The news-democrat. (Providence, R.I.) 1906-1909, 1906-09-13

utdlefS VINO nau, according 10 the news
papers. repeatedly stated that his books
were opened to the inspection OF the COM
mittee. his action In the matter taken in
connection with his newspaper statement,
would seem peculiar 10 say the least.
''In the other case, OF an attempted ex-
animation, the examiner was given free
access 10 all the books, hut as this ex
animation so far as the detail OF II is con-
cerned, is considered by your committee
cation. The result OF that examination
shows profit 20 the ice dealer from
March 10 Aug. "a OF about 27 per cent.
on the invested capital.
COST OF HARVESTING.
"Ice dealers i'm general agree that the
cost OF harvesting ice In a normal season
is rs cents per ton and one OF the dealers
stated TO your committee that the ice
which he harvested last year cost him a
fraction under 25 cents ton. Another ice
dealer who harvested ice outside tho
state did so at an expense OF 20 cents per
ton. including the cose Of the ice house
which he erected. The third dealer who
harvested the larger portion of his supply
did so at 25 cents per ton.
Eliminating then all factors which
enter into both normal and abnormal
years, we have left remaining the addi-
tional freight cost and the additional
price paid to the producer. These are the
only two additional costs which there can
possibly be 10 any dealer in ice in this
city. That being so. II would seem that
a comparison OF prices on the cost OF pro-
duction I'm a normal year, ought 10 result
in showing whether the additional cost,
because Of the conditions which exist this
year. warrant the increase In the prices
to the consumer. and IL IL Is fact that
the additional cost is practically the same
as the additional price TO the consumer,
then there is but one conclusion in the
l. q - aaA 1aa lnr hdC
been entirely justified in making the
price as he did.
RESULTS OF COMPARISON.
on the other hand. II II is ascertained
by this comparison that the increase price
OF ice 10 the consumer is gread deal
more than the increase in the price of ice
10 the dealer then IL would seem that
likewise the committee could come 10 but
one conclusion and that is that the Ice
dealer has absolutely no 1ustihcauon In
fixing the price OF ice at what is claimed
TO be the exhorbltant race which exists
to-day"
The committee then presents compare
tive tables showing the cost OF ice TO the
companies and the profit realized by the
companies. The report then goes on 10
say:
INCREASE NOT JUSTIFIED.
'In connection with these tables IL may
be stated that the committee has gone
on the assumption that ice harvested IN
normal year at % cents per ton yields
a fair profit TO the ice dealer. The basis
for this assumption is that the companies
doing business I'm Pawtucket nave been
I'm business for quite a number OF years
and apparently are In prosperous condi-
tion.
Taking Il for granted. as the com
mittee feels ii is justified In so doing
that there is a profit 10 the ice dealer IN
a normal year when il Is harvested at put
25 cents ton, we cannot see Why le tne
mi 80 fpn n fTnn
been raised i'm the spring 10 such an ex-
tent as IL was.
''In the family trade IL shows that out
side OF all additional cost, the additonal
profit to the Citizens Ice company was
$S2 a ton and since Aug 81, when the
price 10 the family trade was raised by
them 10 so cents per heundred weight, the
increased profit to the Citizens Ice COM com,
pany was over and above all aultlohal
cost TO them S7.s2 per ton
"In the case of the Pawtucket Ice COM
pany the additional profit 10 them on spring
prices to families was $2.53 ton over and
above all additional cost and when they
raised the price to the family trade from
so cents a hundred weight 10 NW nun
dred weight. IL yielded then an Increased
profit over and above all Increased cost
to $l2.J per ton,
"in relation to the South Attleboro Ice
company, the cost per ton FOR harvesting
will agree with the cost per ton TO the
Pawtucket Ice company, and In relation
TO the selling price 10 families the price
per ton will agree with that obtained by
the Citizens Ice company.
CONCLUSION.
"Your committee feels that it has in
vestigated as thoroughly as was possible
the conditions which have effected the
price of ice TO the consumer and ind
that In their opinion as shown by the
tables. the ice companies were not only
not justified in increasing the price OF
4. an no q ht1f III they
were not justified i'm increasing the price
I'm the spring over the price Of the pre-
vious year to such an extent as they did.
II is apparent that the managers OF the
ice companies. seeing an opportunity TO
make some. and IT may be said enor-
nous additional profit, owing TO alleged
conditions. seized the opportunity and
the citizens are being made to pay into
the pockets Of the ice dealers money
which the ice dealers are no justified in
taking.
PLAIN ROBBERY.
when condition Of this character con-
fronts community when an individual
or a community OF individuals compel
the payment to them of price for pub
lie commodity which is entirely without
then your committee believes that
as Acting Mayor Wood stated. IL Is moth
ing more nor less than plain robbery.
These may be considered by many
to be strong words, but your committee
feel that they are entirely justified In
using them and when IL is ascertained
that these things exist. when the rep
Of the people find that their
are being mulcted TO such
an extent II would seem that they
should do what they can 10 remedy such
an unwarranted event.
.IAa-pE+ee- Ice has-beett- -ri4cct-at
such a prohibitive figure that many OF the
;oorer people have been unable TO pur-
There many sos w