The Waxahachie daily light. [volume] (Waxahachie, Tex.) 1894-current, 1907-06-05
BEEF SCHEME SMOOTH
Past fMisa Fasst VI tres ~
bssuamfa' Il tgslsissl

Washington. 81 q 1aae ftaa
thlae sbe Amaflsaa aabis e&9al8
understand bg tAts t&ms and il "
laHa nas. it will soa8e aa9. fer Is ts.
receiving asse iesssu aftaf 8aUfhef
ana hat ls that ~Gas@geF gs ssats is
can hats hat it wlll have to paY FOR tt
This. /, may be- said. aptsars to b.
euln.Htiy proper The latast less0ss
han eono fgon ihs b.ef trust Wh#a
the clamuf against tbs alleged eomv
biHatlon of parkor was at sfs helghts
these same packers calmly iBf8rmaa
the pablic that Il would have 20 pas
The bills. SO they did not care how
much inspection they got Notwith-
standing the muearakers the packers
did not object to the government In
spection. bat merely 10 the fogm u
paying for IT, II the packers paid the
inspection they would have To In
crease the price Of their products and
the people would have additional
cause for complaint. Therefore they
wished the cost placed on the gov
ernmeut. where the people would
stiII pay. but would not feel IL ar
keenly and many Of them might
think the packers were paving Their
plan was successful and instead Of
paying an additional cent a pound
or can for the the inspection. the
consumer pays the cost through the
tariff and internal revenue.
But there was one place where the
shoe pinohed. The packers bought "a
lot of cattle and after they were
killed certain carcases would be CON !
demned by the inspectors. Although /
they were paid for at the prices of
good beef on the hoof, they are
then only good for the hides and
taukage, 50 their value shrinks TO
about rs cents or dollar per hun
dred weight Casually surveying the
situation, the beef trust could see no
good reason why they should bear
| the shrinkage in value after inspec-
| ton, so the members have announc-
ed that hereafter all cattle Will he
purchased subject to po.t- nortam
examination. In other words, II ths
inspectors condemn carcass, 1t 4
condemned as the property OF tn
shipper, and not OF the packer. b
this ingenious process the situatio
. is now satisfactorily cleared up, q
Z far as the beef trust is concerned
The public, out of it's treasury, pay
for the inspection and If the inspet
. tors condemn anything the loss fall
on the shipper and not on the trust
Naturally enough, the commission
men and others who handle live cat
tie, are up in arms. Inspection was
all right as long as the loss fell on
the packers, but when it falls on the
producers or middle men it is dif-
| ferent. As a matter of fact the new
regulation of the beef trust should
result to the advantage of the con-
sumner. for if the trust no longer los
es on the condemned carcasses IL can
| we'll afford TO reduce its prices on the
finished product. However, as the
trust has not been especially noted
for their kindly treatment of the
public a reduction in prices from this
cause is not regarded as probable.
II the reports are TO be believed,
the loss will fall most heavily on
the farmers. only about one-fitth to|
one-fourth of one per cent of cattle
slaughtered at Fort Worth. Texas
Iare condemned after slauehterln-.
while the rate at the northern and
eastern markets frequently runs AS
/ high as four and five per cent This
I is charged largely ta tuberculosis