It is the policy of this firm to mount and organise swatches according to type of fabric, fiber content, and color; to lend them for a period of weeks; recall them.after they have served their purpose; bring the collections up-to-date and send them again at the beginning of another termb Because the same information is given for fabrics of like type but different color, it seemed unnecessary for the purposes of this study to tabulate all data. Consequently 82 representative swatches were chosen for study. Two hundred fifty students were enrolled in the clothing construc- tion classes during the fall term, 1941 (Table I, p. 9). Two hundred thirtybtwo students c00perated in this study. Of these, 92 were enrolled in.TC & RA 150a, an elementary clothing course featuring the use of commercial patterns in the construction of a school or sports dress; 76 were enrolled in TO a RA 250, a course in.the study of pattern mak- ing and dress design; 53 were enrolled in Tc 5 EA 552, an advanced dressmaking course in which wool fabrics are used; 11 were enrolled in To &>RL 352e, a course in design and construction of an afternoon dress TABLE’I Students 000perating in Study Students Students Percentage of Course Number Enrolled Cooperating Students Cooperating re a as 150s 97 92 ' 94.86 so a RA 250 82 76 92.68 Tc & EA 352 58 55 91.37 Tc & RA 352c 15 11 84.61 Totals 250 232 92.az TABLE II 10 Geographical Distribution of Stores Store Name Address A. a S. Silks a Noolens B. Altman 5. Co. imulexen a Elwood Co. The F. N. Arbaugh Co. The Boston Store J. B. Branch .3. Co. Herbert N. Bush, Inc. Carson Pirie Scott 5. Co. B. H. Comstock 6: Co. A. H. Corwin Dry Goods Edson 5. Moore, Inc. Grossmens 5. Co. Halls Bros. The Wm. Henserer Co. A. B. Herpolsheimer Co. The J. L. Hudson Co. Jo We Knapp COe Lansing Dry Goods Co. Lord 5: Taylor He He Maoy & 00., Ines Mandel Bros. Marshall Field 6: Co. Mary Ann Silks James McCutcheon 8: Co. James W. McCreery & Co. M111. Dry GOOdS 000 J. Ce Penney COe Howard B. T. Radcliff, Interior Decorators ' S. Stapler Fabrics Paul Stekette & Sons Stern Bros. Stillman's John Wannamaker Wm. C. Weian Co. Chas. F. Welsk a 00., Inc. ' George Wyman & Co. New York, New York New York , New York Minneapolis, Minnesota Lansing, Michigan Chicago, Illinois Goldwater, Michigan Flint, Michigan Chicago, Illinois Traverse City, Michigan Marion, Michigan Detroit, Michigan Muskegon, Michigan Cleveland, Ohio Buffalo, New York Grand Rapids, Michigan Detroit, Michigan Lansing, Michigan Lansing, Michigan New York, New York . New York, New York Chicago, Illinois Chicago, Illinois New York, New York New York, New York New York, New York Lansing, Michigan Lansing, Michigan Toledo, Ohio Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Grand Rapids, Michigan New York, New York Jackson, Michigan New York, New York Saginaw, Michigan St. Louis, Missouri South Bend, Indiana 11 of silk or fabric which handles like silk. They enjoyed the privilege of selecting their fabrics either in person or by mail from 56 stores in 19 cities in 8 states (Table II, p. 10). LABELING METHODS USED ON SWATCPLE’S STUDIED Pin tickets were used most commonly in labeling swatches. The amount of information given on this type of label is necessarily limr ited. Tickets from.Hudson's and Marshall Field's are commendable. They give fiber content, width and price in all instances. Those from Hud- son's also state service features in many instances. These include washability, permanence of finish, and color fastness (Plate I, p. 12). Enclosing the swatches in envelopes seemed more satisfactory than pin or string ticket labeling. ZMore information regarding the care and use of fabrics was given on the enve10pes. Specific statements were made regarding special finishes (Plate 11, p. 13 & Plate III, p. 14). The greater number of purchases by mail were made from stores which mounted their swatches on charts in loose leaf booklets. This method of labeling has several advantages: a greater number of samples is apt to. be submitted, the appearance of each sample is better, a maximum amount of information can be given, and price comparisons can be made more‘ readily (Table III, p. 15 a. Table XIII, p. '35). Egghteen of the 21 stores submitting swatches used pin ticket label- ing} Three stores, Amulexen & Elwood Co., Mhrshall Field & Co., and James McCutcheon & Co. placed some swatches in envelopes. The fabric name, fiber content, price, width, special finishes, and store name were printed on the face of the envelOpe and a variety of colors of the same fabric were included (Table III, p. 15). m1 Typical Pin and String Tickets Kl. ‘ ”Militant goes v IAIJI use“ cm ) is sent. 13 PLATEII Typical aneloPes in which Swatches were Enclosed : fisrshsll mid". presents ’ sunnmoss ) i woven of 80%. SPUN RAYON 15% RABBITS’ HAIR 5% VIRGIN W00). ‘1 25 yard i 38-39 inches wide MARSHALL MILD I: COMPANY I) Fabrics—Second flew, South, Itete flAXAIBII. lINIEN Guaranteed Fest Colors A crease misting, fully shrunk fabric insuring perfect fit of garment after washing. Width 36% Inch Price $1.50 Per yard WASH GOODS SECTION MARSHALL FIELD & co. State & Washington Sts. Chicago. Ill. 14 PLATE III Typical EnveloPea in which Swatches were Enclosed kirk Sedan Second floor MAISIIALI. MILD & COMPANY State and Wellington Sta. — Chicago PRESENTS YIPW All Spun Rayon Crown Tested Ior labric durability, color Iastness and general wearing uaIities. . ‘TEBILIZED q Tested Crease—Resistance I*Reg. U. 5. Pat. 0". ML amen OI COLORS. “GUIDING WW. NAVY I ILACK 30"139" WIDE 856 m YARD --.'———‘1 I .fl 9’ ._—° °_—'—— a M smromzen SHRUNK a ANTI came W ”I? B. L. Proce- 1'. Guaranteed Fest Colors . A crease resisting fully shrunk sheer fabric insuring perfect fit of garment /) after washing. “ Width 38 Inch Price 28¢ per yd. Wash Goods Section 2nd Floor MARSHALL FIELD & CO. State 81 Washington Sls. Chicago, Ill. THIS FAIRIC WILL NOT SHRINK MORE THAN I7. TEST METHOD CCC-T-I’le TABLE III Methods Used in Labeling snatches 15 Pin Store Nana Swatches Tickets Enve10pes Fabric Stamp L. a S. Silks a. Woolens Be Altmn & COe Armlexen a. Elwood Co. The F. N. Arbaugh Co. The Boston Store Je Be Branch & COe Herbert N. Bush, Inc. Carson Pirie Scott a. Co. B. H. Comstock & Co. A. H. Corwin Dry Goods Edson 6: Moore, Inc. Grossmens a Go. Hallo Bros. The Wm. Hemerer Co. A. B. Herpolsheimer Co. The J. L. Hudson Co. J. W. Knapp Co. Lansing Dry Goods 00. Lord 3. Taylor R. H. Macy a 00., Inc. Mandel Bros. Marshall Field 5. Co. Mary Ann Silks James McCutcheon a 00. James W. McCreery 8: Co. mm Dry Goods Co. J. C. Penney Co. Hoaerd R. T. Radcliff, Interior Decorators S. Stapler Fabrics 43 Paul Steketee 8. Sons Stern Bros. 6 Stillman's John Wannamaker 4 Fin. 0. Weiehman Co. Chas. F. Welek a 60., Inc. 82 George Wynn a. Go. emf-‘35:. CD 0'! mm 0" 0' H ”harem-ammo: 3 19 20 6 1 GI 0'00} 0" II" mbhmmgmum 43 82 13 I Chart Pom) 7 (Chart Form) (Chart Form) Totals 334 313 21 16 Tie swatches from Amulexen a Elrocd co. and one swatch from James Eccutcheon a Go. happened to show selvagefistamps. These stamps indica- ted that the fabrics were imported. Three woolen swatches from Paul Steketee 5. Sons happened to be clipped so that stamps showed which stated the trade name of the fabric (Table III, p. 15). String tickets were not used on the swatches. Three stores, Mary Ann Silks, S. Stapler Fabrics, and Chas. F. Helek 8:60., Inc. mounted their swatches on charts. These charts stated the fabric name, price, width, and in several instances mentioned spec- ial finishes and gave cutting directions (Table III, p. 15). LABEING METHODS USED ON DRESS LENGTHS The dress lengths purchased from Chas. F. Welek 8c 00., Inc. were labeled most satisfactorily. Each dress length was accompanied with a string or a pin ticket (Plate 1, p. 12) and a legible sales slip shich gave specific information regarding the character of the fabric (Plate IV, p. 18). Mimeographed sheets giving suggestions for cutting and set-- ing accompanied a few of the fabrics from this store. They are commend- able (Plate 7, p. 19). This store also enclosed a sheet or attached a label to the fabric whenever an imperfection was present. Examples of these labels are given (Plate VI, p. 20). Twenty-seven of the 245 dress lengths purchased had salvage stamps. They supported the informtion given on sales slips and string tickets in most instances. This is a satisfactory labeling practice that should be used more widely. The stamp is placed on the fabric at the time of manufacture, therefore it should be a reliable source of information for both merchants and consumers (Table V, p. 23}. 17 A slip designed to discourage the expensive practice of returning merchandise was enclosed with the purchases from The J. 1.. Hudson Co. This had been prepared by the Retail Merchants Association of Detroit (Plate VII, p. 21). All dress lengths purchased were accompanied by sales slips. String tickets were attached to all of the woolen fabrics purchased from Chas. I. Welek a 00., Inc. All other fabrics purchased from the store were accompanied by pin tickets. These tickets stated that the fabric was cut to order and was not returnable. They also gave the stock num- ber, fiber content, color, price, yards, name of purchaser, and special information regarding finishes (Table IV, p. 22). Separate sheets were included with three of the dress lengths from Chas. F. Welek 8a 00., Inc. One sheet stated that an allowance had been made for a slight flaw and requested examination of the fabric before cutting (Plate VI, p. 20). The other two sheets gave directions for handling and sewing synthetic and wool Jerseys (Plate V, p. 19). Twenty-seven of the dress lengths purchased carried salvage stamps (Table N, p. 22 a Table V, p. 23). One drapery fabric was labeled "Bonded Fabrics - Regency scrolls - Vat dyes - 100 per cent completely guaranteed washable and sunfast." Three woolens were labeled ”Botany woolen - Ready for the Needle,” two, "Forstmann Woolen.” Forty-one woolens were labeled ”Ready for Sewing" and one ”Salvage Edge 1/8 inch." Three cotton seersuckers were stamped "Shrinkage l per cent," and two rayons “Union Made - Textile Workers Union of America.” One cotton, an Indian Head was labeled "Pemanent Finish.“ One silk crepe was stamped ”Pure Dye Silk.” Tuelve linens were labeled ”Vitaliaed - Tebilised.‘ 18 PLATEIV Typical Sales Slip from Welek's mmyrflp.-m ”>40 90 m>_u_ 7...: H72) MQJJDRMC._.;z ml 000 an >m QmmEIm . . m m m 0 s. .10. a m 1. “gm OH 92382 2 oz. z< Emmmwmto .12: 9.1.3; 1.53 mezmsza ~59 >¢zur uzzo>> 522 much: mmflpwz . . OF 0.5m EDO> . m>Z_OU um KMJM>> ..h_ qmIdu.. n. l-I\-¢.I.111|Ill I...\..e.. 50 TABLEIX Fiber Content of Swatches Fiber Percentage Fiber Identified Fiber Content Assigned Swatches Nmnber by Label by Label By Author Cotton 72 13 59 Cotton 5: Rayon 4 4 Linen 15 13 Rayon 118 53 65 Rayon a Silk 8 8 Silk 19 19 Metal Cloth 2 2 . I001 87 65 65 , 22 Fiber Not Stated 11 11 Totals 334 177 65 167 31 TABLE.XI Fiber Content of Dress Lengths Fiber Percentage Fiber Fiber Dress Lengths Identified Fiber Content Identified .Assigned Purchased Number' by Label by Label by Sales Slip by Author Cotton 68 21 67 1 Cotton and Rayon 5 5 Linen 16 16 16 Rayon 90 14 14 75 Silk 4 2 4 Silk and Rayon 2 1 1 I001 60 60 43 27 Totals 245 114 43 134 76 w 32 slips; silk and rayon mixtures were identified either by labels or by sales slips; woolens were identified by labels and sales slips. SERVICE FEATURES A few of the cotton fabrics_purchased carried labels which stated that they were ”washable,” ”pro-shrunk," ”color fast," and had a ”per- manent finish." Two cottons, a gingham.and a seersucker, and one rayon and cotton suiting were labeled "washable." Three chambrays and one gingham were labeled "pre-shrunk.” One cotton, an Indian Head, carried a permanent finish salvage stamp. One gingham and two seersuckers were labeled "color fast” (Table XII, p. 33). Salvage stamps on all of the linens purchased stated that they were "Vitalised - Tebilized.” One was labeled "shrink proof.” The two silk crepes and the one paper taffeta silk were labeled "pure dye." The silk and rayon velvet was labeled "crush resistant.” Salvage stamps and labels on 38 of the woolens stated that they were "Ready for the Needle," "Pm-shrunk,” and "Decatized" (Table XII, p. 55). STORES PATRONIZED Thirty-eight per cent of all the purchases were made in the State 31' Hichigan. Twenty-two and four-tenths per cent of these purchases were made in the city of Lansing, a few miles from the campus. This city has a papulation of 78,753. County seats throughout the state with populations ranging from 7,343 (Goldwater) to 1,623,452 (Detroit) lecured 15.60 per cent of the purchases. The J. L. Hudson Co. secured 8. 97 per cent of these purchases. TKBLEUXI 33 I Service Features of Fabrics as Indicated by Labels A. Cottons Tyree! Fabric Washable Pre Permanent Shrunk * Finish Color Fast Chambray Cotton Drapery Gingham Indian.Heed Seersucker Spun Rayon & Cotton Totals rs Ft re re B. Linens moor Fabric Vitalissd‘Tebilizcd Shrink Proof Linen 12 1 C. Silks Type of Fabric Crepe Taffeta Silk a Rayon'velvet Pure Dye Crush Resistant Totals D. 'floolens moot Fabric Ibolens Ready for Needle 38 Pre Shrunk Decatised 58 38 Chas. F. Welek 5. Co., Inc. obtained 59.19 per cent of the pur- chases made. This is both a wholesale and retail store in the city of St. Louis which has a papulation of 816,048. It caters to college trade. Nine New York City stores obtained 14.2 per cent of the purchases. Chicago stores and S. Stapler Fabrics in Philadelphia each secured 5.2 per cent of the patronage. ‘Halle Bros. in Cleveland, Howard B. T. Rad- cliff, Interior Decorators in Toledo, The Hm.'Henzerer Co. in Buffalo, and George Tyman a Ca. in South Bend obtained 1.6 per cent of the pur- chases made (Table XIII, p. 55). rm'rHons or PURCHASING '— 0f the 245 purchases, 163 were made by mail from 10 of the 21 stores whose swatches were included in the study. Ninety-six of these purchases were from Chas. r. Welek 5. Co., Inc.., 15 from The .r. L. Hud- son Co., 11 from A. a S. Silks a Woolens, 11 from Lord 5: Taylor, 11 from.James‘S. MCCreery a Co., 8 from.S. Stapler Fabrics, 7 from Mar- shall Field & Co., 2 from B. Altman a Co., 1 fram.Ammlexen a Elwood Co., and 1 from.Carson Pirie Scott a Ca. (Table XIII, p. 35 a Table XIV, p. 36). Thirty-three_per cent or 82 of the 245 dress lengths were pur- chased over the counter: 23 from.15 stores which did not submit swatches and 4 from.The J. L. Hudson Co. which submitted 33 swatches. These stores were probably located in the students' home shapping cen- ters. 0f the 55 purchases made in Lansing stores, 23 were fram.J. fl. Knapp Co., 1? from The F. N. Arbaugh Co., 9 from Mills Dry Goods Co., 3 from Lansing Dry Goods Co., and 3 from.J. C. Penney Co. (Table XIII, p. 35 5 Table XIV} p. 36. TABLE III I Stores Submitting Swatches and Selling Fabrics 35 Store Name Fabrics “Swatches Sent :Dress Lengths Purchased .A. & S. Silks a Woolens B. Altman a. Ca. Ammlexen A Elwood Co. The F. N. Arbaugh Co. The Boston Store J. B. Brauch a Ca. Herbert N. Bush, Inc. Carson Pirie Scott a Co. B. H. Cometock a Co. A. H. Corwin Dry Goods Edson J. Moore, Inc. Grossmmns & Co. Helle Bros. The Hm. Henzerer Co. A. B. Herpolsheimer Co. The J. L. Hudson 00. J. W. Knapp Ca. Lansing Dry Goods Co. Lord a: Taylor R. H. Macy 5. Co., Inc. Handel Bros. . Marshall Field a Ca. Mary Ann Silks James McCutcheon a. Ca. James W. McCreery 8: Co. Hulls Dry Goods Co. J. C. Penney Co. Howard B. T. Radcliff, Interior Decorators S. Stapler Fabrics Paul Steketee & Sons Stern Bros. Stillmsn's John Wannamaker In. C. Welshman Co. .Chaae Fe Wolck & COe, Ines George Hyman a Ca. 3 19 21 H U! 0" ()3 ONhtPtOQ'QOIUIOOOlGOOOCOOOGOOHO’I #- U! 120 00090030 H KID-'10P igigrararardkrharoraashrc>hi H H HUQDOl-‘O‘IOOHU t0 HOIHONOO'ICD Totals 1451 245 ‘An estimate of the number of swatches sent. See page 8. ”Mom than this number of swatches may have been sent by the stores. This represents the number turned over to the author by the students (See Appendix, p. 76). TABLE XIV 36 Methods Used in Purchasing Fabrics According to Price Ranges Price Range Total Number Purchased Per Yard Purchased Over the Counter 1 By Mail 85.00-36.00 2 0 2 84. 0045.00 5 0 5 taco-$4.00 14 2 is $2.00¢3.00 46 5 41 31.00-62.00 111 58 73 30.00-¢1.00 67 57 50 Total 245 82 163 37' Sixty-seven per cent of the 245 dress lengths were purchased by 93.93 All fabrics costing $4.00 to $6.00 per yard were purchased by mail. .Approximstely 86 per cent of the fabrics costing’$2.00 to $4.00 and 66 per cent of the fabrics costing $1.00 to $2.00 were purchased by mail. Of those costing $1.00 or less, 55 per cent were purchased over the counter. Of the fabrics costing $2.00 or less, 43 per cent were purchased over the counter (Table XIV} p. 56). PRICE RANGES SWATCHES The price range per yard of the swatches included in the study was $0.25 to $10.50. The price range of the swatches considered to be cot- tone was $0.25 to $1.98; of the cotton and rayon mixtures $1.00 to $1.25; of the linens $0.90 to $2.50; of the rayons $0.68 to $3.95; of the rayons and silks $1.65 to $5.65; of the silks $1.15 to $6.50; of the metal cloths $2.95 to $3.75: and of the woolens $1.25 to $10.60 (Table XV, p. 59 a Table XVI, p. 40). DRESS LENGTHS The price range per yard of the dress lengths purchased was $0.29 to $5.15. Students in T0 a BA 150a, Clothing, paid from $0.95 to $5.98 per 1352 for 94 dress lengths. Fifty of the fabrics cost $1.00 to $1.50; 36 from.$0.45 to $1.00; and 12 from,$1.59 to $3.98. These students used fabrics of cotton, rayon, rayon.mixtures, and linen. The 76 students in TC 5 RA 250, Dress Design, paid from.$0.29 to £2.45 per yard for 84 dress lengths. Forty-eight of this group cost from:$1.00 to $1.95 per yard; 28 fram.$0.29 to $0.98; and 6 from.$2.00 38 to $3.45. Students in this course used fabrics of cotton, rayon, silk, and mixtures of these fabrics. The 53 students in TO & RA 352, Advanced Clothing, paid from.$l.96 to $5.15 per yard for 56_dress lengths. Twenty-eight pieces cost from $2.85 to $3.95 per yard; 20 cost from $1.95 to $2.75; and s from $5.98 to $5.15. These students used woolens. Eleven students in TO & RA 352a, Advanced Clothing, paid from.$l.25 . to $3.95 per yard for 11 dress lengths. Five of the 11 paid from.$1.95 to $2.25, 3 paid from.$l.25 to $1.65, and 3 paid from.$2.50 to $3.95. These students used silk and rayon fabrics. The average price per yard paid by students in the clothing can- struction classes at Nflchigan State College fall term.194l was $1.87; the median price $1.29; the medal price $1.00. The average price per yard paid by students in TO & RA 150a, Clothing, was $1.12; in T0 & RA 250, Dress Design, $1.10; in TC A RA 352, Advanced Clothing, $3.08; and in TC & RA 3520, Advanced Clothing, $2.17. The median price per yard paid by students was: TC & RA 150a, $1.25; TC & RA 250, $1.19; TC & RA 352, $2.95; and TC & RA 352e, 82.25 (Table XV, p. 39, Table XVII, p. 41, & Table XVIII, p. 42). 39 TABLE XV Price Range of Swatches and Dress Lengths Price Range Number Price Range Number Stretches Snatches Purchases Purchases Stores Sent Sent Made . Made A. a S. Silks 8c Woolens 3 $0.90 $6.00 11 $1.10 $2.25 B. Altman 5: Co. 19 0.45 - 6.50 2 0.65 ~ 4.50 Anulexen 8c Elwood Co. 21 0.59 - 1.85 l The Fe Ne Arbaugh CO. 6 0e59 " 3.4-9 1? 0036 "' 2098 The Boston Store 1 0.69 - 0 Jo Be Branch & CO. 0 1 1075 Herbert N. Bush, Inc. 0 2 2.50 - 3.98 Carson Pirie Scott 8: Co. 8 0.68 - 4.50 l 1.00 B. H. Comstock a. Ca. 0 1 0.79 A. H. Corwin Dry Goods 0 l 0.59 Edson a. Moore, Inc. 0 l 0.39 Grossmens a. Ca. 0 1 1.95 H8110 BT08. 0 1 1.00 The Wm. Henserer Co. 0 l 1.69 A. B. Herpolsheimer Co. 0 l 0.49 The J. L. Hudson Co. 33 0.49 - 4.95 22 0.35 - 4.95 J. W. Knapp Co. 6 0.59 - 1.20 23 0.36 - 2.98 Lansing Dry Goods Co. 0 3 0.59 - 1.29 Lord 8: Taylor 16 1.00 - 3.95 11 1.29 - 5.00 R. H. Macy 5. Co., Inc. 5 0.59 ‘- 1.88 o Mandel Bros. 6 0.48 - 1.48 0 Marshall Field 56 Co. 37 0.38 - 4.00 7 0.68 - 1.50 Mary Ann Silks 8 0 James McCutcheon a. Co. 19 0.75 - 5.50 11 0.79 - 2.98 James W. McCreery a Ca. 4 2.25 - 2.29 0 H111. Dry Goada CO. 4 Oe79 "' 1098 9 0049 - 1098 Jo Ce Penney CO. 2 0079 " 0098 3 0.49 "’ 0089 Howard B. T. Radcliff, 0 l 1.00 Interior Decorators Se Stapler Fabric: 43 0.90 "' 5.95 8 1.25 "’ 2000 Paul Stekette A: Sons 0 5 0.29 - 2.69 Stern Bros. 6 1.98 - 3.98 0 Stillman's 0 2 0.69 - 0.98 John Wannamaker 4 0.25 -- 2.00 0 Wm. C. Reichman Co. 0 1 1.59 Chas. F. Welek 6: Co., Inc. ‘1200 0.45 -10.50 96 0.45 - 5.15 George Hyman a Ca. 0 1 1.39 Totals 1451 $0.2M10.50 245 $0.29 4.55.15 ’ See page 8. TABLEIXVI Price Range of Swatches of Various Fibers and Fabrics ‘ P O ‘ U ’ C o . fl k . ,1 g C _ 7 ...... T . ‘ a ‘ “" A n ‘0‘”' ‘ _~.. We“ 40 TABLEJXVII Price Range of Fabrics of‘various Fibers and Types 41 Brocade -,_- .— 3.“?! Dress Lengths Purchased Number Price Range Cotton Chambray 8 $0.59 «$0.79 Chints ' l 0.35 Corduroy 14 0.89 - 1.29 Drapery 1 1.19 Gabardine 2 0.89 Hemespun l 1.00 Indian.Heed l 0.49 Lace 1 2.00 Pique 11 0.45 3.25 Percale 2 0.29 0.59 Seersucker 5 0.36 0.85 Upholstery 1 1.95 velveteen 9 0.69 1.95 Cotton & Rayon _Crepe l 0.59 Suiting 4 1.00 Linen PlaIn Linen 15 1050 2050 Embroidered Linen l 3.98 Rayon _IIpaca 3 1.00 1.19 Bengaline 2 1.19 1.29 1 'I .8 42 TABLEWXVIII Prices Paid for Fabrics Number Purchased Price per yd. Number 150a 250 352 5E0 85.15 5.00 4.95 4.75 4.50 4.25 3.98 5.95 3.75 5.45 5.25 2.98 2.95 2.85 2.75 2.69 3.65 2.55 2.50 2.49 2.45 2.35 2.25 2.00 1.98 1.95 1.79 1.75 1.69 1.65 firurhracrdkrhorah' F'F‘h‘ H g...- nonohrs>rdcs-srdrd re retarareta H ”GUI-'0uumt—‘t—‘MfiHUD-‘GQHNHHhO‘NNHHHHH 'recsrdrh .-'~. A.“ CHAPTER III LWLOR‘EM OF INEORMITI'VE‘ FILING OF TMILES W 45 WORM OF INE'ORMXEIVE LABELING OF TEDC'I‘ILES ACTIVITIES OF CQESUHER INTEREST GROUPS Two consumer organisations have been active in the promotion of in- formativs labeling for textile fabrics. The American Home Economics .Association works constantly for the promotion of standards for consumer goods which will be foundations for wiser consumer choices. The New Yerk City Federation of Women's Clubs has advocated textile labeling. The American Home Economics Association was organised in 1908 (4) It now has a membership of over 15,000. This organisation is interested in all problems affecting family life. It sometimes acts in an advisory capacity for private and government groups. The consumer education comr nuttee in the Textiles and Clothing Division of this organisation has as its goal the establishment of standards and the use of accurate labels which will give the consumer adequate purchasing information. The New Ybrk City Federationfiof‘Women's Clubs has been very active in promoting labeling of textiles as well as other consumer problems (5). This organisation began a campaign for the labeling of rayon in 1956. Members requested sales persons to put the fiber content of fabrics on their sales slips. These slips were assembled and sent to the Federal Trade Comndssion as evidence of consumer interest in fabric identifica- tion. .Ls a result, trade practice rules were promulgated for the rayon industry by the Federal Trade Commission October 26, 1937'. LABELING ACTIVITIES OF BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS A number of business organisations have taken an active part in festering informative labeling in the field of textiles. The activities of the following organisations are noteworthy in this study: National Consumer-Retailer Council, American Standards Association, National Better Business Bureau, National Retail Dry Goods Association, Associa- tion of Cotton Textile Merchants of New York, and the American Institute of Laundering. The National Consumer-Retailer Council was organised in lag: (6,7, 8). This council grew from.the work of the Advisory Committee on Ulti- mate Consumer Goods of the American Standards Association. Ten national organisations are represented in its membership: American Association of university Women, American Home Economics.Association, General Feder- ation cf‘Women's Clubs, National Association of Purchasing Agents, National Congress of Parents and Teachers, National League of'WOmen voters, National Retail Dry Goods Association, Bureau of Home Economics - Uhited States Department of Agriculture, National Bureau of Standards -- United States Department of Commerce, and Consuners' Project -- United States Department of Labor. National associations of consumers and retailers which include con- sumer education as a part of their work program are eligible for active membership. Representatives of federal agencies, national associations of manufacturers, Better Business Bureaus, and other groups having a substantial interest in the work of the council are eligible to assoc- iate membership. The objectives of this council are educational. It encourages the use of adequate standards for consumer goods and the use of uniform terms inology in describing such goods. It promotes informative salesmanship and factual information in advertising. It fosters c00peration between local stores and local consumer groups. The use of suggested codes of ethics for both retailers and consumers is advanced. 45 The name of this organisation may be used on labels which meet with the approval of its technical committee. This committee has power to enter into contracts, which will safe-guard the council, with manufact- urers or distributors which submit satisfactory labels. Evidence based upon laboratory tests must be supplied to prove that the labels preperly describe the goods to which they are attached. Service fees are charged for reviewing label forms, but not for the use of the statement on labels that meet with the approval of the council. A consultation staff is provided to assist manufacturers in deveIOping informative labels. The American Standards Association (9) is a federation of 72 trade associations, technical societies, and government departments. Its Advisory Committee on‘Ultimate Consumer Goods promotes work on standards for consumer goods. The committee advises the selection of new projects for standardisation, checks on personnel of committees engaged in formr ing standards, follows up progress of work, recommends approving stand- srds, but does not develop standards. It has worked on the development of standards for bedding, upholstery, and for the sizes of children's garments and patterns in the field of textiles. National Better Business Bureau, Inc. (10) was established in 1911 by the Associated Advertising Clubs of the World. There are seventy- five local bureaus in the United States and Canada acting as independ- ent corporations. These bureaus attempt to eliminate unfair and decep- tive advertising'by promoting fair competition and ethical standards. They expose unfair practices and settle disputes regarding them. They provide accurate information regarding legitimate business enterprises. They encourage intelligent buying and attempt to establish public con- fidence in business. Work of the organisation is sponsored by member- c 46 ship contributions of legitimate business concerns. The National Better Business Bureau has published an Informative Labeling manual (10) in which the basic theory of informative labeling is presented. This labeling theory may apply to any type of textile fabric. However, the majority of the labels illustrated in the manual are for finished products. The National Retail Dry Goodsgéssociation (11) represents 6,700 retail stores. It cOOperates with consumers and governmental groups in developing standards for merchandise. In 1937 the merchandising divi- sicn conducted a national department store survey to determine the types of information consumers wanted on twenty-five items of merchandise. In general, consumers asked for washing instructions or directions for special care required, material content, correct statement of size, grade, or quality, directions for use, purpose of the article, weighting or sising, and a statement regarding construction and workmanship. This organisation is affiliated with the American Standards Association. It considers the wants of consumer groups. Ths.Association of Cotton Textile merchants of New'York agreed to use informative labels on sheets and pillowcases after July 1, 1939 (12). Grades were to be indicated. Inferior grades were to be marked irregu- .lar, second quality, second selection, or second. The c00peration of producers, distributors and dealers was urged. The American Institute of Laundering, c00perating with the Tenn- essee Eastman Acetate Company, worked out laundry approved labels for spun rayons (13). Work began on this project in 1959 and includes the testing of rayon blends for convertors, and suggestions for finishers. This plan has extended the manufacturer's control of the product to the 47 completed garment and eliminated the risks involved in selling unlabeled rayons of unpredictable qualities. The label has transferred laundering responsibility to the consumer. ACTIVITIES 0F LMUFACTURERS Textile manufacturers who have been pioneers in textile labeling are: 'Cannon Company, Chatham.Company, Pequot Cempany, Pacific Mills, Botany Company, Pepperell Company, and the'fihittall Rug Company. Al- though most of their infermative labels have been used on utilitarian goods rather than on fashion goods, their success or failure will in- fluence the future of informative labeling on fashion merchandise such as was used in this study. In 1955 the Cannon Company sponsored a long time advertising came pgign to help local dealers (14). Labels were planned to promote the use of National manufacturer's brands. Labels for each of three grades and separate packaging for each label were designed. The name ”Cannon" and the secondary brand name were to appear on each label. The second- ary brand name became the sole preperty of the retailer using it in a given city. National advertising promoted sales. The Chatham Manufacturing Company began using informative labels on sheets in 1935 (15,16,171. These labels were designed to meet the demands of home economists and of'Women's Clubs. The sheets were packed by pairs in a visible package. The label used was in the form of a folder. Page one of the folder gave the specifications of the sheet. Quality, uniformity, thread count, tensile strength, weight per square yard, and amount of sizing'were stated. Page two was a non-technical explanation of page one. 48 Ruth O'Brien, Chief of the Division of Textiles and Clothing of the Bureau of HOme Ebonomics, United States Department of Agriculture, and her staff, as well as Heme Demonstration Agents were consulted by Cha- tham before the label was adOpted. This company was confronted with the problem of selling a new idea in a highly competitive field. The plan appealed to the professional homemaker, women's clubs, and the National Retail Dry Goods Association. Folders were prepared for classroom.use to teach quality in sheeting. The labels were so successful that informative labels were gradually introduced on blankets. They were used by Chatham on their complete blanket line by 1938. Statements were made regarding fiber content (in accordance with commercial standards by the National Bureau of Stand- ards), sise, weight, strength, warmth, color, and binding. The use of informative labels has resulted in more intelligent sell- ing, maintenance of uniform quality, less returned goods and trading up. The best results were obtained in sections of the country where shOpping is done in a quiet, leisurely manner. The same year the Pequot Company used labels which stated that their merchandise exceeded government specifications (18). They were criti- cised because many people do not know the meaning of U. 8. Standards. Pequot used simple, direct, descriptive labels which were easily under- stood, otherwise. This company considered this type of label less con- fusing and more satisfying to customers than a technical one.“ A "Factsg" plan was announced by Pacific Mills in‘May, 1940 (19,20, 21,22). These tags were to be used on fabrics for men's, women's, and children's clothing. They were to indicate the degree of colorfastness 49 for the first time in the textile field. This was to be indicated by the use of colored bands ((19) Table p. 30). Standard Standard Test No. Fastness to Washing Test No. Fastness to Light 4 Superior - Gold bar 5 Superior - Gold bar 3 Satisfactory - Blue bar 3 Satisfactory - Blue bar 2 Fair - Buff bar 2 .Adequate-Blue &‘Buff bar 1 Fair - Buff bar This plan was approved by National Bureau of Standards, flashington, D. 0., Better Fabrics Testing Bureau, R. H. Macy Bureau of Standards, and the laboratories of Montgomery‘fiard, Sears Roebuck, and J. C. Penney. The tag was also to give the.fiber content, washing instructions, and shrinkage data of the garment. The goals hOped for were better consumer relations, sales person training, silent selling, greater confidence in product and reduction in returns. In 1941 the Botany Company adopted a new label (23) which included statements regarding fiber content, breaking strength of warp and weft, colorfastness, seam slippage, wearing quality, and shrinkage. The lab- oratory tests made on these fabrics are in accordance with the United States Commercial Standards for Tool Fabrics. Four grades of Pepperell sheets and pillow cases are labeled with "Buy Guides” (24). Simdlar labels for other grades are in progress. These buy guides are three inches by nine inches. They give the follow- ing information: name of grade of sheet, name of testing bureau (Better Fabrics Testing Bureau), fiber content, type of cotton used, thread count, weight per square yard, finishing materials, type of ham, tensile strength, shrinkage tests, and general information on buying and caring for sheets and pillow cases. 50 The Whittall Rug Company of Wooster,IMassachusetts, has a specifi- cation labeling plan similar to the Chatham plan (25). Their rug labels state the weave, fiber content, dyes, yarn, pitch, wires, shot, and tufts. ACTIVITIES 0F REEAILERS Some retail stores have been outstanding in the field of informa- tive labeling. Those included in this study are: ~Kaufmann Department Store, Pittsburg} marshall Field Incorporated, Chicago; B..Altman and Campany, New York; Macy Company, New York; Bloomingdale Department Store, New‘York; J. C. Penney Company, New'York; and Sears Roebuck and Company, Chicago. In 1936 Kaufmann Department Store of Pittsburg announced a plan to attach specification labels to merchandise to satisfy consumer demands (26). This company has multiple fellowships at the Hellon Institute of Industrial Research. Their'workers evaluate competitive merchandise, create new products, and appraise new merchandise before it is offered to the public. They supplied the information for the labels used on 132 kinds of merchandise sold by Kaufmanns. They set standards and have made descriptive labeling possible. .As the labeling plan progresses, technical specifications and more specific directions for care of the item will be included. JMarshall Field Inc. inaugurated an educational plan in 1936 (27,28). .A series of "How to Buy" booklets were published for consumer use. In 1937 the Fieldcrest certified quality plan was announced. Informative labels were placed on seventeen major lines. These labels were to indi- cate what the article was made of, as fiber content; how it was made, as thread count; the service it would give, as tensile strength and weight 51 per square yard; the care for best service; grade description; and trade mark publicity; These labels were supplemented by retailer booklets Tnnnouncing Fieldcrest Quality Plan" and "Fieldcrest Labels Give the Facts." This merchandising plan was expected to bring'more profitable sales and to establish better consumer-retailer relationships. As a result of consumer agitation, retailer labeling movements were initiated throughout the country. B. Altman and Co., New Yerk City, announced its intention to label all merchandise with fiber content in 1937 and asked for the cooperation of manufacturers (29). From.eXperi- mentation macy's in.New'York City found that the use of informative labels improved consumer-retailer relations (80). Bloomingdale Depart- ment Store used informative labels before Federal Trade Rulings became effective (31). This organization believes that the success of the labeling plan will be prOportional to the coOperation of mills and man- ufacturers. In 1940 the J. C. Penney Company announced its intention to replace manufacturers’ labels with Penney labels except in the case of nationally advertised goods (32). The labels were to indicate construction and performance. The list of items to bear these labels included sheets, blankets, outdoor clothing, bathing suits and woolen piece goods. Blan- ket labels, for example, would state fiber content, construction and merit, weight, size, and washing instructions. Sears Roebuck and Company presented its "Infotag" plan at a meeting of the National Consumer-Retailer Council on.May 7, 1940 (53,34,35,36). The plan began because of the agitation and publicity arising from.the consumer movement. This company believes that merchandising benefits result from.informative labeling. These benefits include better buying 52 and selling, training of sales persons, and clinching of sales. The labels include a nationally known trade name, selling c0py, technical specifications, guarantees, and instructions for care and handling. They are planned for seventeen lines including three brands of sheets and fourteen brands of towels. CHAPTER IV FEDERAL TRADE COLMISSION REGULAT IONS CONCMIING TEE LABEING 0F MILE FABRICS =========== 53 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE LABELING OF TEXTILE FABRICS TRADE PRACTICE RULES OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION The Federal Trade Commission was established by an Act of Congress September, 1914 (37). Five commissioners are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for seven year terms at ten thousand dollars per year. The Commission is empowered to control unfair methods of come petition in interstate commerce. It conducts investigations upon its own initiative, upon requests of the President, either house of Congress, or the Attorney General, or upon complaint from.citizens. Whenever unfair methods are found, the Commission issues an order to "cease and desist." .A fine may be imposed if this order is ignored. The Commission may call trade practice conferences. Representa- tives of an industry may draw up rules for their own conduct at such conferences. The Commission undertakes to enforce these rules against the signers of the rules. The sections of the Clayton Act which deal with price discrimina- tions, price fixing, and restraint of trade through intercorporate con- trol are administered by the Commission. It also administers the EXport Trade Act. The Wheeler~Lea Act, which was passed by Federal Congress, march, 1938, broadens the powers of the Federal Trade Commission. The act gave the Commission jurisdiction over practices that injure the public, but which may not invalue or injure a competitor. Unless an appeal is made, the Commission's "cease and desist” orders are effective after 60 days. Suits may be conducted in district courts where substantial penalties may be inflicted for an offense. False advertising of foods, drugs, cosmetics, and therapeutic devices is prohibited also by this act. The Commission acts c00peratively with consumers, merchants, and manufacturers for the purpose of securing adequate information about goods. Informative labels are a step in this direction. In the textile field trade practice rules have been declared by the Federal Trade Commission for the rayon industry, for the shrinkage of woven cotton yard goods, for the silk industry, for the cotton convert- ing industry, for the linen industry, and for the wool industry. Federal Trade Commission Trade Practice Rules for the Rayon Indus- try were promulgated October 26, 1937 (38). These rules supersede the resolution concerning the term.”Rayon" released on October 3, 1925 and the effect and intent of this resolution as announced on February 1, 1929. The rules provide that fibers, yarns, threads and fabrics made of rayon.must be sold, branded, and advertised as rayon. The statement made regarding the manufacturing process must be accurate. All trade- marks of manufacturers, processors, and distributors must be truthful and non-deceptive. The use of.misleading descriptive words are not to be used. An example of a misleading term.would be "silk - linen” on a rayon fabric. Unless the word rayon is used in connection with fabric terms commonly associated with fabrics of other fiber content, these terms must not be used. Examples are "georgette" and ”chiffon" which are commonly associated with the fiber silk. The fiber content of mixed goods must be listed in order of predominance by weight. musleading merchandising methods are considered unfair. Suggested trade practices include percentage labeling of fibers in 55 mixed goods and labeling giving information regarding treatment and care of fabrics. The latter information may be given through advertising copy. The Federal Trade Commission promulgated Trade Practice Rules for the Shrinkage of Woven Cotton‘Yard Goods, June 30, 1938 (39). "Residual shrinkage" is defined as the shrinkage which remains in goods after it has been subjected to a shrinkage process. Any mislead- ing information given to the consumdng public regarding the pre-shrunk character of goods is forbidden. The amount of residual shrinkage in goods must be indicated when the terms pre-shrunk or shrunk are used. The term.fshrink-proof” and similar terms must not be used unless the goods is free frmm residual shrinkage and has not been stretched after undergoing the shrinkage process. Statements made must be easily read and placed in a conspicuous place. The "Commercial Standard - 0359-36" is acceptable for determining shrinkage preperties. I Trade Practice Rules for the Silk Industry were promulgated on Nov- ember 4, 1938 (40). These rules supersede the rules of June 18, 1932 regarding silk weighting. Silk is defined as the natural fiber of the silk worm. Any con- cealment of silk fibers, yarns, threads, strands, fabrics, and garments is forbidden. The use of ”silk-noil" or "waste silk” must be revealed on labels. Fabrics which are free from.metallic weighting and adultera- ting'materials may be labeled "Pure Silk" and ”Pure Dye Silk." Ten per cent tolerance is permitted in colored fabrics and 15 per cent in black fabrics. The percentage of weighting must be revealed in weighted goods. The presence of non-fibrous or adulterating’materials must also be revealed. Unless silk is actually present the word silk cannot be used 56 alone or with another fiber name in describing a fabric. The fiber content of mixed goods must be revealed in order of pre- dominance by weight. This information must be conspicuously placed on the label. It is considered unfair to sell silk under any false circumstances or misrepresentations, or to aid or abet such a practice. merchandise cannot be sold as silk unless it is silk. Aged, deteriorated and dame aged merchandise must be sold as such.“ Trade and Corporate names must not use the term silk unless a sub- stantial portion of their business is in silk. It is recommended that the percentage fiber content of mixed goods be indicated on labels. It is acceptable to qualify the term silk in silk fabrics, as silk georgette. Information regarding the care and handling of the product is suggested as a good practice. On August 18, 1939 Trade Practice Rules were promulgated for the Cotton Converting Industry (41). These rules are a revision, extension, and replacement of rules passed on September 1, 1931, December 14, 1931, June 30, 1933, and July 2, 1936. Under the new rules it is considered unfair to misrepresent the grade, quality, quantity, construction, manufacture, or distribution of any cotton product. Nusbranding and false invoicing designed to deceive purchasers or consumers is unfair. The origin of the goods must be hon- estly stated. When products are shipped they must not vary from.the samples that were submitted for inspection. Commercial bribery and act- ivities inducing breaches of contrast between others are unlawful. Any other action which tends to represent competitors products in a false way or handicap his business is unfair. Imitation of tradeemarks for 57 the purpose of deceiving consumers is unfair. .Publication of false price lists and price discrimination is forbidden. Goods sold by specification should have confirmation on the invoice and contracts should be performed according to plan. The Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 became effective July 1, [1221.(42). All wool products subject to this act must be identified by stamps, labels or tags. This information.must be given: fiber content, percentage by weight of wool, non-fibrous loading, filling or adulterat- ing matter, and the name of the.manufacturer and other persons involved in merchandising the product. A.manufacturer may use his registered number if he wishes, but the name of at least one reseller must then be used. Trade names cannot be substituted. Labels must be easily read and understood. If information is given which is not required by law, it must not interfere with the required data. Labels must be conspicuous, consistent in type size, in fiber name ing, and easily legible. Evary item.must be labeled separately unless they are attached identical pairs. The percentage of ornamentation must be stated. Specialty fibers must be qualified when used in lieu of the word wool. Angora goat hair may be designated as mohair and cashmere goat hair as cashmere when their percentages and qualifications are given. ‘Virgin wool or new wool applies only to wool that has never been used. Samples must bear the same labels as wool products. Each section of sectional products must be labeled. Fiber content of the face and back of a pile fabric must be listed separately. Linings, paddings, stiffenings, and trimmings composed of any type of wool must be labeled 58 separately from the product itself. ‘Manufacturers are required to keep accurate and detailed records of all purchases and products manufactured. They must guarantee against misbranding. These rules are to be enforced by the Federal Trade Commission. This set does not apply to carpets, rugs, mats, or upholsteries. Trade Practice Rules for the Linen Industry became effective may 1, 1321 (43). Linen is defined as the fiber of the flex plant or a product made of this fiber. All linen fibers and products made of these fibers must be sold as such. Unless a fabric is composed entirely of flax.fib- are it cannot be sold as ”linen,“ "flax," "pure linen," ”all linen," or "all flax."' When a fabric is not made in whole or in part of linen the terms or syllables "lin," "lyn," and the like must not be used alone or in connection with other fiber names. The term "linen product” can only be used on articles containing 50 per cent or’more of linen by weight. The term.”part linen*:must be used only on articles containing a sub- stantial portion of linen and the entire fiber content nmst be revealed. The fiber content of such maxed goods must be stated in order of pre- dominance by weight. When fibers are present in amounts of 5 per cent or less they may be called miscellaneous fibers. Fiber content of mixed goods must be stated in percentages. Finishing materials and loading or adulterating materials must be indicated by some form of labeling. A variation of’more than 5 per cent will not be permitted when the approximate_sise of an article is stated. A variation of 2 per cent should not be exceeded when an exact statement of size is made. An exact statement of size must be made on imported linens. Inferior and damaged merchandise must be sold as such. 59 The term "linen" cannot be used as a trade mark unless the article is of linen fiber construction. The term."hand" cannot be used to de- scribe the process of manufacture unless it is true. Fictitious price reductions, false price advertising, and price tags designed to deceive are forbidden. Sale advertisements must be truthful. The sale must not be composed largely of inferior merchandise or of a quality other than the one advertised. Price discrimination between customers and consignment selling des signed to clog or close trade are unfair. Shrinkage statements must be specific and accurate. Residual shrinkage must be stated in percentages. It is recommended that merchandise should not be accepted for re~ turn without just cause. Percentage fiber content of mixed goods is approved. Information regarding treatment and care of the product is considered a good practice. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMHZNDAT IONS 60 CONCLUSIONS AND IE'COITENDAT IONS' This study of textile fabrics and their labels, was limited to the fabrics which were used by students in the clothing construction classes of Michigan State College during the fall term of 1941. The purpose and procedure have been outlined, the data compiled, and the results noted in Chapter II. Thoughtful perusal leads one to raise many questions; to wish that the study might have been more extensive as well as more intensive, and that additional studies which suggest themselves might be undertaken immediately. What types of fabrics did the girls of'Michigan State College sel- 2§t_during the fall of 1941? Top ranking cotton purchases were: cordu- roy first, pique and gingham tied for second, velveteen third, and champ bray fourth. more plain dress linens were used than cotton corduroys. Rayon crepes were two and one-half times as papular as spun rayons. Silk fabrics were nearly extinct. Three times as many 100 per cent wool fab- rics as wool blends were used. 0f the blends, wool and rabbit hair led the list, but cotton, rayon, and silk were combined with wool also. Where did the students buy their fabrics? Apparently that depended on the price, because more than half of the fabrics costing less than $1.00 were purchased in person and over the counter. .All of the fabrics in the highest price range, $4.00 - $6.00; 86 per cent in the $2.00 - $4.00 price range; and 66 per cent in the $1.00 - $2.00 price range, were purchased by mail. Why does this relationship between price and place of purchase ex- ist? Is it true that local stores are not aware of the types and qual- ities of fabrics which the students desire? Do they find it more profit- 61 able to cater to the larger group of persons who purchase inexpensive fabrics and consequently by-pass the business of the discriminating col- lege students? Do they understand that a really large number“ of col- lege students purchase fabrics each year for use in their clothing clas~ ses; that the fabrics themselves represent only a part of the necessary expenditures for materials; that many of these students will sew for themselves and their families long after they have finished their college training; and that many others will become teachers and influence another generation of students to select fabrics from the stores which cater to their needs? Apparently some of the larger stores are aware of these facts. One company is particularly egressive in seeking the business of the college students and is most cooperative in catering to their needs. Ninety-six of the 245 purchases included in this study were made from this store. How much does it cost the college student to purchase dress fabrics for her class problems? This was not a subject for study. However, the study indicates that the average price paid per yard by students in the elementary clothing classes was $1.12; in the dress design classes $1.10; and in the two advanced construction classes, $3.08 and $2.17. These figures may be misleading. Total cost is determined by the number of yards purchased. The yardage requirement is influenced by the width of the fabric. Therefore, the total cost of the wool garments made from fabrics costing an average of $3.08 and the silk or rayon fabrics cost- ing $2.17 per yard may not have been greatly different. It would have been interesting to follow through the fabrics of the study_to determine the difficulties which the students encountered in handling theme Did they fray, slip, water spot, wrinkle, shrink, or l'652 undergraduate students were enrolled in the clothing construc— tion classes of Michigan.State College during the regular school year, 1941-42. 62 stretch? were they pressed or printed off-grain? Was the yardage accur- ate? Did the fabrics hold the press? were there reasons which could not be anticipated from.the information at hand, why another choice would have been better for a specific purpose? It would have been enlightening to study the serviceability of the garments made from the fabrics: to recall them occasionally for inspec- tion in order to determine the types of deterioration which took place in the natural process of wearing out; to analyze wearing records to determine how much service was secured from.each garment; to determine the cost per unit of wear as contrasted with the total original cost; to evaluate the relationship between the satisfaction received from the gar- ment and the extent of accurate information which could be secured about the fabric before its purchase. ‘Would such a study have revealed, as did the study of the Texas Home Economics Association, that the articles carrying labels with the greatest amount of information gave the most satisfactory service? It would have been exceedingly worthwhile to check the accuracy of the fabric labels and the accuracy of the sales persons' comments con- cerning them by means of microscOpical, physical, and chemical tests. Would such tests have proved, as did the Kansas State College investiga- tion in 1939, that the information on the labels and comments of sales persons were in many cases inaccurate? It would be of interest to repeat similar studies from year to year in order to determine fabric trends, price trends, merchandising trends, and consumer purchasing trends. What kind and how much information did the labels of the 1941 fall dress fabrics carry to the consumer? The great majority of the swatches 63 were labeled with pin tickets, most of which contained only the price and width of the fabric. However one store should be commended particu- larly for its policy of including.more information and for checking whether or not the fabric was crush resisting, washable, sunfast, and pro-shrunk, and for indicating its fiber content. This was done con- sistently for all fabrics and there seemed to be an equal chance that the negative as well as the positive service features would be checked. A few of the stores enclosed their more or less promotional types of fabrics in envelOpes which contained helpful information while others mounted their fabrics and labeled them. In both of these cases such things as fiber content, special finishes, care, various types of des- criptive statements and guarantees were apt to be included. In no case were such fabric specifications as breaking strength, thread count, weight, and resistance to abrasion stated. There was a great difference in the kind and amount of information which the stores provided concerning their goods. As might have been expected, those which had widely established reputations, a large enough trade area to bring them within the jurisdiction of the Interstate Coma merce Commission, and were located in cities where Better Business Bureaus were functioning, complied more fully with the rules and regu- lations. Often these stores exceeded any imposed or recommended prac- tices and included types of information which lessened the claims for dissatisfaction and difficulties which might develop in using the goods. Did the labeling of these fabrics comply with the requirements of the Wool Labeling Act and of the Trade Practice Agreements of the Federal Trade Commission? .As nearly as could be estimated by a non-technical 64 study of the fabrics, less than one-fifth of the cotton swatches, one- half of the rayon swatches, three-fourths of the wool swatches and all of the linen swatches submitted to the students as samples from which their selection of fabrics could be made, carried labels stating fiber content. Of the dress fabrics purchased, about one-third of the cotton, one-sixth of the rayon, all of the linen and all of the wool, carried labels stating fiber content. Apparently legislation is much more ef- fective than trade practice agreements in securing compliance with a labeling practice. Claims as to "Shrink-proofness” of cotton fabrics were almost conSpicuous by their absence. Perhaps this should be cred- ited to the Trade Practice Rules. There is one final implication: Why are not manufacturers and retailers practicing more general and more adequate textile labeling? What can the trained home economist do about it? 33mm 1. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 65 REFERENCES Grimes, M.A. Labeling in Texas. JOurnal of'Home Economics XXIX, No. 5, (March, 1937), pp. 171-2. Grimes, MtA. Labeling in Texas. Journal of Home Economics XXI, No. 5, (may, 1938), pp. 162-4, 293-6. Fletcher, 3., and Dennhardt L. .Adequacy of labeling certain textile fabrics with regard to fiber content. Journal of Home Economics XXXII, No. 1, (January, 1940), p. 37. Sorenson, Helen. The Consumer Movement. Harper & Bros., 1941. p. 6. General Federation of Women's Clubs of New'York City and New'York City Federation of Women's Clubs. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 2, No. 2, (February, 1938), p. 18. Handbook of Informative Labeling. National Consumer - Retailer Council, Inc., 8 West Fortieth Street, New York. Consumer - Retailer Relations Council to promote consumer program. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 2, No. 4, (January, 1938), p. 1. Consumer - Retailer Relations Council to promote consumer program. Industrial Standards VIII, (July, 1937), p. 169. Standards for consumers goods in the American Standards Association. Journal of Home Economics XXVII, No. 8, (September, 1935), p. 445. The Better Business Bureaus. National Better Business Bureau, Inc., Chrysler Bldg., New York. National Retail Dry Goods Association. Consumer Education News- letter, Series 3, No. 4, (may, 1937), p. 10. Labeling sheets and pillowcases. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 3, No. 9, (April, 1959), p. 20. Laundry approved labels. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 5, N0. 5, (May, 1941), p. 130 Cannon sheet campaign. Printers' Ink CLXXI, (June 6, 1935), p. 43. Chatham sheets now sold with labels. Printers' Ink CLXX, (Febru— ary 21, 1955}, p. 87. Chatham labels. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 5, No. 1, (October, 1940), p. 9. Fair trade practice in the textile industries. Journal of Home Economics XXIX, No. 10, (December, 1957),, pp. 698-700. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 66 Pequot's stamp of approval. Printers' Ink CLXXI, (June 13, 1935), pp. 40-50. Pacific Mills inaugurates informative factag plan. Textile World XE, (May, 1940), p. 30. Blanchard, F. S. Pacific Mills factag. Printers' Ink CXCI, (June 7, 1940), pp. 15-8. Pacific Mills undertakes an elaborate labeling program in May. Con- sumer Education Newsletter, Series 5, No. 1, (October, 1940), p. 12. Pacific Halls labels approved. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 6, NO. 2, (October, 1941), P. 440 Botany ad0pts new label. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 5, No. 3, (may, 1941), p. 22. Pepperell's labels answer more questions than consumers ask. Sales management VL, (August 1, 1941), p. 56. Labeling of wool goods. Rayon Textile‘Mbnthly XXII, (June, 1941), ' p. 335. A retail labeling plan. Printers' Ink CLXXV, (may 28, 1936), p. 48. Facts for consumers. Advertising and SellinngXVII, (June 4, 1936), P0 18s ‘ Fieldcrest certified quality plan. Business Week, (December 12, 1936), p. 18. Identify fabric. Business Week. (August 7, 1937), p. 24. Cobrin,ZHarry.A., Retailers favorable to labeling rayon. Rayon Textile Monthly XIX; (January, 1938), pp. 15-6. Coughlin, W. E. mere information on fabric identification. Rayon Textile Menthly XXII, (may, 1941), p. 33. Penny labels. Consumer Education Newsletter. Series 5, No. 3 (may, 1941), p. 23. Hecht, F. C. flew the infotag helps Sears sell. Printers' Ink Rbnthly' XLI, (August, 1940), pp. 10-2. Informative labels by Sears. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 5. NICO 1, (OCtOber, 1940), p. 90 Sears labels approved by National Consumer - Retailer Council, Inc. Consumer Education Newsletter, Series 5, No. 3, (may, 1941), p.23. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 67 Hecht, F. C. How Sears Roebuck uses informative labeling. Indust- rial Standards XII, (May, 1941), pp. 109-14. Maynard, H. H.,‘Weidler, W. 0., Beckman, T. N. Principles of'Mer- keting. Ronald Press Co. 1939, p. 659. Trade Practice Rules for the Rayon Industry, as Promulgated October 26, 1937. Federal Trade Commission, Washington. Trade Practice Rules for the Shrinkage of Woven Cotton'Yard Goods, as Promulgated June 30, 1938. Federal Trade Commission, Wash- ington. Trade Practice Rules for the Silk Industry, as Promulgated November 4, 1938. Federal Trade Commission,‘Washington. Trade Practice Rules for the Cotton Converting Industry, as Promul- gated August 18, 1939. Federal Trade Commission, Washington. Rules and Regulations under the wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, Promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission, Effective July 15, 1941. Trade Practice Rules for the Linen Industry, as Promulgated Feb- ruary 1, 1941. B IBL IOGRAPHI l. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 68 BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Coles, Jessie V., Standardization of Consumers' Goods, Ronald Press Company, New York, 1932. 323 Pages. Coles, Jessie'V., The Consumer-Buyer and the market, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1938. 582 Pages. Hess, Katherine Paddock, Textile Fibers and Their Use, J. B. Lipp- incott Co., Chicago, 1941. 530 Pages. Hoyt, Elisabeth Ellis, Consumption in Our Society, McGraw-Hill Book 00., Ines. 1938. 420 Pages. Maynard, H. H,,'Weidler, W. 0., Beckman, T. N., Principles of Mar- keting, Ronald Press Co., 1939. 659 Pages. Reich, 3., and Seigler, 0., Consumer Goods and How to Know Them, American Book Company, New York, 1937. 526 Pages. Reid, Margaret 0., Consumers and the‘Market, F. S. Crofts & Co., 1938. 569 Pages. Sorenson, Helen, The Consumer Mbvement, Harper & Bros., 1941. 245 Pages. Wingate, Isabel B., Textile Fabrics, Prentice Hall, Inc., 1935. 511 Pages. BULLETINS Bulletins National Association of Wool Manufacturers, 80 Federal Street, Boston, Massachusetts, The Irrelevancy of rVirgin'WOOI Content to Fabric Quality. National Better Business Bureau, Inc., Chrysler Bldg., New York, On the Pr0per Use of the'Words 'Harris Tweed'. Ibid, 0n the Use of the Word 'Permanent' in Advertising and Selling. Ibid, 0n the Use of the‘Word 'Proof' in Advertising and Selling. Ibid, The Advertising and Selling of Articles Treated to Prevent Mbth Damage. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 25. 26. 28. 29. 31. 32. 69 PERIODICALS American Business X (may, 1940), 26-7, How Kaufmann's uses research to build busi- ness, E. G. Thoman American Dyestuff Reporter XXIV (December 2, 1935), 575-9, 679-80, ass-s, Consumer technical information; its preparation and distribution, D. E. Douty. XXYII (March 7, 1938), 135, Color fastness identification. XXVIII (July 10, 1939), 361-9, Labeling of consumer textile goods, C. T. Simon. XXIX (January 22, 1940), 32-7, Consumer movement and the textile industry, F. S. Blanchard. [XXIX (June 24, 1940), 332-6, Consumer marches on, E. Freedman. XXIX (December 9, 1940), 656-62, Infermative textile labeling. XXX (April 14, 1941), 194-6,217, Some scientific aspects of inform- ative labeling, H. F. Herrmann. Business Week (December 22, 1934), 8, Shrinkage labels. (march 27, 1937), 45, Buyers ask lowdown on textiles. (August 7, 19:57), 18, Linen trade association. (October 16, 1937), 48, Plan rayon labeling. (December 4, 1937), 24-5, The will do rayon labeling job? (March 19, 1933), 38, Silk and wool rules. (July 23, 1938), 22, Proposed trade practice rules for silk indus- try. (June 21, 1939), 17-8,‘Who censors labels? FTC and FDA seem.to have established joint jurisdiction. (February 3, 1940), 33, Schwartsihartin 'Truth in fabrics bill'. (October 26, 1940), 37, Shrinkproof wool. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. '38. 39. 40. 46. 47. 48. 49. 70 (may 24, 1941), 41-2, Code for hosiery. (July 26, 1941), 38-9,‘Wool flare up; label battles aren't over. Canadian Chemical and Process Industries XXIII (August, 1939), 409, Regulations for marking material content on hosiery. Commercial and Financial Chronical CLIII (July 19, 1941), 326, wool products labeling act becomes effective. Commercial Reporter (may 20, 1939), 483, Argentina decrees on textile manufacturers marking regulations established. Consumer Education.Newsletter Series 3, No. 2, (November, 1936), 15, Textiles. Series 3, No. 2, (February, 1937), 22, Responsibility for labeling fabrics. Series 3, No. 3, (February, 1937), 12, Advisory committee on ul- timate consumer goods. Ibid, 14, Fieldcrest quality plan. Series 3, No. 4, (Hay, 1937), 10, Truth in fabrics bill. Ibid, 21, Consumers' National Federation. Ibid, Consumer - Retailer Council. Ibid, 22, New‘York Federation of Women's Clubs. Series 2, No. 1, (October, 1937), 29, Trade practice rules for the rayon industry. Series 2, No. 2, (October, 1937), 26, Linen Trade Association. Series 2, No. 4, (January, 1938), l, NRDGA officially affirms con- sumers' standards program. Series 2, No. 2, (February, 1938), 14, Wool and part wool fabrics. Series 3, No. 1, (October, 1938), 14, PrOposed trade practice rules for the silk industry. ( .3 ) I) q) a ) 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 71 Series 3, No. 1, (October, 1938), 15, WOOl labeling bill. Series 3, No. 3, (February, 1939), 14, Grading and labeling. Series 3, No. 7, (march, 1939), 6, Trade practice rules for the silk industry. Series 4, No. 1, (October, 1939), 9, Uniformity in labeling patterns advocated. Ibid, 10, Informative labeling. Ibid, 21, Sanforizers notify trade. Ibid, 33, Study of informative label- ing. , Series 4, No. 2, (February, 1940), 2-6, Consumers to the fore. Ibid, ‘ 22, Schwartz-Martin Truth in fabrics bill. Ibid, 30, Colorfastness Ibid, American standards for testing materials, tests for cotton shrinkage. Ibid, 33, Consumers prefer labeled merchandise. Series 4, No. 6, (February, 1940), 9, Informative labeling. Series 4, No. 7, (may, 1940), 17, Preposed trade practice rules for the linen industry. Ibid, 29, Definition for unfinished cotton piece goods. Series 5, No. 1, (October, 1940), 9, Informative labeling. Ibid, 11, Informative labeling. Ibid, 36, Wool Products Labeling Act. Series 5, No. 2, (February, 1941), 12, Shrinkproof wool. Ibid, 21, Trade practice rules for the linen industry. Ibid, 33, Labels for woolens. Series 5, No. 3, (may, 1941), 22, Wool hearings. Series 6, No. 2, (October, 1941), 44, Wool Products Labeling Act. ‘FTT’P-""' 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 72 Consumer's Research Bulletin X (January, 1941), 4-6, New wool labels; what they can.mean to consumers. Industrial Standards VIII (January, 1937), 21-2, Rag labels show quality; meet consumer demand. 'VIII (October, 1937), 268, Informative labeling is first job of Consumer - Retailer Council. IX (June, 1938), 148, What should labels say? IX (July, 1938), 169, Percent shrinkage on labels. XII (may, 1941). 114-16, New develOpments in labeling. Journal of Agricultural Research LVIII (June 15, 1939), 12, Adequacy of labeling of certain textile fabrics with regard to fiber content. Hazel Fletcher, Lois Denhardt. Journal of'Home Economics XXVII (June & July, 1935}, 395, Silk Weighting. XXYIII (march, 1936), 151-6, Terms used on textile labels. XXVIII (December, 1936), 683-4, Consumers' protection labels. XXIX (January, 1937), 37-9, Textile termdnology. XXIX (September, 1937), 446-7, Fiber identification and shrinkage of textiles. XXIXI(October, 1937), 556-7, Home economics in the textile and clothing field. Gladys Winegar. XXX (October, 1938), 568-70, Research round table on textiles and clothing. Mhry Anna Grimes. XXI (June, 1938), 395-6, Turkish towels and specifications. Jarg- aret B. Hays. XXX (July, 1938), 406-12, Service study of four qualities of cotton turkish towels. Ruth Elmquist Rogers, Margaret E. Hays. XXXI (April, 1939), 241-2, Crease resistant fibers. Mergeret S. Furry. a“; 'AAA.‘ I'd-1.“:- . '~ . 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 73 XXXII (February, 1940), 99-100, Specifications for cotton broad- cloth. Gladys R. White. XXXII (March, 1940), 162, Report of the Texas Committee on the stand~ ardisation of consumers' goods. fiery Anna Grimes. xxx11 (April, 1940), 212, Retailer - Consumer. Max Certs. Medern Plastics XVIII (August, 1941), 45, 'Strictly American'; dress label designed for crown rayons. National Wool Grower 'XXXI (January, 1941), 23, Wool labeling law a broad path to con- 31111161.. XXXI (July, 1941), 21, Labels startle retailers. xxx: (August, 1941), 24, Labeling law and quality in goods. _Printers' Ink CLXX.(February 21, 1935), 87, Specifications. CLXXI (April 4, 1935), 7-8,‘Women.want description not ABC grade labels. N. B. Nichols. CLXXII (July 11, 1935), 37, For sheppers' education. CLXXIV (February 13, 1936), 103, Design stories bring buyers. Don Grindley. CXXCII (March 3, 1938), 11-4, Why specification labels is not a sub- stitute for advertising effort. C. Nyman. CXXCIII (June 9, 1938), 70-1, Informative labeling; what consumer wants to know about products is shown by department store survey. CXXCVII (may 18, 1939), 23-6, Quality seal on guard - interview with J. A. Spooner, Advertising Manager, American Viscose Corporation. CXCI (April 12, 1940), 11-3, Teachers grab show at Stephens College Consumer Conference. CXCVI (July 4, 1941), 68, Consumers want information. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 74 Rayon Textile Monthly XVI (February, 1935), 30, Rayon vs Silk, 'How will labeling affect either?‘ XVIII (August, 1937), 500, Merit of label shown in bemberg. Theodore Hood. XIX (January, 1938), 33, One answer to the label question shows ready acceptance of rayon merchandise. XIX (August, 1938), 463-4, Pr0per labeling of shrunk fabrics set forth.by Federal Trade Commission in new rules and regulations. XIX (September, 1938), 521, A.year of labeling. Beveridge A. Dunlap. XX (November, 1939), 84,'Vat dyed multi-colored labels. XXII (February, 1941), 37, New developments in merchandising in 1940. Ephriam.Friedman. XXII (April, 1941), 49, Tentative regulations to guide apparel trades on wool laboratory rules. XXII (June, 1941), 39, Trade practice rules for the hosiery indus- try. (XXII (June, 1941), 350, New trade marks of the textile industry. XXII (August, 1941), 49, Regarding wool labeling. Retail jxecutive (September 18, 1940), 5, National Retail Dry Goods Association, fabric identification in dresses. (December 11, 1940), lo, Labels for woolens. Sales Management XLI (November 15, 1937), 74, Standards - informative labeling. XLII (March 15, 1938), 22-3, Informative labeling is here. Etna Kelley. Textile Colorist LXIII (January, 1941), 43-4, Wool products labeling act of 1939. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. 131. 75 Textile World IXXCV (February 28, 1935), 92, The consumer asks what a product really is. .XXCVIII (may, 1938), 50-1, Hosiery rules favored. IXXC (April, 1939), 69, Telling the consumer.‘ Fessenden s. Blanch- ard. XEI (February, 1941), 80, Enter a new era of informative labeling. N. E. Dell. " QA-p‘ Ibid, 112, How two mills meet label act - American . Woolen Company and Sullaway Hosiery Mills solve wool-content * designation. ( i. XCI (April, 1941), 80-1, Labeling a profit Opportunity. C. Talbot. } Ibid, 86, no fireworks at wool hearing - Federal Trade Commission labeling rules criticized. XCI (June, 1941), 128, Labeling rules are set; supplement to wool products act. XCI (August, 1941), 102, Consumers ignore labels as law goes into effect. APPENDIX 76 APPENDIX Record of Fabrics Purchased by Members of the Clothing Construction Classes Michigan State College October, 1941 Student's Name: Course number: TC a RA Fabric purchased: Type. Trade name (if known), Cost, Please attach a swatch of the fabric to this sheet! Store: Name, Address, Purchased: By mail, Over-the-counter, Information received: What did the clerk say about the fabric's fiber content, durability, care, What facts did you notice on the posters used in displaying the fabrics? What facts did you notice on the end of the bolt? What written materials were wrapped with your fabrics? (labels, tags, tickets, sales slips, bills of sale, etc.) Please attach them all to this sheet: -499 . 5LT: winnIfin—Wmm What terms were written on the fabric itself? (salvage and wrong side) Please quote them all exactly! Pdease contribute all of the samples which you have collected in your search for fabrics for this course (with their attached tickets) to the box which has been provided. \ :M U SE 0N1Y Jul 22 “3% { Oct.“ ’48 _ -- INTER-HERA!!! szér. Julzz 4 ‘ 61 19 ’ \As 6 ‘17 m4 '5' .. (:‘OM USE n \- (3.5 U '- -w— . -.-_—— _—_v A 9 ”'TIT/ilLfiI’IILfijlimrl((i/flifl'ifll’lflliyflfli‘imfi'Es