CORRESPONDENCE

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIX, Issue 125, 28 May 1915, Page 10

CORRESPONDENCE

FOOD PRICES AND EXPLOITATION AN OPEN LETTER TO THE RIGHT HON. W. F. MASSEY, PREMIER OF NEW ZEALAND. Sir, — You have made numerous public statements through the press to the effect that if any proof of exploitation was forthcoming, you would deal with the I matter. j Early in September last I gave evidence on oath before the Foodstuffs Commission, and although I have made re- ! peated requests for a transcript of my I evidence, all my communications have been completely ignored. A witness, giving evidence before a Royal Commission or a Committee of the House, is entitled to hay© a. copy of his evidence for revision, and I protest against the methods and lack of courtesy shown by the parties responsible. My evidence showed that the very day | war was declared wholesale grocers and wholesale druggists increased their prices from 10 per cent, to 80 per cent, on i stocks on hand, which had borne no increased cost whatever. Commodities in ! daily us©, such as sugar, flonr, oatmeal, kerosene, cream of tartar, baking powder, tinned fish, rice, sago, tapioca, gelatine, cornflour, lentils, currants, sultanas, candles, drugs, chemicals, surgical dressings (cotton wool, bandages, lint, etc), sugar ot_ milk, glycerine, patent medicines, toilet soaps, and other cornmodiJ ties numerous to mention in detail, were all advanced. This evidence was supported by suppliers' original invoices, I showing the actual costs of foodstuffs in I stock on the sth August last, pricelists issued by wholesale houses on tho sth August increasing prices, original invoices from wholesale houses to retailers, showing that these advances had been made dnring the month of August, retail grocers' advertised prices one "week before war was declared and th© advanced prices charged immediately after. All shipment* on the water were purchased under normal conditions, the only increased cost would be war insurance, at that time 3 per cent, on British and neutral vessels. Goods shipped immediately after war was declared were aho purchased under normal conditions, and no goods carrying advanced charges beyond 3 per cent, war insurance would reach Christchnrch before Ist October. 1914. The Moratorium Acte passed by your Government, following the lead of the Imperial Authorities, creating bank notes legal tender, preventing foreclosures on mortgages, and limiting interest rates on mortgages, were intended to preserve stability, and to prevent panic and exploitation. The Regulation of Trade and Commerce Act was clearly intended for the same purpose, yet the very day war was declared, when every loyal man and woman in New Zealand was impressed with the necessity of sacrifice and giving of their best, and school j children gave their prize money and ! th-err pence to patriotic • funds, it is left j to a gang of traders, acting in concert, shamelessly to exploit tiro people. The intention of the Act is clearty . expressed, and one of its provisions provided for the setting up of a Commission ; that Commission was bound to consider enormously increased prices, without increased costs, as exploitation within the meaning of the Act. Exploitation means "illegitimate profits," and all trade conspiracies interrupting the law of supply and demand, even in normal times, is exploitation. The milkman who waters his milk, the baker who gives short weight in bread, the merchant who operates.,,in restraint of trade, are 'all exploiters, and every housewife in New Zealand knows that this exploitation has taken place. One reason advanced in justification is that the merchants are entitled tocharge higher prices to cover the depreciated value of stocks on hand when the war is over. Everyone connected with the grocery business knows that wholesale stocks are turned over from at least six to eight times in a year, and no goods could roach Christchurch from Europe after the war is over under two months, so that stocks on hand would bo disposed of before new goods came to hand. No business man of ordinary intelligence would buy heavily at high market rates, with the risk of ultimate loss. Another mendacious statement in justification is that as some merchants and retailers did not increase prices, there was no exploitation, as the public could be supplied through these channels. My firm's stocks were approximately £50,000 on the sth August last; practically all foodstuffs were sold during the first week of the War; all traders who sold at prewar prices were in the same, position. I have made a sworn statement to the Foodstuffs Commission that if my firm had charged the same prices as other wholesale firms, the increased profit on tbe month's business, from the sth August to the 4tli September, would be at least £5000. The aggregate value of j stocks held by wholesale grocers and j wholesale druggists in New" Zealand at ' the outbreak of war would amount to at least two millions sterling, and the increased prices charged would be fully ' £400,000 on goods that carried no in- j creased cost; which is an indication of the illegitimate profits made by exploitation. The fact that prices were raised produced a panic, the very thing the Regulation of Trade and Commerce Act was designed to prevent. There was a rush to stock up household cupboards, which created an actual shortage at the time. This was tho opportunity seized by exploiters to levy toll on the people. The result is that every bread-winner in New Zealand has to face a heavy increase in his cost of living, through preventable causes operating within the Dominion. The one man in New Zealand who could have prevented it was yourself. Yon had full authority from 'Parliament to deal with the matter. Had you gazetted the Act fixing the standard price for all commodities as those ruling on the Ist August, with a provision that any additional costs actually incurred on goods arriving after war was declared could be added, the exploiters would have been checked. The penalty of £500 for ea«h offence would have been a sufficient deterrent. — Yours sincerely, ANDREW FAIRBAIRN. Christchurch, 15th May, 1915. fWhen interviewed by a Post reporter on the above matter, Mr. Massey said he had not the slightest objection to Mr. Fairbairn obtaining a copy of his evidence, though it was a matter for the Commisßion to decide. On the other matters contained in the letter Mr. Maesey said he declined to enter into a controversy.]