The record-union., 1895-03-09
themselves what they were accustomed
to employ othars to do for than

Our reports 1rOm the fruit distributing
centers OF the Eastern States, Chicago
and New York. which come from the
merchants who distribute the fruits to the
consumers, are uniform in stating that
Tor 1898 the chief cause of low prices for
fru1t was the widespread economy of
living forced upon the masses of the peo-
pie and extending to those in what might
be termed the middle class in point of
means. To this was added a plentiful
supply OF the Eastern product For 1894
the Eastern product was not abundant.
but the strain of economy was bearing
more hardly upon the mass of consumers
and was greatly increased by the par
alyzatlon OF trade during the midsum-
mer months by the almost universal. in
excusable ana destructive railway strike.
Your committee submitted with its
statements the returns of sales of fruit
shipped to various Eastern points by
several fruit-growers and shippers, as
representative of the great body of pro-
ducers. We have carefully analyzed
those of the returns submitted which are
most nearly complete and for the largest
body OF shipments. They were sub
mitted as representing that portion Of the
product OF 800 acres of fruit which was
shipped to the Eastern States, los car
loads, the return to the grower being
So, 100 80, or al the rate of $50 S5 per acre.
To ascertain the net result to the grower
there is charged against these returns the
cost of picking, packing, boxes, paper
and loading into cars, at the rate of Sl00
per car, which, not having any informa-
ton to the contrary, we presume to be
not overstated, and again as the cost of
pruning and cultivating 800 acres, S25 per
acre. Assuming both of these estimates
10 be fair, your committee makes show
ing of net return to the grower on 800
acres, from that portion OF the product
which was marketed in the East, of ST.
455 36, or at the rate of Sl3 So per acre.
We find, however, that in The docu-
ment entitled ''The Resources of Califor-
nia," carefully prepared by authority of
law for distribution at the Worlds Fair
at Chicago, the statement, made upon the
authority of A. I. Hatch, represented to
be one of the largest ana most enterpris-
ing fruit-growers i'll the State, that the
cost of pruning and cultiyating fruit
orchard for the fourth year, presumably
the maximum, is placed at SI5 per acre.
We have also found, from the books
carefully and systematically kept for
fruit ranch similarly located to the one
under analysis, the showing of actual
cost for pruning and cultivating for the
fourth year to have been S6 30 per acre.
Accepting the average as being the mean
between the estimate OF so experienced
and well-known grower as MIR. Hatch,
and the actual demonstration by books
Kept for that purpose on an equally we'll
managed ranch, 1t would place the cost
at Sll per acre, or difference of Sl4 per
acre between this average and the esti-
mate made in the showing presented by
your committee. Adding this SI4 per
acre to the Sl3 So, net return to the
grower, We have showing of net profit
TO the grower Of SZ7 s. per acre, and this
during the disastrous gear Of 1891. What
producer in the Eastern States, or in any
OF the adjoining States and Territories
on the Pacific Coast, or merchant or
manufacturer or railroad company within
the State can make an equally favorable
showing for the year 1894?
1t will be observed that there is no
credit to the ranch for other products or
from sales Of fruit in local markets.
There may have been none, but that
would seem to be unlikely, and in our
Judgment a thorough and complete
analysis OF the cost of operating the ranch
would show a net return during the year
1894 OF somewhere in the neignborhood
OF $50 per acre. 1t would be far more
pleasing to the officers of this company
II this showing could be made TO have
been $500 per acre net, and ii it were, the
charges for the transportation of the fruit
to the East would not be increased, nor
would the company cease its endeavors
TO improve It's service or In every reason
able way to extend the facilities and
cheapen the cost Of marketing California
fruit in the Eastern States.
We further find that the los cars re-
ferred to were marketed in cities of
Omaha, Minneapolis, Chicago and New
\ ork, and one car in the city of Montreal:
that in nearly every case the contents of
carload, whatever the nature of the fruit
were sold i'll several different lots and the
prices differed with each lot sold. For
one carload OF pears to New York City
the prices ranged from 65 cents to 81 90 per
box. for one carload sold n ba
81 % to 81 70 per box; ana for carload of
peaches marketed IN Omaha, the prices
ranged from p cents TO 70 cents per box.
The returns of sales bear occasional in
dorsements to the effect that goods were
in poor condition" fruit dead-ripe."
"over-ripe," and in some cases boxes
broken" and mo good" but in the main
there was an absence of these notations,
so that 1t may be taken that upon the
whole the goods reached their destination
in nayerage,condition.
We cannot account for the difference in
the prices except upon the theory Of diff
ference in quality and internal condition
of the fruit. 1t certainly seems fair To
presume that the maximum price was
obtained Tor the goods OF the finest dual
lty and IN the most nearly perfect condi-
ton, and that the lower prices were at
tributable to inferior quality or condition,
and that this difference in quality and
taInly for the most part the price for the
transportation of the fruit and the man
ner In which 1t was handled had nothing
to do with the price obtained, and 1t is
equally evident, unless the supply was
greater than the market would take, that
had it all been of the same quality and in
the same condition as that which brought
the maximum price, the maximum price
would have been obtained for the entire
carload, in which event very handsome
increase would have been netted to the
grower.
Your committee is pleased to state. for
which we are duly grateful, that it is mot
OF those who unwisely and unintelli-
gently lay the entire responsibility for
the serious loss involved at the doors of
the railroad company" on the part of
the railroad companies we must deny apy
share whatsoever in the responsibility for
the alleged serious loss involved The
railroad companies are certainly not
chargeable with responsibility for the
hard times. They certainly are not re-
sponslbIe for the railway strike. nor the
lnadequacy OF the enforcement of the
laws Of the land. They are certainly not
responsible for the decay of the fruit, nor
for the lndlscriminate and unsystematic
methods employed by the producers in
Shipment, which results in the gluttine of
markets. Previous to the year 1891
there had been some attempt upon the
part OF the fruit growers TO regulate ship
ments under the organization known as
the California Fruit Union, and while it
is popularity supposed that that organiZa-
ton 1alIed In the accomplishment of the
utmost benefit to the producer. vet the
annual reports of its managers show that
In so lar as the growers and shippers of
California fruit co-operated in systematic
shipments and distribution OF the fruit