The Dominion. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1910. ANTI-TRUST BILL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 953, 21 October 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1910. ANTI-TRUST BILL.

The Commercial Trusts Bill, which passed' its second reading last evening in the Houso of is described as an "Act for the repression of monopolies in trade, or commerce." Legislation of this nature will naturally mtiet' with very general support'' where it can be shown that the monopolies proposed to be attacked are injurious to the public. The difficulty, is to so frame such legislation as to serve the purpose, aimed at without 'unfairly harassing trade and discouraging' commercial enterprise. In the Bill introduced by the Peime Minister there are obvious weaknesses, but Sir Joseph Ward is entitled to credit for his attempt to deal with, the subject, more especially in view of the circumstantial stories which have been in circulation for a'considerable time concerning a threatened invasion of an American Meat Trust. t New Zealand cannot afford to have its great meat industry fall under the control of a foreign combination which could eventually exploit the farmers of the country at its; leisure, We cannot say that we. regard, this contingency as at all imminent, but the possibility has already given rise to anxiety here and elsewhere. The clause of the Bill now before Parliament which defines what shall be considered to be a "commercial trust" 1 has apparently been drafted 1 to cover as wide a scope as possible. It reads/as follows: , ■ ' . ■ : ;,.

(1) In this Act,.'unless the contrary intention '.': appears, "ooaimeroial,; " trust" means any association pr',:combination (whether incorporated or not) of any number of persons established either .before or.after, the,commencement, of this Act, and cither', in ~Ne\v Zealand or elsewhere,, and ' , .; •.■■•■ :

(a) Having as its object or. as one of its'objects that of (i) controlling,, determining, oi influencing the supply, or domand, or price of. any .'goods; in New. Zealand or any part thereof, or■':elsewhere; or that of (ii) creating or maintaining in : New Zealand ;or ' ■ any. part thereof, ; or, . elsewhere, 'a .monopoly, whether, complete or partial, ,in the' sup-, ply or demand of any goo'dsj or '••.■• ■■'.■

:• (b) Acting in New . Zealand'. or elsewhere with any such object aS'aforesaid; and ; , inchides any firm or incorporated ■ company haying. aDy suoh ..bbjeot, or "apt-; ing as aforesaid. ■ , •' ' .

The goods to which the Act applies are: /Agricultural: implements, coal, meat, flour and/oatmeal, and the other by-products of the milling of wheat and oats,. petroleum, or; .other mineral oil. (including kerosene, naphtha, ; etc.),, sugar,' and tobacco (including : cigars' and : , cigarettes).', This.is a ; fairly; wide ...order, and' should'. it &i' any: time be' found necessary ;: t6 : extend the list, this, of course, ;coiild be done. ; ' •;•■■■"■•■■•■•■ ■ ;■-;

; On" , reading" the'., •interpretation clause c[uoted.above it;will /immediately, be ".seen that 'the powers given ;under : the Act v 'are to be ex-' tended to the operation's .'of Trusts J outside Now , '. Zealand;': How, it-is prpposed.-'to ■:■ exercise ' tho provision , of. ; the'Act' outside New Zealand is not clear. -Presumably it means that Trusts outside , New.:Zealand'.' which attempt to establish .monopolies in . this country. will come under ;• the law j but; if. this is what is intended the drafting of the Bill \viH ; require' camondnient. During. .discussion last.evening it was made ...very., , clear', that in the New Zealand House : of jßopresentatives,, as elsewhere, many 'people, have', extremely crude ideas as to'what constitutes > a monopoly in tho objectionable -sense; A 'combination ; of ; .businesses -.for . .the cheaper: production or manufacture of gobds.'mjty'have a ; most beneficent ,the .public , are'.concerned:-:■ The ::combihatibn may be productive.of larger profits to those engagedv in. thej; particular business concerned) , .but that, increased'profit isi, iot' necessarily" : made',at ' the expense ; of'•■• the - consumer. It: may: be . attained as the ; .resulfTof greater economy in working; the : elimination of waste rendered possible by centralising tho manage- , ment._ Atleastone member appeared to think that, if a : business', man' earned above a certain ■' percentage ofprofit he became thereby a monopolist- and should be> ; brought: under': the;provisiona of the Bill. This, 'of course, is very.absurd; but it.'.is"alsoi a verydangorous idea to get abroad. Success in , business is very largely , dependent on skill in management, and a firm which .sells its goods to the public at a lower.price than its competitors may yet pay a' bigger dividend to its proprietors than is its rivals. At the present time those.: having capital to invest are;very shy of risking it in industrial undertakings in New Zealand, 1 not-because they have :any: doubt as to.the resources,'of the.- country, but because of the feeling of uneasiness whicß has -''been., created by the unceasing attacks on capital and those associated, with it. .Therefore,it is desirable to point out the danger underlying the expression of such foolish ideas as that recorded in connection with the Bill under -discus-. , sioni It is worthy of note that the Trust Act in force. in the: Commonwealth' of Australia is now;: being tested very thoroughly in the prosecution of the colliery owners, who have combined for mutual protection and trade purposes. The statement was published recently that the pro-, sedition was to be abandoned owing to the Act having proved defective. This,•• however, has since been officially contradicted, and the case is to be pressed on with. Under the test of actual enforcement'such legislation is always liable to, be found, defective and it will probably bo some time before, a thoroughly sound and equitable measure is placed on the Statute Book. - ; ; . : , : n -i-