JUSTICE TO THE BUYER

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 19, 22 July 1925, Page 4

JUSTICE TO THE BUYER

An interesting discussion on weights and measures that took place in the House of Representatives last evening is published in this issue under the heading "Tins of Jam." Particular attention was paid to the weight of jam in a tin containing 14 ounces. The popular impression—so often ; erroneous— is that a pound of jam is synonymous with a tin of jam. In some cases that is so; but retail purchasers of jam, candles, and other goods have got into the way of asking for "a tin" of this or "a packet" of that without specifying the weight;, and packers have got into the way, and adjusted their plant accordingly, of putting up goods into packages not necessarily containing pounds, or quarters, or half pounds, and in some cases one ounce or two ounces. This matter comes .within the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 1908, administered by the Health Department, and it certainly was in the mind of that Department, some years ago, to have a packet reputed to be a pound of a given article to contain 16 ounces net weight. The reason given then for delay was that the war had made it difficult for adjustments of weighing machinery to be effected to do this, and so nothing further was done. The same reason is assigned to-day for still further delaying this economic reform in retail trading. There can be no doubt, notwithstanding what may be stated on the packet, that most people buying retail an article weighing 14 or even 12 ounces do so in the belief Ijhat they are getting a full pound, just as most men buying a pocket tin of tobacco imagine they are getting 2 ounces when on the tin it may be plainly printed that it contains If dunces.

This whole business of weights and measures is far from satisfactory in New Zealand. That it is archaic in comparison with the United Kingdom is proved by those who have experience of shopping here and at Home, and additional proof of this i 3 furnished by the Minister of Industries and Commerce (Mr. Anderson) in undertaking during the recess to obtain British expert advice. Incidentally, it was curious to mark the doubt of Mr. M'Keen, a Labour member, if exposure of weighing and measuring instruments to the full view of the public was practicable. Why not? It is the public's right to Bee that it receives fair weight and fair measure ; and it is in the best interests of the conscientious trader to satisfy his customer on that score. The old days when retailers of meat and other foods erred on the generous side when weighing have gone ; to-day conditions are nioi'e exacting, competition is keener, and weights and measures cut finer. Ovei-weight if persisted iv may mean all the difference beween solvency and bankruptcy for a trader; systematic underweight in a large turnover may represent a handsome addition to profits. The approach of members of Parliament as a body towards this great economic question of faii-play to tho New Zealand retail purchaser does not inspire confidence in flick ability 1.0 handle it. All that (he consumers in the Dominion n.sk ;uui have n. tijjbt i.o ask is, what members us * .whole

have never demurred granting to the overseas buyers of produce, viz., just weights and truthful representation of quality or grade.