Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1900-07-24
A BIG DIFFERENCE.
beginning of the Mckinley
Administration.

A republican organ declares that the
price of farm machinery, etc, is the
same as in 1896. Let us see about this.
The fact is that the manufacturers
have raised the price to the jobber,
the jobber has raised the price to the
retailer, and the retailer has raised
the price to the consumer. This in
price of raw material, which is most
lyiron and protected by the infamous
tariff which permits the iron pro-
ducers to rob the American people at
their own sweet will. Retail prices
vary according to the willingness of
retailers to make little profits or
their desire to make large profits.
For that reason it is impossible to
quote retail prices on farm machin-
cry, but it is easy to get the whole
sale prices. In 1896 a three-inch box
brake Weber wagon, standard goods
the world over, was sold to the retail
er at $4s. To-day that same wagon
costs the retailer $50, an increase of
16 2-3 per cent. to the retailer. In
vestigation will disclose the fact that
because of lower discounts and short
er time this percentage is increased
to the consumer. The same fact will
hold good in further quotations of
farm machinery. In 1896 Kingman
Silver buggy, standard goods the
world over, cost the jobber $52. To-
day he pays $55, which increase is put
upon the retailer and by the retailer
put upon the consumer. In 1896 a
Stamboul cultivator, standard piece
of machinery, cost the jobber $12. To-
day it costs him $14.5o, an increase of
over 90 per cent. Will these republic
an organs ask us to believe that the
retailer absorbs this increase and con-
tinues to sell the Stamboul cultivator
at the same price he sold it for in
1896? In 1896 disc harrow cost the
jobber $23. The same harrow costs
the jobber to-day an increase of over
IS per cent. OF course the jobber
must add this to the price he charges
the retailer, and the retailer must add
1t to the prices charged the farmer.
The cost of the iron in a common
buggytthe raw iron-is $2.65 more
than it was in 1896. The farmer pays
from Is to $50 per cent. more for every
thing he buys now than he paid in 1896,
for clothing, groceries, farm machin-
cry, farm supplies, for all the little lux
alies of life and for all the great neces..
saries of life. No republican organ
dare print in parallel columns the price
Of all commodities In 1896 and in 1900.
To do so would be to prove that the
farmer is getting the worst of it on all
sides-tha.t while he is better off to-
day tnan in 1896 he has not profted in
proportion with the protected trust
barons.
Interest charges are lower now than
in 1896, but is the farmer better able
to pay the lower interest when the
price of what he sells has increased IS
per cent. and the price of what he buys
increased from Is to $50 per cent, the
average increase being s2h per cent?
With the increase woefully on the side
Of the trusts and against the farmer
is he better able to pay the decreased
interest now than he was the larger In
terest in 1895?
The whole question resolves itself
thusly: Is 1t justice to the farmer when
the price Of his products increases 10
per cent. and the prices of all he must
buy increases IS per cent? Would the
farmer be better off If the price of
what he has to buy were only increased
the same per cent. as the products he
has to seu7 If the farmer is better off
by reason of an increase Of 10 per cent
in the price of his products, would he
not be about six times better off If he
received the same increase as the tariff
barons receive through favored legisla-
ton and political chicanery? And is
not the farmer as much entitled to IS
per cent. increase as the tariff baron?
The World-Herald challenges the re-
publican organs to quote comparative
prices In 1896 and 1900 of all products
the farmer raises and all products the
farmer must buy.-Omaha World-Her-
aid.