The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-07-27
WHY PITTsBURG PLUS FELL


 burg plus" relieves the consumers of steel of an unjust and heavy tax. It rids the thirty-two other steel producing states of a competitive handicap which the commission found utterly indefensi- ble. Pittsburg plus is the device by which consumers of steel were made to pay the Pittsburg price plus the freight cost from Pittsburg to point of consump- ton, no matter if the steel were used in the very community in which it was pro- duced. Pittsburg plus was a corporate device to retain control by diminish ing the competitive opportunity that be- longed to other producing centers by reason of location or ability to produce steel at lower cost than Pittsburg. h. asmuch as practically every other center can produce steel more cheaply than Pittsburg, the far-reaching and domi- neering nature of the device is readily apparent.
 The commissions terse opinion reads that ''it retards business in all steel cen- ters except Pittsburg. The corporations discriminatory prices adversely affect the public interest. The cost of produc- ing steel at the corporations Birming- ham plant is approximately twenty per cent. less than at it's Pittsburg plant. There is greater surplus production in the Birmingham district, yet the price at which tks corporation sells its steel at Birmingham is very much greater than at Pittsburg." Thus the manufacturers and consumers of steel in the Birming- ham area, who buy of the corporations Birmingham plant, have had the advan- tage neither of the shorter haul nor of the cheaper actual cost of production. Whatever trade arguments may be ad- duced in favor of the Pittsburg plus de- vice, those arguments are pertinent only to a monopolistic purpose of control of the industry. Such arguments are not valid when the subject is viewed in the light of justice to the consumers of steel or with respect to our American prin- ciple of an equal opportunity and square deal to those engaged in legiti- mate competitive enterprise.
 The remarkable feature of the his- tory of Pittsburg plus is not that it should be condemned by a government commission, but that it should have been able to persist for so long g period, all though based on an essential injustice and admittedly injurious to steel manu- faeture in every district except Pitts burg. The practice at first appeared to be impregnably intrenehed. In the begin ming, when the device was first applied, the steel corporation saw further ahead, much further ahead, than it's competi- tors. Indeed, when the practice was initiated there were very few who had any proper prophetic understanding of it's ultimate significance. Only those who knew steel, thought steel, dreamed steel and controlled steel foresaw the day when that control would be threat ened, and sought to forestall any such event. It is now believed that these men even over-reached themselves, and that the industry, including the corporation, would be better off if Pittsburg plus had never been invented.
 It is interesting to view the conclusion set forth by the commission, which finds that the device has added millions of dollars annually to the price the users of steel products have had to pay. Says the report, the practice "adds thirty mil lion dollars a year alone to the cost of steel products to farmers of eleven Vest ern states. The discriminatory Pitts burg plus prices have very substantially lessened and at times destroyed the com petition of steel users located at great number of points, including dozens of cities in the states of Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota. A large number of steel users in the states of Iowa, Nebraska, Missouri and Indiana, and in the South ern states of Alabama, Georgia and Ten nessee, were very seriously hampered be- cause of the system"
 This is impressive, as was also the fact that the organization of anti-Pittsburg plus committees in thirty-two states made united attack upon the practice and for the space of more than three years battered determinedly at that solid wall of control until it finally has fallen. The case may be carried to the courts; but that need cause no apprehension. The practice is utterly wrong and legally in- defensible. It may be dragged out over innumerable appeals and delays. but in the end the case will be decided in favor of competitive manufacture and com petitive marketing. The decision is a tri- umph for fair dealing and a much be- lated justice, in part to the manufac- turers, but in far greater measure to the users of steel and steel products.
 GERMAN GUARANTY ESSENTIAL
 Those Who ara watchin0 tho London