The river press. [volume] (Fort Benton, Mont.) 1880-current, 1905-03-22
THE BENEVOLENT BEEF TRUST.

1t is announced from Washington
that certain information regarding
the alleged beef combine, which was
contained in the official report of
Commissioner Garfield, has lot been
made public, and it is assumed that
federal officials propose TO make use
OF this part of the report in criminal
proceedings against members of the
combine. 1t is possible that the in.
formation withheld is much more
damaging to the packers that the data
which were recently presented to the
public.
The report of Commissioner Gar.
field is the subject of considerable
discussion throughout the country.
The members Of the Kansas legisla-
ture made an indignant protest
against the statement of profits made
by the packers, as shown in the re-
port, and passed q resolution in which
Is expressed the opinion that Mr..
Garfield's report is intended to vindi.
cate the beef trust OF extortion and
other evil deeds. The report is also
condemned by many newspapers as
inaccurate aud misleading, and is
represented as a defense of the beef
combine rather than an impartial re-
view of market conditions.
According to Commissioner Gar
fields reprrt, the big packers who
form what is popularity known as the
"beef trust may be regarded as pub
lie b~enefactOrs, Us their books show a
margin of profit so small as to defy
competition. These book accounts,
prepared by the packers themselves,
Indicate an average net profit of only
% cents per head for every animal
killed-this small profit, it is alleged.
being obtained from the utilization of
by-products that are wasted by the
smaller concerns. The beef carcass,
according to the packers figures, is
frequently sold ut less than cost. 1t
is further claimed that the "beef
trust handles only Is per cent of the
cattle slaughtered in the United States,
but official data show that it makes 9S
per cent of the purchases in the six
principal markats-a circumstance
which enables ii to control prices.
The figures given by Commissioner
Garfield Il, the average profits of the
beef .rus, are challenged 10y Cu,hbert
Powell, commercial, editor of the Kan
sas City Journal, who is considered a
high authority upon livestock market
conditions. MIR. Powell prcscu,, an
exhibit OF prices of cattl, and the
value Of packing house products that
shows 4 margin OF profit Il, leas,
seven times greater than that iudi-
Gated in the Garfield report. His Is.
innate is based upon the years kill.
ing OF a big western packing plant.
whose average returns from the by
products Of every head of cattle
slaughtered were As follows:
Average value of hides 80
Average value of fats ~
Average value of o~ifal.... III
.Sla.ll
MIR. Powell, in reviewing the da,a
presented IN his exhibit, submits these
conclusions:
ut is plain from the figures why the
little houses cannot prosper. The
small OLA! and the fats yield the big
houses Il profit OF SI.S2 per head. which
is mostly lost by the little killer.
And when the value of the cured hide
is added. the large packing companies
receive a gross income from the side
products Of So Ii. Native steers on
the hoof averaging 1905 pounds. and
dressing IS per cent. in killing. make
100 pounds Of clear meat. and are sold
on this market at $40 per hundred.
weight. which would make their cost
at the yards on the hoof 1913. TAX