THE BAKER AND THE MILLER

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 33, 3 November 1919, Page 5

THE BAKER AND THE MILLER

BEHIND THE SCENES IN THE BREAD BUSINESS "CAR-GEAR" TACTICS During the hearing of evidence in Melbourne relating 16 tho price of bread last week, the Jligh Prices Commission evinced- considerable .interest in "a sort of a bond" demanded of certain bakers by tho .(Jar Clear Committee, which comprises representatives of the Flour Miliars and Master Bakers' Association, but is not, according to Mr. lCirtou. (secretary of tho latter association) officially attached to either 'association. Georgo Broadway, baker, lootscray, Fnid ho "had some trouble" about three months ;igo, when M'LiMinan, his miller, threatened to stop his supply of flour., Tho Mailer linkers' Association had ft law, it appeared, that no. baker was allowed to tako on new wholesale trade. He had to pay .£lO to the other baker, Steven, who lost the wholesale trade in question. Witness was not a member of tho Master Bakers' Association. The chairman (Sir J. W. M'Cay): Who asked vou to pav the .C 10? Witness: Mr. Kirton, the secretary of tho Master Bakers' Association. AW. two months sign,- witness added, the J-lw was refunded. Invited to step up to tjje witness s table. Mr. Kirton, secretary of the .Master Bakers' Association, said there wis '•'an element ol truth" in what Broadway had said. Tho 4110. die explained was "a sort of a bond." Witness had-nothing to do with it. ' . Tho chairman: Did you collect tno Witness: I beiievo Mr. Broadway a cheque for the amount. Did you ask him to send the cheque. —I ani not awaro, that I did. Did' your office notify him to product',£lo?—Witness said ho could not v answer that offlmnd. Ho would prefer time to look up the case. ' Do'you suggest that Mr. Broadway sent vott JSIO spontaneously?—'No; he must have had some intimation. The cheque, witness said, eanic to his oOice, and was subsequently refunded.. That was- probably four months ago. . In reply to questions, witness explained that the .£lO would be 'a sort of a bond" for fair trading. The asso-,, ciation desired, that no baker should take, on anv new wholesale trade, buKSl'fl who had bought into such trades were entitled to be bought out. _■ The 'cha ; vmau:- Your association, f&r as it has power, forbids a baker taking any other baker's customers, even at tho prescribed price? Witness: That is so, The purposo. T/ras to prevent, i baker from unfairlycutting into another's trade by means oi a lower price. ••• Jfr. Broadway, recalled, said he aid not quote a lower price for the ■whole* sals trade -in question. The customer sent for him and 'asked him to servo him. : Mr. Kirton, recalled at this stage, said the reason the money wns refunded to Broadway was that when the increased jjiico of bread was contemplated, Broadv. ay declined to fall into line unle« ho got a refund. Tho chairman: Were you surprised? Witness: Not altogether. The chairman (irouirally): Tor Ihe moment I cannot understand what insti. fication there was for collecting this -CIO —from a man''who did not belong to tho association—on behalf of a purely voluntary association that uses only moral suasion on its own membern. Witness insisted that tho bonds were collected only to ensure fair trailing. Tim practice, fie explained, had been discontinued since the Civil Service test case. Mr. Williams: Tour real purpose is to prevent a new man starting a business ■without buying out one of the businesses already in existence? » Mr. _Kirton: Jn resiiect of wholesalo trade already bought, yes. The .chairman: Why should a wholesale customer not he nt'libert.v to changc liis baker if ho choose? Been pro one baker has bought out'another 'baker, is that any reason why a customer should be bound to iiim for ever? Witness: To yon, as a layman, Mr. Chairman, it may seem a .littln arbitrary, but I can assure you it is quite just. The chairmay: Thank you.