THE CEMENT INQUIRY.

Taranaki Daily News, 5 November 1921, Page 4

THE CEMENT INQUIRY.

FURTHER EVIDENCE HEARD. BOARD OF TRADE’S CASE. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Nov. 4. The cement inquiry was resumed toExamined by the Solicitor-General, Mr. McDonald, chairman of the Bo&rd of Trade, said the cement ehortage was acute as far back as July, 1920. It increased to a crisis in December, remained acute in January and laeted until February or March, 1921. It was no exaggeration to say that cement was being distributed in Wellington in bucketsful and Wanganui and Taranaki were in bad positions. In March, in response to urgent requests, a shipment of 1500 tons was made to Wanganui, but the order was cancelled because only 50 tons could be paid for. The same sort of thing occurred all over New Zealand and control was abolished. The only reason for this was a financial slump due to the inability of people to get the money needed. Mr. McDonald, cross-examined by Mr. Myers, said that during the control period New Zealand cement was selling at from £5 to £lO cheaper than imported. The public would have no right to complain if manufacturers had based their charges on the world’s prices, but they would have complained. The Board of Trade, in investigating the cement industry was freely given the fullest information by the companies. The board was practically in the position of managing director of the companies, so far as information was concerned. There was not a shadow of doubt. that the companies had played the gams fairly with the Government -and the public. The board had "not included the Milburn Company in the investigations, the chief reason being that it was not exclusively producing cement. Wellington, Last Night. Mr. McDonald, chairman of the Board of Trade, continuing his evidence, instanced the great shortage of cement at the time tjie agreement was arrived at between the companies. There was not a shadow'of doubt that the companies had played the game fairly with the New Zealand Government and the New Zealand public. The board was only empowered under the Act to suppress monopolies detrimental to the public welfare. As the time of the agreement the Golden Bay Company was in the worst financial position and had to be given a price to induce them to go on producing. He disagreed that the agreement between the companies was in restraint of trade.

The commission adjourned till Monday.