The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1913-06-21
Equal Price Gas

from the Muncie Press, in which the editor Of the
Press takes issue with the Palladium policy of an
equal price to all consumers for gas.
Aside from the one misstatement that the
Palladium objects to reduction in the price of
gas, belied in the Press editorial by first reprint
paragraph from a former Palladium editorial,
there is only one point seriously and sincere
ly differ with the Press. That is that as a
matter of fact there is scientific and equitable
basis for such sliding scale of prices" as the
40, 35 and 80 cent rates proposed by the new nat
ural gas company for it's product.
The criticism of the Palladium for sliding
scale of circulation rates is absolutely right,
though unjust. 1t may be added that the Pal
ladium has sliding scale according to the guam
tity used for advertising. For this the Palladium
offers apologies. AS long the Palladium s
competitor in Richmond uses sliding scale rate
SYSTEM the Palladium must perforce follow suit.
That is one of the beauties of unreguated COM
petition.
The Palladium, however, is not inconsistent.
Two years ago this paper was the first to call at
tention to the sliding scale or discount or rebate
system being the basis of all monopoly and
consequent inequality of opportunity. At that
time we advocated placing all industry on an
equal price basis as far as the purchase of all
materials, commodities or services were con-
cerned; we'll as requiring the finished products
thereof to be sold on the same basis. Inasmuch
such law would regulate the Palladium s
rates equal price basis and protect it
against discriminatory rate making the part
of it's competitor, the Palladium naturally feels,
despite its present rate system is simply practi-
CAL that it's conscience is clear and it is free to
continue a propaganda to make everyone's dollar
equal in purchasing power.
In seeking to justify inequality in price MAX
ing, the editor of the Press goes on to say:
at is easier and less expensive given
of to than to fifty Cost of delivery
considered the small of much favored
in the sliding proposed Richmond larger
although the motive of the company
doubtedy increased individual aggregate
consumption"
Yes, and it was so much easier and less expen-
sve for the railroads to handle the business of
the Standard Oil company that they gave it
freight rebates These rebates or discounts were
less than those accorded the Standards smaller
and less fortunate competitors. Consequently
the Standard undersold it's competitors to the ex-
tent of the rebates and began to wax of monopo-
ly size.
The process was slow. Too slow for the sane
timonious captains of that piratcal crew. Using
they forced the railroads to arbitrarily increase
freight rates to competing oil refiners. Then
they compelled the railroads to turn over that in
crease in freight rates money to the Standard
Oil company. That the so-called drawback"
Competition disappeared. 1t could not exist
against such criminal special privilege. The oil
monopoly flourished. Savings from natural and
evolutionary improvements that cut the cost of
production provided new products and wider
markets, no longer to be shared between pro-
Queer and consumer through the workings of the
law of competition, sweled dividends and surplus
to scandalous size. John d. kept on going to
church twice every Sunday and brought up his
son to be Sunday school teacher. He also found
the days too short thanks to a miraculous provi-
dence, to invest all his income and profits so
began to found universities, endowments for
teachers pensions and medical research insti-
tutes.
He scratched his head so when first he pom
dered over his invention, the rebate that he
became bald. In his later years of affluence
which he always kidded everyone into believing
he devoutly believed flowed from God but which
the muckrakers showed came from the rebate.
and drawback, he affected a wig and became ad-
dicted to golf.
What has this to do with the question of
sliding scale of natural gas rates for Richmond?
Just this: 80 cent gas for the big manufacture
ing consumer forces the smaller domestic con-
sumner to pay 40 cents 1t is rebate fiched from
the pockets of the poorer and less able to pay
class and turned over to the larger consumer by
the gas company. In criminal parlance, the gas
discount is the burglar" the gas company is
the fence the larger consumer is the receiver
of .'stolen goods and the domestic consumer