MILK SUPPLY

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 220, 11 June 1920, Page 7

MILK SUPPLY

'8 Sir,—Mr. Bennett's wail that he has td; spend time replying to mo is rather «' poor argument, considering that my letter . was simply an explanation of th'o farm-; ers' 6ide of the case. In reply to a letter'' |S by his own manager (Mr. Ward), Mr. ' u Bennett is incorrect in stating that I.; was not fair in quoting figures for car- . tain months. What I gave was the price;. l ' for the whole twelve months mentionedby Mr. Ward himself, and in doing so I 6tated that I would leavo your rcadors: to judge who was responsible for tho', ■ price to tho consumers during that per-' Ji iod. My figures,aro for milk supplied | by the Wellington Dairy Farmers' Aeso-; ° ciation during that period (who supply i . more than half tho city milk), and if Mr. Benncitt's figures are correct as to thacost of tho whole of the council's milk; during: that time, all I h.ivo to say j. that tho balance must have cost them< : " mucli more than tho price unid for that; _ supplied hy the Dairy .Farmers' Associai, tion—l am, etc., ' * J. M. WHITEMAN. ; " Wallacevillo, June 10, 1920. Sir,—ln tlipi face of the letter over tha; signature of Mr. Whitoman, Mr. Ward's' letter needs no further commentary by, ine. . I should like, however the pifblio " to study tho letters and to-: ' draw,the only obvious conclusion thatj they are bedqg gulled .'by the City Council, and to demand a public inquiry into , „ the city milk supply.—l am, etc., ■; J. 1 , T.. J. HOWELL. '" Paraparumu, June 0. 1920. .