THE GRAIN BAG QUESTION. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 8449, 23 March 1889, Page 5

THE GRAIN BAG QUESTION. TO THE EDITOR.

Sib, —You? lender in Wednesday morning'is issue is mode valueless by the omission of one small word.

You quote from my remarks at the meeting at Outram as follows:—" If there was one thing that had proved disastrous to New Zealand it was the shipping of grain to England." Insert the word " traders " after New Zealand and the qutotation will be practically correct. I emphasized thiE point by referring to the losses made by the New Zealand Grain Agency Company, and also by individuals then in the room,—clearly showing that my remarks were not intended to apply to New Zealand, bat to traders.

As the insertion of the word " traders " completely alters the sense of the quotation, I need not further refer to it, only to express my regret that your very crushing article had such a baseless foundation.

The " labyrinth of sums " you refer to were only market reports copied from your own paper, and the " snuffing out" was attempted by Messrs Shand and Grant, who asserted the reports were wrong. But mere assertion is not good enough to meet this case: proof, absolute proof, is required, and nothing less will do. In your issue of February 28 you challenged the Dunedin grain buyers to prove, " that Dunedin prices rule invariably so much higher than Onristchurch for wheat, for example, as to cover the whole loss on bags," and further on," to cover the loss of the discount'of 2J per cent, deducted here."

At the meeting at Outram I accepted the challenge, and from your own market reports showed clearly that during the six busy months of the grain season of 1888 the farmers selling f.o.b. Duuediu actually received 3£d per bushel more for prime milling wheat, after allowing for bags and discount, than the farmer selling f.o.b. Lyttelton.

How have you met my reply to your very distinct challenge ? Not by showing my figures were wroDg —this you cannot do—but by

1. Misquoting my remarks at Outram, and then trying to ridicule me therefor; 2. By stating that my figures were "discredited, and certainly mystifying," without giving any proof whatever they were so, other than bare, empty assertion. As with Messrs Shand and Grant, so with you. Mere assertion is not good enough : proof is wanted; 3. By giving the market reports (Christchurch, Oamaru, and Dunedin) for the " off" months viz., January, February, and part of March ISB9, months noted for the greatest local fluctuations in the price of grain that have occurred for many years, and consequently are no guide to decide the relative prices of grain in any of the markets referred to.

It is a fact well known to buyers, sellers, and agents alike, and I think it is not too much to expect that the writer of your articles on the question in dispute should also know, there has been really no market in Dunedin for wheat for some months past, and prices quoted have been merely nominal; but if you take the months March to September (these are the months in which nearly all the grain in New Zealand is sold) in any of the past 25 years, you will find that good milling wheat has been generally 3d to 4d per bushel higher in Dunedin than in either Lyttelton, Timaru, or Oamaru, and I challenge you to prove my statement wrong.

If, as j'ou insinuate, a "coterie" has been tryiug to control the price of grain in Dunedin, in order to make an extra profit, is it not strange that outside buyers have not been induced to come here and operate, with the view to snap up this extra profit ? Surely they were not all so blind to their own interest, and yet what do we find —outside buyers are practically uukuown in this market. I confess lam somewhat curious to see how you will" steer round this corner."

To my mind it is ridiculous to write about " coteries " controlling the price of any article in Dunedin. The law of " supply and demand " will prevail, " coteries " or " rings " notwithstanding.

So far as I know, all the grain merchants in Duuedin have ever attempted in the way of controlling the market is to keep the grain bag business running on the established lines that prevail throughout the whole of the Australian colonies and New Zealand—excepting the towns of Lyttelton, Timaru, and Oamaru. I am, &c, March 21. Hy. Haeraway.