■HD 1913 THE LIBRARY OF THE NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002407108 National Industrial Conference Board 15 BEACON STREET, BOSTON, MASS. BRANCH OFFICE 724 SOUTHERN BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D. C. THE National Industrial Conference Board is a co-operative body composed of representatives of national industrial associations, and organized to provide a clearing house of information, a forum for constructive discussion, and machinery for co-operative action on matters that vitally affect the indus- trial development of the nation. Frederick P. Fish Chairman Frederic C. Hood Treasurer Magnus W. Alexander Managing Director MEMBERSHIP American Cotton Manufacturers' Association American Hardware Manufacturers' Association American Paper and Pulp Association Electrical Manufacturers' Club Manufacturing Chemists' Association of the U. S. National Association of Cotton Manufacturers National Association of Manufacturers National Association of Wool Manufacturers National Automobile Chamber of Commerce National Boot AND Shoe Manufacturers' Association National Council for Industrial Defense National Erectors' Association National Founders' Association National Metal Trades Association Rubber Association of America, Inc. Silk Association of America The Railway Car Manufacturers' Association United Typothet^ of America ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP Associated Industries of Massachusetts Associated Manufacturers and Merchants OF New York State WARTIME CHANGES IN THE COST OF LIVING July, 1914 — November, 191 8 Research Report Number 14 February, 1919 Copyright 1919 National Industrial Conference Board 15 Beacon Street Boston, Mass. CONTENTS PAGE Foreword v Introduction I. Food 3 Increase from July, 1914, to November, 1918 3 Relative Increase in Separate Cities .... 4 II. Shelter 6 III. Clothing 11 Yard Goods 13 Hosiery and Underwear 15 Outer Wear and Furnishings 15 Clothing Budgets 16 IV. Fuel, Heat and Light 19 Fuel . . 19 Light 22 V. Sundries 24 VI. The Complete Budget 26 Conclusion 31 Appendices 32 K^ ^c/^ LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1: Relative Retail Prices of Food in the United States, January 15, 1913, to November 15, 1918, inclusive 3 Table 2: Percentage of Increase in the Retail Price of Food in the Principal Cities of the United States, Sep- tember 15, 1917, to September 15, 1918 4 Table 3: Summary of Estimated Average Changes in Rents as Paid by Wage-Earners, July, 1914, to Novem- ber, 1918, in Specified Cities, by Percentage Groups within which Rent Increases Fall . 7 Table 4: Average Retail Prices and Percentages of Increase in Price of Selected Yard Goods and Wearing Apparel, July 1, 1914, and November 1, 1918 .... 14 Table 5: Trial Budgets of Clothing for a Wage-Earner and his Wife for One Year, Based on Comparative Prices in July, 1914, and November, 1918 ... .17 Table 6: Percentages of Increase in the Retail Price of Coal in Ton Lots for Domestic Use between July, 1914, and November, 1918, and between November, 1914, and November, 1918 19 Table 7: Percentages of Increase between November 1, 1914, and November 1, 1918, in the Retail Price of Coal for Domestic Use in Selected Cities 21 Table 8: Percentages of Increase in the Cost of Living in Representative American Communities, July, 1914 — November, 1918 .28 Table 9: Percentages of Increase in the Cost of Living in Certain Shipbuilding Districts between December, 1914, and August, 1918, by Separate Items .... 30 Appendix Table A: Average Retail Prices of Selected Yard Goods and Wearing Apparel as Secured in November, 1918 32 Appendix Table B: Percentages of Increase in the Average Price of Selected Yard Goods and Wearing Apparel as Secured in November, 1918 33 Foreword TN August, 1918, the National Industrial Conference ■'■ Board published a report on wartime changes in the cost of living, in which price increases between July, 1914, and June, 1918, were shown. The present report covers the period from July, 1914, to November, 1918, and thus depicts the increase within the entire war period. The figures presented in both of these reports must be regarded as general averages, representative of the country as a whole, but not to be applied to particular communities until allowances have been made for possible local deviations from the average change in the cost of the separate items. Since November, 1918, there have been many changes in the prices of articles entering into the family budget. These changes are not considered in this report, which represents the situation existing at the cessation of hostilities. Wartime Changes in the Cost of Living July, 1914 — November, 1918 INTRODUCTION In this report are given figures supplementary to those published in August, 1918,^ by which it was shown that up to the early summer of 1918 the cost of living as measured by pre-war standards had advanced 50% to 55%. Avail- able reports of studies covering practically the same period tend to show that this estimate was entirely adequate." In assembling facts regarding changes in the cost of living up to November, 1918, the same method was employed as in the previous investigation. Food prices collected by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics were accepted as measuring with sufficient accuracy changes in the cost of that item and therefore no original investigation of food costs was made. Facts regarding changes in rents were obtained from various local organ- izations closely in touch with, and thus able to speak authoritatively of, local conditions. Changes in the cost of clothing and fuel were estimated from price quotations likewise secured directly from reliable retail dealers in representative communities. Information as to the cost '■ National Industrial Conference Board. Research Report No. 9, fFartime Changes in the Cost of Living, August, 1918. * Investigations made by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in co-operation with the Wage Adjustment Board of the Emergency Fleet Cor- poration showing changes in the cost of living between December, 1914, and June, 1918, in five Pacific Coast shipbuilding districts indicated increases to the beginning of June, 1918, of 54.82% in Tacoma, 49.24% in Seattle, 47.16% in Portland, 40.74% in Los Angeles and 39.49% in San Francisco. {Monthly Labor Review, September, 1918, pp. 115-117.) Increases in the cost of food in these five cities were considerably less than the average increase for the entire country as measured by average prices for the year 1913, used in the Board's report, and the proportion of the total family income spent for food was also less than the usually accepted average. Both of these circumstances indicate that Pacific Coast conditions are not typical of the country as a whole. But an addition of several points to the total increase to allow for this would not give an estimate in excess of that brought out by the Board's study. 1 of light, carfare, amusements, insurance, tobacco and other sundries was obtained from agencies well informed regarding these items. In this report, as in the earlier one, conditions in July, 1914, were taken as the base or starting point from which to measure subsequent changes. The percentages of increase thus show how much more it cost the average American wage-earner to live in November, 1918, than in July, 1914, at as nearly as possible the same standard. Attention should be called to the fact, emphasized in the first report, that no single percentage of increase can be applied indiscriminately to all communities alike, and that even among individual families in the same com- munity there are certain to be variations from the average change in the cost of living. The basis of the present report, however, is sufficiently broad, both as to the amount of data included and sections of the country represented, to warrant the generalizations made and to furnish a close approximation of the increase in the cost of living to the average wage-earner within the period of the war. I FOOD In its report on wartime changes in the cost of living issued in August, 1918, the National Industrial Conference Board estimated that between July, 1914, and June, 1918, the cost of food to the average wage-earner had gone up 62%.i This figure was based on the retail food price index numbers of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, which had been carefully checked with other studies of increases in the price of food. Increase from July, 1914, to November, 1918 Index numbers of retail food prices as compiled by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics are presented in Table 1 for each month within the period January, 1913, to November, 1918, inclusive.' TABLE I : RELATIVE RETAIL PRICES OF FOOD IN THE UNITED STATES, JANUARY 1 5, I913, TO NOVEMBER 1 5, I918, INCLUSIVE Average price for the year 1913 = 100 (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics) Month 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 Average for the year 100 102 101 114 146 al68 January 98 104 103 107 128 160 February . . . . 97 101 101 106 133 161 March 97 99 98 107 133 154 April 98 97 99 109 145 154 May . . 97 98 100 109 151 158 June ... 98 99 100 112 152 162 July 100 102 100 111 146 167 August ... 101 107 100 113 149 171 September ... 102 107 101 118 153 178 October 104 105 103 121 157 181 November .... 105 105 104 126 155 183 December 104 105 105 126 157 a " TheDecemberindexnumber, which was not available when this investigation was made ,was 187. 1 Research Report No. 9, pp. 7-21. ^Monthly Review of the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, February, 1918, pp. 100-101; ibid., April, 1918, p. 137; ibid., June, 1918, p. 77; Monthly Labor Review, August, 1918, p. 116; ibid., October, 1918, p. 93; November,_ 1918, p. 78. Index numbers for October, November and December, together with the average for 1918, were furnished by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in advance of publication in the Labor Review. 3 From this table it appears that in November, 1918, the price of food, as compared with the average price for the year 1913, which was taken as typical of the period immediately preceding the war, had advanced 83%. From April, 1918, to November, 1918, the move- ment of food prices was steadily upward; the point reached in the latter month was the highest for the war period. The cost of a number of staple articles in Novem- ber, 1918, was at least 100% higher than five years before; the price of pork chops and of sugar had risen 100%; of flour, 103%; of corn meal, 110%; of bacon, 114%; and of lard, 115%. The price of every article for which quotations were secured advanced at least 50% between November, 1913, and November, 1918. Relative Increase in Separate Cities In Table 2 is given the average increase in the retail price of food between September 15, 1917, and September 15, 1918, the latest date for which such detailed com- parisons are available, in the 45 cities where the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics collects price quotations.* TABLE 2: percentage OF INCREASE IN THE RETAIL PRICE OF FOOD IN THE PRINCIPAL CITIES OF THE UNITED STATES, SEPTEMBER 1 5, I917, TO SEPTEMBER 1 5, I918 (United States Bureau of Labor Statistics) Locality Percentage of increase Locality Percentage of increase United States 164 Pittsburgh, Pa 16.0 Baltimore, Md 23.4 Cleveland, Ohio . . . 15.9 Seattle, Wash 23.0 Chicago, 111. 15.7 Scranton, Pa 21.3 Manchester, N. H. 15.6 Richmond, Va 20.6 Boston, Mass 15.5 San Francisco, Cal. . . 20.6 Omaha, Neb 15.5 Charleston, S. C. . . . 20.3 Rochester, N. Y. 15.2 Portland, Ore 20.0 St. Louis, Mo. . . 15.2 Atlanta, Ga 19.9 Providence, R. L . . . 15.1 Los Angeles, Cal. . . 19.5 Columbus, Ohio . . . . 15.0 Washington, D. C. . . 19.4 New Orleans, La. . . . 14.9 Memphis, Tenn. . . . 19.1 Cincinnati, Ohio . . 14.7 Newark, N. J 18.6 Little Rock, Ark. . . . 14.5 Philadelphia, Pa. . . . 18.4 Bridgeport, Conn. . . . 14.4 Louisville, Ky. . . . 17.9 Dallas, Tex 14.3 Fall River, Mass. . 17.6 Birmingham, Ala. . . . 14.2 New Haven, Conn. . . 17.0 Milwaukee, Wis. 13.8 Kansas City, Mo. . . . 16.6 Indianapolis, Ind. 13.6 Buffalo, N.Y. . . . 16.5 St. Paul, Minn 12.4 NewYork, N. Y. . . . 16.5 Minneapolis, Minn. . . 12.0 Jacksonville, Fla. . . . 16.4 Springfield, 111. . . 11.0 Denver, Col 16.1 Butte, Mont 10.9 Detroit, Mich 16.1 Salt Lake City, Utah 10.0 • Monthly Labor Review, November, 1918, pp. 96-97. 4 This table affords substantial corroboration of pre- viously assembled evidence that increases in food prices were fairly uniform from city to city and that, as a rule, only slight allowance, if any, need be made to take account of local differences. Although in the year ending Sep- tember 15, 1918, food price advances varied from 10% in Salt Lake City to 23.4% in Baltimore, in the majority of places the increase did not differ widely from 16.4%, the average for the 45 cities combined. The estimate of 83% as the rise in the cost of food within the period of the war is, therefore, representative of most American industrial communities, and fairly meas- ures the advance in the cost of this important item between the summer of 1914 and November, 1918. II SHELTER In the Board's previous report, the average increase in rents the country over from July, 1914, to June, 1918, was placed at 15%. This figure was somewhat arbitrary, as any estimate of average changes in rents must be, since local conditions vary greatly. But it was considered to make adequate allowance for the large increases in some places, unchanged conditions in others and decreases in still others. In November, 1918, chambers of commerce, real estate boards and brokers, and charitable and civic organizations in a large number of cities were again asked to furnish figures showing rents as paid by wage- earners. One hundred and ninety-seven replies from 93 cities were tabulated. On the basis of these, estimates were made as to average changes in rents between July, 1914, and November, 1918, in the separate cities and for the country as a whole. Since replies to the questionnaires came from individuals and organizations representing widely varying interests, and since sometimes not all sections of the city were included, the estimates thus obtained must be regarded as broad averages of the changes that have occurred rather than as refined measurements of conditions in any one particular section. Sometimes they are the opinion of but a single organization or individual. As an indication of rent conditions in any given locality, there- fore, they may be inadequate. As a whole, however, they offer a reliable index of the rent situation the country over. Table 3 gives the estimated average changes in rents paid by wage-earners in American cities between July, 1914, and November, 1918, as indicated by the data thus assembled. The cities are arranged by population. The percentage groups in which the cities are placed mark the limits within which falls the average change as estimated by the Board on the basis of all replies received, not the range in the individual city. Together, the cities embrace a large proportion of the industrial population of the United States. TABLE 3 : SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED AVERAGE CHANGES IN RENTS AS PAID BY WAGE-EARNERS,, JULY, I9I4» TO NOVEMBER, I918, IN SPECIFIED CITIES, BY PERCENTAGE GROUPS WITHIN WHICH RENT INCREASES FALL (National Industrial Conference Board) Percentage Percentage N«. of ' of increase No. of of increase- Locality reports in rents k 1 by groups a Locality reports in rents, Tby groups a Tend ties hav ing a population of 500,000 or over in 1916 Detroit, Mich. . . 4 21%^% Pittsburgh, Pa. . . 3 nfcr-^% Pkil&delphia, Pa^ . 5 n%-20% Boston, Mass. . . 2 10% orless Cleveland, Ohio . . 3 do. Chicago, 111. . . . 8 da. New York, N.Y. . 7 do. St. Louis, Mo. . . 3 do. Baltimore, Md. . . a do. Los Angefes, Cal. , 2 do^ Nine cities 1 laving a population of 300,000' to 500,000 in 1916 Seattle, Wash. . . 3 Over 40% MinneaipoliB, Minn. 4 10% or less Washington, D. C. 2 21%-4&% ;New Orleans^ La. . 2. do. Buffalo, N.Y. . . 3 do. Cincinnati, Ohio . 7 do. Milwaukee, Wis. . 5 ll%-20% San Firancisco, Cal. 3 No changt Newark, N. J. . . 1 do. 1 i i Thirty-two citi es havii g a population of 100,000 to 3C 10,000 ii 1 19.1& Portland, Ore. . . . 4 Over 40% :San Antonio, Tex. . 1 11%-2Q% Tacoma,Wash. . . 3 21%-40% Pallas, Tex. 2 , do. Salt Lake City, Utah 1 do. iHartford, Comn. . 1 da Lowell, Mass. . . . 1 do. Cambridge, Mass. 1 10% orless Worcester, Mass. . 4 da. Reading, Pa. . . . 1 do. Springfield, Mass. 1 do. Providence, R. I. . 2 do. Paterson, N. J. . . 2 do. Cohambus, Ohio . 2 do. New Haven, Conn. 4 ll%-20% Louisville, Ky. . . ; 2 do. Toledo, Ohio . . . 4 do. Albany, N.Y. . . 2 do. Denver, Col. . . . 3 do. Scranton, Pa. . . 1 do. Syracuse, N. Y. . . 4 do. Kansas Ci€y, Mo. . 2 No change Trenton, N. J. . . 1 do. Indianapolis, Ind. 1 do. Oakland, Cal. . . . 4 do. Omaha, Neb. . . 1 do. Birmingham, Ala. . 1 do. Nashville, Tenn. . 2 do. Spokane, Wash. . . 3 do. ;Atknta, Ga. . . . 1 Decrease New Bedford, Mass. 1 do. Memphis, Tenn. . 2 do. '^ The percentages given indicate the group- within which falls the average change a estimated on the basis of all replies received, not the range for the individual city. TABLE 3 : SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED AVERAGE CHANGES IN RENTS AS PAID BY WAGE-EARNERS, JULY, I9I4, TO NOVEMBER, I918, IN SPECIFIED CITIES, BY PERCENTAGE GROUPS WITHIN WHICH RENT INCREASES FALL — Continued Locality No. of reports Percentage of increase in rents, by groups Locality No. of reports Percentage of increase in rents, by groups Twenty-six cities having a population of 50,000 to 100,000 in 1916 Flint, Mich. . . . Chattanooga, lenn. Erie, Pa Roclcford, 111. . . . Portland, Me. . . . Bayonne, N. J. Saginaw, Mich. . . Fort Wayne, Ind. . Schenectady, N. Y. Norfolk, Va. . New Britain, Conn. Yonkers, N. Y. Charleston, S. C. . 1 Over 40% 3 do. 2 do. 1 21%-40% 1 do. 1 do. 1 do. 1 do. 3 n%-20% 2 do. 1 do. 1 do. 2 do. Utica, N. Y. . Duluth, Minn. Akron, Ohio Springfield, 111. Savannah, Ga. Wilkes-Barre, Pa. Sioux City, Iowa Evansville, Ind. . Brockton, Mass. . Tampa, Fla. East St. Louis, 111. San Diego, Cal. . El Paso, Tex. . . Sixteen cities having a population of less than 50,000 in 1916 Columbia, S. C. Chester, Pa. Madison, Wis. Kenosha, Wis. Waukesha, Wis. Elkhart, Ind. Gary, Ind. Knoxville, Tenn. Over 40% do. 21%^% do. do. do. do. ll%-20% Warren, Ohio . . Lincoln, Neb. . . Superior, Wis. Billings, Mont. . Concord, N. H. Dubuque, Iowa Waterloo, Iowa Champaign, 111. ll%-20% 10% or less do. do. do. No change do. Decrease "The percentages given indicate the group within which falls the average change as estimated on the basis of all replies received, not the range for the individual city. In only one of the ten largest cities in the country did the average increase in wage-earners' rents amount to more than 20%; in four, the increase was very small. In Detroit, the largest rises in rents were for heated apartments for which greater demand was reported as higher wages enabled workers to raise their standard of living. In Los Angeles,' practically the only increases noted were for the better types of houses. In certain parts of Philadelphia, rent advances were considerably greater than the estimated average of 20%. The Phila- delphia Housing Association, however, placed the average rise at only 11%. The Real Estate Board of Cleveland reported the increase in that city to be 15%, but evidence from other sources suggested that it was somewhat greater. Twenty per cent is apparently a representative allowance. In New York, rent changes varied from borough to borough. The Real Estate Boards of New York and Brooklyn estimated 15% as the increase for better grade tenements; rents of cold-water tenements in Manhattan had not changed. The rent profiteering committee of the Maryland State Council of Defense stated that although many landlords in Baltimore asked no higher rents than in 1914, some charged 20% or 25% more. It was said that the greatest increases were on sub-leases. Negro tenants were reported to have been most adversely affected, both in Baltimore and in St. Louis. In Boston and Chicago, occasional instances of rent advances were found, but they were not representative of the city as a whole. Among the smaller cities, the same general variety of experience was noted, but there were fairly frequent in- creases running well above the average. Rents reached their highest figures in certain cities where the demand for housing could be met only by the construction of new buildings at greatly increased cost. Exceptionally pro- nounced advances in rents were noted in large shipbuilding centers like Seattle and Tacoma, Wash., Portland, Ore., Portland, Me. and Chester, Pa. Cantonment cities such as Salt Lake City, Utah, Chattanooga, Tenn., Rockford, 111. and Columbia, S. C, also reported unusual increases. Smallest increases in rents were found in those localities where there had been no war industries and from which labor consequently had moved to other places where work was more plentiful. Owing to the increased cost of fuel and service, rents of steam-heated apartments had generally gone up some- what more than those of cold-water tenements, cottages and semi-detached houses; steam-heated apartments, however, are not usually occupied by wage-earners. In some places, the demand for higher grade accommodations forced their rents up and the resulting vacancy of less desirable quarters produced a decrease in the rents of these. Instances of profiteering were found in many localities, on sub-leases, by speculative dealers and by others controlling a small amount of property. Many real estate imterests, on the other hand, frequently co-operated to hold rents at a reasonable figure. The opinion was general that in normal communities rents would not go down until prices of materials and labor were reduced. Increases in rents as reported in November, 1918, showed greater uniformity over 1914 rates than did the advances reported in June. In some communities, where rates had been abnormal, local committees had taken control of the situation.' In others, where there had been no extraordinary surplus of houses, restrictions on building had more nearly regulated supply to demand. An increased cost of maintenance was everywhere re- ported. The estimate of 20% as the average advance in rents is of fairly broad application. It represents a more general increase than did the 15% increase recorded up to June, since in the interval rent increases had become more widely effective. It cannot be too strongly emphasized, however, that, in the case of rents especially, local varia- tions from the average must always be taken into account when studying the cost of living in any given community. ' Tke United States Department of Labor reported in January, 1919, that the Bureau of Housing and Transportation had organized rental adjustment committees in 76 cities throughout the country and that in SO other localities it had adjusted complaints relating to matters of rents and housing througli already existing agencies. As a result, it was said, hundreds of evictions had been prevented. 10 Ill CLOTHING In the Board's earlier report, the average increase in the cost of clothing between July, 1914, and June, 1918, was placed at 77%.' In assembling data as to price changes since June, questionnaires were again sent to retail stores in the important cities of the country, asking for comparative prices in 1914, and in June and November, 1918, of identical grades of goods. To the 25 articles for which price quotations were secured in June were added men's and women's coats selling for $10 in 1914, men's work shirts priced at 50 cents and men's negligee shirts priced at $1 in 1914. Straw hats were omitted. The 28 items studied were not intended to cover a family's complete clothing needs, but are amply illustrative of the trend of clothing prices. Replies to the questionnaire from 112 stores in 46 cities were tabulated." Average prices In June, 1918, and November, 1918, as quoted by these stores in November, are given In Appendix A. The percentages of increase since July^ 1914, are shown in Appendix B. In these ^ Research Report No. 9, pp. 45-64. 2 The cities were grouped geograpMcaffly in four districts as follows : Eastern Citirs ... 42 Baltimore, Md. . . 1 Boston, Mass. . 7 Bridgeport, Conn. . 2 Buffalo. N.Y. . . 5 Fall River, Mass. . 2 Manchester, N. H. . 1 Newark, N. J. . 3 New Haven, Conn. 2 New York, N. Y. . 6 PMadelphia, Pa. . 1 Fittsburgh, Pa. . . 3 Providence, R. I. . 3 Rochester, N. Y. . 1 Scraaton, Pa. . . . 3 Towanda, Pa. . . . 1 Washington, D. C. . I Southern •Cities. . Atlanta, 'Ga. . . Austin, Tex. . . Birmingham, Ala. Charleston, S. C. D^Uas, Tex. . . Jacksonville, Fla. Little Rock, Ark. Memphis, Tenn. . New Qdeans, La. Richmond, Va. . Tampa, Fla. . . 22 Middle Western Cities 1 3 2 2 1 4 1 .2 2 1 Middle Western Cities 31 . 4 Chicago, 111. Cleveland, Ohio . •Columbus, Ohio . Detroit, Mich. . Indianapolis, Ind. 11 Kansas City, Mo. . 2 Lincoln, Neb. ... 2 Louisville, Ky. . 3 Milwaukee, Wis. . 2 MiiDineapoJis, Minn. 2 St. Louis, Mo. . . 2 St. Paul, Minn. . . 2 Spring-Md, HI. . . 1 Far Western Cities . 17 Butte, Mont. ... 4 Denver, Col. ... 2 Los Angeles, Cal. . 3 Salt Lake City, Utah 3 San Francisco, Cal. . 2 Seattle, Wash. ... 3 tables only the simple average was used. This is suffi- ciently accurate for the present purpose, especially in view of the fact that the questionnaires were returned from different sections of the country somewhat in proportion to the distribution of the industrial population. These quotations have been arranged in four groups for purpose of analysis but close comparisons between conditions in different parts of the country should not be made. Increases in the cost of clothing are dependent upon many factors other than geographical location, factors which operate among stores in the same section as well as among the different sections of the country. For this reason, also, no attempt was made to analyze price changes by cities. The average increases for the country as a whole, however, may be accepted as representative of the rise in the cost of clothing of wage-earners during the period of the war. Price advances of the separate items fre- quently varied widely from store to store and from city to city. In some, one article was higher; in others, another. But in combining all of these articles into the clothing budget, differences tend to counterbalance one another and the total increase in the cost of clothing is of much more general application than the great diversity of quotations for the separate items would at first suggest. November, 1918, prices were compared directly with prices in July, 1914, instead of ascertaining the increase since June, 1918, and adding this to the average rise up to that date as shown by the earlier investigation. This method gives a much truer indication of the total increase within the war period, since articles for which comparative prices were secured in November were in many instances of a different make, weight, style or quality from those for which prices had been quoted in June. This is evidenced by the fact that while prices of standard goods as given in June were approximately the same as prices of the same goods as given in November, for many other items June prices as given in June were higher than June prices as reported in November. It thus appears that June prices quoted in June were for goods at the height of the season, whereas prices given in November were for goods seasonable in November, but commanding 12 an actually as well as a relatively lower price in June.^ Moreover, as the war went on, certain lines of goods dropped out of the market entirely, so that it was not possible to carry comparative figures over the entire period from July, 1914, to November, 1918. When this occurred between June, 1918, and November, 1918, other goods were substituted. Since in all cases, however, quotations were requested for goods which had been selling at the specified prices in 1914, the increases noted in November, 1918, correctly picture the changes in cost within the entire war period. Any difficulty involved in comparing July and November prices is thus obviated. In Table 4 are given average prices in November, 1918, of goods selling at a specified price in July, 1914, together with the percentages of increase above the 1914 prices.'' Yard Goods Woolens. The price of woolen yard goods increased on the average well over 100% during the war period. This includes an advance of 131.6% for serge and 115.4% for broadcloth. The price of poplin, on the other hand, rose only 96.4%. Variations in the prices of all of these fabrics were very large. Serge quoted at $1 in 1914 brought $2.50 as the most frequent single price in Novem- ber, 1918. For poplin, the majority of quotations were $3 or less. Broadcloth selling for |2 in 1914, in November, 1918, most often cost $4.50 and $4. Cottons. Percale showed the most striking average increase of any item in the list, 264.4%, representing an average, price of 27 cents in November, 1918. In more than one-third of the stores, 25 cents was quoted. Voile, on the other hand, advanced an average of only 87.9%. The range of price increases for all cottons was very wide. 1 In order to be certain that these differences in average prices as quoted in June and as quoted in November were not due to the fact that in the November investigation more than twice as many stores were included as in the June study, prices quoted by 20 stores which furnished prices in both June and November were analyzed. The same circumstance was noted: average prices of many articles as given in June were higher than the average of June prices as quoted in November. 2 In all tables of average prices, fractions of one-half cent or more have been considered as adding one cent to the price: smaller fractions have been dis- regarded. For this reason the percentage figures and the average price figures do not always appear to be in strict accord, since in computing the former exact average prices were used. 13 TABLE 4: AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES AND PERCENTAGES OF INCREASE IN PRICE OF SELECTED YARD GOODS AND WEARING APPAREL, JULY I, I9I4, AND NOVEMBER I, I918 (National Industrial Conference Board) Article July 1, 1014 price November 1. 1918 Average retail price Percentage of increase above 1914 price WocJen Yard Goods Serge Poplin Broadcloth .... Cotton Yard Goods Percale Gingham Longcloth Fruit of the Loom . . Voile . ... Hosiery Men's . . . . Women's . . Kait Underwear Men's union suits . . Women's vests .... Muslin Underwear Women's combinations Suits Men's Women's Coats Men's Women's Shirts and Blouses Women's blouses . . Men's negligee shirts Men's work shirts . . Men's work shirts . . Overalls Shjoes Men's Women's Gloves Men's dogskin . Women's cape . Hats Men's felt .... Women's velvet . . . 81.00 1.60 2.00 .07>^ .10 .12>^ .15 .25 .15 .25 .50 .10 1.00 $2.32 2.95 4.31 .27 .32 .31 .35 .47 .28 .49 1.15 .23 1.83 15.00 15.00 26.40 26.15 10,00 10.00 19.91 19.11 1.00 1.00 .50 1.00 1.64 1.79 1.33 1.97 .75 2.14 3.50 3.00 5.88 5.72 1.25 1.00 2.27 2.00 2.00 1.50 3.49 2.79 131.6 96.4 115.4 264.4 216.7 151.1 136.5 87.9 89.0 94.2 129.7 127.9 82.7 76.0 74.4 99.1 91.1 64.2 79.4 166.1 96.7 185.7 68.1 90.5 81.4 100.2 74.7 86.1 14 Hosiery and Underwear Hosiery. Men's hose selling for 15 cents in 1914 varied In price from 20 cents to 40 cents in November, 1918. The most frequent figure was 25 cents. Women's 25-cent hose showed a price range from 35 cents to 75 cents. In 80% of the cases the price quoted was 50 cents or less. Knit underwear. Men's union suits costing 50 cents in 1914 were sold for $1 by 31 stores in November, 1918, and for $1.25 by 20 others. Prices ranged from 75 cents to $2. Women's 10-cent vests brought from 12)^ cents to 45 cents with 25 cents most frequently quoted. Muslin underwear. For a garment selling for $1 in 1914, the average price in November, 1918, was $1.83. The most common quotations were $2, by 26 stores, and $1.50, by 22. Prices varied from $1.25 to $2.50. Outer Wear and Furnishings Suits and coats. Twenty-five dollars was the most common quotation in November, 1918, for men's and women's suits selling for $15 in 1914. Although prices ranged from $20 to $35 for men's suits, only a few of the quotations were less than the most frequent price. The price of women's suits varied from $16.50 to $35 but quotations of less than $25 were infrequent. Men's coats priced at $10 in 1914 cost from $15 to $25 in November, 1918. More than one-half of the quotations were $20 or more. In the case of women's coats, on the other hand, the most frequent price was $15, with nearly four-fifths of the stores charging $20 or less. MerC s negligee shirts and women's blouses. The prices of men's negligee shirts selling for $1 in 1914 showed an average increase of 7'9.4'%; those of women's $1 blouses advaiiced 64-2%. Approximately 95% of all the Novem- ber, 1918, quotations for men's shirts were $1.50 or more, whereas 60% of the quotations for women's blouses were $1.50 or less. Men's work shirts. Two dollars was the price most frequently quoted in November for men's work shirts costing $1 in 1914; 50-rices. ^ Based on Cleveland prices. J Based on Manchester, N. H. prices. ^ Based on Richmond prices. " Decrease. Attention should be called to the fact that estimates of changes in the cost of living shown by these investigations of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics are subject to correction because of the method used in estimating the advance in the cost of sundries. This was in all cases assumed to be the same as the increase found for all other items combined. Such a method has no scientific basis. As a practical matter it would make little difference if the increase in the cost of sundries had been substantially in accord with the average increase for the other items. But in such a case as Baltimore, where the increase in the budget exclusive of sundries was found to be 80%, this method injects a considerable margin of error. Thus in Baltimore up to November, 1918, carfare had advanced only 20%, and numerous other sundries items not over 50%, while life insurance had not advanced at all. In view of these facts it is certain that an allowance of 80% as the increase in the cost of sundries is too high. Since 30 the sundries item exclusive of furniture and furnishings represented practically 22% of the total budget in Baltimore, the Bureau's arbitrary method of estimating involves a significant exaggeration of the increase in the budget as a whole. Estimates of changes in the cost of living should not be confused with changes in wholesale price index numbers such as Bradstreet's, Dun's and those of the New York Times Annalist. As shown in the Board's previous report, such wholesale commodity price changes do not necessarily run parallel with changes in retail prices. In times of rapidly rising prices, expecially, wholesale quota- tions tend to advance faster than retail. Furthermore, such wholesale commodity price index numbers, while a valuable reflection of market conditions, do not take account of the varying importance of the different items in the family budget. In short, they are not a measure of changes in the cost of living. Conclusion On the basis of the foregoing evidence, it appears that between July, 1914, and November, 1918, the cost of living for wage-earners in representative American com- munities advanced 65% to 70%. The most marked increases were noted in the cases of clothing and food. The advance in the cost of these two items, although vary- ing somewhat from place to place, were, on the whole, fairly uniform; differences in these must, however, at times be considered. Much wider deviations from the average increases occurred in rents and in the prices of fuel. For these, particularly, some adjustments may be required in applying to specific communities the general average increase reached by the Board. By making due allowance for local variations, however, the Board's figures may readily be applied to most American com- munities. 31 APPENDIX— Table A AVERAGE RETAIL PRICES OF SELECTED YARD GOODS AND WEARING APPAREIi AS SECURED IN NOVEMBER, I918 I914-I918 (National Industrial Conference Board) Price July 1, 1914 United States Eastern Cities Southern Cities Middle West- ern Cities Far Western Cities ARTICLE Average retail price Average retail price Average retail price Average retail price Average j retail price ; Junel 1918 Nov.l, 1918 June], 1918 Nov.l, 1918 Junel, 1918 Nov.l, 1918 Junel, 1918 Nov.l, 1918 Junel, 1918 Nov.l, 1918 Woolen Yard Goods Serge Poplin . . Broadcloth . ... $1.00 1.50 2.00 $2.03 2.61 3.78 $2,32 2.95 4.31 $2,06 2,65 3,82 $2,31 3.00 4.31 $2.07 2.56 3.69 $2.33 2.89 4.29 $2.02 2.51 3.87 $2.38 2.87 4.30 $1.94 2.75 3.68 $2.21 3.05 4.35 Cotton Yard Goods Percale Gingham Longcloth . . Fruit of the Loom . Voile .07^ .10 .12K .15 .25 .24 .28 .27 .32 .41 .27 .32 .31 .35 .47 .24 .27 .27 .32 .42 .28 .31 .32 .35 .48 .23 .27 .26 .29 .40 .27 .31 .32 .35 .46 .24 .29 .27 .33 .44 .27 .34 .31 .36 .48 .23 .27 .25 .32 .38 27 30 30 36 45 Hosiery Men's . Women's . . .15 .25 .25 .42 .28 .49 .25 .44 .29 .49 .25 .42 .28 .50 .25 .40 .29 .47 .24 .40 .28 .47 Knit Underwear Men's union suits Women's vests .50 .10 .95 .19 1.15 .23 .95 .20 1.14 .23 .98 .19 1.23 .23 .96 .19 1.18 .23 .90 .19 1.01 .22 Muslin Underwear Women's combinations 1.00 1.61 1.83 1.58 1.73 1.66 1.85 1.67 1.94 1.57 1.85 Suits Men's . Women's 15.00 15.00 22.73 23.83 26,40 26.15 22.33 24.11 26.19 26.24 22.27 22.75 25.83 24.91 23.23 24.45 26,50 26.24 24,08 23.36 27.86 27.46 Coats Men's ... Women's . . 10.00 10.00 17.51 17.44 19,91 19.11 17.00 17.91 19,46 18,61 18.25 17.14 20,39 19.79 17,90 17.05 20.29 19.40 17.08 17.11 19.86 19.25 Shirts and Blouses Women's blouses . . Men's negligee shirts Men's work shirts . . Men's work shirts 1.00 1.00 .50 1.00 1.43 1.56 1.07 1.68 1.64 1.79 1,33 1,97 1,47 1.56 1.13 1.67 1.66 1.78 1.43 1.96 1.33 1.47 1.04 1.64 1.60 1.72 1.26 1.95 1.41 1.58 1.06 1.71 1.57 1.87 1.33 2.04 1.49 1.60 1.01 1.72 1.76 1.78 1.19 1,90 Overalls .75 1.84 2,14 1.77 2.11 1.72 2.01 2,05 2.25 1.86 2.23 Shoes Men's . Women's 3.50 3.00 5.45 5,23 5,88 5,72 5.53 5.39 5.83 5.79 5,40 5.33 6.14 5.67 5.54 5.16 5,93 5.72 5.19 4.83 5.72 5.56 Gloves Men's dogskin Women's cape 1,25 1.00 2.06 1.81 2.27 2.00 1.97 1.74 2.18 1.92 2.31 2.06 2.46 2.15 2.09 1.77 2.30 2.02 2,08 1.86 2.21 2.05 Hats Men's felt . . Women's velvet . . 2.00 1.50 3.11 2.59 3.49 2.79 3.01 2.44 3.39 2.70 3,18 2.75 3.80 2.88 3.13 2,85 3.38 2.99 3.21 2.36 3.56 2.59 32 APPENDIX— Table B >ERCENTAGES OF INCREASE IN THE AVERAGE PRICE OF SELECTED YARD GOODS AND WEARING APPAREL AS SECURED IN NOVEMBER, I918 I9I4-I918 (National Industrial Conference Board) ARTICLE K^oolen Yard Goods Serge Poplin Broadcloth Cotton Yard Goods Percale .... Gingham . . . Longcloth . . . Fruit of the Loom Voile Hosiery Men's ... Women's .... K.nit Underwear Men's union suits . Women's vests . . Muslin Underwear Women's combinations Suits Men's Women's . . Coats Men's Women's .... shirts and Blouses Women's blouses . Men's negligee shirts Men's work shirts . Men's work shirts . Overalls shoes Men's Women's .... 31oves Men's dogskin . . Women's cape . . iats Men's felt Women's velvet . Price July 1, 1914 $1.00 1.50 2.00 .07>^ .10 .15 .25 .15 .25 .50 .10 1.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 10.00 1.00 1.00 .50 1.00 .75 3.50 3.00 1.25 1.00 2.00 1.50 Junel, 1918 United States Percentage of Increase above 1914 prices 103.5 74.3 215.3 175.6 112.3 111.9 65.3 64.4 68.0 89.7 92.2 61.4 51.6 58.9 75.1 74.4 43.4 56.0 114.7 68.2 145.8 55.7 74.2 65.2 80.9 55.4 72.8 Nov.l, 1918 131.6 96.4 115.4 264.4 216.7 151.1 136.5 87.9 89.0 94.2 129.7 127.9 82.7 76.0 74.4 99.1 91.1 64.2 79.4 166.1 96.7 185.7 68.1 90.5 81.4 100.2 74.7 86.1 Eastern Cities Percentage ol Increase above 1914 prices Junel, 1918 106.3 76.7 90.9 221.9 168.0 116.2 115.2 66.2 66.2 75.7 89.5 95.9 58.0 48.9 60.7 70.0 79.1 47.2 56.4 126.6 66.5 136.3 57.9 79.5 57.7 74.2 50.7 62.7 Nov.l, 1918 131.3 100.1 115.6 276.0 211.4 153.3 135.9 91.4 90.6 97.6 127.5 128.1 72.6 74.6 74.9 94.6 86.1 66.4 77.9 186.7 96.0 180.9 66.4 93.1 74.2 92.2 69.7 79.9 Junel, Nov.l 1918 1918 Southern Cities Percentage of Increase above 1914 prices 107.4 70.8 84.4 208 172 111 94 59 66.7 68.7 95.1 92.3 65.6 48.5 51.7 82.5 71.4 32.7 47.3 108.1 64.3 129.6 54.3 77.8 85.0 105.6 58.9 83.3 132.5 92.5 114.3 256.8 214.7 157.7 130.2 84.6 84.8 101.2 145.3 134.7 85.1 72.2 66.0 103.9 97.9 60.4 72.1 152.1 95.0 168.6 75.5 88.9 96.9 114.6 90.0 91.7 Percentage of- Increase above 1914 prices Junel, 1918 Middle West em Cities Nov.l, 1918 102.4 67.4 93.3 216.8 193.0 113.0 118.9 75.4 63.6 61.1 91.7 87.0 66.6 54.8 63.0 79.0 70.6 41.1 58.1 111.7 70.8 173.8 58.2 71.8 66.8 77.1 56.7 90.0 137.9 91.0 114.9 254.1 238.5 148.3 139.8 90.2 91.0 87.0 135.2 127.2 94.2 76.7 74.9 102.9 94.0 56.7 87.1 165.0 104.0 200.4 69.6 90.5 84.3 101.9 68 99.6 Percentage of Increase above 1914 prices Junel, 1918 Far Western Cities Nov.l, 1918 93.9 83.2 84.0 203.6 167.1 102.8 111.3 53.8 59.5 60.7 79.8 94.4 57.2 60.6 55.8 70.8 71.1 49.5 60.0 102.1 71.8 147.6 48.4 61.0 66.7 85.7 60.7 57.4 121.3 103.6 117.7 260.0 195.0 139.4 140.0 79.4 86.7 88.9 102.8 120.5 85.4 98.6 92.5 76.4 77.9 137.9 90.3 197.1 63.5 85.4 77.1 105.0 78.1 72.5 33 Publications of the National Industrial Conference Board IS Beacon Street, Boston, Mass. Research Report No. 1. Workmen's Compensation Acts in THE United States — The Legal Phase. April, 1917. Summary of Research Report No. 1. Research Report No. 2. Analysis of British Wartime Re- ports ON Hours of Work as Related to Output and Fatigue. November, 1917. Research Report No. 3. Strikes in American Industry in Wartime. March, 1918. Research Report No. 4. Hours of Work as Related to Out- put AND Health of Workers — Cotton Manufac- turing. March, 1918. Research Report No. 5. The Canadian Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. April, 1918. Research Report No. 6. Sickness Insurance or Sickness Prevention? May, 1918. Research Report No. 7. Hours of Work as Related to Output and Health of Workers — Boot and Shoe Industry. June, 1918. Research Report No. 8. Wartime Employment of Women IN THE Metal Trades. July, 1918. Research Report No. 9. Wartime Changes in the Cost OF Living— July, 1914, to June, 1918. August, 1918. Research Report No. 10. Arbitration and Wage-Fixing in Australia. October, 1918. Research Report No. \l. The Eight-Hour Day Defined. December, 1918. Research Report No. 12. Hours of Work as Related to Output and Health of Workers — Wool Manu- facturing. December, 1918. Research Report No. 13. Rest Periods for Industrial Workers. January, 1919. Research Report No. 14. Wartime Changes in the Cost of Living — July, 1914, to November, 1918. Janu- ary, 1919. Research Report No. 15. Problems of Industrial Read- justment IN THE United States. February, 1919. INDUSTRIAL NEWS SURVEY Important industrial news in concise form. Weekly 32.00 per year Date Due ■ Cornell University Library HD6983.N3 1919 Wartime changes in the cost of living, J 3 1924 002 407 108 PROPFF?TY OF LIBRARY NEW W'^ r^Jf SCHOOL WOOSTflU A • ijR RELATIONS CORNELL UNIVERSITY N'5