The Goodland republic. [volume] (Goodland, Kan.) 1891-1907, 1900-10-19
LIVE STOCK MARKETS.
Comparative Prices OF Cattle and Hogs
For Three Years Under the Cleveland
and Mckinley Administration.


7 time ago, in his speech in the opera
house he quoted statistics to prove his
contention that the price Of stock had
increased under the Mckinley admin
I istratiOn, aud was much higher than
under the Cleveland administration
His methods were not fair and his
I conclusions were not correct. From
I tables published in The Drover's Daily
Telegram Of January 1, 1900, the follow
/ ing results are obtained
The average top price Of native fat
steers at the Kansas City market, for
the years 1898, 1894 and 1898 was - "A.
Average for the years 1897, 1898 and
1899, 1886.
The presidential election years 1885,
! 1900 are left out for the sake Of fair
ness, and. because 1900 is not reported.
The prices quoted are per hundred
live weight in both cases.
The gain per hundred under the Nc
Kinley administration, for the years
named, is d cents on beeves.
The average top price Of hogs at
Kansas City for the years 1893, 1894
and 1898 was 1926. Average for the
years 1897, 1898 aud 1899, 81 81. Prices
quoted are by the hundred, live weight
In both cases.
The loss under the Mckinley admin
istration on price Of fat hogs, for the
years named, per hundred is s139 as
against q cents per hundred gain
nu beeves.
Grouping hogs and beeves, under
years named, average price per hun
dred under Cleveland. So. Average
1nder Mckinley, for years named 50 Al
making a loss of 80 cents per hundred.
The total number Of fat hogs reeeiv-
ed at Kansas City for the years 1897,
1898 aud 1899 was 9,O6I,5I3- Average
zach year, 3,O2O5 O4 Estimating aver
age weight of market hogs at %
pounds the total weight of hogs each
year would be 697,613,4OO pounds, or
6,796, 134 hundred weight
Loss on hogs each year, 81 90 per
hundred weight Average yearly loss
on hogs, s9,446.6I6,. . Total loss for
the three years, SIS, 339, 848.66.
Total mum Der of fat steers received
At Kansas City for the years 1897, 1898
and 1899, 2,s37, 291. Average per year,
945, 1853 Estimating average weight Of
steer at 1000 pounds; average hundred
weight each year, 9,457, $50
Gain per hundred under Mckinley,
for the years named, q cents. Aver
age gain each year, 1886, 1920. Gain
for three years, s5.S58, 3O69O.
Loss on hogs one year So 444.6ls p
Gam on steers three years.---------. 5955 SO 80
Balance loss on boEs...............ss ls5 S09sz
It will be seen that the loss on hogs
one year is about one third greater
than the gain on steers for three years
Total loss On hogs three years--.-.S s39 SIS IS
Total gain on steers three years. 5is5o-SO5-sO
Balance loss on 81, Isl, 81 IS
This is at Kansas City alone. Take
all the stock markets and packing
( houses in the United States the
amount Of loss could not be much less
than sl25,OOO,OOO.
It is not difficult to account for the
advance in the price Of beef steers and
other cattle. In the first place the
loss Of stock on the ranges by winter
storms and summer drouth in the last
few years has shortened the supply by
many million head Of estimated
as high as 100000.
Then the Spanish-American war, the
war IN South Africa, in the Philippine
! islands and In China has largely in
creased the demand for American
canned beef. Only a few months ago
I Russia placed an order in the United
States that ran up into millions Of
pounds, for her army in the east.
As has been shown, the republican
contention does not hold good, but is
contradicted by facts and figures. But
the sweet voice of the republican stump
orator is still heard in the land claim
ling the earth for Mckinley and piet-
i nrfnu O -fur around fha mon