Citation
Amendment to code of fair competition for the cotton garment industry as approved on September 27, 1934

Material Information

Title:
Amendment to code of fair competition for the cotton garment industry as approved on September 27, 1934
Portion of title:
Cotton garment industry
Creator:
United States -- National Recovery Administration
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publisher:
United States Government Printing Office
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
6 p. : ; 24 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Clothing trade -- Law and legislation -- United States ( lcsh )
Cotton fabrics -- United States ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

General Note:
Cover title.
General Note:
At head of title: National Recovery Administration.
General Note:
"Registry no. 217-1-06."
General Note:
"Approved Code No. 118--Amendment No. 8."

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
This item is a work of the U.S. federal government and not subject to copyright pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §105.
Resource Identifier:
005024539 ( ALEPH )
63654220 ( OCLC )

Full Text





NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION




AMENDMENT TO

CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION

FOR THE


COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY


AS APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 27, 1934


WE DO OUR PART


II




UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON: 1934


Farsolby tbe Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D.C - Price cents

P::.


Approved Code No. 118-Amendment No. 8


Registry No. 217-1-06























This publication is for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., and by district offices of the Bureau of Foreign
and Domestic Commerce.

DISTRICT OFFICES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Atlanta, Ga.: 504 Post Office Building.
Birmingham, Ala.: 257 Federal Building.
Boston, Mass.: 1801 Customhouse.
Buffalo, N.Y.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Charleston, S.C.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Chicago. Ill.: Suite 1706, 201 North Wells Street.
Cleveland, Ohio: Chamber of Commerce.
Dallas, Tex.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Dttroit, Mich.: S01 First National Bank Building.
Houston, Tes.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Indianapolis, Ind.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Jacksonville, Fla.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Kansas City, Mo.: 1028 Baltimore Avenue.
Los Angeles, Calif.: 1163 South Broadway.
Luuisville,-Ky.: 40S Federal Building.
Memphis, Tenn.: 229 Federal Building.
Minneapolis, Minn.: 213 Federal Building.
New Orleans, La.: Room 225-A, Customhouse.
New York, N.Y.: 734 Customhouse.
Norfolk, Va.: 406 East Plume Street.
Philadelphia, Pa.: 422 Commercial Trust Building.
Pittsburgh, Pa.: Chamber of Commerce Building.
Portland, Oreg.: 215 New Post Office Building.
St. Louis, Mo.: 506 Olive Street.
San Francisco, Calif.: 310 Customhouse.
Seattle, Wash.: S09 Federal Office Building.










Approved Code No. 118-Amendment No. 8


AMENDMENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION
FOR THE

COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY

As Approved on September 27, 1934


ORDER

APPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE
COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY
Hearings having been duly held in full compliance with the pro-
visions of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, approved
June 16, 1933, in connection with amendments to the Code of Fair
Competition for the Cotton Garment Industry and the annexed re-
port on said amendments containing findings with respect thereto
having been made and directed to the President,
NOW, THEREFORE, on behalf of the President of the United
States, I, Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator for Industrial Recovery,
pursuant to authority vested in me by the Code of Fair Competition
for the Cotton Garment Industry, by Executive Orders of the Presi-
dent, including Executive Order No. 6543-A, dated December 30,
1933, and otherwise; do hereby incorporate, by reference, said an-
nexed report and do find that said amendments and the Code as con-
stituted after being amended comply in all respects with the per-
tinent provisions and will promote the policy and purposes of said
Title of said Act, and do hereby order that said amendments be and
they are hereby approved, and that the previous approval of said
Code is hereby modified to include an approval of said Code in its
entirety as amended; such approval to take effect fourteen (14)
days from the date hereof unless some good cause to the contrary is
shown to the Administrator prior to that time and the Administrator
issues a subsequent order to that effect.
The Administrator may on the first Monday of December 1934, or
thereafter, hold such hearing as he may specify to determine the
effect of the operation of these amendments and whether they should
be continued or modified.
HUGH S. JOHNSON,
Administrator for Industrial Recovery.
Approval recommended:
SOL A. ROSENBLATT,
Division Administrator.
WASHINGTON, D.C.,
September 27,1934.
88403--1181-124--34 (1)











REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT


The PRESIDENT,
The lWhite House.
SIR: On June 18, 1934, a Public Hearing was called to consider
amendments to the Code of Fair Competition for the Dress Manu-
facturing Industry, the Code of Fair Competition for the Men's
Clothing Industry, and the Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton
Garment Industries. Matters of various subjects were heard, among
which was the problem of placing manufacturers of cotton house
dresses under the provisions of the Dress Manufacturing Industry
Code or the Cotton Garment Code, whichever Code would be most
applicable to such manufacturers. These amendments are part of
the results of this hearing. Every person who requested was fairly
heard in accordance with the rules of the National Recovery
Administration.
When the Code of Fair Competition for the Dress Manufacturing
Industry and of the Cotton Garment Industry were approved on
October 31, 1933, and November 17, 1933, respectively, there were
contained in the definitions of each of these Codes general and vague
references to a type of product, and neither code contained defini-
tions evenly remotely satisfactory or practical as a means of limiting
the coverage or scope of either code on this product. As a conse-
quence, much serious overlapping and unfair competition has re-
sulted, primarily because of very marked differences in the wage
provisions of the Codes. The one provided for a minimum of $12
and $13 for a forty (40) hour work week and the other for minimum
rates for operators of from $15.50 to $26.25 for a thirty-five (35) hour
work week.
At the time of the adoption by the Cotton Garment Industry of its
Code of Fair Competition, this possible controversy was foreseen and
the Code as approved contained a provision an excerpt from which
is as follows:
The products covered by Section A, paragraphs 8 (cotton wash
dresses) are included in this Code pending the prompt
holding of such further hearing on such notice as the Administrator
in his discretion may fix, and the final determination of whether the
definitions of any of them shall be modified or eliminated or whether
any of the subdivisions shall continue to be included in this Code."
A further provision was contained in the Code, namely Section D
of Article 2, which provided in part as follows:
If there arises any dispute as to whether such product
is covered by the provisions of this or another code the
Administrator may, after notice and hearing, decide under which
code the product or subdivisional industry manufacturing the same
is covered."
Anticipated disputes did arise and hearings were held, as a result
of which, there was appointed, by Order of December 14, a Special







Administrator for the purpose of classifying dress manufacturers
as between the two codes, and of making a study and report or
recommendations with respect to amendments to the Dress Manu-
facturing Code and of the Cotton Garment Code concerning defini-
tions and wage rates and/or hours of manufacture of such dresses ".
This Order, by its own terms, was to expire on July 1, 1934, and
further provided that the Special Administrator appointed under
it should on or before that date make a report with recommenda-
tions. It was intended that on the basis of this report and other
proceedings, the Administrator would take further steps to arrive
at a permanent solution of the matter by proper amendments to the
Codes. The Special Administrator who was appointed under this
Order did, during his incumbency as Special Administrator, classify
on the basis of reports, information and hearings a large number of
manufacturers, to-wit, something over 500 in number. Notwithstand-
ing the provisions of this Order, the Cotton Garment Code Author-
ity issued labels for the manufacture of house dresses to a substantial
number of firms who had not been classified by the Special Adminis-
trator as being entitled to operate under the Cotton Garment Code,
so that in total approximately 700 firms made dresses to which they
attached cotton garment labels during this period. In general, a
very chaotic condition resulted which was most unsatisfactory to
all elements-the so-called legitimate house dress manufacturers
fully as much as the dress industry. As a result of this chaos, the
Dress Code Authority filed an application for an amendment for the
Cotton Garment Code, and on the basis of this application, public
hearing was held. After this public hearing and the report of the
Special Administrator, conferences and discussions were held by the
Administration with the various groups involved, separately and
jointly.
Following is a summary of what appear to be the salient facts of
the situation:
There is a group of manufacturers to whom undue hardship might
result from the application to them of all provisions of the Dress
Code. However, the problem of delimiting this group and ascertain-
ing just exactly what degree of relief would remedy the alleged
hardship, without at the same time creating new conditions of unfair
competition, was and is an extremely difficult one. Further, the
product which this group makes, while clearly distinguishable in its
very lowest price ranges from the products made by the Dress Code
manufacturers, reaches a point which the Special Administrator
referred to above "Where the two lines of manufacture overlap they
can hardly be distinguished by fibre, price or styling."
The great difference between the wage and hour provisions of the
two Codes creates such a labor cost differential that large numbers
of manufacturers, who never were house dress manufacturers within
the knowledge or memory of anybody in the Industry, clamor to be
given the right to operate under any conditions and terms designed
to afford relief to the so-called legitimate house dress manufacturers,
which, if permitted, would give these groups very large and utterly
unjustifiable competitive advantages over both dress manufacturers
under the Dress Code and such legitimate house dress manufacturers








as might conceivably be entitled to some measure of relief. Such
manufacturers merely want to pay wages as low as possible.
Throughout this entire discussion the Dress Code Authority has
consistently maintained that the manufacture of dresses is one indus-
try, and, until it is all included in one code, the problem cannot be
solved.
From this welter of fact, conjecture and opinion, the following
recommendations are made in order to effect a sound solution of the
problem:
(1) That the definition of cotton wash dresses in the Cotton Gar-
ment Code be amended to include only dresses of linen or of chief
content of cotton selling at wholesale to retailer up to and including
$22.50 per dozen.
(2) That all dresses selling at wholesale to retailer at over $22.50
per dozen come under the Dress Code.
Under this arrangement a very definite line is drawn between the
dresses which may be manufactured under the Cotton Garment Code
and those that must be manufactured only under the Dress Code.
This solution of the problem does not estop the manufacturers of
dresses of the price range above $22.50 per dozen from requesting
and obtaining such relief as circumstances justify if unfair competi-
tion or undue hardship is shown.
It has been shown that a comparatively small volume of dresses
of linen or of chief content of cotton wholesaling at below $22.51
per dozen have been manufactured heretofore by members of the
Dress Manufacturing Industry operating under the Dress Code;
also that a comparatively small volume of cotton dresses whole-
saling at over $22.50 per dozen have been manufactured by the
so-called legitimate house dress manufacturers. No real hardship
will be imposed upon anyone by the limits defined. If a house dress
manufacturer wishes to manufacture dresses wholesaling at $22.50
per dozen he may do so under the terms of the Dress Code and, if
circumstances justify, the Administrator may make exemptions in
individual cases in order to prevent undue hardship. Enforcement
by the Code Authorities can only be accomplished by a clear cut
decision with a minimum of overlapping.
The amendments are in four (4) parts as follows:
Part 1. Amends-Definitions, Article II, Section A of the Code by
striking out the words "cotton wash dresses" and inserting,
"dresses of linen or of chief content of cotton selling at wholesale
to retailer up to and including $22.50 per dozen "
Part 2. Further amends-Definitions, Article II, by deleting Sec-
tion B, which defines cotton wash dresses" for the purpose of the
provisions of the Code as originally approved.
Part 3. Amends-Administration, Article IX, Section B, by re-
moving the name "The National Association of Cotton Dress Manu-
facturers" appearing in Item 10 of said Section B, and inserting in
place thereof "The National Association of House Dress Manufac-
turers, Inc.".
Part 4. Amends-Unfair Trade Practices, Article XI, by adding
as Section D, a provision making it an unfair trade practice and a
violation of the Code to attach labels issued under the Code to any
garment not specifically included within the Code.








The Deputy Administrator in his final report to me on said amend-
ments to said Code having found as herein set forth and on the basis
of all the proceedings in this matter:
I find that:
(a) The amendments to said Code and the Code as amended are
well designed to promote the policies and purposes of Title I of the
National Industrial Recovery Act including the removal of obstruc-
tions to the free flow of interstate and foreign commerce which tend
to diminish the amount thereof, and will provide for the general
welfare by promoting the organization of industry for the purpose
of cooperative action of labor and management under adequate gov-
ernmental sanction and supervision, by eliminating unfair competi-
tive practices, by promoting the fullest possible utilization of the
present productive capacity of industries, by avoiding undue restric-
tion of production (except as may be temporarily required), by
increasing the consumption of industrial and agricultural products
through increasing purchasing power, by reducing and relieving
unemployment, by improving standards of labor, and by otherwise
rehabilitating industry.
(b) The Code as amended complies in all respects with the perti-
nent provisions of said Title of said Act, including without limita-
tion sub-section (a) of Section 3, sub-section (a) of Section 7 and
sub-section (b) of Section 10 thereof.
(c) The amendments and the Code as amended are not designed
to and will not permit monopolies or monopolistic practices.
(d) The amendments and the Code as amended are not designed
to and will not eliminate or oppress small enterprises and will not
operate to discriminate against them.
(e) Those engaged in other steps of the economic process have not
been deprived of the right to be heard prior to approval of said
amendments.
(f) The Code empowers the Administrator to take the within
action.
For these reasons these amendments have been approved.
Respectfully,
HUGH S. JOHNSON,
Administrator.
SEPTEMBER 27, 1934.













AMENDMENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR
THE COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY

The Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Garment Indu1tq,;
approved November 17, 1933, and subsequently amended, is her1. :
amended as follows: t,'::
1. In Article II, Section A of said Code, item (8), the words:';,
"cotton wash dresses" are stricken out and the words "dresses of:i:
linen or of chief content of cotton selling at wholesale to the retail :!.
up to and including $22.50 per dozen are inserted.
2. Section B of Article II is deleted.
3. Section B of Article IX is amended by striking out the words
"The National Association of Cotton Dress Manufacturers" -ap-
pearing in item (10) of the official copy of the Code and insertig
in place thereof The National Association of House Dress Mann-
facturers, Inc."
4. Article XI is amended by adding Section D as follows:
"D. It shall be an unfair trade practice and a violation of this
Code to attach N. R. A. labels issued hereunder to any garment not
specifically included within this Code." j
Approved Code No. 118-Amendment No. 8.
Registry No. 217-1-06." ;:
(6)

0








3 1262 986
,.~ ...j...
*" ...:=.




Full Text

PAGE 1

V Approved Code No. 118-Amendment No. 8 Regitry No. 217-1-06 NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION AMENDMENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY AS APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 27, 1934 WE oo OUR P.ARl UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 1934 ( I / For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, ,vashington, D.C. Prit:e 5 cents

PAGE 2

This publication is for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Offi ce , W as hington, D . C., and by di s trict offi ces of the Burea.u of Foreign ancl Dom es ti c Comm e rc e . DISTRICT OFFICJES OF THE DEP A R "TMENT OF COMMERCE Atlanta , Ga.: 5 04: P os t Offi c e Buildin g . Birmingham, Al a. : 257 F e deral Building. B os ton , M a s s . : 1 8 01 Customhou s e . Buffal o , N.Y.: C hamb e r o f C ommerce Building. Charl es ton , S .C .: C h a m be r of Comm e r ce Building. C hi cag o, Ill.: Suit e 1706 , 201 N o rth Wells Street. Cl e veland , Ohi o : Chamb e r o f Comm e rce. Dallas, Tex. : Chamber of C o mm e rce Building. D e t ro it , Mich . : 8 01 First N a tional Bank Building. Houston, T e x. : Chamb e r of Commerce Building. Indianapoli s, Ind . : Chamber of C o mm e rc e Building. J ac k s onville, Fla . : Chamb e r o f Commer <'. e Building. Kan s as City, Mo. : 102 8 Baltimore Avenue. L os Angele s , Calif. : 11 6 3 South Broadway. L o ui s vill e;Ky.: 40 8 F e d e ral Building. M e m p hi s , Tenn . : 2 2 9 Federal Building. Minn ea poli s , Minn. : 213 F e d e ral Building. N e w Orl e an s, La. : Room 225-A, Cust o mhou s e. N e w York , N . Y.: 7 34 Cu s tomhouse. N o rfolk, Va.: 40 6 E as t Plume Street. Phila de lphia, Pa.: 4 2 2 C o mm e r c ial Trust Building. Pitt s bur g h, Pa.: Chamb e r of Commer ce Building. Portland , Or eg. : 2 15 N e w Post Offi ce Building. St . L o ui s, M o . : 50 6 Olive Str ee t. . San Franci s co, C a lif. : 310 Cu s tomho1.1se. Seattle, Wa s h.: 809 Fed e ral Offi c p Builcling.

PAGE 3

Approved Code No. 118-Amendment No. 8 AMENDMENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY As Approved on September 27, 1934 ORDER APPROVING Al\IENDl\fEN'l' TO THE CooE OF F Am Col\IPETITION FOR THE COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY Hearings having been duly held in full compliance with the pro visions of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933, in connection with amendments to the Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Garment Industry and the annexed re port on said amendments containing findings with respect thereto having been made and directed to the President, NOvV, TIIEREFORE, on behalf of the President of the United States, I, Hugh S. Johnson, Administrator for Indu strial Recovery, pursuant to authority vested in me by the Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Garment Industry, by Executive Orders of the Presi dent, including Executive Order No. 6543-A , dated December 30, 1933, and otherwise; do hereby incorporate , by reference, said an nexed report and do find that said amendments and the Code as con stituted after being amended comply in all respects with the per tinent provisions and will promote the policy and purposes of said Title of said Act, and do hereby order that said amendments be and they are hereby approved, and that the previous approval of said Code is hereby modified to include an approval of said Code in its entirety as amended; such approval to take effect fourteen ( 14) days from the date hereof unless some good cause to the contrary is shown to the Administrator prior to that time and the Administrator issues a subsequent order to that effect. The Administrator may on the first Monday of D ecember 1934, or thereafter, hold such hearing as he may specify to de~nnine the effect of the operation of these amendments and whether they should be continued or modified. Hum I S. JOHNSON, Acl11iinistrator for I nclustrial Recovery. Approval recommended : SoL A. RosENBLATT, Division Administrator. ,v AsHINGToN, D.c. , Septembe1 27, 1934. 88403 -1181-12434 (1)

PAGE 4

REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT The PRESIDENT, The White H ouse . Sm: On June 18, 1934 , a Public Hearing was called to consider amendments to the Code of Fair Competition for the Dr ess Manu facturing Industry, the Code of Fair Competition for the Men's Clothing Indu str-y, and the Code o:f Fair Competition for the Cotton Garment Indu str i es. :Matters of various s ubj ects were h eard, among which was the problem of placing manuf acturers of cotton house dresses under the provisions of the Dress Manufacturing Industry Code or the Cotton Garment Code, whichever Code would be most applicable to such manufacturers. These amendments are part of the results of this hearing. Every person who requested was fa.irly heard in accordance with the rules of the National Recovery Administration. When the Code of Fair Competition for the Dr ess Manufacturing Indu stry and of the Cotton Garment Industr y were approved on October 31, 19 33, and November 17 , 1933, respectively, there were contained in the definitions of each of these Codes general and vague references to a type of product, and neither code contained defini tions evenly remotely satis factory or practica.1 as a means of limiting the coverage or scope of either code on thi s product. As a conse quence, much serious overlapping and unfair competition has re s ulted , pri1narily because of ve ry marked differences in the wage provisions of th e Codes. The one provided for a minimum of $12 ancl $ 13 for a forty ( 40) hour work week and the other for minimum rate s for operators of from $15.50 to $26.25 for a thirty-five (35) hour work we.ek. At th e time of th e adoption by the Cotton Garment Industry of its Code of Fair Competition, this possible controversy was foreseen and the Code as approved contained a provision a n excerpt from which is as fallows : "The produ cts covered by Section A, paragraphs 8 ( cotton wash dre sses ) * * * are included in this Code pending the prompt holding of such further hearing on such notice as the Administrator in his discretion may fix, and the final determination of whether the definitions of any of them shall be modified or eliminated or whether any of the subdivisions shall continue to be included in this Code." A further provision was contained in the Code, namely Section D of Article 2, which provided in part as follows: "If ,:, * * there arises any dispute as to whether s uch product is covered by the provisions of this or another co de * * * the Administrator may, after notic e and hearing, decide under which code the product or s ubclivisional indu s try manufacturing the same is covered." Anticipated disputes did arise and hearings were held, as a result of which, there was appointed, by Order of December 14, a Special (2)

PAGE 5

3 Administrator " for the purpose of classifying dress manufacturers as between the two codes, and of making a study and report or recommendations with respect to amendments to the Dress Manu facturing Code and of the Cotton Garment Code concerning defini tions and wage rates and / or hours of manufacture of such dres ses ". This Order, b y its own terms, was to expire on July 1, 1934, and further provided that the Special Administrator appointed under it should on or before that date make a report with recommenda tions. It was intended that on the ba is of this report and other proceedings, the Administrator would take further steps to arrive at a permanent solution of the matter by proper amendments to the Codes. The Special Administrator who wa appointed under this Order did, during his incumbency as Special Administrator, classify on the basis of reports, information and hearings a large number of manufacturers, to-wit, so methjng oYer 500 in number. Notwith tand ing the provisions of this Order , the Cotton Garment Code Author ity i ssued lab els for the manufactur e of house dresses to a substantial number of firms who had not been cla s~ ified by the Special Adminis trator as being entitled to operate und e r the Cotton Garment Code, so that in total approximately 700 firms made clre s es to which they attach 0 d cotton garment lab e l s during this period . In general, a, very chaotic condition re s ulted which was most un atisfactory to all elements-the so -call ed legitimate hous e dre. s manufacturers fully as much as the dre ss indu st ry. As a re ult of thi s chaos, the Dre ss Code Authority filed an application for an amendment for the Cotton Garment Code, and on the basis of th is application, public hearing was held. After thi s public hearin g and the rer ort of the Special Administrator, conferences and discu ss ions were held by the Administration with the varion g roup s involved , s eparately and jointly. Following i a summary of what appear to b e the salient facts of the situation: There is a group of manufacturers to whom undue hard s hip might result from the application to them of all provisions of th e Dre s s Code. However , the problem of delimiting this group and a sce rtain ing just exactly what degree of relief would remedy the alleged hardship, without at the sa me time creating new conditions of unfair competition, was and is an extTemely difficult one. Further, the product which this group n1.ak es , while clearly distinguishable in its yery lowe st price ranges from the products made by the Dress Code manufacturer , r 0 aches a point which the Special Administrator referred to above ",vhere the two lines o:f manufacture overlap they can hardly be distinguished by fibre, price or tyling." The great difference between the wage anr:1 hour provi si ons of the two Codes creates such a labor cost differ e ntial that large numbers of 1nanufacturers, who never were house dre s manufacturers within the knowledge or memory of anybody in the Industry, clnmor to be given the right to operate under any conditions and term s de igned to afford relief to the so-called legitimate hou e dress manufa,..turers, which, if permitted, would aive the se. groups very large and utterlv unjustifiable competitive advantages over bo t h clre s manufacture/s under the Dress Code and such l egi timate hou s e dress manufacturers

PAGE 6

4 as might conceivably be entitled to some measure of relief. Such manufacturer merely want to pay wages as low as possible. Thronghout this ent ire discu ~ sion the Dres s Code Authority has con~istently maintained that the manufacture of dresses is one indus try , and , until it i s all included in one code, the problem cannot be so lv ed . From this w e lter of fact, conjecture and opinion, the following recommendations are made in order to effect a sound solution of the problem: ( 1) That the definition of cotton wash dresses in the Cotton Gar ment Code be amended to include only dresses of linen or of chief content of cotton se lling at wholesale , to retailer up to and including $22.50 per dozen. (2) That all dresses se lling at wholesale to retailer at over $22.50 per dozen come under the Dress Code. Under thi arrangement a very definite line . is drawn between the dre ss es which may be manufactured under the Cotton Garment Code and those that mu t be manufactured only under the Dress Code. This solution of the probl e m does not estop the manufacturers of dresses of the price range above $22.50 per dozen from requesting and obta ining suc h relief as circumstances justify if unfair competi tion or undu e hard s hip is shown. It ha s been s hown that a comparatively small volume of dresses of lin e n or of c hief content of cotton wholesaling at below $22.51 per dozen have b ee n manufactured heretofore by members of the Dre s s : Manufacturing Indu s try operating under the Dress Code; also that a comparatively small volume of cotton dresses whole sa ling at over $22.50 per doz e n have been manufactured by the so ca lled legitimate house dress manufacturers. No real hardship will be imposed upon anyone by the limits defined. If a house dress manufacturer wishes to manufacture dresses wholesaling at $22.50 per dozen he may do so under the term s of the Dress Code and, if c ircum s tances justify , the Administrator n1.ay make exemptions in individual cases in order to prevent undue hardship. Enforcement by the Code Authorities can only be accomplished by a clear cut decision with a minimum of overlapping . The amendments are in four ( 4) parts as fallows : Part 1. Am ends -Definitions, Article II, Section A of the Code by striking out the words " cotton wash dres ses " and inserting, "dresses o:f linen or of chief content of cotton selling at wholesale to retailer up to and including $22.50 per dozen ". Part 2. Furth er amends-Definitions, Article II , by deleting S ec tion B, which defines " cotton wash dresses" for the purpose of the provisions of the Code as originally approved. Part 3. Amends-Administration, Article IX, Section B by re moving the name " The National Association of Cotton Dress Manu facturers" appearing in Item 10 of said Section B, and inserting in pla ce thereof " The National Association of House Dress ~1anufac turers, Inc. '. Part 4. Amend s -Unfair Trade Practices, Article XI, by adding as Section D, a provi si on making it an unfair trade practice and a violation of the Code to attach labels issued under the Code to any garment not specifically includ e d within the Code.

PAGE 7

5 The Deputy Administrator in his final report to me on said amend ments to said Code having found as herein set forth and on the basis of all the proceedings in this matter: I find that: (a) The amendment to sa id Code and the Code as amended are well designed to promote the policies and purposes of Title I of the National Industrial Recov ery Act including the removal of obstruc tions to the free flow of interstate and foreign commerce which tend to dimini s h the amount thereof, and will provide for the general welfare by promoting the organization of industry for the purpose of cooperative action of lab or and management under adequate gov ernmental sanction and supervision, by elimi na ting unfair competi tive practices, by promoting the full est pos s ible utilization of the pre sen t productive capacity of industries, by avoiding undue restric tion of production ( except as may be temporarily required), by increasing the consumption of indu stria l and agricultural products through increa si ng purchasing power, by reducing and relieving unemployment, by improving standards of labor, and by otherwise rehab ili ta ting in cl u stry. (b) The Code as amended complies in all re pects with the perti nent provisions of said Title of said Act, including without lin1ita tion sub-section (a) of Section 3, s ub -section ( 11) of Section 7 and sub section (b) of Section 10 thereof. ( c) The amendments and the Code as amended arc not designed to and will not permit monopolies or monopolistic practices. ( d) The amendments and the Code as amended are not designed to and will not eliminate or oppress small enter prises and will not operate to discriminate against them. ( e) Those engaged in other steps of the econom ic process have not been deprived of the right to be h ea rd prior to approval of said amendments. (f) The Code empowers the Administrator to tak the within action. For the e reasons the se amendments have been approved. Respectfully, SEPTEMBER 27, 1934. HU GHS . JOHNSON, Acl11iinistrator.

PAGE 8

/ AMENDMENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON GARMENT INDUSTRY The Code of Fair Competition or the Cotton Garment Industry, approved November 17, 1933, and subsequently amended, is hereby amended as follows : 1. In Article II, Section A of said Code, item (8), the words " cotton wash dresses " are stricken out and the words " dresses of linen or of chief content of cotton selling at wholesale to the retailer up to and including $22.50 per dozen " are inserted. 2. Section B of Article II is deleted. 3. Section B of Article IX is amended by striking out the words " The National Association of Cotton Dress Manufacturers " ap pearing in item ( 10) of the official copy of the Code and inserting jn place thereof "The National Association of House Dress Manu facturers, Inc." 4. Article XI is amended by adding Section D as follows : "D. It shall be an unfair tr.a.de practice and a violation of this Code to attaGh N. R. A. labels issued hereunder to any garment not specifically included within this Code." Approved Code No. US-Amendment No. 8. Registry No. 217-1-06. (6) 0