FOOTWEAR FACTS

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 152, 29 June 1935, Page 5

FOOTWEAR FACTS

HOW MANY PAIRS A YEAR ?

NEW ZEALAND HOLDS HER OWN ' (Contributed by A. E.Mauder.)' ' How many pairs of shoes are pur--chased each year by the average woman? How long does a pair of shoes last the average man? Certainly there [has been a considerable change during the past decade, especially among the ladies; and the customer of today usually appears to set less value than did an earlier generation on a shoe's. lasting quality, and more on its appeal to the eye. In some countries thia tendency has been carried to an extreme as yet—fortunately—not followed in New Zealand. The great major' ity of New Zealand women still prefer something better; and very cheap but low-grade fancy shoes do not satisfy the standards of the public in this Dominion. It is interesting to compare the popu-; lation of the Dominion with the total number of boots and shoes purchased during a year. New Zealand's white population comprises: 560,000 males over 14, 540,000 females over 14. For these 1,100,000 persons, the New Zealand manufacturer supplied 1,440,000 pairs of boots and shoes, while a further 410,000 pairs were imported. The figures do not include either rubber or canvas shoes or slippers. Of the total of 1,850,000 pairs, it may be roughly estimated that about 550,000 .were men's boots and 'shoes,' and 1,300,000 were ladies'. This would mean that, over the Dominion as a whole and over all classes of th» community, men andl youths, on average, buy about one pair of boots of shoes a year; while women and girls, on average, buy a,new pair every five months. Here we see the effect of fashion in ladies' shoes, and the mod* crn desire to have a different pair of shoes to match every frock- A woman today may possess three or four—or half-a-dozen—pairs of shoes; and it appears that, on average, once every five months she buys herself a new pair. MOSTLY MADE IN NEW ZEALAND. Here is another striking fact. Only about 80,000 pairs of men's and youths' leather shoes were imported from overseas, while about 470,000 pairs were made in New Zealand. In other words, of every seven pairs of men's shoes sold, six were made in the Dominion. Of ladies' shoes, about 320,000 pairs were imported, while nearly 1,000,000 were manufactured here; which means that, of all the ladies' shoes sold/three pairs out of every four were mad« in New Zealand factories. ' Some of the imported shoes were undoubtedly of first-class workmanship and made from materials of good quality—but certainly they were not, in either workmanship or material, superior to shoes of the corresponding class made in New Zealand. On the other hand, it is indisputable that a proportion of the imported shoes are of an inferior quality. We cannot reasonably compare—as some people persist in comparing—the best grades of imported shoe with the cheaper grades made m this country. There are both good shoes and inferior shoes imported from England; and there are both good shoes and inferior shoes made here in New Zealand. All we claim is that, class for class, our New Zealand shoes are equal A very interesting new development is'the manufacture of slippers and ladies' "kosy" shoes. The demand for these today is'almost incredible. Before the slump, they were all imported from overseas; but it is worth quoting the figures which reveal the enormous expansion of this industry in the Dorainiom , Slippers, pairs made Year. ***• 1929 7,fw» jnoQ *... 137,000 i93i ;;;;;;. 212,000 t o^9 *«■■•••• 306,000,' \iii 434,000 \ In addition, there were 116,000 pairs of these slippers and "kosy" shoes imnorted last year; so that the aggregate requirements of the public are appar* ently about 800,000 pairs per annum. Perhaps men average one pair of new slippers every two-and-a-half years; and ladies one pair a year. EMPLOYMENT AND TAXES. « The shoe manufacturing industry ia New Zealand today directly employs 2500 workers, together with nearly 50fl more in the tanneries; and it tori""* boots and shoes worth over £1,000,001* a year (at factory selling price). Inc». dentally, it is estimated that those W gaged in the tanning and «NjP» factoring industries contribute £100,00 a a year in-taxes—primage, income ta*, Lid unemployment taxes-to t^tete We sometimes hear the OTtacum that there are "too many factoriesjjl bbutt* is the result of a "us^^S^S which should be cleared "Pj*? °J*«J statistics certainly state that therea*» 71 establishments registere* ;»$» should be noted that, for statistical pm* poses, every local bootmaker, or eve*. a boot repairer, who employs onw two workers, is officially counted as * "factory." This is often »*«#»«js the public. The truth is that there are fourteen factories in New, Zealand w£* an average of over 100 workers apieeej and 4hese are comparable mi size jan<g also inefficiency) majority of shoe factories to Great BrThTquestion of the Customs tari* is outside the scope of this article; tjrt it is perhaps worth mentioning that th* taxes paid (by workers and employ* ers) in the tanning and shoe-manufa* turing industries amount to aPPJ«J* mately 10 per cent of the value of «* shoes produced. On the other hand, the duty on imported English ahoe« is only 16 per emit, (both tax and cosl being taken in New Zealand currency). The net protection of the New Zealand industry is thus only 6 per cent > WEEieiTcAOL FOR THEFT \ "It's not a very convincing story, Jl it?" said Mr. H. P. Lawry, S.M., in thS Magistrate's Court today after hearing the explanation of James Frederick Embleton, aged 41, a seaman, whoa* he sentenced to seven days' imprison* menffor stealing a pair of boot* valued at 12s lid from Martin's Sho» Store. Embleton said that he had bought the boots from a man in the street for 6s, and that when appre» hended he had been trying them on,. but he pleaded guilty to save trouble* ; Sub-Inspector C. E. Roach's version ' of the incident was that at about 8 ; o'clock last night Embleton, who ha« ■ two other men with him at the tim«, ; was seen taking the boots from where1 j they were hanging outside. Martin's shop in Willis Street. The police were informed and the man wa* pointed out to them in a lavatory in Wakefleld Street. A search revealed the boots in his possession. He said he had bought them, but this wa» denied by. the manager; o£ Jhe shop,