The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-29
which the syndicate is member, regard

which the syndicate is member, regard
the latter as dangerous rival.
One familiar with the situation sums 1t
up thus: cit seems to have been the policy
OF the syndicate to secure hold OF some
kind upon its patrons that no one could
shake off. As result, it carries large
number Of its patrons by furnishing them
saloons and holding the leases to their
premises. While nominally a wholesale
concern, it is practically retail lnstltu-
ton as WE'LL for none of its customers dare
to go elsewhere for beer. The syndicate
scope is gradually being extended, and
wherever it gets a hold no one else has
chance. 1t is slow but sure freeze
out for the rest of US, and many of us are
hot in favor of protective measures that
afford protection to such rival-one that
will crowd the rest of US out of the business
in the long rum"
The situation across the bay in Alameda
County i3 about the same as In San Fran
cisco, for the brewers there know that they
will be in the midst of the fight before
long. In and out OF the association, there
are six or eight breweries, and when the
circus begins the thirsty citizens OF that.
locality will drink deeply and cheaply.
One OF the best fighters in the lot is Charles
II. kramm OF the Anchor Brewery. In
the past he has locked horns with the
syndicate, and later he jumped into
fight against the syndicate and the Brew
ers' Protective Association com bined. In
a recent article in The CALL the informa
ton was published that Mr.. Kramm was
cast out of the association for cutting the
price of beer, and that he had combined.
with the Washington, Independent and
American breweries. He states that. he
did not combine with the bre weries named.
In his explanation of how he left the asso-
citation Mr.. Kramm gives some interesting
information concerning brewery methods,
the very methods that have brought about
the present troubles in the association
camp. Mr.. Kramm writes as follows:
About three years ago the syndicate, which
was then selling beer at So per barrel, realiz-
ing the fact that there was no money in 1t at
ing their object, namely, the freezing out of
the ''small fry' ON this side OF the bay, called
meeting OF the brewers doing business IN OAK
land and Berkeley and made combination,
with the result that the beer was raised to 80
net. The terms of the contract, as was subse-
quently proved were based upon misrepre-
sentation of facts, and after few months had
rolled by it became very apparent that was
getting the worst of IL, and II remained with
the Brewers Protective ~ Association the re-
suit would be very disastrous TO my exchequer
and refused to abide by the contract unless 1t
was modified.
This is the reason was least out" of the as
ISOLATION, and not because l lowered the price
of beer for every retailer in the county Knows
/ was the last one to come down, holding out
for the high rate until was compelled to meet
the cut made by other breweries, both in and
out of the syndicate. My customers land
their name is legion) viii to man bear me
out in this.
The cut referred to was made in this fashion.
The price of beer was maintained at S. per
barrel, put the drivers were instructed to spend
81 over the bars of any saloon they left beer
in. technicality, so to speak, which pro-
tected them from the charge of reducing the
price, but which virtually lowered the article
in question.
Trusting that you will give this space in your
journal and uphold the reputation THE CALL
has always enjoyed for fair dealing, am
CHAs Fl. KRAMM.