The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1923-06-26

SeaIer Roberts Calls Proposed
Change Confusing and Oyster
Agrees With Him.

6&ISOS WIFI T1tIIIs
There will be no change in the
weight Of coal to ton in Wash
ington, the District Commissioners
decided today in accepting the
recommendations of George s.
Roberts, sup erintendent Of
weights, measures and markets.
Deny Coal Request.
The action Of the Commissioner
is a denial of the request of local
coal merchants to reduce ton from
2, 240 pounds to 1000 pounds. Coal
merchants IN making the request
announced that reduction in the
coal price would follow permission
to sell short ton.
Superintendent Roberts told the
Commissioners that the reduction
of the weight of ton of coal
would cause confusion, dissatisfae-
ton, misunderstanding, and be con-
trary to the public interest, and
probably in some respects contrary
to the interest of the coal ner-
chants as well.
IF such reduction in weight were
made" said Roberts report, nthe
average householder would find 1t
necessary to purchase one or more
additional tons per year.
I'm delivering to consumers coal
sold at retail in the District of Co
lumbia, the usual custom is for deal
ers to deliver same at the curb. The
storage cost, usually about rs cents
per ton, must be borne by the con-
sumner in addition to the purchase
price of the coal. This storage cost
per ton would. in my opinion. un-
questionably remain the same, re-
CARELESS of the reduction in weight
advocated by dealers.
Assuming that there are in the
District $4,000 families occupying
residences, the additional tax upon
the people for storage alone with no
compensatory benefits whatsoever,
would be In the neighborhood Of
$37, 500 a year"
Would Confuse Public.
Superintendent Roberts points out
that it has been the custom for
more than 100 years to sell long"
or 2,240-pound ton Of coal in Wash
ington. He declared it would take
a long time for the public to be-
come accustomed to the short" or
2,000-pound ton, and Sin the mean
time the opportunity for deception
by merchants would be great"
There appears to be no general
demand for the reduction" he says.
ION the contrary, it appears that
those consumers who have expressed
themselves on the subject are prac-
tically unanimous in opposition.
There is no necessity for the re-
duction. Under the law as it stands
there is no restriction whatever upon
the quantity of coal dealer may
sell or purchaser may buy.
"The state Of public mind regard
ing the coal business is such that If
the weight were reduced, many per-
sons would doubtless believe they
were being cheated regardless of
whether they were in fact being
would tend to reduce public conf
dence in coal merchants generally"
Mr.. Roberts continues: ST am
informed that the average esti-
mated cost per ton for delivery of
coal sold at retail in Washington
is probably not less than 80 cents.
If, therefore, $4,000 families are
forced, by a reduction in weight, to
buy an additional ton each year,
this would add another annual tax
on the people Of approximately $45,-
900, making a total annual tax Of
$82,500 for which those who pay
1t would receive nothing. And II the
price, by reason Of any unforeseen
circumstances should fail to come
down, the unnecessary burden
would be far greater than is indi-
Gated above"
Regarding statement Of coal mer-
chants that the price Of coal would
come. down with the weight reduc-
ton, Superintendent Roberts says:
No Saving Possible.
''Even If the price were reduced
in proportion to the reduction in
weight, there would be no saving
to anyone, and 1t would be imprac-
ticable for dealers to reduce the re-
tail price in full proportion to the
reduction in weight. A large por-
ton of the coal sold at retail is sold
in lots of one, two, or three tons.
The cost to the dealers for delivery
of a short-weight ton would be
practically the same as for delivery
of a long ton. 1t seems unreason-
able to expect that this cost will
be added to the price to the con-
sumner as usual"
Superintendent Roberts submitted
the report to. Commissioner James
F.. oyster, who approved It and
placed II before the Commissioners.