The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 1920. SENSATIONAL PROFITEERING REVELATIONS.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3393, 26 January 1920, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE

MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 1920. SENSATIONAL PROFITEERING REVELATIONS.

With which its incornoratuxl “The Taihape Post and Waimarino Newe.”

During the past week some of the evidence upon wllich~General Smuts based his statement that profiteering was the gravest problem the British Empire has to deal with, has come to’ hand. To say that it is sensational gives -but a limited conception of its seriousness; it is on the border-line of being past conception; it is of so inhuman an-d outrageoulsl a nature that it is scarcely believable——in fact, it may reasonably, indeed, be asked, is it true’? Already the profiteering class have characterised it as utterly impossible; the old reptilian lie that has been practised for over six thou-I ‘scand years at least, is still the stock‘ method of the descendants of the pro— ‘ fiteer of Eden_ A Mr. Shackleford, of‘ ‘Auckland, just returned from Britain, asks, is it true?. Then answers, lhimself by saying it cannot be true.‘ ’lt seemed to us that in transmission” lthere may have been some mistake about the figures, but as the report, was duplicated——sent separately from, |two different sources, and by two elif I ferent cable routes, is not only against any error in transmission, but also that the astounding facts are as the cablegram stated them to be. Human nature, or human ‘greed, will make it easy for New Zealanders to believe lsome portion of those sensational dis‘closures, we refer to that part which lstates that the British Government ‘has made profits out of Australian [wool running into some seventy milllions of pounds sterling. Indeed, the [Director-General of Raw Materials oflicially admits that “the British Go-A vernment is selling woo] from Australia and New Zealand at profits running into many millions” But he ladds, “the Dominions understood this iwould be done after the —war, and thatl lthey were to receive half the profits.”l Who made this stupidly loose ar:l rangement with the Imperial Govern.‘ ment on behalf of New Zealand far-1 mers? Did farmers really agree to‘l such an arrangement, or now that the lwhole thing has come to light, are!‘ lfarmers to -be-placated by receiveing} ‘something by way of a nest-egg they' knew nothing about? Will New Zea-1 ‘land farmers ‘be asked to take what {the authorities here and in England ‘like to give them, in place of theirl right as discovered by an exhaustive‘ ‘inV9Stig3’oioll by untrammelled ac‘ Dcountants? From the figures: quoted, there should be something a.ppl~oxim-{‘ ating twenty millions of pounds due, to New Zealanders, more or less, on‘ the Sale of ‘their “"001; ‘by what moral right, by what standard of ethics does the British Government claim half the profits? Truly, amongst the most disastrous results of war is that it has left a veritable plague of thieves and Drofiteers to prey upon those who were not killed in the fighting. The Director-General of Raw Materials emphasised the fact that New‘Zea.land farmers were treated worse than native Indians and Egyptians", Worse than British and South African farmers, all of whom were getting top market prices without sharing their , Profits with the Government, and this Director-General of Raw Matepia.l‘S now declares that the British Government would be guilty of a great “breach of -faith unless New Zealand wool growers had every penny of the benefit of the

rise in prices prorhptly handed over to them. Farmers will understand that this is the cabled opinion of no less a personage than the Director-General of Raw Materials in Britain. Farmers are justly ‘entitled to Know who made such arrangements with the British Government which virtually were to rob them of some fifteen to twenty -millions of money, perhaps more. What has the High Commissioner for this country been doing that lie did not apprise farnners of what was takingplace‘? And what was the object of the New Zealand Government in not letting farmers and people into the s-eeret of what stupendous robbery was in process in connection with the marketing of wool‘? What had become of the “scfuarg rlenl" prirrciplve. so much vaunted? We can only conclude that it was a part of the reptilian camouflage to blind farmers and people to the fact that they had been specially set aside from all other farmers of the Empire—— black as well as \\.'hite--«to be made the I subjects of the most bold and outrageous orgy of profiteering. Even thel Di-rector-General of R-aw. Mater-ial-s" conscience was not elastic enough to permit him to see such robbery and not raise a voice against it, he said, “the Imperial Government will be ,committing a great breach of faith unless, Australasia now gets the benefit of the rise in the price of wool.” This country is, indeed, in the llftllds of Philistines, for farmers are at »a. loss to know where to leek for redress. In. 'Britain, South, Africa. India, Egypt,’ and other parts of the Empire there ’was a. Government who saw that the [people and farmers of their respective ‘ countries were not exploited, nnd'they got a square deal in the shape of ourt rent market prices;‘not so in New Zealand. Governrnent in Britain has been forced into limiting the consciencelcss greed of profiteers. and profiteers have retaliated by -disclosing that the poople’s government is no better than tliemselves, and between them they have created “ the gravest problem the Empire has to contend with.” Returning to the sensational disclosures: we had cabled out two separate reports, and in the main facts both reports were in complete accord. A Mr MacKintler, -; Yorkshire warehouseman, reporting on the result of the Ofl‘ic‘i-al Sub-Commi-«ttee’s investigations into the cost of standard counts of yarns, said the profits now made ranged from -100 to 3000 per cent beyond the War Ofiice’s former allowance. quoting spinners’ own figures in every instance. Is it any wonder that the Central Pro- I fiteering Committee gasped with aston/islnnent‘? The profitecring lie was out, I land spinners stood convicted on their own figures; on their own figures and accounts spinners were convicted of profitec-ring to the extent of from 400 to 3000 per cent over and above what i the War Office allowed. Let us be re:a- ! sonable. people, and ask ourselves whether the British Empire is not ruledl by the greatest humbugs on earth,‘ while it would bring to "trial and pun- I ‘ish the ex—Kai.ser, and at -the same time protect from punishment and molestation such viperousness as that] which makes even a Central Profiteer- 5 'ing Committee stare aghast. ’l‘hel late German Eriipcror is a , criminal by virture of enginccringl a war that resulted in the death ofi millions, but is he a greater criminall ,than the men who -are causing thcl death of millions more by -a. process of ; starvation, by making clothing and food, the two most. essential things to human life, impossible to obtain. Truth will out, and it will soon be comlmon knowledge that many millipons 0f I tons of clothing and food are yet Slored iaway, limiting supply by artifice ‘CO create an abnormal demand, so that spinners of New Zealand wool may grab from 400 to 3000 per 001112 mol’o than the War Ofiico allowed them, and that meat monopolisis nright starve distracted peoples to keep up ‘E-hi’ guilty system of extortion. It is pl'CClio’Co(l that when the public of B’-ritaill 10a1‘l1 lthe truth about the Accountants’ Inlvestigation of the criminal wool farago, there will be “violent.” eXpTeS‘sion of indignation, and who Will be responsible for such violence? The other account states that When the public know the facts there will arise la howl of execration, and it is added, i that which is happening with wool is also happening with cotton and metalsWhat will New Zealand farmers do about the millions that the DirectorGeneral of Raw IVI-aicrials asserts are due to them? They have a just claim for the difference betvseen fourteenpence and sixtyperrce. per pound at least for their wool. and lot it not be forgotten that this claim holds good for the wool sold for New Zcaland manufacture, as prices here for manufflCllll'£‘d Woollens are no less extreme uthan they are in Britain. The huge I per cen-tagc of profit cabled is, according -to 'the cabled niessages, levied lon the cost of the wool, but there is a. possibility that cablemen have erred, and that additional to what the War Office allowed, is calculated upon a per. centagc upon tliC' overplu-3. as compound intr.-rest is calculated. There is, however, nothing to indicate this. the messages are clear, they state that spinners am} others are taking from 400 to 3000 percent above. and beyond what the War Office stipulated. In

addition to this, the 'GrOVel-nnxent is xnaking colossal profits. Truly the world is in a maelstrom of profiteering, in which the masses of the people are compelled to give Trom 400 to 3000 per cent more of their labour to purchase than fair profit Warrant. During the recent election campaign -some candidates claimed thet their party had enacted the most. far-reaching antiprofiteering law of any country in The world. What‘ has become of that measure‘?