The daily star-mirror. (Moscow, Idaho) 1911-1939, 1920-02-09
MEMBER OF ASSOCIATED PRESS
A BLOW AT PROFITEERfNG.


A grand jury in the federal court a
Spokane has returned indictments
against three leading firms of tina
city, the Culbertson, Grote-Rankir
Company; the Spokane Dry Goods
Company, and the Hill Shoe Compa-
ny, for profiteering in necessities
Seventy counts are contained in the
indictments against the Culbertson
Grote- Rankin Company, while the Spo-
kane Dry Goods Company was indict-
ed on 76 counts aud Hill Shoe Com
pany is indicted on 65 counts. The
evidence shows profiteering that is al
most unbelievable. Items show prof
It's ranging as, high as 322 per cent
in the Culbertson GroteRankin
sales; 296 per cent in the Hill shoe
people were told were ''the safest in
Dry Goods Company
The list of items sold, with cost price.
selling price and profit secured form
interesting and startling reading. 1t
is interesting because the items show
that the claim of enormous prices be-
ing paid for shoes and other goods
by the retailer to the manufacturer are
false
Profiteering in shoe prices is eX-
posed by these indictments The claim
that dealers are paying $40 to $13
per pair for shoes is disproven by this
report of the grand jury which, in 65
sales shows the highest price paid by
the retailer for a pair OF shoes to be
$7.75 and these shoes were sold to
a woman for $3.50 Shoes that cost
the Hill Shoe store from $2.75 to $7.75
land there was but one pair costing
the higher price mentioned out of the |
IS sales reported) were sold for from
So to $3.50, the profit in the IS sales
reported ranging from 100 to 296 |
per cent
We have heard much about the I
enormous cost of shoes from the man
ufacturer, who, because of scarcity of
leather" and high wages paid for
labor" was forced to charge the re-
taller from $40 to SIS for shoes and
the prediction was made that shoe
prices will go to S25 per pair because
of ''the cost of manufacture" yet what
shoe store had not sold a pair of shoes
hat cost the firm latter the whole
sale house had had it's profit more
han S7.75. The report shows that the
Hill Shoe Company has been buying
hoes for as low as $2.10 per pair and
or the 500 shoes the firm got SAFE.
The grand jury has evidently found
he profiteer and he was not the man
facturer, either. This bears out the
in this paper some months
go which stated that profiteering in
hoes was being carried on to an I'M
extent
1t is interesting to learn how wom-
n from Moscow and other Inland EN-
Ire towns who go to Spokane to buy
pods under the mistaken belief that
ley are getting rare bargains and
ping better in Spokane than in their
,me town, get 'skinned"fby the Spo-
me sharks. Here are few samples
ON the indictments against the Spo-
me Dry Goods Company, owners of
e Crescent store. The indictment
yes the name of the purchaser, the
ticle purchased, the cost price and
e price paid by the customer Here
e a few: Mrs. Dahihjeim, coat, cost
l.93, sold for $45, profit s23 OF; Miss
Davis, coat, cost $40, sold for $3.50,
oft $4750; lady's coat buyers
me not given cost $500, sold for
30, profit $685. The list includes
kinds OF items, from union suits
It cost s3.05 and are sold for $40, up
dresses on which almost 300 per
1t are made.
That the Investigation and indict-
nts will do a lot of good cannot be
lied. 1t will awaken the people
0 have been spending their money
recklessly to the fact that they
e been robbed and they will be
5 lavish with their expenditures
the penalty ranges from a small
, and imprisonment up to $4,000
} and two years Imprisonment for
h Indictment, it is likely to put an
to some of the profiteering that