Evening journal., 1918-07-15
PACKERS AND THE TRADE COMMISSION.

PACKERS AND THE TRADE COMMISSION.
A MEluuAN meat packers who attacked Sc
- vercy by the Federal Trade Commission a recent
report are striking back. Five OF them headed by
Armour and Company OF Chicago, have Joined In an
additional statement In which they ssyf
The charge Of pronteering made against the Ameri-
can packers by the Federal Trade Commission is not
true Tho fact that the commission alleges monopoly
docs not bear out the charge.
The importance that should attach TO the commits
sons charges best indicated by the tendency OF It's
members TO gain political preferment by attacks big
business. It is not surprising that the commissions
charges have been made with regard for their
effect upon the public than for the facts In the
The commission says that because the packers
profits are large they unquesonaby pronteerlns.
Profits are largo small only when considered in
relation TO the size Of tho business which they
earned In the Of the five leading packers, the
profits for the past three years amounted TO si0OOO0
on sales asgresatng nearly five billion dollars That
means less than three cents the dollar. 1t is
smaller rate Of profit than enjoyed by any other large
business In the world
"The profit on the actual invested capital is not out
OF accord with capital invested other lines OF business
and is smaller than on businesses which
highly perishabe products subject TO seasonal nucua
tion
Il" is perverslon Of facts when the commission tells
the public that one OF the packers make high
263% profit. The investment OF the packers ia not
Of the nve largest packers capitalized for the
amount actually invested. Instead Of watering their
stock, they have permitted It to remain at nominal ng
ures which fact has been taken advantage OF by the
commission.
THE public is entitled to know all the facts regarding
packers profits and methods OF doing business but tho
present instance their chief and only rests
the amount of profit which the packers realize from the
sale OF each pound Of their product The pront the
aggregate spells nothing 10 the lndydual he is affected
only by the amount OF that pront which comes out OF
his pocket. s1-
ut is fact which the commission cannot deny and
which Government accountants verify that packers
profits represent approximately quarter OF cent per
pound Of product In other words when the consumer
buys pound Of meat from his retail dealer, a quarter
part OF one cent out OF the amount which he pays
profit for the packer
Yet by camOufage Of figures the commission would
have the public believe that the packers preylng
upon the public. No Will contend that quar-
Ter OF a cent pound is unreasonable profit per-
shsbe product which has TO be both manufactured and
distributed by the firm which gets the quarter cent
turn rt ~'is s' s-7
sFurher It is fact seemingly ignored by the Federal
Trade Commission that since last November, packers
have been limited to profits They not permitted
TO in OF two and half cents each dollars
worth business transacted and the total profit ON the
actual investment in meat food lines must not exceed
nine per cent. per annum.
Government representatives have full to the
packers books and in position 10 know that the
profits have not been greater than prescribed by the
regulations.
'The charge OF monopoly is far from substantial |
ion by the facts is the charge OF pronteerng II
tte that the packers aYs many Interests in common
but thais true in every line OF industry and It does
not follow that their mutual interests make the
petition between them any less keen. The commission
foes not follow up its charges Of monopoly with facts
ind there that warrant the charge
"The truth about the packing industry is that It
rospers the smallest margin OF profit OF any busl-
ess OF national consequence and that because Of its
nlcency and organization It has served well both the
roducer and the in peace times and that
ne nation is war, it has been able to meet the
sual demands made upon it better than has any other
re-wRr industry.
,rhese facts wil be demonstraied, by any impartial
yestigatlon and they submitted to offset the
reiudce which might arise from the unjust charges |
nd msstatements Of the Federal Trade Commission"
With such conflict OF statement between the report
the Trade Commission and this statement by the
ackers 1t must be clear TO everyone that the packers
eel that they have a Just grievance against the
ommlsson II that not true. they scarcely would
ave the hardlhood TO contradict laty and pub
ely much Of the critical matter contained in that report