The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-11-07
WHO PAYS THE FREIGHT?

| Apropos of President Ripley's as
sertfon that excessive railroad rates
| do not materially AFFECT the price
which consumers pay for goods. Mr..
w. Y. Morgan in the Hutchinson
News comes forward to contradict Mr..
Ripley. He argues that the jobber
and the retailer do not pay the
freight, but they add it to the cost
of the article and make the consumer
pay it.
Here is President Ripley's state
ment: Did it ever occur to you that
SO far as merchandise rates are con-
cerned the roads might haul the sup
plies consumed in the state free of
charge, and 1t would not affect the
living expenses of the average family
to the extent of five dollars a year
or that they might double the present
rates and the average householder or
head of family would not know it
unless he saw it in his newspaper"
While Mr.. Morgan is right in
theory, the State Journal believes that
when it comes to the practical work.
ings of the matter, President Ripley is
correct. Yet it is not always the con-
sumner who pays the freight-some-
times it is the producer. 1t is usually
the other fellow from the one who
makes the price.
For instance, heretofore the Kansas
farmer has never had anything to say
about the price of his wheat. He has
taken whatever has been offered him
in Kansas City or Chicago less the
freight and expense of handling. In
other words. he has paid the freight
and he is the producer.
But now certain farmers are at
tempting to say that their wheat is
worth a dollar a bushel If they sue
coed, the man at the other end of the
line will come to them and pay their
price. Then it will make no differ
ence to the farmer what the freight
is. 1t will be added to the cost of the
grain to the consumer.
The producer also pays the freight
on cattle. The stockman takes what
ever the packing houses in Kansas
City and Chicago offer him, and he
pays the freight to get his stock to
them.
But when 1t comes to trust-control-
led goods, the manufacturer fixes the
price to the jobber, the jobber adds
his freight and profit and makes the
price to the retailer. and the latter
repeats the operation, charging the
sum up to the consumer.
Now a reduction of four, five or
more cents a hundred pounds on
wheat would benefit the farmer, pro-
viding he could keep the grain dealer
from absorbing it, but it does not fol-
low that a reduction of ten or even
twenty cents a hundred pounds on
sugar, or baking powder or kerosene,
or crackers, would benefit the con-
sumner who pays the freight. Not at
all. 1t would go to the jobber, or to
the retailer whichever happened to
be in position to get it. The reduc-
ton would be so small when figured
down to the purchases of the consum-
er that it would make no difference in
the price to him. That's the way it
works in practice. That is why Mr..
Ripley's statement is true.
Yet 1t does not follow that Presi-
dent Ripley is correct in assuming
that Kansas is not entitled to lower
rates on such articles, simply because |
they would not thereby be cheapened |
to the consumer. 1t Is discrimina-
lions in such rates as these that build |
or tear down cities and make COM |
munities prosperous or otherwise. 1t |
is these rates that build up great mon
opolies for some men at the ruin of |
their competitors. Such rates make |
for princely fortunes or disastrous
poverty.
Although the consumer might not
save a cent by a small reduction in
grocery freight rates, such a reduc-
ton might enable a large number of
Kansas grocery jobbers to enlarge
their business enough to employ 100
more men each at good wages. A
OF in |
benefit other communities. Those who
would benefit directly would make
more business for their neighbors and
thus the benefits would eventually be
even if the consumer was
not saved a cent in the price of his
groceries. Towns would grow into
cities, built up by substantial indus
ries which could not exist if discrim-
mated against in freight rates.
The publisher of the Hutchinson
News is, in a way. a jobber in print
paper. He buys it by the carload and
sells it to his subscribers. 1t is quite
likely that he is charged excessive
freight rates amounting to 5000 or
more a year. That comes out of his
pocket He probably would not ar
que that If he were saved that
amount by reduction in freight, he
would lower his subscription price or
advertising rates cent. But that 5000
would go far towards paying the rem
al on a linotype machine and enable
him to make a better newspaper for
his subscribers. So the benefit would
De passed along.
Mr.. Ripley is correct in way, but
MS deductions do not necessarily fol-
ow. The main question is whether
Kansas is Disseminated against or