Rensselaer Union, Volume 6, Number 27, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 26 March 1874 — Plows. [ARTICLE]

Plows.

• • r Beqjamin Franklin was mistaken when he set in motion the proverb—“He who by the plow would thrive ainwir nut either hold or drive." “Poor Richard” did not take into account the making of plows, nor yet the selling of the same. The Grangers think that their thrift is severely taxed and seriously lessened by the, operation of what they denounce as the “plow ring." They do not object Io sharing their profits equitably with the manufacturers, but they do protest against sharing it with middlemen, or rather, to be more exact, they insist upon the rightto buy at wholesale prices when they ouy in wholesale quantities. Herein they are reasonable in their demand, and are bound to carry their point The twenty-one Western plow-making establishments which agreed in October last to sell “ no plows to Farmers’ Clubs Or Granges except at retail prices” ought to be compelled to change their policy, and probably will be. It is unjust, and contrary to usage. Wholesale merchants are accustomed to sell goods at wholesale prices to all who purchase in wholesale quantities, whether in the trade or not. Any man can buy carpets, prints, fhrniture, etc., at the factory at wholesale priced, if only h? buys in wholesale quantities. The mercantile trade is not a monopoly, and why should plows be an exception to the general rule? There is no good reason for it, and the farmers should “ peg away” at the ring until they break it, and secure competition in the plow trade. The apologists of the ring contend that the manufacturers were compelled to stand by their agents. This sounds fair, but is fallacious. How would the citizens ot Chicago like it if the wholesale grocers should agree that hereafter they would sell for consumption only at retail prices? The man who -is accustomed to lay in store sugar by the barrel, tea by the chest, and coffee by the sack would thus be obliged to pay as much for his provisions as if he bought in driblets. If he should protest against this arrangement, he would be told that “ to abolish middlemen would be to revolutionize society.” The assumption of the makers is that all their plows must go through middlemen, or none of them, while everybody knows that such is not the case in other lines of business. Notwithstanding the fact that our whole sale grocers sell large quantities of goods to consumers direct, there is no lack of retail grocers, nor any complaint from them. Of course they would be glad to monopolize the trade, and compel every pound of sugar, tea, coffee, etc., to pay toll to their till; but they know that no such outrage upon the public would be tolerated. The Rock Island Union remarks that the farmer who demands the right to buy his agricultural implements from the factories at wholesale rates might, with equal propriety, demand to buy hie dry goods, groceries, and every article of food and raiment in the same manner. Precisely so. The farmer has that right now, so tar as concerns dry goods and groceries. No reputable wholesale house would charge a Granger any more for the same bill of goods than he would the Granger’s mercantile neighbor. The farmers do not demand retail quantities at wholesale prices. There would be no justice, of course, in any such demand as that. The middlemen are a necessity. If the Grangers think it possible entirely to dispense with their services, they are mistaken. At the same time the expense of their services should be avoided so far as possible. The farmers have always been free to club together in the purchase of nearly all commodities needed by them, and if the plow-makers persist in attempting to compel them to buy plows of agents only they will signally fail in the end, succeeding only in cutting their own throats.— Chicago Journal. ——-