"Dear Dr. Johnson:" First, let me say that there is no signature appearing on this letter, though the line for the signature is designated as "Maurice Stonehill, Colston Optical Company." And the letter reads:

DEAR DR. JOHNSON: I have your letter of May 8th, and will attempt to answer your queries.

1. The terms of the lease are very flexible. The length of time the lease will run can be mutually arranged; however, the lease we get from Sears has a 60-day cancellation clause in it. Which, incidentally, they have never used in practice.

2. The anticipated opening date would be at least two months away; however, the certain date cannot be determined until the manager of the store returns from his vacation two weeks from now.

3. The salary guarantee would exist as long as you are associated with us. 4. Names of O.D.'s and locations follow and are all in Sears Roebuck and Company stores. Myron Chalfin, East 86th and Carnegie, Cleveland, O.; Arthur Gore, W. 110th, Lorain Street, Cleveland, Ohio; Frank Berger, 21000 Libby Road, Maple Heights, Ohio; Herman Raines, Adams and Whitaker Streets. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Nathan Burnthal, 515 Sandusky Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Other stores are located in Baltimore and Buffalo.

5. In advertising, we never mention the O.D.'s name. In your state we cannot mention that examinations are available. However, by mentioning complete optical department the general public assumes that such a service is available. It is entirely possible that some of the eye-ware salesmen who call on you are familiar with us and from them you can learn something about us.

Bear in mind that most of our advertising is done on radio and television and hence samples are not available.

I trust that this is the information you desire.

There we have a letter which, obviously, is in response to a letter addressed to Colston from an optometrist in Indiana. We have an allegation by Dr. Corns of the State Board of Examiners in Indiana that solicitation has been made by the Colston Corporation in Ohio of optometrists in Indiana for the employment in Ohio corporations.

Your testimony is that this has not come to your attention?

Dr. Rowe. I think that I can say this, that in 1959, the Colston Optical Company was purchased by the Cole National Corporation and they have not been associated with us since the time of that purchase. This was done by someone who is not in the optical business today. He sold it subsequent to this letter. So, I cannot answer for that gentleman, for Cole National. I am aware of the present policy, the present philosophy, and I am aware of the philosophy that existed since Cole National took over the Colston business which is not to solicit optometrists for employment where it is illegal to solicit them, whether it be from one state or another state or anywhere. In other words, if it is illegal to employ optometrists in Indiana as it is in Ohio, as it is in Pennsylvania, we do not solicit optometrists for employment in those states. That has been the policy of Cole National since they assumed the ownership of the distributor.

Mr. JACOBS. That is a very likely answer, and I appreciate it. However, since this was raised on August 17, 1967, I wonder if you would be kind enough, Dr. Rowe, to look into the practice of the Colston Company in Ohio, and perhaps write to this committee and make an assertion with respect to your inquiry of the activities along the lines I have suggested. I am quite interested as the Representative from Indiana, Indianapolis as a matter of fact, in this problem inasmuch as an official of my state has brought it to my attention. Would you be kind enough to supply this committee with the results of your inquiry on this matter?

Dr. Rowe. I can get you that; I will see that you receive it. (The information referred to was not received.)

Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Chairman, I am sorry to have taken so much time, but when one of my constituents writes me, I most certainly wish to respond.

May this be made a part of the record (indicating file)?

Mr. SISK. Yes.

(The documents referred to follow :)

GOVERNMENTAL RESEARCH PUBLIC AFFAIRS ASSOCIATES,

Columbus, Ohio, March 29, 1960.

WOULD YOU LIKE AN INCOME OF $12,000 A YEAR TO START?

a. practicing optometry.

b. in an air conditioned department store.

c. a store that values its reputation fust as carefully as you will your clients for examination.

d. in an Indiana city with the maximum of cultural and civic facilities.

e. where industry is diversified and the air is clean.

f. where your wife and children will find a real permanent home in a neighborhood you could then afford.

g. where the express highway cuts your travel time. The population, while growing, is more native than cosmopolitan as found in Gary for instance.

Some of our optician licensees in situations like this one earn an income of $20,000 annually.

This is a permanent situation. If you feel you are qualified, call for an interview today.

Mr. THEODORE M. GRAY,

Columbus, Ohio.

THEODORE M. GRAY.

SOUTH BEND, IND., March 29, 1960.

DEAR MR. GRAY: I am interested in the position mentioned in your letter. If you are going to be in South Bend soon, please call me as I would like additional information on said position.

Respectfully yours,

R. E. STULLER, O.D.

INDIANA OPTOMETRIC ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Indianapolis, Ind., April 12, 1960.

Approximately in the middle of March, I returned home one evening to find a card in the front door, bearing the name of Mr. Theodore M. Gray, and whether I would be interested in a position in Ft. Wayne doing optometric work which would pay a minimum of $12,000.00 a year. Also stamped on the card was the title, Governmental Research Affairs Associates. Mr. Grays phone number and address were also listed.

I replied by mail to Mr. Grays card, at 30 E. Broad St., Columbus 16, Ohio, and indicated I was interested in the position.

On April 6, a Mr. M. L. Stonehill from the Colston Optical Co., Cleveland 13, Ohio, called me at my home and said he was the one offering the position in a Sears Roebuck Store, Ft. Wayne. It appeared Mr. Gray was just the go-between man. Mr. Stonehill said I would make a minimum of $12,000.00 a year guaranteed. There would be no salary but a yearly contract. I pay $100.00 a month rental to store for rental of space and equipment. The work would be refracting only and this would be my remuneration.

When I told him I belonged to the Association and would have to think this over, he replied, if I was married to the Association to forget the whole deal. He thought this type of work was much more ethical than belonging to the association. There has been no further contact or correspondence at date of this report.

Dr. A. R. JOHNSON,

Fort Wayne, Ind.

COLSTON OPTICAL CO., Cleveland, Ohio, May 12, 1959.

DEAR DR. JOHNSON: I have your letter of May 8th., and will attempt to answer your querries.

1. The terms of the lease are very flexible. The length of time the lease will run can be mutually arranged however the lease we get from Sears has a 60 day cancellation clause in it. Which incidentally they have never used in practice. 2. The anticipated opening date would be at least two months away-however the certain date cannot be determined until the manager of the store returns from his vacation two weeks from now.

3. The Salary guarantee would exist as long as you are associated with us. 4. Names of O.D.'s and locations follow and are all in Sears Roebuck and company stores. Myron Chalfin, E. 86th. and Carnegie, Cleveland., O. Arthur Gore, W. 110th. U Lorain St., Cleveland, O., Frank Berger, 21000 Libby Road, Maple Hts. o., Herman Raines, Adams & Whitaker St., Philadelphia, Pa., Nathan Burnthal, 515 Sandusky St., Pittsburgh, Pa. Other stores are located in Baltimore and Buffalo.

5. In our advertising we never mention the O.D.'s name. In your state we cannot mention that examinations are available. However, by mentioning complete optical department the general public assumes that such a service is available.

It is entirely possible that some of the eye-ware salesmen who call on you are familiar with us and from them you can learn something about us.

Bear in mind that most of our advertising is done on radio and television and hence samples are not available.

I trust that this is the information you desire.
Very truly yours,

Mr. SISK. The gentleman from Maryland?

MAURICE STONEHILL.

Mr. GUDE. I have several questions that I would like to ask, Mr. Sisk.

Did your Association have any requirement, so far as your members are concerned, as to the technical or professional qualifications of optometrists or opticians employed by you?

Dr. Rowe. The optometrists and the opticians employed must be qualified by licensing where it is required or they must have gone through an apprenticeship. If they have not had the proper apprenticeship, we place them in a training program of apprenticeship, because in ever state, as to the optometrists, he must be licensed, and, of course, we require that he have his license, because, otherwise, he cannot practice without it. Where opticians are required to have a license we also hire licensed opticians. But they are not licensed in all states, and they achieve their skills through a process of apprenticeship.

Mr. GUDE. Over and above what is required by local law, you do not have any problem as to qualification?

Dr. RowE. We feel that the law establishes the standards by which we can operate. They have to be at that level. That is a part of the law. Beyond that point, we simply attempt to secure the best personnel available as the situation requires.

Mr. GUDE. Do you have any code or requirements so far as the member firms of your Association are concerned as to the procedure they must follow in the examination of customers or clients who come to those firms? For example, if a certain state permitted a member firm to have an optometrist on the payroll, do you have requirements that he must perform certain examinations when an individual comes in for an eye examination?

FORT WAYNE JOURNAL-GAZETTE Tuesday, Feb. 21, 1967 15A

GRAND OPENING

OF A NEW OPTICAL DEPARTMENT AT SEARS

Dr. Rowe. If we did that, Mr. Congressman, we would be dictating to the optometrist as to what his professional judgment tells him he should do, and we do not attempt to dictate to the optometrist as to what he should do. If he has become licensed, then he should be able to perform these functions without being told by someone else how to perform them. By establishing standards, in effect it would be telling him that he must do certain things. We do not think that is proper, that an optometrist should be told to do certain things. We tell him that he should do the best job that is necessary in his professional judgment.

Mr. GUDE. In other words, your Association does not have a standard or ethic so far as being an optometrist is concerned?

Dr. Rowe. We have ethics. I do not have them with me. It is a part of our bylaws, and if you would like I can send you a copy of the bylaws and indicate the standards by which our members operate; but I thought you were referring to the fact that we tell the optometrist what he must do. We do not attempt to do that, because this can work both ways. If we have the right to dictate to him to operate under certain standards, then we will have the right to dictate to him how much time he must do this in and how much time he must do that in. We do not feel that we should do that. He is licensed to do that. He has had training and has qualified himself to do this work, in the eyes of the public and in the eyes of the State government, to do that. We tell him to use his judgment, and his judgment is his own. We do not interfere with his right to do that.

So far as the ethics of our members are concerned, we have established an ethical code. I am sorry that I do not have it with me. I think that the best way to give you this evidence is to send it to you.

(The information requested was not furnished.)

Mr. GUDE. Does this ethical code require that they should perform their job in a certain manner or to do certain things or merely to be governed by the ethics of their profession?

Dr. Rowe. By the ethics of their profession, to be so governed. Mr. GUDE. Thank you. That is all.

Mr. SISK. Dr. Rowe, you said earlier that the King Optical Company was a member of your Association?

Dr. Rowe. Yes.

Mr. SISK. Are you familiar with a Mr. Driscoll of Ritholz Company? Dr. Rowe. There are three Ritholz's; Dr. Ben, Mr. Don, and Mr. Julius Ritholz.

Mr. SISK. They are all major stockholders in King Optical Company. Dr. Rowe. Mr. Don is a stockholder; I do not believe that Julius Ritholz is a stockholder.

Mr. SISK. I ask this question, Dr. Rowe, in connection with the ethical standards required of the members of your Association. Are you familiar with the situation where a Mr. Ritholz went to prison for attempting to bride a member of the Michigan Board of Optometric Examiners?

Dr. Rowe. Yes, I am.

Mr. SISK. You are familiar with that case?

Dr. Rowe. Yes.

Mr. SISK. I wanted to establish this for the record, to indicate a trend. One of the things we are concerned about is the so-called corporate practice where, after all, the dollar profit of course has to be