FRUIT ON THE WHARVES.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1556, 27 September 1912, Page 3

FRUIT ON THE WHARVES.

ME. BUTLER'S COMPLAINT. At the meeting of the Wellington Harbour Board on Wednesday night Mr. R. Fletcher referred to a short article which appeared in Tub Dominion- of September 12, and which was headed "Fruit Pilfering." In tho article it was said: "Mr. C. D. Butler, representing tho New Zealand Provision ,imd Produce Company, of Christclmr'ch, called at The Dominion Office to call attention to the wholc-salo pilfering of fruit which ho states he saw going on shortly beforo noon on the Quen's Wharf yesterday. Not only were there you'hs and young men standing round about the place in inspection, freely and openly eating tho fruit, and scattering skins of oranges about the wharf, but he declares that he saw some young men go away with baskets of fruit which had been "lifted" fhun the surplusage left after the cases had been emptied and then refilled. No time can be spared to re-pack the case as snugly as originally, and possibly a nuarter of the total of all inspected ca«e disappears, which our informant considers pretty rough on tho grower." In mentioning the matter, Mr. Fletcher said that when be had seen the article ho had thought that it would have been better had Mr. liutlef interviewed the board's secretary or liimself before approaching the press. As it was. Mr. Butler had caused quite a hubbub. As a matter ot fact, pilfering on the wharves had not increased. The fruit, Mr. I'letclier continued, was emptied out of its cases on the floor of the examining slied, inspected, and then could not all be got,. back into the cases. To get this fruit away, some young men had been sent, along to remove it in bags. That, wa= what Mr. Butler had seen. "The press." he added, '"usually make inquiries before Cutting these things in—at least, Ihat is the case, with respectable journals." Mr. Fletcher went on to say that as far as the labourers were concerned, lie thought Hint pilfering liad been reduced absolutely to a minimum. It was slated, also that' the practico was for merchants to sell the fruit for the person to whom it belonged, and that in future the merchants would send along cases in wliicli tho surplus fruit I could b» taken away. I [Mr. Fletcher is mistaken in inferring that no inquiry was made. Tnnuiries were made, and the results were appended to Mr. Butler's statement.]