THE MILLING INDUSTRY.

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18219, 1 November 1924, Page 10

THE MILLING INDUSTRY.

♦— — r t ;<i ALLEGED RESTRAINT ($ TRADE. EVIDENCE FOR THE CROWN, (PRESS ASSOCIATION- TKLEGiUf) I * Dt. XLDIX, October 31, Tho frown cvitlonc o was the flourmilliug case. Francis Joseph Campbell, swretary i.f tho Mnsti'r Bakers' Associate s,ato ' l hlf f.xpeneneo was that, was -rent, dissatisfaction with tho w»* tho (.aerations of I>istributors Lindtrf affected the trade. The two main plaints were the diflU-ulty of gettijtf the brands desired a;ul the poor quia, ity of the flour supplied. Tho at*tj. meat in the letter from Distributor Limited that linkers should be if the orders wore pinoed before % first of the mouth covered a workablj plan if Distributors, Limited, eariiet it out, but they sheltered behind ttt : phrase "If tho flour was available. 1 * Jn answer to the Judge, the witness said there was no question of a quota. They were assured by Mr McDonald that if orders were in by tho first of the mouth ihey would get the flour n. quired. ' His Honour said tho wliolo point\rj« whether it was in the public interest that a baker should be required to t»k» flour he did not. want. George William ten, advising officer in the of Industries and Commercer«tfd ho had held that position since 1920, He held the degree of Master t#f Qommcrctf of tho University of Xow Zealand, and had studied economies. Ho was «, qualified accountant. In his wotk he had boen constantly in tOTMSx wity the eeonomie position in New Zealand. Since his appointment, in 1920 ho had i been in touch with the movements of wheat and flour. It. was tho duty of his Department to wateli tho public interest in the matter of prices and methods of distribution, and also to do whatever it eould to assist industry and trade. ITo put in statistics aad particulars of all mills within Distribtt- 1 tors, Limited, and also of all thoM outside the combine. After giving,' tho history of wheat control, witness* said that in March, 1923, with Mr ■ Schmitt and Mr Collins, ho lia,d wet a body of millers and their executive officers. Mr John Keunie (managing; director for Messrs Fleming and Co r and chairman of directors of Distributors, Limited at tho time), was in thb chair, and ho explained that witnew and his colleagues were not mootiqjf Distributors, Limited. It was undffls ' stood that they were meoting a nil# bcr of flourmillers and their cxceutivfc officers. They we'ro told that an agrefjment had been mado between tlifc millers and the representatives of the wheatgrowors. Witness understood that some millers did not 6ign tb« agreement.. Ho did not yfood Bros, had signed it, but ho bdlitSYel that they complied with its terms. Witness and his colleagues had a diseussiou with millers, to whom they submitted figures showing what they considered to be the cost of producing , flour, bran, and pollard, and they wore told that tho prices could not be reduced, aa an agreement had been signed. The milltfrs indicated that it would be impossible to secure the Tfl- * scinding of tho agreement if the D#« partment insisted ou a reduction in t&£ , prices of flour, bran, and pollard. After retiring from tho meeting, wit* J ness and his colleagues went back, and made a brief statement as to tho position in which they found themselves. They stated that they could not tafce tho responsibility of (confirming <fce prices that had been fixed, and that they would refer tho matter back to Ministers of the Crown for consideration. Tho question ivas referred to tho Minister of Agriculture to decide whether the embargo was to bo continued or not, and he decided to continue the embargo. The Wheat Board was still in existence, but it had bo legal status. Prior to the formation of Distributors, Limited, tho price of Oamaru flour was regulated by tse price of Dunedin flour. About onethird of the flour produced would bo sold in small bags. On Juno SOth, 1922, a circular was sent by witnesses Department to flourmillers. _ ' To Mr He recognised that it was wise to encourage the production of wheat in New Zealand. Jt was desirable that in this matter tho country should bo self-dependent. Ho thought that would bo the main reason for the tariff against wheat. He did not know that bakers thought it worth their "while to assist in briugiag about tho combination of millers. : In tho course ctf his cross-examina-tion Mr Skerrctt remarked that ljo was content to leave the deductions from witness's answer to his Honour or anyone who was not an economist. His Honour (smilingly): How do you know I am not an economist, Mr ■ Skerrctt? Mr Skc'rrott: I assume that in your Honour's favour. At best, it is a dismal science. Continuing, witness said he agretJtt that tho Minister of Agriculture and ... the Board of Trade were concerned with tho prospects of the wheat-grow-ing industry in New Zealand for the ensuing year. The Government atyl Board of Trade, at tho end of last year, concerned themselves in tSe. agreement between tho wlieatgrowe|B and the millowners only in the matter of price. The Minister of Agriculr turo was concerned in ail matters affecting the agriculture of the Dominion. Witness maintained that in the beginning of 3922 there was no immediate danger to the wheat-growing industry of New Zealand. Ho did not consider that the Minister and the Boayd of Trade had intervened. At 5.30 p.m. the Court ad,journed»wU 10 o'clock to-morrow morning, FV (special to "tbi rmss.") * An interesting calculation is the amount that each day of tho case of the Crown against the Distributors, Limited, and others in the .Supreme Court represents to the parties engaged. Given nine lawyers, including three King's Counsel, it is not difficult to conclude that the legal expenses will represent a sum that alone wonld be quite acceptable as a Christmas present. Then there, are fifty-two witnesses to be reckoned with, not to mention various heads of Government Departments. There will be twenty witnesses from the north.