Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1921-04-23

"A conservative estimate" he said
OF what this profiteering cost the rail,
roads from 1916 to 1919 is $4,000 600
year in coal bills and 500. 600 OOO
for steel and iron products. including
equipment and repairs from locomo-
tive and car companies"
Greater In 1920.
Prices in 1920 were increased to
such an extent that the production
attributable to profiteering was un-
questlonably much greater. and would
probably have totalled $500, ,OOo, ,OOOi'
the exhibit continued. 1T must be un-
derstood that these estimates are
thoroughly conservative and are based
upon Information which is by no means
complete
The railroads expended approxim-
ately 500, ,OOO. 600 for coal and 81. .21O. ;
5UoOtO for other materials and sup
plles IN 1870, a total expenditure Of
about $4,000, 100000. Since then there
has been decline in the cost of almost
everything purchased by the railroads.
According to figures published by the
bureau OF labor statistics, there was.
up to February. 1921. decline Of
5o1a per cent in average wholesale
prices of all commodities although the
decrease in the cost of living in the
same period was less than 10 per cent.
II, as the railroads claim. this recess
sion is to continue, it will be only a
comparatively short time before an
average decline of so per cent will be
recorded.
Operating Income Boosted.
ut is plain what this would mean
to the railroads. The same amount
of materials purchased in 1920 win
cost $1,000, 100000 less. In other
words making no allowance for in
creased traffic and the CONSEQUENT
higher revenue at increased rates now
in effect, railroad operating expenses
would be reduced by this amount.
which would be direct addition to
operating income"
The average price of coal jumped
from S1.4S ton in 1915 to 1894 a
ton in 1920. according to the exhibit.
which estimates that approximately
$31S S,S0O. 900 more was spent by the
railroads for coal last year than in
1916, when prices were slightly above
The pre-war level" Mr.. Lauck de-
,lared the coal company's explanation
# higher labor costs was branded as
'alse by the federal trade commission.
ae added that official data on pro-
luction and distribution of coal showed
hat the increase in price was three to
our times as great as the increase in
abor costs.
Earning Of II companies set forth in
he exhibit showed that from an aver
lge percentage earning of 10 in 1912.
he percentage rose to go in 1917. de-
lining to 17.2 in 1918.
Illustrating profiteering in the iron
md steel industry, Mr.. Lauck con-
inued:
Illustrates Gouqing.
'The financial manuals, such as
doody's and Poor's, published the an
ual reports Of 10 steel companies.
Eighteen Of these were in existence
rior to the war. The other. the
iidvale Steel and Ordnance, was in
orporated in 1915. It is therefore
sft out of the average and totals.
During the pre-war years 1912
914. these 18 steel companies had an
verage net income Of 81, 600. For
he war years 1916-191S the income Of
hese same corporations averaged ap-
$277, 900 or almcst
AACNIy TOUR duO one n8n times the
re-war average. In other words. in
ae three years Of war these companies
lade total Of more than billion
ollars Of which some $50, ,O0O, 900 re-
excess profits over pre-war
anditions. These excess wartime pro-
ts Of at least $3.50, ,O0O, 900 represent
burden OF about $50 upon every
merican family.
The average profits Of the United
tates Steel corporation for the years
816-1918, were $211, ,O94, ,557, repre-
.nting - per cent Of its heavily
altered capital stock. This was more
ian four times its pre-war average Of
5000. 600.
Bsthlshsm Grsatsst Offender.
I'm relation to capital stocks. the
,ofits earned ~ the Bethlehem Steel
'rporation were even higher than
lose Of the United States Steel cor-.
,fation. In contrast with prs-war
'ofits Of appreximately &4,260 Coo
q Average annual profits during tbs
Il years 1QaN-lo10 were apprp1-, I.
Can't - - ass -