CORRESPONDENCE

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11511, 18 February 1903, Page 9

CORRESPONDENCE

CHRISTCHURCH MEAT COMPANY'S PROFITS. TO THS EDITOR Of THE TRESS. Sir,-On reading "Country SharetSTsaid can be construed into.meaning anvthinir else than that the profits for the amounted to £31,341 19s Bd, out of which £3000 hoe been set aside to reserve There is a much more important point In mt Goulds speech upon which "Country Shareholder" has not commented. It* the stress which he lays upon the import«£e of providing fully for *he of machinery and d e P»* la }i on ."* bunding* und plant it. general. He also expresses the hope that in future yea™ the Board will see its way to provide larger sums for depreciation. In the profit and loss account there » on item of £7394 Os 9d written off for reaewaU and replacements to buddings, machinery, und plant, which, of course, mdudes repairs to buildings and plant, valued, apparently, at something over £200,000. after deducting the value of the 796 acres of land. But does this item include anylliing for depreciation of buiMSg and wear and tear of mac« JM ry-l rnTan deprivation properly so-called.' Mr Malet, in bis speech, evidently r«gai<ls this item as depreciation entirely, for he refers to tho corresponding item of £MW 5s 8d in the previous year's profit and loss account as having been "wntten off buildfogs, machinery, und plant," and not orilj so but pats the Board on the back for Bte'rnlv facing tlie true position, and "making no attempt to bolster up the account by suspending any writing off or that year." Could they, with propriety, do otherwise than write off renewals, repairs, and replacement*? The question is, tow mud. of the £5280 5s 8d last year, and of tlie £7394 0s ad this year, is composed of depreciation, properly so-called, ifnothing, why accord such high praise to the Board for making no attempt to bolster up the account by """P/ 0 * 0 writing off of what they could not with 7 Would Mr Malet consider a fair estimate of depreciation upon buildings, machinery, and plant, valued roughly at £200,000 to £220,000, bearing in mind, as Mr Joseph Gould that "new inventions often compel us to throw out Mod sound machinery, not because it is worn out, but because it has become obsoVte?''—Yours, etc., •• *" ' DEPRECIATION. Christchurch, 17th February.