The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1916-08-29
PUBLIC OPINION

To the Editor:-
 There is now in committee. the draft for a new law to be brought be- fore United States Congress. popularly called the Stephens bill, so named on account of the man who first introduc- ed it. Like any law that will have . wide-reaching effect, 1t has caused dis cussions based on a mfsconception of what this law is intended to accom- plish.
 The first and most serious rniscon- ception is the one that this law If passed will be mandatory on every manufacturer in the country. This is absolutely not so. The law says particularly that it merely gives the permission to a manufacturer to take advantage of this law for his own pro- lection. If he thinks that his business will be improved by making Q list of prices that will be alike all over. the country, then the law simply gives him this privilege, but any manufacturer who does not feel that this privilege will protect his business can ignore this law as though 1t were never passed. This disposes of nlisconcep- ton number one.
 The next misconception is, that 1t is against the accepted theory of Amori- canism, which is that this Is a land of opportunity and gives the small indi- vidual the same opportunity that the big one enjoys. It is contended by those who for selfish reasons are look ing for opportunities to discourage the enactment of this law, that it will create a monopoly for price-protected goods. This is exactly opposite to the truth as will be shown little further on.
 The third misconception, which is really part of the second, is that the consumer is not interested in this lnw; in fact, it Is to his interest that 1t should not pass because if it is passed he will have to pay more for certain things. This misconception ia fos-- tered by the interests who are oppos- ing the passage of this bill This is very far from the truth. and can be easily demonstrated.
 For example: In a certain store in this city they sold last week a certain article for $2.28. This article is ad- vertised by the maker to sell for $S.50. This article costs at .he very lowest price that it can be bought, $2.2s. The manufacturer charges as follows: $s.50 less the trade discount of 33 1-3 per cent. which brings 1t down to . fraction less than $2.34, from which discount for cash, which amounts to fraction less than five cents, making cost, as said before. of 32.29. AS 1t costs this type of store 2S per cent. at the very least to do business. and one per cent. must be added for de- livery, making it 29 per cent. to bo added on this particular item, it brings the exact cost to this store for this ar- ticle to $2.95.
 As they were selling this article for $2.28, they lost exactly '67 cents on the transaction. Now. no persons with the smallest grain of common sense but can see that there must be an opening in the fence somewhere. He knows that no store can succeed unless it makes profit. The trou- ble is that there is no one to put him wise to this thing. He cannot expect the newspapers to do it, be- cause the firms that are doing this are the ones who are advertising the heaviest.
 In the store to which reference was made above a set of furniture was priced $40 higher than the same set in a store in which price-cutting was not practiced.
 This type of store is the store that opposes the Stephens Bill, because they know that this law will compel them to be honest. A store doing business by these methods is just as dishonest as a railroad that gave re- bates. By selling trade-marked goods. such as kodaks, victrolas, Ingersoll watches, etc., at a cut price. they give the public who is ignorant of their real purpose the impression that be- cause they sell well known merchan- disc at cut prices, therefore every thing they sell is sold the same way. The writer's experience with furni- ture proves very conclusively that this is not so.-
 The chain grocery store situation in Philadelphia, and to the nationwide chain stores in the tobacco trade, are examples. These systems restrict opportunity and monopolize the field to such an extent that a newcomer finds it too difficult to enter.
 This is what the Stephens bill is de- signed to prevent. It is for the in- terest of every man, woman and child | in this country. Unless this law or | one similar is passed it wiu mean that | my children will never have the | chance to work themselves up in the | world It will mean that my son | and your son will have to work for | some corporation all the days of his | <Jf f, sight to smooth the way for them
 Do you think that this is exaggerat- ing the situation? If you do, you will | soon be disillusioned if you will look up who is fighting this Stephens bill. | ou will find that the Standard Oil in- | terests, the tobacco interests, the chain