The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-11-26
The VIM. II. Block Co.
2 and 9 e. Washington st.

her that the stone is 'off-colored' and con-
tains a flaw. He will show her a poor dia-
mond of the same size as the other and fix
upon 1t price which he knows is less than
the fine brilliant could be sold for. The
result viii be that madame will send her
hne br1lliants back in rage and buy the
inferior stone for twice what ii is worth.
This evil has grown to such an extent that
It is sometimes impossible 20 detect the
fraudulent character OF the stories brought
US: They are ell very ingenious AS re-
suit big houses, except in rare cases, refuse
70 place prices upon jewels brought to
Them"
The jeweler continued: "People have the
queerest notions about diamonds and other
Jewels, and some of them give us much
trouble. The most general delusion is that
diamonds have standard value just as ar
bitrarily fixed as that OF a double eagle
You will frequently hear people say: 1T is
an excellent investment to place your money
in fine diamonds, for they are worth just
so much carat, and you can always sell
them for just what you paid for them My
lady buys a handsome brooch for 500, and
after wearing ii year or two endeavors TO
val. She is offered SEQ for it. She then
throws up her hands and lifts up her voice
and protests that she has been swindled.
What nonsense it all is! With diamonds as
with other merchandise, stone is worth
exactly what it will bring Were 1t other
dealing. How could / make money in
selling double eagles when l would have
to pay go for them, and could not sell
them for penny more? Here is very line
Indian brilliant upon my finger. | bought
it at forced sale and paid nearly $500 Tor
1t. Yesterday l was offered 1880 for II,
but / would not sell because / am in love
with the stone. Yet / cannot say that the
stone is worth $780, 1t was worth 1t at
the time that sum was offered for 1t by one
who wanted 1t, but If / were compelled to
sell it next week at twenty-fours notice
might not get 5000 for 1t. Why should
woman expect to wear brooch for two
years and then obtain for it the same
money she paid for its Last week bought
a new carriage and paid 81 800 for it. said
to a friend Come and take an $500 drive
with me- He looked at me as If he thought
me insane. i mean it, said. There Is a
carriage that cost me 81 500. We will drive
in it through the park Tomorrow / viii
not be able to obtain 81 $50 for it, With
jewelry 1t is much the same way.
But ii would take me a day TO tell you
all I would like to-" said the jeweier as he
drew breath Another thing that people
never consider Is the risk we run through
the changes of fashion, the stock we must
carry and the length Of time we must held
! cannot sell it at any price. Here is a coral
set / paid 200 francs FOR. You can have 1t
fc~ en- Whv7 ont OF fashion and no one
can tell whether it will again become the
mode for half century. Here Is n cats
eye-they are all q species of garnet-that
cost me 800 francs 1t has no price at all
upon it now. A few years ago melee dia-
What do I mean by 'meee?' They are
the small briliants, ranging from the one-
quarter down TO the One-sixty-fourth Of
carat. Here Is a melee brooch for which
three years ago asked $720. / can duph-
cate it for S225. Here is another case
in point. This fine chronometer which i
carry cost me $3.50. To-day could not du-
plicate it for less money, and yet ] could
it ever was But, alas it IS a keywinder
and not 1stemwinder, and now no one will
purchase any but the latter kind. We must
run these risks, and we must make people
nav for them