Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-06-23
DENIED BY A PACKER
Report That Beef is Higher and
Cattle Lower Contradicted.
Mr.. CURTIS STATISTICS
Chicago Critic Takes Exception to
Their Accuracy.
TAKES FIGURES FROM BUSINESS
Contends That Selling Prices of Beef
Do Not Show the Steady
Advance.
TAKES FIGURES FROM BUSINESS
BY WILLIAM f. CURTIS.

BY WILLIAM E. CURTIS
written Tor The Star and the Chicago Record
Herald.
On the 26th of February and the It'll of
March were published two letters contain
Ing statements and statistics concerning
the farm value of cattle and the price of
dressed beef in which some of the packing
house people of Chicago find serious dis
crepancies. They tell me that the figures
gave out do not conform to the recoros
OF their own officers or to the regular gov
eminent publications,
When l was down in Texas Indian Ter
ritory and Kansas the farmers complained
that the price of beef cattle on the hoof
was very low, and had been going down for
years. In Washington and other cities the
retail price of beef has been advancing
for years. Roasts. beefsteaks and other
cuts are 20 to 30 per cent higher than they
were a rev years ago, and 1 asked a
learned pundit to explain this phenomenon
why the price Of cattle should be SO low
and the price of beefsteaks so high? I pre-
pared series of questions which he answer
ed and the tables which are criticised were
compiled by him He is one of the high
est authorities on the cattle and beef trade
in the land, and ore who is entirely disin-
terested. He is not engaged In the beef
trade, he Is not a farmer, his sympathieS
are with both. and his only motive is to
ascertain the truth. He obtained the ma
terlaI upon which the figures were based
from what would be generally accepted as
reliable sources of Information.
Differences Between Statisticians.
Unfortunately, however, crop and cattle
reporting Is not an exact science and is
subject to more than ordinary errors. Doc
tors always differ. Statisticians seldom
agree, and usually dispute the premises
as well as the conclusions In reports made
by each other. ALI of them are more or
less biased by their confidence or lack of
confidence In sources of information. The
personal equation cannot be eliminated
from any statistical calculations. There
is always great divergence between the
opinions or opt1mfsts and peSSimists, or,
a friend of mine puts 1t, between blondes
and brunettes. Until the cattle on a thou
sand hills are actually counted no man can
know their number and their value cannot
be determined until they are sold In the
meantime the best we do is to make
the closest guesses possible. The price de-
manded by the seller from buyer and the
value of steer given to a tax collector
are likely to very considerably. Human
nature will not permit the man who wants
to buy to place so high estimate upon
the steer as the man who wants to sell 1t
The same observations apply to the butcher
and the retail dealer and their customers.
There Is always a dispute between the
several statistical bureaus Of the govern
ment concerning the accuracy of returns
received by each other. Each relies with
confidence upon its own sources of informa-
ton The Agricultural Department gets its
facts concerning crops, cattle, etc, from
about 5000 different individuals, scattered
through every county of the agricultural
states, and they send In reports unknown
to each other. They are farmers, bank
ers, commission men, cattle dealers, rail-
road agents. lawyers, drummers and all
sorts and conditions of men. In making
their returns they are supposed to be gov
a1 I1,y oh ion and I'M
as well as hearsay information, and every
. man is supposed to be conscientious and
disnterested The census reports are based
upon the returns of enumerators who go
from house to house and from farm to
farm and ask direct questions. Neither
makes actual count, and the Information
of both is necessarily defective. Therefore
liz is impossible for them ever to agree
The statisticians of the Agricultural De-
partment in reaching their conclusions
strike an average between the optimist
and the pessimist. II one of their report
ers saws forty and other says fifty they
put 1t down as forty-hve.
The Figures Criticised.
One of my friends In Chicago says: I'VE
have undertaken to compare some of the
figures in your letters with our own rec
ords as well as with the Department of
Agricultures estimates, which are notori-
ously inexact as to cattle, and we do not
find warrant for the conclusion that cattle
prices have been steadily falling while
dressed beef prices here have been going
up.
I'm the beginning you quote from Depart
ment of Agriculture statistics. giving the
total number of cattle, other than mich
cows, in the country on January l, 1906,
as At OCT 600 head, worth STAG, III, 100, an
average value of S15-S5 a head Then you
say this price is lower than 1t has ever been
since the records were kept. and that the
lowest mark ever reached before 1908 was
In 1891 when the average touched S17.55
per head
THE statistical abstract of the United
States for 1904, page 392, for January ],
1905, gives the total number of cattle as
43 669 443. total value, 1851 81 .30S; average
value, S15.15, 60 cents lower head than
your lowest mark. The same government
figures show for January !, 1891: Number
of CATTLE 81, s75 64s; total value, s544 127 90s.
giving an average value of $1476 per head,
nearly SO less than your lowest figures for
1891 and more than 81 head less than
your lowest mark on Januxry /, 1906
Further along you say that the high
water mark in price OF cattle other than
dairy cows was reached In 1885, when the
average was $2623, and in 1900. when the
average was $33 At The statistical abstract
says the total number OF such cattle jan
uary /, 1886, was q, S66,573 and the total
value S604. 1928 giving an average value
Of S2S.25 per head instead of $262 %: for
January !. 1900. 1t puts the total number
at 27,610.o54. and the total value at $685.
6,260, giving an average value of $25 a
head instead of $33.H. I cannot guess
where this $S3.47 come from. There must
be some flaw In 1t. for. according to this
and other items in the article, while the
farm value OF beef steers has declined
50 per cent since 1900 the sttck-yards'
market yalue-with a high price period in
teryening In 1902-has declined only 1-3
per cent, or from $40 to 1922, per hundred
weight. Such a wide variance in percentage
of decline seems hardly reasonable.
department OF Agriculture cattle statistics
are hardly fair criterion. anyhow. accord
ing to our experience, by which to judge
| market prices OF BEST cattle or dressed beef.
sense accurate. That was shown when the
census of 1900, compared with Department
Of Agriculture statistics for previous years,
made 1t appear that the number of cattle,
| other than mich cows. In the country In