Waterbury Democrat., 1903-02-12
"THEN AND NOW. '
Comparing Prices on Commodities
 xxr.4, TN, s,s vaor go


 With Those of 25 Years Ago.
 Two men indulged in an animated discussion on East Main street to-day about the price of clothes, boots ana shoes, flour and other things Ill tnat line, one contending that such artlcles cost less now than they did thlfty oE thirty-five years ago, and the other tax ing the ground that his friend WAS joking While the row was at us height q Democrat reporter happeneu along and thinking the partles Were likely to come to blows the scribe stood in and wanted to know what was up One of the persons explained the SUD iect under discussion and then went on to show that he can buy as good q sult of clothes for $10 now as he could get for $25 thirty years ago He also sald he could do as well with S2 for root wear at the present time as he could for ST when he was boy in this town. He was in business in 'T2, he said, and sold our for ST a barrel. h fact, he claimed that in a general way every thing is cheaper now than it was thirty years ago and wages much higher.
 When the other man got a chance to speak he commenced by comparing the price of rents to-day with what they cost thirty or forty years ago, also coal and meat. He denied emphaticaHy that you can get as good a suit or clothes now for $15 as you could for S25 some years ago. and said that any body who thought $2 will purchase as ! much shoe leather today as could De had for S7 twenty-five years ago was simply talking for sport. Z
 The wind interfered somewhat with the debate and in consequence the dis putants went different ways with the understanding that they should meet again and talk the matter over when they had more time.
 The remarks set the reporter to think ing, and while he was not sure he had notion that the man who held that there is not very much difference in the price of commodities to-day com pared with what they cost twenty-five or thirty years ago was right and con cluded to ask some of the dealers what they thought about the question. After hearing what they had to say he was not much wiser than before, for ii seemed that even the dealers do not agree on questions of this nature. John B. Mullings said that the man who claimed you can do as well in a ready
 
 twenty-five years ago for $25 was right generally speaking, but he thought the comparison would be better if he had compared $15 suit of to-day with one that cost $35 thirty years ago. ". s Jones didn't look at it from Mir NIul lings's standpoint He claimed that the difference in the price of ready made clothing now compared with what i was twenty ylfive years ago, was by nc means as much as one of the parties to the East Main street dispute put it He had no hesitation in stating tha you cannot get as good a suit to-day for $1O as you could for $25 when ht went into the business about twenty five years ago. He thought that a sui which would cost $15 at that time car be bought now for S10.
 E. l. Finn was asked what he though about the difference of opinion regard ing the cost of footwear now and then He said the man who thought NyoI could do as well with $2 now as yol could with $7 twenty years ago was very much mistaken. He admitted however, that boots and shoes are mucl ] cheaper now than they were at that time. The $2.50 shoe on the marke to-day is as good as the one that cos S4 when he started in bushes in 1882.