The Washington times., 1914-02-01
PRICES OF WHEAT AND
FLOUR.

IL farmer gets 56 cents for a
bushel of wheat, as he did in the
autumn of 1906, what ought the
buyers Of -four, bran, and middlings
to pay fer the products of that
bushel of wheat?
They did pay, according to COM
putations by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, just a shade over 81.
That is, between the farmer and
the user, there was an increase of
trife less than 80 per cent.
Perhaps that was justifable. At
! any rate an argument can be made
to sustain the thesis that the ele-
vator, the primary buyer, the COM
mission man, the railroad, the mil
ler, the jobber, and the retailer re-
ouire that much to cover their rea-
sonable expenses and fair profits.
But it viii be dangerous for the
defenders of the high percentage of
added cost to put in their defense,
because after they get it in the
; bureau may spring corresponding
! figures for October, 1911, which show
that all these processes were per-
| formed for less than one-half that
same percentage of increase! If the
thing could be done in October, 1911,
for 3s.A per cent, why should it have
cost 80 per cent in October, 1906?
This is not an easy question to
answer. Yet the figures as careful
ly prepared by the bureau, put that
question up to people who are
studying the high cost of living.
Here are the figures:
| In October, 1906, the average
price of wheat at ten elevators was
SOL cents. That is what the farmer
got.
At that same time the average re-
tail price of the patent -four made
from a bushel of wheat was 1863
cents.
The average wholesale price of the
bran and middlings made from that
brshel. of wheat, at that time, was
12.4 cents.
The average wholesale price of the
lower grade -four from that same
bushel of wheat was 10.S cents.
Total price of all products, S1.001.
Let this statement be put in an
, other form so that there will be no
uncertainty just what it means.
The average bushel of wheat un-
der consideration is turned into four
different products.
First in value is patent -four. Of
this 76.9 cents worth was made.
Then comes a lower grade -four,
of which less quantity is turned
out 1t is set down as worth 1913
cents.
Next come the bran and shorts,
or middlings; these are Jumped to-
gether as worth 12.4 cents.
But in making up the figures the
bureau takes the retail price for pat
ent -four only; for the low grade
-four, bran and shorts, it takes the
wholesale prices.
Assuming that these, when sold at
retail, gained as much in price as
did the patent -four, they would have
had about so per cent added to their
wholesale price, Assuming that fig
ure as correct, these secondary prod
ucts would have brought, at retail,
ll.6 cents more than they did at
wholesale; so that the final figure on
the product of our average bushel"
of wheat would have been S1.Il7. in
stead Of $1.001 as assigned to it by
the bureau statisticians.
Remembering that that average
busheI" of wheat cost Only SCI
cents, it appears that by the tine it
gets to the consumers it has increased
rather more than 100 per cent in
value.
SOAiS DoSAB liO"y W WIG CApciiCNCe
of the same average bushel" in Oc-
tober, 1911, we find totally differ
ent experience. The bushel of wheat
was worth 97.8 cents to the farmer.
The patent -four made from it cost,
at the retailers, $1.03s. The low
grade -four, bran and shorts were
that this is a wholesale, not a retail
price, 1926 cents. Total value of all
the products of that bushel of wheat,
S1.364. The total value of products
in this case represents only 3S.4 per
cent increase over the original cost
of the bushel of wheat. That is to
say, in a time when the primary
price Of wheat was low, the middle