New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-07-10
PRLCES 10 CONSTMERS.

| Tho Democrats Of Ohio and Iowa must take
notice that they cannot use over again this year
with success the same ammunition that they
fred away. more or less effectively, in the cam
pairn which terminated last November. The
| suggestion may seem frivolous and unneteS-
sary. 1t would be, if Democrats were either
c?ndd or shrewd. If candid, they would not
now be repeating assertions which may have
been made last year in honest error, but which
nobody can now make without intent TO deceive
If they were shTewd, they would realize that
the voters are not at all likely to be deceived
twice by the same untruth. Yet even now
s,nle of the Democrats are repeating the same
old story that the new tariff has made all things
more costly to consumers. They are only try
ing to burn over again the powder they burned
IN the contest last year.
American journals and speakers have a very
easy task. They have only to obtain from
local stores of good standing quotations show
! ing the actual cost to consumers in different
places of articles which enter most largely into
the cost of living at this time and at the same
time ycar ago. They will find that many
farm products are higher, and If the Democrats
choose TO assert that higher prices for farm
products have been caused by the tariff, let
them. They make that assertion in Eastern
cities and manufacturing towns, not realizing
that even in these Eastern States farmers have
something to say about elections. But when
retail prices of other products which are used
by the great majority of the people are COM
pared. it will be found that the reported adj
vance has not taken place. Instances can be
found here and there of higher prices charged
for goods imported, of qualities used only by
the rich and luxurious. But fair comparison
of prices of the goods which the millions in
this country do actually use would cover with
confusion any Democrat who has not the cheek
| of wooden Indian or HindOO idol.
It is even to many ProtectOnistS mystery
why retail prices do not advance when the
market is defended against foreign competition
| by higher duties. Why should not clothing be
dearer, men ask, if the cloth lof which it is
made costs more? Why should not the cloth
cost more if higher duties have been put on
cloth from abroad and on wool imported? Why
should not the tin can or the tin dinner-pall
cost more, and the canned vegetables and meats,
| if tin plates are dearer? These are natural
questions. and men who have not found the
answer to them are sometimes likely to believe
assertions Of Free Traders even against then
own personal experience.
| But take first simple illustration; did a
higher duty on barley add half IA cent to the
cost of glass of beer? Everybody knows that
the dealer could not afford to charge II
cents or cents q glass. Even if his beer did
cost him little more, he could better afford
to put up with smaller profit than to drive
away part Of his customers. And in most cases
the beer did not cost more at wholesale. In
any event, either the wholesale or the retail
dealer takes the difference out of his previous
profit rather than risk loss Of custom 1t is eX-
actly the same principle that applies to cloth
ing tin cans and pals and many other articles
The man who has been in the habit Of getting
a $50 suit of clothes is not going to pay 81
or 50 more because of new duties. The dealers
know that right well they know that he will
simply buy a cheaper article, and very likely
90 to another dealer for it, and consequently
the dealer demands from the manufacturer suit:
of clothes tat he can afford to sell at the ole
price. IL one manufacturer will not furnish
such suits another WILL and the competition
is so sharp that no one dareS to risk the loss
Of custom by raising prices. Hence the cloJhiel
demands from the cloth manufacturer goods al
the old price, and if one will not furnish such
cloth another will. No mill ventures to risk
its trade by demanding higher prices as long
as it can possibly sell at the old rates So tht
consumer does not pay half cent moro fol
his can Of vegetables or meat. Because traders
know that he win not, they demand from the
manufacturer canned goods at the old rate anC
the Gamers in turn demand from the manu-
facturcrs Of cans their supply at former prices
Either the maker of the cans Or the packer o
the canned goods ordinarily makes profit large
enough to bear the tritling increase of cost in
volved by the advance thus far seen in til
plates, and the one or the other takes thai
tliHing cost cut of his profits rather than risk
the loss Of custom.