Norwich bulletin., 1922-05-19
cwritten Specially for The Bulletin)

CWritten Specially for The Bulletin)
 A friend who is travelling in Europe sent me, the other day, a copy of The New York -Herald's Paris edition. From it l clipped the following text of Frau co-American wisdom:
 ''The man with the hoe has his little troubles, but he doesn't have 10 fork over 12 francs for so sous worth of veg etables."
 This seems to indicate that markets and market prices are much of a rnuch- ness, whether in America or in Europe. Also, that profteers are of abou- the same complexion of soul on both sides the big water.
 two thoughts about two quite distinct phases Of the price situation.
 One is regarding that word worth'' in the quotation The writer assumes that Inc non-farmer pays '-12 francs for so sous worth of vegetables" Now it goes without saying that, if the non-farmer pays twelve francs, 1t is because the vegetables are worth twelve francs to 1in- They are, or he thinks they are. 0therwise he would keep his twelve francs and go without the vegetables Why, then start off with any assunp- ,ion that they are really worth so sous? That may, indeed, be what the farmer gets, but isn't 1t quite as possi- 5le that he gets less than they are 'worth7' Isn't this assumption quite as natural as the other, viz: that the consumer pays more than they are i'nrorth7''
 Standing on this side of the stump and considering 1t in the light which ialls on it from the direction of the farms, let's put the thing the other ray round and see how it reads For instance;
 The man Eith the hoe has his little troubles. chier among them being that be can get only so sous Cor l3 francs worth of vegetables"
 You are kindly Invited to observe hat this way of stating it is just as good English, quite as truthful, ard sxsctly as logical as the other.
 If, as we have seen. the buying con- Fuuer thinks the vegetables in question worth" I2 francs to him, why aren't lhey worth 12 francs to the produc- -ng farmer?
 AS Alkall Ike says, How comeT' How comes 1t that the carrots and cabbages which are 'worth' 12 francs at noon on the city counter were worth" only so sous that same morning on the farmers wagon?
 what constitutes worth, anyway7 By what is it measured? To the consumer, these vegetables are worth 12 francs, or he wouldn't pay that sum for them. To the farmer. they are worth but 50 sous. pr he wouldn't take that sum for them. He isn't compelled to sell, any moro han the other fellow is compelled to ouy. The farmer wouldn't take his so sous unless he had rather have them all things considered, than the carrots and cabbagess The consumer wouldn't pay 12 francs few hours later unless all things considered, he had rather have hem than the t2 francs. What, then, are they really worth2
 This seezns to Do another case where sa-elesmess in the use of words confus- ss popular ideas. If two people use the same word. but each one attaches a somewhat different meaning to 1t. niis. understanding is natural, almost 1nevit able. Bitter quaTrels have ragged for nc better reason than a different ia def uttions. Men have been martyred ful no better reason than a dispute over tbt meaning of words. Wars have beer fought because great governments dis agreed as to the exact purport of treat, stipulationA
 Take this word 'aworth." Webster gives two definitions, with no less tna1 a dozen shade os difference set forth lie also gives five words as synonyms viz: Desert, merit, excellencey price rate. Yet 1t is used in our text witl a meaning essentially different from. thz conveyed by any one of these so-caile, synonynis- It is used in a sense whicl makes it equally descriptive of an St sous price at a. m, and of 12 franc price at 10 a. ID.
 IL comes rlose to this, that, when VI talk of worth as meaning a things sellint value. ws fad it largely dependent ol circumstances and conditions. It isn't in hereut snd fixed, but floating and var lable. These carrots and cabbages wer nsnifestly worth less to the city con Euuaer at the farm whereon they grew han they were on his kitchen table ii town. In the first case they werA re ally worth nothing to him. for thay wer 5ut of his reach. It added to their ac .nal worth to him that sore one shoul bring them in and put them within hi reach And that service, of course he owe