Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1919-02-27

obNdtcu db Unobo u6dElHgo tud1 tuO
large packers are in active competi-
tio n with each other. There are alb
solutely no agreements among the
five largest packers to control prices,
and they together handle less than
forty per cent of the meat supply of
the country. The largest company
handles only about twelve per cent
of the total meat supply and less than
twenty five per cent of even the out
put of houses that are under U. s. In
spection.
There are about two hundred and
seventy packing concerns, besides
those operated by the five largest,
that are under Federal Inspection,
and hundreds of local houses that are
not subject to inspection. All large
cities have packing houses that COM
pete directly with the five largest.
Some of their representatives appeared
at the hearings in Washington and
stated that they were prospering, and
that there was fair and open competi-
ton in the industry.
I have publicly stated that we have
no serious objection to being relieved
of our interest in refrigerator cars and
stock yards. But we have pointed
out that it is decidedly questionable
whether any efficiency or benefit can
be gained by such procedure. We
would also call attention to the fact
that during the recent hearings, no
evils, needing correction have been
brought to light in connection with
packer ownership of these facilities.
/ quite agree with Mr.. Hoover that
there is no reason for the Government
to take over the branch houses of the
packers, but do not feel that suffi-
cient consideration has been given to
the question of handling other prod
ucts than meats. Swift & Company
handles only few such products,
and they are distinctly related to our
business, either as by-products of the
packing houses, or as goods which
can be economically handled through
our extensive distributing organiza-
tion.
/ hardly think that the Government
should assume authority to dictate
what products any business concern
may or may not handle. There is not
only no need for such step in con-
nection with the packing business,
but it would act as dangerous pre-
cedent which might be extended to
all other Industries.
1t is little difficult for me to recon
cile Mr.. Hoover's criticism of the fact
that the large packers have eliminated
middlemen and gone direct to the re-
tailers with the general opinion that
marketing should be as direct as pos
sible from producer to consumer. I
think it will be conceded that if we
have elimated unnecessary middle
men this has been to the advantage of
the public at large.
Since there is no monopoly, the
facts do not justify the statement that
sas time goes on this efficiency cannot
fail to diminish, and, like all monop-
lies, begin to defend itself by repres-
sion rather than by efficiency AS
long as the large packers have to use
their utmost efforts in competition
with each other and with hundreds
of smaller concerns to earn their
profits of only two or three cents on
each dollar of sales, there is no room
for a falling off in efficiency.
However, l welcome such sincere
and disinterested views as those ex-
pressed by Mr.. Hoover. The public
and our Legislators need to understand
our business much more thoroughly
than they do now, before they are in
position to undertake restrictive
regulation. Swift & Company hal
voluntarily appeared before Congress
ional Committees to give such in
formation as is desired. We have
nothing to conceal. All we want is al
opportunity to get the facts before
the public, and when this has been &C
complished, we shall rely on th'
sense of fair play of the American
people, and shall abide by their yer
Dict"