PRICE OF MILK.

Taranaki Daily News, 6 August 1920, Page 4

PRICE OF MILK.

HALE case dismissed. NO UNDUE PROFIT MADE. At the Magistrate's Court, New Plymouth, yesterday, before Mr. Bailey, S.M., the hearing was resumed of the information against. John Hale, dairyman, of selling milk at 8d per quart, claimed to be an unreasonably high price within the meaning of the Board of Trade Act. Mr. Billing appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Quilliam for the defence. The defendant, John Hale, in evidence, said lie had been dairying for 27 years. At present he had ~>G rows, and the average number milked was from 30- to 36. For three or four years lie had been charging fid per quart. Previous to January he had generally been a penny per quart above the other vendors. In February the latter increased to 7d, and later witness made an increase to Bd. His name had been inserted in the advertisement (notifying the increase to 7d per quart) without his authority. His reasons for increasing the price was the higher cost of producing the crops, in manures, seeds, and labor.' Witness gave particulars of the big increases in the cost of chaff and bran. He stated that this year lie had commenced artificial feeding in February, and it usually continued till the middle of October. The grass could only be relied on for about three months/ Cross-examined by Mr. Billing, witness said he had made up his mind that he would either have to get more for the milk or relinquish the business. He could not produce milk under lOd per quart. E. Griffiths, a member of the council of the New Zealand Jersey Breeders' Association, said Hale had' a herd of pedigree cattle of good type, which was well looked after. From' a dairy point of view there was probably no other herd as big as Hale's that was as good. The tests of the herd were something above the average. Witness was of opinion that at a low estimate it would cost double to produce milk in the winter. There were other disadvantages, including the long hours during the wet and cold weather, which made people reluctant to take up the task. After the conclusion of the evidence for the defence, Mr. Quilliam reviewed various aspects of the case. He submitted that the prosecution had not made out a case, and had even failed to justify the bringing of the prosecution. The testimony of their witnesses was not to file point. The defence had gone to considerable trouble and expense to answer the charge, because if Hale was to be branded, as a profiteer his business would have been affected. Some j doubt hj.d arisen during the ease as to who was responsible for the proceedings. It was a matter of indifference to defendant, but the bringing of such charges at random without inquiry was to be strongly discouraged, seeing that the Board had every power to make investigations, and even to fix the price. In asking for costs, counsel requested that these be given against Johnson, as Courts were reluctant to give costs against Government departments. Hale had received some benefit as the result of the prosecution, as it hid been the means of malting clear his position financially.

Mr. Billing stated in reply that it was a Board of Trade prosecution. Giving his decision, his Worship said t.ho case was different from any others; in these there had been some standard to go on, in the matter of wholesale and retail price, and it had been easy to calculate the profit' made. In' this Instance it seemed on the face of it that the man selling 1 milk at eightpence per quart, while the other vendors were selling at sevenpehee, was making an extortionate profit, providing the other, people could do it at that' rate. The evidence tendered by the prosecution in one case was by a man who bought milk and afterwards retailed it. He had other side-lines in his business and seemed to be making a profit. On the other hand Hale was making about £I4OO in milk in a season, and showed outgoings in expenditure of £InOO. After a long time in investigation there might be found items which were not properly charged, but on the whole the outgoings shown were justified. In this 110 wages were allowed for Hale and no interest on the capital invested. He certainly did not seem to be making any undue profit, in fact the figures showed quite the reverse. It seemed an extraordinary thing that in Taranald, where milk ought to be cheap, it was retailed at a higher price than in other towns, though how vendors there made it pay was doubtful. It would almost pay a dairyman better to supply a factory, where the returns are made according to the quality of the milk. The case was dismissed, his Worship reserving the question of costs for further argument. He expressed the opinion that the Board might have made some further inquiry, and not have gone purely on the fact that- thp defendant sut ue the price of milk.