The river press. [volume] (Fort Benton, Mont.) 1880-current, 1913-12-10
WEDNESDAY. DEC. 10, 1913.
HIGH COST OF LIVING

The Chicago ReCOrd-1erald Tor
a considerable time been running dali
ly a column by Arthur NJ. Evans dis
cussing cost Of living problems. The
other day the daily article was open
ed with the following interesting
question ~propounded by a Montana
resident, DR.. A. Z. Myrick, of STAN
ford:
Thirty years ago." he writes, "the
Illinois and Iowa miller by law was
allowed to take one-eighth of the
wheat for toll and delivered even
Fights of it to the farmer.
Sin 1913 the Montana farmer sells
a bushel Of wheat for Sc cents and
this bushel makes about 40 pounds
of flour, or IS cents worth of wheat
will make a 50-pound bag of flour.
Then the farmer goes across the
street and pays $1.7O for the bag Of
flour.
''In other words, he gets back "A
per cent of his wheat, while the miller
and the middleman get 56 per cent.
Who gets the money!"
There is a question which strikes
deep into the DOT OF the present cost
of living problem. One can apply it
to many other lines besides wheat
and flour, and the difference between
producer and consumer will be about
the same. 1t does not alone apply
to mills in the Judith basin. 1t ap-
plies to mills everywhere. Yet it
does not appear that the flour mills
of the country as a whole are making
much more profit proportionately
than they did under the old system.
In Minneapolis the great milling cen
ter, the P~illsburys were probably
making as high, or a higher percent
age OF profit Oh their investment than
their successors are today. Anyway,
they made a good m-ny millions when
the difference between wheat and
-four at the local grist mills was what
DR.. Myrick says it was thirty years
ago-and the Pillsburys had to COM
pete in a measu against h local
grist mills. In fact, the big mills ap-
pear to nave competed SO successful
ly that they have largely driven the
local grist mills out of the business.
Where does the difference go? Are
our boosted modern business methods
a costly failure? Are we becoming
less efficient in manufacture and dis
tribution instead of more efficient?
Much labor saving machinery has
been invented during the past thirty
years. Railroads haul twice o. much
to a trainload as they did then. The
methods of handling the grain and
the flour are more economical than
they were.
Mr.. Brandeis and other men who
have made a study of the question
tell us that we are woefully lacking
in system; but have we less of it than
we had thirty years ago? 1t is not
possible that we have too much sys-
tenn? The owner of the grist mill
had u book in which he noted down
the amount of wheat taken in and the
amount of flour which went out.
When he became overstOcked he
went out himself ana sold the flour
with pen and ink. He had no book
keepers; he had no elaborate Office
force; he had no force of statesmen.
What -four he did not sell to cOnsum.
ers directly from the mill he sold to
grocers in the neighborhood. He was
content, all that was necessary for
him was one profit. Now the -four
has to pass through several hands
before it reaches the ultimate con
sumer.
Flour is not an exception. Dozens
of other products are handled in the
same way, and they have gone up in
price in the same way. The figures
almost bring one to the conclusion
that the big corporation with its elab
crate equipment for doing bushes:
is not efficient, but rather that it il
woefully ineficient.-Great Falls Trib
une.