The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 1920. SCOTCHING THE PROFITEER.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3471, 27 April 1920, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE.

TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 1920. SCOTCHING THE PROFITEER.

With which is incorporated “The Taihape Post and Waimarino News.” '

,_ W'hile the New Zenmud Govern-:nenr_ {is surrounded by profiteers who clam- , our to know what ‘the Board hf Trade ‘will consider fair profits, the British IGovernment has settled the question, ‘not only by proclamations and orders under War Legislation, but also by a.n I‘ Indemnity Act, freeing“ them “from all irritating legal action to have what are lrtermed '-the_- “Blue, Book” rates set J aside. The__’Blue Book‘ rates constitute , :1‘ statement of what is legally and I morally the rightcourse to follow in ipricemiaking, ‘leaving no ambiguity, .'no doubt,”an'd nopossible divergence of I the well-worn custom of adding a reasonable percentage 3on cost. The British authorities found that if the demands of hungry profiteers were to be met, nothing less than $700,000,000 would have to be .paid over and above a just and fair profit. It certainly does not stand highly to the credit of shipping that shipowners would ‘have taken some £400,000,000_ of the amount sdught to be extorted if Government had not oiice for ‘all shaken Ithe sharks.,oif with the Measure that 'makes the Blue_ Book rates like the ilaws of the Medes and Persians un- , alterable. All eflorts to establish artificial prices with the passing of the Indemnity Bill will be futile, as it puts all artificial price-makers out of Court, barring profiteers of the future as wellas those: of the past, from practicing the trickery by which they would take away the stamina and the, life blood of the people. This great” saving measure is to be limited in itsi operations by the furthest bounds of‘ Empire, leaving out only those Dominions who have self-government, and] who, states the message received, may! pass their own Indemnity Bill. So far as present. intelligence indicates, the Bill is only applicable to what. afi"ects the Government; no provision is mentioned of the Bill’s application to trading with His Majesty’~s subjects, other than His Ma.jesty’s Government, but it is unthinkable that any course of common honesty forced upon those trading with His Z\lajesty’s Govern-i ment, will not be equally applied by Profiteering Commissions and Boardsi of Trade to trading with His M3tl€Sl~y’S subjects. Under any circumstances, the Bill leaves Boards of Trade in no doubt about what constitutes a fair price, and that no man is honest who demands hundreds per cent because of his having cunningly engineered a shortage, while there need have been no shortage. Shortage can no longer be a decent pretext for huge profits; the Bill definitely lays down that profits are to be based on cost, plus a reasonable profit. However Stlallge it may seem that traders should demand to assess their profit in any other Way, it is undeniably true that they have done so, and are still levying llllT.‘dl‘odS per cent by nefarious methods. It is too well known to need mentioning that even the Premier in and out of Parliament has, time and again. accused the profitecr who hasl been able to establish an idea of, shortage, but the most outrageous pretext for profiteering is that of th(} men (*3) who insist that the fair price of commodities has nothing whatever ‘fo (10 With cost, but should be based on whatever their very elastic consciences decide it may cost to replace them. If an article costing one penny would, in their estimation, cost a pound

i to replace in stock, traders think that l they are justly entitled to ilenrandiihe pound. When questioned, they have {the audacity to say that unless they 1' did so they would not have enough I capital to carry on their business. They ' practise this two-headed penny trick ‘on the people with amazing daring and impudenoe, laws made for protecltion of the people notwithstanding. They had no more right under the law to take a pound for a -shilling"s worth by fraudulent misrepresentation than they would have to take a pound out let? a man ’s pocket by force, replacing it with. a shilling, and yet this has actually been permitted by the law; Government, ‘Commissions, and Boards see no way of stopping such robbery, because, they say, it is impossible to-de.t'el-mino what is a fair profit. The British Goverfiment estimates‘ that if it were compelled to pay such artificial market prices for goods and shipping during the war, instead of on the basis ‘of cost. plus in reasonable profit, which has been the wholesome custom in the past, it would have to pay out to the trading leeches another £700,000,000. When one tries to imagine what has been taken from the people ofthis Dominion by artificial market pricemaking, the sum looms appallingly large, it runs- into hundreds of millions, and yet an elastic law permits such robbery to continue, breeding inidustrial unrest, and incurring the risk [of revolution. Whatever difiiculty may have been experienced by the Board -of Trade and the Government in ldeter-mining what is ,2. fair market {price in the past that difliculty is now removed by the passing of a Bill which states that artificial market prices are wrong, stherefore illegal, and Government must not be irritated by attempts to drive profiteering coaches and ships through its legislative acts. The Act applies to the Whole Empire excepting the self-gfierning Dominions, states the message received on Saturday, and it significently adds, “‘Self—govel-ning Dominiens may pass their own. Measure.” They may, or they may not, suggests the cablegram, but those under disabilities, !those from ‘whom hundreds of millions have alreadybcen dsihonestly taken by an artificially boosted cost of living, which has "condemned themtofa. ‘linger-‘ ing existence, noW:4lla.ve.f-thcx whole British Einpire, except s'elf:'-gov'erlling‘x Dominions, ‘backing“til:e'm. in demanding abolition of7ari’i‘fieia.l market price-making, if not in demanding restitution of that they have admittedly been robbed of during the war period. The .British Act is retrospective, why not make that this Dominion may pass l retrospctive also, putting ' profits, whether paid by Government or people, on a precisely. similar basis Of course, the British Government, as well as the New Zealand Government, had lallowed itself to become entangled in a labyrinth of profiteering, lost in a. maze of extortion. a position £0 impossible that no other way out than forcing the barriers and killing the 013- l tprcssors remained pra_ct_icable. It willl L be remembered that this journal, a few jdays ago, denouncedfithe -system of,‘ spying andvinforming which the New Zealand Government had set up,‘_.as being useless and an insult to robbed people. We pointed out that refer‘ ence to invoices would render profi~ teering committees unnecessary, and! that profits should be based on im*oices l from importer and inanufacturor to] consumer.‘ Now, this is almost pre-,’ cisely what the British Parliament has made into law. opel'a'~tting oven‘ dtlrel whole Empire. and they assume that] New Zcaland will pass a similar law at once. As a matter‘ of fact, the British. Measure renders a New Zealand l\[c-asure of a similar character} necessary, for nobody would sell to] Britain at a market price based on cost, so long as nlatrkets were availablo in which an orgy of profiteering still .prevaiied. ,Furthel', nobody will sell to Government unless the some system of market: price—.making was applied in a. general way, to private, as well as to Government purchases. Plainly, notice has been given to pro? litFbol's tliat they must quit their nefarious schemes ‘for getting rich quick.l_ that they must return to the 01d.,l honest way of living—-live and let live.