PUBLIC OPINION.

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume XLIV, Issue 6498, 27 September 1915, Page 3

PUBLIC OPINION.

THE PRICE OF GREU)

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —Circumstauces have compelled me to delay answering "Common-senj-e," who appears lnlf sorry that he ventured into the correspondence column of your paper, but then what else could the poor man do when that horrid "AL T. Breadbasket;; attacked a trade in which he is so vitally interested Me objects to the soft impeachment of special pleadiug on that behalf, accuses his opponent of ft ling to perceive any difference between gross and net profit, and in a burst of virtuous indignation (or bluff") proffers «£5 towards any PeUriotic Fund if proved commercially wrong. Well Sir, that <£,">, which ropresents loss than the profit on turning one tou of (lour into bread, is quite safe, and unless there is a marked increase in heart activity, the Patriotic funds will not benefit from this philanthropic gentlemau—it is safe because he is not commercially wrong. No doubt the same might be said of the merchants and others who have made the war an excuse for exploiting the general public. This is a phase of commercialism which sometimes tends to a crushing under foot of patriotism for the sake of temporary gain, even, ifc may be, at the cost of the health and lives of our soldiers, and maybe of the Empire itself. To the spirit of extreme commercialism, tempered with ambition and militarism run mad, we owe the present raid by Germany on civilization with all its attendant horrors.

But to return to the price of bread. Southern flour, which is quite equal to the best, is now £14 per ton, less 2i per cent, which means about £15 landed ia Tauranga. From a ton of flour any capable baker should, without difficulty, produce 1360 21b loaves, which retailed at 5d amount to £'28 6s 8d The cost of Hour and production and delivery, including wages, fue), horsefeed, etc , potatoes, yeast, etc., and rent of bakery, at a liberal estimate, would be £22 10s, leaviog a profit balance of £o 16s Bd. la addition to this there is the profit on small goods, and to arrive at a correct estimate a portion of the expenses should be charged against the other branch of business which benefits thereby, say £2 10s in all. The profit therefore, direct and indirect, should be £8 6a Bd. However, let us take the amount £5 16s Bd. Were bread to be reduced to 4d this would almost be wiped out, but flour is seldom stationary in price for long, and an increase of 10a per ton eay to £15 103 would give the storekeeper vendor an immediate profit of £2 16s 8d ton, plus os 4d, equals £o as the price of bread would advance to 4-Jrd. On the other hand should flour~ fall to £12 10s, there would be no change in the price of bread, and the storekeeper vendor wou'd be clearing £2 13s 4d on bread alone, apait.from other profits mentioned above. I think therefore the basis suggested by me, takiag everything into consideration, is a fair and reasonable one. Certainly there can be no two opinions that the present price of 5d is far too high, in fact might by , some be characterized as exorbitant, and a fall of a half penny at least is considerably overdue, when you think of the small amount of capital,involved in the production and delivery of bread, and the profit a storekeeper vendor receives on a tuin over of £ 15, irrespective of the increaa • ed sale of groceries which invariably follows the sale of bread.—l am, etc , INTERESTED OBSERVER. TauraDga, Sept 24, 1915.