Evening Star Newspaper, February 19, 1935, Page 4

A2 DOUBTS GENERAL | ON GOLD RULI How to Show Damage Suf- fered One Problem for U. S. Bondholders. By the Associated Press. If you're lost in a mage of dollar signs, ‘gold clauses,” “Iinvalidations” and “devaluations,” don’t feel down- hearted. Just think of the learned men in the National Capital. Many of them are in the same fix. Even the Supreme Court, whose nine justices represent the acme of | legal learning, couldn't agree on just what should result when the Govern- ment took gold out of circulation findl chopped the dallar down to 59.06 per cent of its old gold content. The best thing to keep in mind is that practically speaking, the Govern- ment was upheld yesterday by the high court, 5 to 4. Liberty Bond Different. But if you've got a Liberty bond you're entitled to somewhat more de- tails. Out of the torrent of confusion over the court'’s ruling on Federal bonds which have gold clauses, has emerged a possibility that future legal actions against the Government may be possible. But the potentialities were considered somewhat unclear and ex- perts were divided. John M. Perry, a New Yorker, who knows considerable law himself, con- tended the Government owed him $1.60 in devalued dollars for every old dolalr he invested in Government bonds. Chief Justice Hughes, reading the majority report, said the Govern- ment acted unconstitutionally in ab- rogating the gold clause in its own contracts, but then added: “Because the Government is not at liberty to alter or repudiate its ob- ligations, it does not follow that the claim advanced by the plaintiff shall be sustained. * * * Plaintiff canre- cover no more than the loss he has suffered and of which he may right- fully complain. He is not entitled to e enriched.” How to Show Damage. This apparently was the nub of the question for Government gold bond- holders: How as Justice Hughes put it, to show “any actual damage.” Justice Stone indicated it might need a return of gold to circulation to prove such damage and dismissed the question as “academic.” Even in such an event, Stone said, “Congress could withdraw the privilege of suit upon its gold clause obligations." Some high administration quarters take the same view, that is, that no damage could be proved unless Con- gress returned gold to use as money. But since an administration spokes- man considers this an impossibility, these same officials believe “‘the door s locked at all times” for damage suits. Some legal authorities, however, think that the purchasing power of the dollar is involved. This view holds a damage suit could be filed if the bondholders could prove in court that the devalued dollars offered them by the Government have less THE_EVEN Gold Opinion Highlights Majority Ruling by Chief Justice Hughes Explains Verdict on Basis of Points of Law at Issue. By the Assoelated Press. Here are some of the outstanding observations in Chief Justice Hughes' majority opinions en three points in the gold elause cases, followed by some of the highlights from the dis- senting opinions: PRIVATE BOND CABSES. ‘ The question before the court 1§ one of power. Not ef policy. And that question touches the validity of these measures at but & single point, that is, in relation to the joint resolu- tion denying effest to the “gold clauses” in existing contracts. The resolution must, however, be con- sidered in its legislative setting and in the light of other measures in pari materia. The decisions of this eourt re- lating to clauses for payment in gold did not deal with situations corre- sponding to these now presented. The rulings upholding gold clauses and determining their effect were made when gold was still in circu- lation and ne act of the Congress prohibiting the enforcement of such clauses had been passed. We are of the opinion that the | gold clauses now before us were not contracts for payment in gold cain as a commodity or in bullion, but were contracts for the payment of | money. We also think that, fairly con- strued, these clauses were intended to afford a definite standard or measure of value and thus to protect against a depreciation of the cur- rency and against the discharge of the obligation by a payment of lesser value than that prescribed. It is unnecessary to review the his- toric controversy as to the extent of this power (of Congress to establish a monetary system) or again to go over the ground traversed by the | court in reaching the conclusion that the Congress may make Treasury nates legal tender in payment of debts previously contracted as well as of those subsequently contracted, whether that authority be exercisad in course of war or in time of peace. Here, the Congress has enacted an expressed interdiction. The argument against it does not rest upon the mere fact that the legislation may cause hardship or loss. Creditors who have not stipulated for gold payments may | suffer equal hardship or loss with creditors who have so stipulated. The former, admittedly, have no constitu- tional grievance, and while the latter may not suffer more, the paint is pressed that their express stipulations for gold payments constitute property and that creditors who have not such stipulations are without that property right. And the contestants urge that the Coneress is seeking not to regu- late the currency but to regulate con- tracts and thus bas stepped beyond the power conferred. This argument is In the teeth ef purchasing power than the dollar they invested. But what a job! Many Causes Contribute. Lawyers say in such a court nctlon: it would be necessary to show the loss in buying power was due to devalua-: tion and not possibly to thousands of other causes that might make a §1 shirt of three years ago cost $1.25 today. Entering into such a case would be such vast questions as the opera- tion of the law of supply and demand an prices and whether the drought or devaluation has boosted the price of meat to its present level, as com- pared to the price when the bonds were bought. Some experts frankly don’t look for many suits of this kind, even if a theoretical legal right exists, GOLD CLAUSE ACT T0 STAY ON BOOKS| Law Remains, Though Part Was Declared Unconstitutional by Supreme Court. By the Assoclated Press. The act invalidating gold clause contracts remains on the statute books even though the Supreme Court has held that part of it is unconstitutional. The court held that the law was constitutioral in outlawing gold eclauses in private contracts, but in- valid in so far as obligations of the Federal Government were concerned. Legal experts said today that if the whole act had heen declared unconstitutional it would have been eliminated from the books, but that under the divided opinion it will re- main unchenged. F Attorneys who look in future years to see what the law is will have to read the act and then search else- where for the Supreme Court’s in- terpretation, showing that in part it is no longer law. The pertinent clause of the law Teads: “Every obligation, heretofore or hereafter incurred, whether or nat any such provision is contained there- in or made with respect thereto, shall be discharged upon payment, dollar for dollar, in any coin or curreney which at the time of payment is legal tender for public and private debts.” 18,000 WORDS COVER DECISIONS ON GOLD Five Opinions and Summary Are Delivered in Two Hours by Supreme Court. By the Assoclated Press. It* took- the Supreme Court 18,000 words, two hours, five opinions and a summary statement from the bench to dispose of the gold cases yester- day. Chief Justice Hughes read three majority opinions covering the three issues involved—private bonds, Gov- ernment bonds and gold certificates, Associate Justice McReynolds gave his views extemporaneously from the bench and read part of one prepared opinion covering all the cases. Associate Justice Stone read an opinion concurring generally with the majority, but differing in some Tespects. Hughes began at noon. Stone com- pleted the proceedings about 2 o'clock. Former College Dean Dies. ST. PETERSBURG, Fla., February 19 (P).—Dr. Herbert A. Pullen, 61, past president of the American Society of Orthodontists and a former dean of Buffalo University, Buffalo, N. Y., died of & heart attack, another established principle. Con- tracts, however expressed, can not fet- ter the constitutional authority of the Congress. Contracts may create rights of property, but when contracts deal with & subject matter which lies within the contral of the Congress they have a congenital infirmative. Parties can not remove their trans- actions from the reach of the domi- nant constitutional power by making contracts about them. Despite the wide range of the dis- cussion at the bar and the earnestness with which the arguments against the validity of the joint resolutien have been pressed, these contentions necessarily are brought under the dominant principles to which we have referred to a single and narrow point. That point is whether the gold clauses do constitute an actual interference with the monetary policy of the Con- gress in the light of its broad power to determine that policy. Whether they may be deemed to be such an interference depends upon an &p- praisement of economic conditions and upon determinations of questions of fact. With Tespect to these conditions and determinations, the Congress is entitled to its own judgment. ‘The devaluation of the dollar placed the domestic econamy on a new basis, In the currency as thus provided, States and municipalities must receive their taxes; railroads, their rates and fares; public utilities, their charges for services. ‘The income out of which they must meet their obligations is cetermined by the new standard. It requires no acute analysis or coin of the present standard of value.” This obligation must be fairly con- strued. The “present standard of value” stood in contradistinction to a lower standard of value, * * * We think that the reasonable impcrt of the promise {5 that it was intended to assure ope whe lent his money to the Government and took its bond that he would not suffer loss through depre- ciation in the medium of payment. The question is necessarily pre- sented whether the joint resolution of June 5, 1983, is a valid enactment 50 far as it applies to the obligations of the United States, ‘There is no question as to the power of the Congress to regulate the value of money, that is, to establish a mone- tary system and thus to determine the currency of the country. The ques- tion is whether the Congress can use that power so as to invalidate the terms of the obligations which the Government has heretofore issued in the exercise of the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. We do not so read the Constitu- tion. There is a clear distinction be- tween the power of the Congress to contral or interdict the contracts of private parties when they interfere with the exercise of its constitutional authority and the power of the Con- gress to alter or repudiate the sub- stance of its own engagements when it has borrowed money under the authority which the Constitution con- fers. When the United States with eon- stitutional authority makes contracts it has rights and incurs responsi- bilities similar to those of individuals who are parties to such instruments. We conclude that the joint reso- luction of June 5, 1933, in so far as it attempted to override the obliga- tion created by the bond in sooth went beyond the congressional power. In this view of the hinding quality | of the Government's obligations, we come to the question as te the plain- tiff’s right to recover damages. That is a distinct question. Because the Government is not at liberty to alter or repudiate its obligations, it does not follow that the claim advanced by the plaintiff should be sustained. ‘The action is for breach of contract. As a remedy for the breach, plain- tiff can recover no more than the loss he has suffered and of which he may rightfully complain. He is not entitled to be enriched. Plaintiff seeks judgment for $16,- 93125 in present legal tender cur- rency on his bond for $10,000. The question is whether he has shown damage to that extent, or any actual damage, as the Court of Claims hag no authority to entertain an action for nominal damages. ‘The change in the weight of the gold dollar did not necessarily cause loss to the plaintiff of the amount claimed. The question of actual loss cannot fairly be determined without considering the economic situation at the time the Government offered to pay him the $10,000, the face of his bond, in legal tender currency. The case is not the same as if gold coin had remained in circulation. Plaintiff demands the “equivalent” in currency of the gold coin promised. But “equivalent” cannot mean more than the amount of money which the promised gold coin would be worth to the bondholder for the purposes for which it could be legally used. That equivalence or worth could not properly be ascertained save in the light of the domestic and restricted market which the Congress has law- fully established. Plaintiff has not shown, or at- tempted to show, that in relation to buying power he has sustained any loss whatever, * * * Plaintiff seeks to make his case solely upon the theory that by reason of the change in the weight ef the dollar he is entitled to $1.69 in the present cur- rency for every dollar promised hy the bond, regardless of any actual loss he has suffered with respect to any transaction in which his dollars may be used. We think that position is untenable. GOLD CERTIFICATES. ‘The asserted basis of the blaintiff’s claim for actual damages is that by the terms of the gold ecertificates he was entitled on January 17, 1934, to Tecelve gold coin. It is plain that he can not elaim any better position than that in which he would have been placed had the gold coin then been paid to him. profound economic inquiry to diselose the dislocation of the domestic econ- omy which would be caused by such a disparity of conditions in which it is insisted those debtors under gold clauses should be required to pay $1.69 in currency while respectively receiving their taxes, rates, charges and prices on the basis of $1 of that currency. We are not concerned with conse- quences, in the sense that conse- quences, however serious, may excuse an invasion of constitutional right. We are concerned with the canstitu- tional power of the Cengress over the monetary system of the country and its attempted frustration. Exercising that power the Congress has under- taken to establish a yniform currency, and parity between kinds of currency, and to make that eurreney, dollgr for dollgr, legal tender for the payment of debts. In the light of abundant ex- perience, the Congress was entitled to choose such a uniform monetary sys- tem and to reject a dual system with respect to all obligations within the range of the exercise of its eonstitu- tional authority. The contention that these gold clauses are valid contracts and cannot be struck down proceeds upon the as- The cuyrepgy paid to the plaintiff for his gold certificates was then on & parity with that standard of value. It ean net be said thap in receiving the currency on that basis he sus- tained any actual loss. There was not on January 17, 1934, a free market for gold in the United States, or any market available to the plaintiff for the gold coin to which he claims to have been en- titled. Plaintiff insists that gold had an intrinsic value and was bought and sold in the world markets. But plaintiff had no right to resort to such markets. “Impending Chaos,” Cited in Minority Opinion of Justices Here are highlights from the opin- ion of the minority in the gold clause cases, signed by Justices McReynolds, ‘Van Devapter, Sutherland and Butler. Acquiescence in the decisions just anneynceq (the majority opinions) is sumption that private parties, and | impessible. States and municipalities, may make and enforce contracts which may limit that authority. Dismissing that un- tenable assumption, the facts must be faced. We think that it is clearly shown that these clauses mufiin ‘with the exertion of the power granted to the Congress and certainly it is net established that the Congress arbi- trarily or capriciously decided that sueh an interference existed. FEDERAL BONDS. ‘The bond now before us is an obli- gation of the United States. The terms of the bond are explieit. Th were not only expressed in the bo: itself, but were definitely prescribed by the Congress. The circular of the Treasury De- partment of September 28, 1918, to ‘which the bond refers “for a statement of the further rights of the holders id " also g s of i s o puided that the principal “are payable in United States gold Just men regard repudiation and spoilation of citizens by their sover- eign with abhotrence; but we are asked to affirm that the Constitution has granted power ta accomplish both. Nos only s there Ro permission fo such actions; they are inhibited. And no plentitude of wards can conform them to our charter. ‘The fundamental problem now pre- sented is whether recent statutes passed by Congress in respect of money and credits were designed to attain a legitimate end. Or whether, under the guise of pursuing a monetary rated a plan primarily designs destroy private ebligations, repudiate nationpl debts and drive into the Treasury all gald within the country in exchange for inconvertible prom- ises to pay, of much less value. Pay, af much less value. | the Senator who presented it. It was tion and {ts enforcement would deprive the parties before us of their rights un__der the Constitution. If this is permissible, then a gold doliar contajning one graip ef gold may become the standard, all contract rights fall, and huge profits appear on the Treasury books. Instead of $2,800,- 000,000 as recently reported, perhaps $20,000,000,000, maybe enough to cancel the public debt, maybe more. To such conterfeit profits there would be no limit; with each new debasement of the dollar they would expand. The power to issue bills and “regu- late valyes” of coin cannot be so enlarged as to authorize arbitrary action, whose immediate purpose and neeessary effect is destruetion of in- dividual rights. Loss of reputation for honorable dealing will bring us uynending humili- ation; the impending legal and moral chaos is appalling, CORPORATE BONDS, ‘The purpose of section 43 incorpor- ated by the Senate as an amendment to the House bill, the Thomas infla- tion amendment, was clearly stated by the destruction of rights. But we must not forget if this power exists - Cngress may readily destroy other obligations which present ob- struction to the desired effect of | further depletion. The destruction of all obligations by reducing the stand- ard gold dollar to one grain of gold, | or brass or nickel or copper or lead will become an easy possibility, lawfully aequired We think that in the circumstances Congress had no power to destroy the obligations of the gold clauses in private obligations. The attempt to do this was plain usurpation, arbitrary and oppressive, GOVERNMENT BONDS. Valid contracts to repay money | borrowed cannot be destroyed by exercising power under the coinage | provision, | This (the majority opinion) amounts | to a declaration that the Government | may give with one hand and take away with the other. Default is thus made both easy and safe. Obligations cannot be legally avoided by prohibiting the creditor from re- ceiving the thing promised. | GOLD CERTIFICATES. | For the Government to say, we! have violated our contract but escaped | the consequences through our ewn| statute, would be monstrous. In mat- ters of contractual obligation the Government cannot legislate so as to excuse itself. If any individual should undertake to annul er lessen his ebligation by secreting or manipulating his assets with the intent to place them beyond the reach of creditors, the attempt would be denpunced as fraudulent, wholly ineffective. In view of the statutory direction that gold coin for which certificates are issued shall be held for their pay- ment on demend “and used for no other purpose,” it seems idle to argue (as counse] for the United States did) that other use is permissible under the ancient aet of March 3, 1863. We are dealing here with a debased standard, adopted with the definite purpose to destroy obligations. Such arbitrary end oppressive action is not within any congressional power here- tofore recognized. ‘The gold clauses in these bonds were valid and in entire harmony with pub- lic policy when executed. They are property. To destray & validly ac- quired right is the taking of property. ‘They established a measure of value and supply e basis for recovery if broken, If this reduction of 40 per cent of all debts was within the power of Cen- gress and if as a necessary means to accomplish that end Congress had power by resolution to destroy the gold clauses, the holders of these corporate bonds gre without remedy. But we must not forget that if this power exists Congress may readily destroy other cbligations which nt ob- struction to the desired effect of fur- ther depletion. The gold clauses in no substantial way interfered with the power of coin- ing money or regulating its value or providing an uniform currency. Their existence, as with many other cir- cumstances, might have circumscribed the effect of the intended depreciation and disclosed the unwisdom of it. But they did not prevent the exercise of any granted power. Congress breught about the condi- tions in respect of gold which exist when the obligations matured. Hav- ing made payment in this metal im- }aoulble the Government cannot de- end by saying that if the obligation had been met the creditar could not have retained the gold; eonsequently he suffered no damage because of the non-delivery. ‘These bonds are held by men and women in many parts of the world; they rely upon our honor. Thirty Seek Legislature Seat. DALLAS, Tex. (#).—Lats of would- be State Representatives are bound to be disappointed. Thirty have an- nounced they are seeking the seat | francs will be reloaned mare freely. vacated by Mrs. Sarah T. Hughes, who resigned to beeome the State's first woman District Court judge. GOLD RULING HELD HELPING STABILITY French See Flafidln’s Policy of Cheap Money Aided by Decision. By the Assoclated Press. PARIS, February 19.—French finan- cial circles expressed the belief today the United States Supreme Couri's gold clause decision would contribute to the stability of world currencies and price levels, As for its effect on French economy, it was asserted in many quarters the cheap money policy of Premier Pierre- Etienne Flandin would be greatly fa- cilitated. Effort Obstructed, ‘The premier's efforts to bring Paris money rates into line with open mar- ket rates in London and New York hitherto have been obstructed by the uncertainty of the last five weeks. During this time the dollar has been ' advancing, but now it is expected dol- lars will be sold forward in Paris and Generally, the belief is expressed that by relieving European markets of their anxiety the gold decision will re- sult in a return of the normal flow of funds, particularly in Paris. Paris Shows Interest. As the heart of the gold bloc, Paris viewed the outcome of the cases with particular interest. Financial circles admitted concern that a cheap dollar would put such a strain on gold moneys that they might not be able to resist the pressure. Other reaction from abroad was re- ported as follows: LONDON.—Financial markets in- terpreted the Supreme Court decision on gold clauses in bonds as removing recent uncertainty and stabilizing the market. The stock exchange support- ed trans-Atlantic issues. |, BERLIN.—The German press saw the decision as a victory for President Raosevelt. STOCKHOLM —Prof. Gustav Cas- sel, gold authority, said the decision “has the greatest moral significance.” ROME.—The stock exchange, isolat- ed by government regulation, showed no important changes. MOSCOW. — The Soviet Union showed no interest whatsoever in the Supreme Court’s findings, the news- papers not even mentioning it. | CAPETOWN.—Union of South Af- rica markets firmed and the gofcrn- ment is expected to have an $11,€00,- 000 surplus due to gald taxation. GENEVA.—League of Nations ex- perts said the court decision would stimulate the stabilization of condi- tions in the United States and abroad. STATUS OF PARLEY ON MONEY VAGUE Officials Profess Ignorance of Possible Plans for Werld Stabilization, By the Assoclated Press. High administration officials, glee- ful over the Government's practical victory in the gold cases, today, nev- ertheless, considered prospects of an international monetary conference somewhat distant. It was agreed on every hand that this Government's power in achieving stabilization between the dollar, pound and other important currencies, had been strengthened tremendously by the Supreme Court’s ruling removing all constitutional doubts about the devalued dallar. But these same sources were ig- norant of eny plans by President Roosevelt to take the initiative in' summoning nations to discuss money —or of approaching Great Britain on ! the subject of currency stabilization. Mr. Roosevelt'’s announced purpose, as given to the London Economic Conference, and repeated to the Su- preme Court by Attorney General Cummings, is “permanent stabiliza- tion of every national currency.” Should a foreign nation take the | initiative and approach this Govern- ment, informed quarters considered it certain such advances would be| entertained seriously. But en im- | portant factor was repeated intima- tions by the President that stabiliza- tion should be sought on more than gold alone. In recent days, Secretary Hull has | said repeatedly this Government has | neither made nor received overtures | on the money problem. e FORMER CHIEF JUSTICE’S DAUGHTER HEARS RULING Mrs. Hugh Wallace Accompanied Mrs. Owen J. Roberts at Gold Decision. ‘The daughter of former Chief Jus- tice Melville Weston Fuller, who died in 1910, was among the notables gathered in the Supreme Court for the handing down of the gold clause deeision. ‘The daughter, Mrs. Hugh Wallace, was accompanied by Mrs. Owen J. Roberts, wife of the associate justice. From a niche, the bust of Mrs. Wal- lace’s father, along with those of eight other Ohief Justices, looked down upon the scene. Feb. 21 to Feb, 25 WASHINGTON'S BIRTHDAY CRUISE TO in the smart “BRITA Sailing including round-trip railroad New from New York Thursday, Feb. 21 at 6 p. ;. d Returning early Monday, Feb. 25 Washington back to Washington $55.90 up York and return.and the complete Cruise. See your own Steamship Agent or BERMUDA moter-liner NNIC” ticket, from Washington to CUNALP WHITY STAR NG _STAR. WASHINGTON, D. . TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1935. Solemnity and Sorrow Mark Statement of Gold Opinions Hughes Brushes Forehead Twice in Reading Majority View—Minority Leader Says *Constitution Gone.” By the Assoclated Press. Solemnity and sorrow marked the reading of the gold ease decisions yesterday. ‘The solemnity was in the tones of Chief Justice Hughes as he presentec the majority verdict upholding the New Deal on all except the abroga- tion of the gold clause in Government securities. Sorrow crept into the voice of Justice McReynolds as he attacked the majority stand. Before starting to read, Mr. Hughes glanced for an instant over the notahle gathering before him. From the bench he picked up a large white handkerchief and brushed his forehead. Then he spoke in clear, sonorous tones, moving his head from to time as he emphasized a pas- . He leaned far back in a deep Rustle Sweeps Court. “Plaintiff,” he said, “seeks to make his case solely upon the theory that by reason of the change in the weight of the dollar he is entitled to $1.69 in the present currency for every dollar promised by the bond, regard- less of any actual loss he has suffered with respect to any transaction in which his dollars may be used.” A rustle swept through the court as he read the next sentence: “We think that position is untenable.” As he continued the Chief Justice paused freguently. “Congress,” he said, “has under. taken to establish a uniform cur- rency and parity betwren kinds of currency and to make that currency, dollar for dollar, legal tender for the payment of debts. “The Congress was entitled to choose such & uniform system and to | reject & dual system, with respect to all obligations within the range of the exercise of its costitutional au-| thority.” When the Chief Justice had finished he again reached for the handker- chief and wiped his forehead. Minority View Expressed. Justice McReynolds leaned forward in his chair to express the views of the minority. The former Attorney General in the Wilson cabinet did not read the formal opinion he had prepared; he spoke extemporaneously. Dejected, he said. “The Constitution is gone.” “We are confronted,” he declared, “with & dollar which has been re- duced to 60 cents, which may be 30 cents tomorrow, 10 cents the next day and 1 cent the day following.” He expressed the emphatic opinion the country could not measure the eventual effect “of what has been done here this day.” -He spoke as though delivering a sermon. Bitting to the left of the Chief Justice, he looked neither to left nor right. To him all this was flagra: pudiation, i b “God knows I do not want to talk about such matters” he continyed, “but it is my duty.” Gold Clause Ruling “Guessed” in House About 2 Years A go U. S. Contract Opinion Was Predicted by Pet- tengill of Indiana. | By the Assoclated Press. Representative Pettengill, Demo- crat, of Indiana “guessed” nearly two years ago what stand the Supreme Court would take on the suspension of the gold clause in Government eon~ tracts. That particular bill was found by | the court to be illegal. Pettengill was one of seven Demo- crats to vote against the measure | when it was before the House. He held Congress could abrogate the gold clause in private contracts, but con- tinued: “Cen Congress impair its own cen- tracts? It never has been held, so far as I know, that the United States can directly repudiate its ewn cen- tract directly entered into with one of its own citizens.” His “guess” was this: “I believe the Supreme Court will hold this bill goes heyond the eonsti- tutional powers of Congress.” The Miracle Shit—Acclaimed For Smart Style With Solid Comfort Sy 15 . Gl % 4 A\ W JAYSON SHIRT With the Jayson No Starch, No Wilt Collar Attached —There’s more smart style—more real comfort, better fit and more wear in a Jayson Shirt than you ever im- They launder like new without starch——will not shrink! A wide assortment of new patterns, Flain shades and white. Try agined possible. rich them 92 No Curl No Crush No Stiffness No Blister No Wilt No Starch NoWrinkle No Stays —See the Fish Bowl Test in the window and you'll quickly understand _the idea of the Jaysen Shirt with the Jayson Collar At- tached. Fish Tank filled with water tells the story and proves that perspira- tion or moisture will not wilt the Jayson Collar, Note the crumpled or- dinary collar. ote the smooth, erisp Jayson Col- lar shown en right, Manufactured Under License Granted by the Celanese Corp. of America Street Floar. he Avenye"=7th. 8th and © St3