CHAIN STORES INQUIRY

Evening Star, Issue 22452, 24 September 1936, Page 16

CHAIN STORES INQUIRY

THE EVIDENCE DIFFICULTY FEAR OF VICTIMISATION ALLEGED [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, September 23. Tbe chain stores inquiry was continued by the Industries and Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives to-day. Mr G. Watson, who is appearing for a group of department stores, said he had received from tho Wellington Federation of Buyers a letter asking to have their name withdrawn from the petition" presented by Mr Wylie. The letter stated that many storekeepers had signed the petition under an entire misapprehension and now wished to withdraw their support. Mr Wylie, in reply, said the petition consisted of only two lines. It was difficult to see how anyone could have signed it under a misapprehension. Some of the people signing had given from one guinea downwards, but the majority had given practically nothing. He considered that 60 per cent, of the business people in New Zealand were lacking in business acumen and business intelligence. He produced a telegram from the Canterbury Master Butchers’ Association to the effect that it was strongly in support of the petition. The Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr Sullivan) : Did you personally get the signatures? Mr Wylie: There were f6ur others besides myself. I called on 300 or <IOO persons. There are many who would come forward before a Royal Commission, but they are afraid to come out now because of victimisation. Mr Sullivan; Why should they not be willing to give before Parliament evidence they would give before a Royal Commission ? Mr Wylie: They are afraid of the publication of the evidence. The Chairman said the committee would not bo satisfied with the evidence until it had had an opportunity of hearing statements from spme of those who had signed the petition. Mr Wvlie replied that he could arrange tliat only if the Press were not present; otherwise it might lead to victimisation. The Chairman said the committee should have before it representatives of the interests that Mr Wylie claimed he had authority to act for } and they should insist on hearing that evidence. Evidence was given on behalf of the Advisory Council of the New Zealand Standards Institute by Mr L. J. M'Donald, who submitted that the protection sought by the owners of individual stores against chain-store competition could be best provided by the progressive application of the principle of standardisation.