Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 22, Number 67, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 May 1901 — PRICES HERE AND ABROAD. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

PRICES HERE AND ABROAD.

Why Some American Product* Are Sold —% Cheaper Abroad than at Home. Any fdol can ask questions, any idiot can utter a falsehood, and neither the question not the falsehood can be answered without investigation, requiring sometimes much care and time. For the past thtee months our Free-Traders have rung the changes on the accusation that our ibanufacturers were selling their products abroad at a much lower price than in the home market. This accusation has been made, as most Free-Trade statements are, in general without any attempt at specific names or amounts. The few instances of guesswork have been so ridiculous as to deserve notice. This question of export discounts was thoroughly investigated ten years ago, and we were no more afraid of it now than we were at that time, when It proved to be the biggest kind of a bugaboo. Until a thorough Investigation Is made by a competent committee, with power to summon and question reliable witnesses, no one can wholly affirm or deny statements in or in particular. In the meantime there are phases of the subject that will bear discussion.

For the sake of argument let us suppose that our manufacturers do dispose abroad of their surplus stock or any of their stock at cut rates. Is this not a universal rule of trade? Does not every merchant have his “clearance sale?” Are not unseasonable and shopworn goods marked down “below cost?” Are not stale and damaged products sold away under regular prices, frequently below cost of production? Is it anything rare for our great stores to put a certain article or articles on sale at or below actual cost to attract customers, who will buy paying articles In such quantities as to make up for the small loss? To introduce a new product does not the maker put it at a very low price, or, In fact, give away samples at first, till the people have proved its merits? There Is one firm In the State of New York which gave away last year over 1,000,000 sample bottles of medicine. Besides the cost of the medicine was the cost of bottles and postage and the work of bottling, packing, shipping, addressing, etc., and yet that firm charged 50 cents and $1 a bottle for the same medicine.

These are all fair and legitimate expedients of trade. If an American manufacturer, lu order to introduce a machine, or tool, or rail, or anything else into a new market, as an inducement makes a special price or discount on a trial order, putting the article at cost or perhaps below cost, and being willing to pocket his loss for the sake of future trade and profits, is It anybody’s business, and mnst he sell at the same price to his established trade, which would mean that he would soon sell to no one at any price? Certainly American labor, the basis of all prosperity, Is not the loser by an operation which provides Increased employment In American mills and factories.

Has any one but a blind Free-Trader any idea that our manufacturers are going to habitually sell their products at a loss unless for some good trade reason? These reasons are four, and no more: To get rid of surplus stock; to get rid of undesirable stock (stale, unseasonable, damaged or out of date); to Introduce new goods; to introduce ?oods into a new market. So much for the export price. But Free-Traders assert that protection enables the manufacturer to extort exorbitant prices at home far In excess of what is a reasonable profit. We do not nee dany investigating committee to settle this question for us. Every man is capable of settling it for himself. And there is not an honest man in any part of the United States to-day but must acknowledge that he can buy any and every necessary thing cheaper, considering quantity and quality, than ever before In his life. It does not matter if steel rails are a little higher; it costs less to ride and less to send freight on the railroad than ever before. It does not matter if structural Iron or wire nails are somewhat higher; It costs no more to buy or rent a house. It does not matter if wool or leather fluctuate In price; clothing and shoes were never s 6 reasonable in price. The advertisements in the daily papers prove this statement. Compare prices with those of five years ago under FreeTrade, with ten years ago, with twenty years ago, with any past year, and It will be found that the same qualities of goods for wear or use were never so cheap as now. Why? Our grand home market, built up by protection, makes such an enormous demand that commodities are turned out by the thousands instead of the hundreds. No one will question that a thousand pairs of shoes can be made per pair cheaper than a dozen or a hundred pairs. That is why everything Is cheaper to-day, and that Is why more people are employed In spite of the Increased use of labor-saving machinery. So this revived bugaboo of the FreeTraders, 1 with a grain of truth and a mountain of falsehood, will fall by its own weight. The more light turned on It, the more ridiculous it will appear. Protectionists will never hesitate to discuss prices any more than they do wages.—American Economist.

Beet Baser Production.

The statistics of the beet sugar industry, as summed up in a census bulletin, sbow that, after many years of manufacture on a small scale, it has assumed large proportions, and in the census year more than one-third of the domestic sugar product was obtained from the beet. This quantity of sugar, 70 per cent of which was suitable for immediate consumption, was produced in a year of extremely unfavorable

agricultural conditions In the beet districts. The yield of beets per acre was less than half that of an average season. The factories could readily manufacture more than two and one-half times the quantity of sugar produced, if supplied with sufficient raw material. —Pittsburg Times. The American Way. A Spanish Governor General would have shot Agulnaldo on the luneta at Manila In forty-eight hours. A French polonial Governor would have sent his prisoner home for a long term of confinement In a French fortress, as was done with Abdel Kader. An English General would have placed Agulnaldo on a man pf war and the rest of his life would have been passed as Arabl’s has been, In some place like Ceylon. The proposal of an oath of allegiance would have occurred to none of these men because no one of them represents a government moderate, merciful, bent only on bringing the Philippines to an autonomous self-government at the earliest possible moment. With every possible temptation to severity the American authorities In nearly three years have executed no one. A war which long since sank, so far as the Filipinos are concerned, to the assassination of sentries, the torture of stragglers and the perpetual rising of “amigoes,” who easily passed from peasants to soldiers and back, has been waged by us without cruelty, reprisals or vindictive butchery. When self-govern-ment, once organized, collapsed In treachery the American authorities organized local rule again. When this collapsed, a third local administration was organized. With patience, with persistence, with a resolute confidence that in the end men in the Philippines could be taught to manage their own affairs, each failure and collapse has been succeeded by another attempt as persistent and patient to organize local self-rule anew. Such a policy has been slow. It was not at first understood by the Tagals and other tribes. They undoubtedly despised this course and practice. They regarded it as weak. Relentless, sweeping severity would have brought peace earlier; but it would have postponed self-government and rendered It Impossible for a generation longer. The earlier success by such a policy would have meant lasting failure of the real purpose of the United States In the archipelago.—Philadelphia Press. A Good Man to Have Pleased.

American Farmer—Yes; protection is all right. All my crops sold, all my mortgages paid off, and everything I can raise this year sole} ahead. The Cow and the Hen. The product of the dairy and the hen in the United States in the year 1900 amounted to 1075,000,000. It will be interesting to compare this with the value of some other principal products: Dairy and hen 9675,000,000 Corn 751,000,000 Hay 446,000,000 Cotton (1899) 335,000,000 Wheat 323.000.000 Oats 209,000,000 Pig iron (1899) 245,000,000 Coal (1899) 250,000,000 Copper (1899) 104,000,000 Gold and silver (1899) 142,000,000 Of this cow and hen product we export about 1 per cent, consuming 99 per cent ourselves. Here again is an illustration of our enormous borne market. Add to the above product fruits and nuts, and we have a total of 9800,000,000 practically all sold in the home market. Could our laboring classes use the eggs, the butter, the milk, the poultry, and the fruit which they do. If they were idle or their wages were reduced to foreign levels? That’s the whole story.

Mr. Bryan Has Yet to Learn. It is apparently William Jennings Bryan's incurable delusion that after he had succeeded In inoculating the body of the Democracy with the poisonous virus of Populism the resulting postule was the whole thing. Defeat baa not cured him of his Illusion; be still Insists that there is no- Democracy but diseased Democracy. From this point of view—and we are persuaded it is the correct one—Mr. Bryan'9 domineering attitude toward Democrats who have not been able to agree with him Ls readily explained and may l>e more readily excused. He Is a man of parts and of most engaging and agreeable personality, and though his ascendency In the Democratic party has cos* it dear and has proved a profound misfortune to the country, he Is not too old to learn. Other defeated candidates for the Presidency have lived to serve their fellow' citizens with great usefulness. Mr. Bryan Is a comparatively young man. When he shall no longer undertake to spread himself over too much surface he will be aM right.—Philadelphia Record (Dem.).