ANTI-TRUST BILL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1626, 14 December 1905, Page 2

ANTI-TRUST BILL.

‘FIGHT OYER THE FISCAL QUESTION.

By telegraph, Press A'ss’n, Copyright | Sydney, Deo 13. The Daily Telegraph declares that the Anti-Trust Bill audaciously provides a short cut to the most extreme and oppressive protection. Melbourne, Dec. 13. The Anti-Trust Bill defines lower remuneration as less pay or longer hours, or any terms or conditions of labor more disadvantageous to the worker. Imported goods include all parts or ingredients of goods. Trade means production of any kind. Unfair competition includes “if competition would, probably, or does result in greatly disorganising Australian industry or throwing workers out of employment ; if imported goods have been purchased abroad at prices greatly below their ordinary cost of productions where produced or below market price where purchased ; if goods are being sold in Australia at a price less than gives the importer or seller a fair profit upon a fair foreign market value or cost of production, together with all charges (after shipment from whence exported directly to Australia ; if any importerjjor seller directly or indirectly gives agents or intermediaries disproportionately large remuneration for selling or recommending goods.” Provision is mado that any person who monopolises, attempts, or combines to monopolise any part of trade amongst several States or with other countries, with a desire to control to the detriment of the public the supply or price of any merchandise or commodity he becomes liable to a penalty of £SOO or two months’ imprisonment. Anyone aiding or abetting a contravention of the Act is held equally guilty and equally punishable with the controveners. The Board of Investigation is invested with powers equivalent to those of a Royal Commission. Sir W. Lyne claims the Anti-Trust Bill is not nearly so drastic as the American Bill, which has been largely followed in a modified form. Mr Watson generally approves of tho measure. Mr Cook, deputy leader of tho Opposition, [says the Bill is the hottest dose Australian trades unions have yet administered. It is not a proposal regulating competition, but preventing it. It may seek to repress trusts, but if it does it will be by impressing trade. It goes far beyond the dream of moderate Protectionists.

Received 11,3 p.m., Deo. 13. . Melbourne, Dee. 13. Bit william Lyiie, in moving the second reading of the Anti-Trust Bill, said that every effort should bo undo to preserve our industries. If justification needed for the introduction of the Bill it was found in the experience of the United States in the operation of trusts. He quote! the American SSook Journal to show the systom adopted by the Harvesters' Trust to crush opposition. There was an urgent necessity to do something to oope with the Harvester Trust. When they found a fore gn firm dumping goods into Aurralia with the express purpose of killing industries it was time for something to ‘bo done. Anyone who did not take action was not worthy of the name of “ Australian.” They ought to be ca'led “ Little Australian?.” Under the Bill a trust was net a firm or an individual. There ha! to bo combination. Shipping Companies would not be affic'ed unless they joined in a monopoly with a joint board to control Iho whole of their Bbips and direct what freight should be oharged to the inquiry of the public. Government did not wish anything to bo done which would cause au internal monopoly and increase prices. Already, owing to his action, the price of harvesters had been reduced. The Bill only dealt with foreign and inter-Stato trade ; that confined to one State did not come within its scope. The interests of producers, workorp, and consumers were nil considered. It was neccs ; a'-y that persons should wilfully engage in a combination or monopolies before tboy were affrcted by the Bill. He commonded it to every section of the coin'munity. On the motiou cf Mr Cook, the dobato was adjourned until to-morrow.