No price too high

[snopes]

Comment: "The Price of a Comma"

The story tells of a woman who telegraphed her husband for permission to
buy (a chair, a gem, a braclet). The husband responds "No, price too
high." The telegraph company sends the message "No price too high." She
bought the item, husband is irate. In some accounts the husband sues the
telegraph company and wins. In some accounts the husband should have known
that the telegraph company does not use punctuation.

In either case, the moral is "Be careful with little details."

Any truth behind this story?

[Nick Theodorakis]

Why wouldn't he just telegram "No"?

Nick

[AnglRdr]

One would think the budget-conscious spouse would've ended the telegraph at "No."

[kanazawa]

Originally Posted by Nick Theodorakis

Why wouldn't he just telegram "No"?

Nick

No (Stop)
Price too high (Stop)

[snopes]

Originally Posted by AnglRdr

One would think the budget-conscious spouse would've ended the telegraph at "No."

Not if, say, the pricing structure of the particular telegraph company he used charged for a ten-word minimum.

That response also would not indicate that the issue was one of price, rather than an issue of the sender's not wanting his wife to purchase the item at all, regardless of cost.

[Chloe]

Originally Posted by snopes

Not if, say, the pricing structure of the particular telegraph outlet charged for a ten-word minimum.

Then a truly thrifty person would have used all ten of 'em.

(We get our money's worth! Squeeze that penny until the queen screams!)

[damian]

If the woman needed permission from her husband to buy something, one could ask what was she doing out of the house without him in the first place?

[Chloe]

I agree, but the stereotype of women having to check with their husbands before making a purchase still persists.* Hence this kind of hi-larious crap in cutesey stores:



*Maybe the male equivalent is that stupid superbowl commercial.

[Jahungo]

I would think that (in a marriage where both partner's finances are fully merged) one party should consult with another before making a purchase that is sufficiently expensive relative to their net worth/income.

[snopes]

Originally Posted by Chloe

Then a truly thrifty person would have used all ten of 'em.

Such as, "If I've said it once, I've said it ten times!"?

[dfresh]

Originally Posted by damian

If the woman needed permission from her husband to buy something, one could ask what was she doing out of the house without him in the first place?

Maybe I am an incredible sexist monster, but my wife asks my clearence before buying expensive items. I handle the budget, so I know if we have extra few hundred to buy something she wants that was not planned for. Of course, I do keep her barefoot in the kitchen usually, so it is not much of a concern.

And yes, I do ask her permission before I buy something too expensive that is not planmed for.

[mags]

Originally Posted by dfresh

I handle the budget, so I know if we have extra few hundred to buy something she wants that was not planned for.

In which case, she is not asking for permission, she is checking the state of the finances. I think most couples do/should discuss major purchases.

[Chloe]

Originally Posted by Jahungo

I would think that (in a marriage where both partner's finances are fully merged) one party should consult with another before making a purchase that is sufficiently expensive relative to their net worth/income.

Which is an excellent reason not to merge finances.

I'll never forget watching the 700 Club, with Pat and his male co-host and his female co-host, It was a fund-raiser (for a change) so Pat announced that he was going to double his own financial commitment. Then the male cohost announced he was going to double his commitment. Then the female co-host looked at the camera and said, "Honey, can we?"

It's not about both spouses consulting each other in that case, in the case of the OP, or in the case of the sign I posted above. I'm about to google for the "your wife just called" sign; I'll post it when I find it.

[Dropbear]

dfresh "ask permission" has a specific implication somewhat different to what you describe which is consulting on major purchases. You ask permission from the person in authority you get agreement from your partner.

Dropbear
(who noted the spank from mags while typing this but decided to stick it in anyway because he takes so long to write posts that if he gave up by virtue of spanking he'd never post anything, ever.)

[woohmom]

At my house, the finances are shared, he handles balancing the checkbook, I pay the bills. It works for us. When it comes to big purchases, he's way more responsible than I am. He asks for permission first. I ask for forgiveness after.

[RealityChuck]

Well, it's possible, but it's probably modeled upon a real example: the Tariff bill in the 1870s where a misplaced comma cost the US government hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The phrase on things exempt from the tariff was supposed to be:

"Tropical fruit-plants for the purposes of propagation"

The actual law said:

"Tropical fruit, plants for the purposes of propagation."

Thus making all tropical fruit duty free. Congress later fixed the law, but not after money was lost.

See the New York Times for this article of February 21, 1874.

[Bonnie]

An anecdote involving a telegraph, a missing comma, and "No price too high" circulated at least as early as 1870 (see below). I suspect it was adapted at some point thereafter to appeal to a broader audience, hence the married couple.

A California operator, who telegraphed to San Francisco, inquiring if he should buy at quotations, received in reply; "No price too high," but when, after acting upon this advice, he ascertained that the reply should have read, "No; price too high," he was provoked, not to say annoyed. [From "Miscellaneous," The Chicago Tribune, 7 March 1870, Pg. 2.]

TELEGRAPH PUNCTUATION. -- A sharp wheat buyer in Solano county [California], seeing quotations slightly advanced, a few days since, telegraphed to the Bay to know if he should buy at quotations. The answer came: "No price too high"! On the strength of the omission of the comma, he "pitched in" and bought 200 tons, which he was obliged recently to sell, pocketing a loss of one dollar per ton. A comma after "No" would have saved him that loss. So much for punctuation. [Printed in The Daily Columbus [Georgia] Enquirer, 8 March 1870, Pg. 57.]

In some accounts the husband sues the telegraph company and wins.

For what it's worth, a British newspaper published the account of the hapless wheat-buyer in April, 1870, adding that he consequences of missing comma had led to a lawsuit.

-- Bonnie

[RivkahChaya]

Originally Posted by Jahungo

I would think that (in a marriage where both partner's finances are fully merged) one party should consult with another before making a purchase that is sufficiently expensive relative to their net worth/income.

That's how it works in our house.

However, this was back when people sent telegrams. By the 1970s, people in the US generally sent telegrams only overseas, or as some sort of novelty-- people sometimes sent congratulations on a new baby by telegram, and the telegram was saved as a keepsake, IIRC, and there were those singing telegrams.

I am 43, and I only personally sent one telegram in my life, under really unusual circumstances. I was cautioned by the clerk to write out in letters any punctuation I wanted used. Maybe back when telegrams were more common, people were assumed to know that.

Anyway, if this dates back to a time when phones weren't common, or making a long distance call was still a matter of ringing the operator, telling her who you wanted to talk to, and what their number was in a certain city and state, then hanging up, and waiting for her to patch lines through several cities until the connection was made, when she would call you back, telegrams could sometimes be faster.

But there might even be something more sinister. Sometimes stores that had charge accounts didn't allow women to make large charges without permission from their husbands. If they clerk or manager knew the couple, she or he might just know it would be OK, or the store might have written permission on file. But if the woman wasn't known to the store, she might need the telegram to show the clerk in order to be able to make a charge.

I don't have a cite for that, so it's a FOAF story, but the FOAFs are my grandmothers and great-aunts.

So a woman could have sent a telegram for that reason, and the word "permission" might not be a reflection of their relationship, but of the times.

Not that any of that demonstrates the story as true, but I think it's at least plausible. It's not like the woman found out the next day she was dying, so Jesus went to the store and bought whatever it was for her, and by the time the husband got home, she was already dead, causing the husband to realize he was an asshat, so he started an orphanage, and also invented direct dial long distance, because he couldn't stand to look at telegrams anymore.

[Avril]

Ah, but from what I can tell, it is sometimes presented as a far glurgier story. I found it in a late 2009 sermon here, for example:

Years ago, before cell phones and emails, a wife wanted to make a big purchase. Her husband was traveling overseas on business so she sent him a telegram about a diamond she wanted to buy. In the telegram, she raved about the beauty of the diamond and said how it would make her very happy, trying to do everything to convince him to okay the purchase. At the end of the telegram she mentioned that the gem cost $75,000. He sent a return telegram to her with four simple words that could not possibly be confused: "No, price too high!" When she received the telegram it read: "No price too high!" The telegram company left out the comma after the word "no" and the wife rejoiced in his permission to buy the diamond. But that’s not the end of the story. The husband returned home, discovered the mistake, sued the telegram company and won.

Had gratitude guided that husband’s life, he might have omitted the comma himself, to express his thankfulness for having her in his life – he might have! When we think of expressing ourselves in gratitude for the gift of God’s grace in our lives do we think: "No, price too high!" or "No price too high!"?

I also found it where I believe it originated, in a book called Action Grammar: Fast, No-Hassle Answers on Everyday Usage and Punctuation, published in 1995. Google books has it here. The story in Action Grammar is somewhat less glurgified, but here you are:

A woman went to Europe and decided to buy a fabulous necklace. She sent a telegram to her husband describing the price and asking if the price was too high. He responded by fax: NO PRICE TOO HIGH. Delighted, she bought it. Only after he saw the necklace did he realize he'd left out the comma after no: NO, PRICE TOO HIGH.

It does not appear to be presented as a factual story, but rather an illustrative anecdote. Note that in this case he sends a fax; this puts the story at a time when people had telephones (obviously).

[Avril]

Of course I have spoken too soon! I found a reference in a 1919 grammar text, Modern Punctuation: Its Utilities and Conventions, though it leaves out the wife and her penchant for jewelry. Here it is presented as "the classic case of the telegram 'No. Price too high," which was delivered in the form "No price too high," with expensive results..."