THE PRICE OF MILK.

Waikato Argus, Volume V, Issue 344, 22 September 1898, Page 4

THE PRICE OF MILK.

TO THK EDITOR. Sib.—With reference to Mr Spragg's circular to the milk suppliers of Waikato, I am unable to follow his statements. In alluding to the higher prices poijd to suppliers in other part* of the colony, he gives as a reason that in some cases one factory receives as much as nine times the quantity dealt with by each of the Waikato creameries. I have before me the report of the year's work of the Tai Tapu Dairy Company (Limited), as printed in the Canterbury Times. It reads as follows : The annual report of the directors, after congratulating the shareholders on the prosperity of' the year juat concluded, announced that the total amount of milk dealt with was 768,599 gallons, ut to the gallon. The price paid for butter was 9d and 5-12ths per lb, which had given suppliers about 4£d per gallon for their output of milk. The refrigerator plant had been completed, and it and the new boiler had been paid for. Notwithstanding the drought, which had decreased the output of butter for the year by 20,7251 b, and the cost of the improvements which had been made iu the plant, suppliers, had received £136 more for their butter than in the previous year, which meant an increase of about Id per lb. The balance-sheet was the best issued by the company, and the financial position was sound. A dividend of 5 per cent, on the subscribed capital was recommended. Theretiringdirectorswere re-elected. The following figures, to my way of thinking, prove conclusively that Mr Spragg can pay the suppliers of Waikato 3d per gallon and then have a very fair margin of profit, by comparing the return of the Tai Tapu with ours. This factory received 768,599 gallons of milk at lOilb. per gallon, being lsd more than we get. This gives a gross return of £4803 lis Id. For the sake of argument I will admit that each of our factories only supplied one-ninth of the above amount. In order to illustrate my case I will take the figures which attach to the factory which I supply— Whatawhata. The outside cost of running this factory was £l6O, including delivery of cream to Ngaruawahia. The cost of running nine such factories would, therefore, be £1440. If he paid 3d for the whole season, being l£d less than Tai Tapu paid last year, Mr Spragg would still have netted £2563 Is 9d more than did the Tai Tapu factory, made up as follows :—The 1-Jd extra paid on amouut supplied gives £4003 Is 9d ; ex penses of nine factories at £l6O Der factory, gives £I4OO. This taken from the total leaves a balance of £2563 Is 9d. Unless my figures can be confuted, there is clearly no reason why Mr Spragg should not pay 3d for the whole season. The Tai Tupu average price for their butter was 9d and 512ths per lb. We all know that Mr Spragg sold no butter in this colony at less than Is cash per box, aud received as high as Is 3d during some part of the season, so that he has enjoyed considerable advantage over the Tai Tapu Company.—l am, etc., W. W. Higginsow. Whatawhata, 20th September, 1898.