Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

COAL DEALERS

j. / ! : -b’ A TRUST CHARGE.

DEFENDANTS FINED.

PALMERSTON NORTH’, Nov. 3

; An action under the Comihereihl Trusts Act was brought in thfe Supreme Court to-day. Various specific acts * that are frequently taken fto achieve a combination or a monopo.y are prohibited by this. Act, 1 under heavy penalties.; ■ In the present case, a cool dealer, named. For no, was refused a supply of coal by the defendans, except at a price higher than'that which defendants charged to other traders, the : reason being that’ Foino is - not a jnember of the . Coal Merchants’ Association/ which had, as one of its objects, the control 1 of the retail selling; price■ of coal; • ‘ 1 " '' >*'

Tlie defendants were Wm. Pnklowski, Harry Tuson, Walter Ruchanau. Edward George Child, Wm. James Child, Edward Waler Child, of Palmerston North City Coal Merchants’ Association, and the Pukemiro Collie"ies -Ltd; ' •V'*.- ‘'.vv-rV ■ /' •

. The Grown Prosecutor pointed out that if the whole of the coal dealers became members of' the Association, it was q bite -clear that there would be'i a- -tendency* for 5 them to consider their” own interests exclusively/ and for the public to suffer. ■ iT-he defendants’ were charged, counsel stated, wth refusing-to) selFcoaf to Porno, except' under disadvantageous conditions, for the reason that he was. not a member of their » Association,; terms being that Forno was. required to pay ten shillings l ppr ton more for his coal than was charged'to the Association, members, .Counsel added that, so far, as the Pukemird Collieries were concerned, .all ! of #ie -Waikato Coal Companies - were: associated, and the Pukemiro Coy; was made a. defendant because -it -that/it also had, committed an offence by. directly ref using; to-supply Forno.

All of the defendants : admitted tho offence/ they agreed to accept tile following penalties, subject to the Court’s approval, which was given: Pulowski, £2O; Coal Merchants’ Association, £SO: costs were allocated at* follows: Pukemiro Coy. £25, phis half disbursements ; the other defendants £25, plus half of the "disbifrsemen'tb.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19321105.2.53

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 5 November 1932, Page 8

Word count
Tapeke kupu
328

COAL DEALERS Hokitika Guardian, 5 November 1932, Page 8

COAL DEALERS Hokitika Guardian, 5 November 1932, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert