CONTROL OF FLOUR APPEAL

Evening Star, Issue 19000, 23 July 1925, Page 6

CONTROL OF FLOUR APPEAL

POSITION OF DISTRIBUTORS, LTD. CASE FOR FLOUR-MILLERS [Pee United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, July 23. The Appeal Court heard further argument in the case in which the Crown appeals from Mr Justice Sim’s decision against it in the prosecution of certain flour-millers and Distributors, Ltd., for alleged breaches of the legislation against trusts. Mr Skerrett, continuing his address for respondents, gave the dates of the sowing and harvesting of wheat. Besides these, ho would like the court, in order better to follow the argument, to know that roughly one-fourth of the total flour in New Zealand was unaffected by the control of Distributors, Ltd. Hearing of the trial began on November 24, so that the whole operations of Distributors for 1923 and practically the whole of 1924 were in review by the court. Returning to his argument, Air Skerrett referred to the official statement of the Minister of Agriculture in March, 1923, dial as a result of sad experience many tauiiers had gone off wheat to other lines, which were more steadily remunerative; that they regarded wheat as a gamble, as it involved heavy capital expenditure to grow, forcing a farm to rely on getting a sufficient amount of labor during harvest time, otherwise the returns from the season’s work might be seriously depreciated. Some eight to nine thousand farmers were engaged in the wheat-growing industry, and m general the wheat grown in New Zealand was insufficient for the dominion. Only in 1922 was wheat grown in the dominion sufficient for its demands. From 1917 to 1924 'the world’s parity of wheat was always lower than the price fixed in New Zealand, with the exception of the end of 1924. What underlay the action of the Government was to encourage the growth of wheat in New Zealand. Millers were as much interested as the Government in the provision of the raw material available for their industry, and it was in their interests that there should bo a stabilised price for flour. It was not only desirable, but necessary, to make Now Zealand independent of foreign supplies. Apart from war conditions, Mr Macdonald bad asserted the necessity to have some form of control. The Go vernment had purchased the whole nep from the merchants and brokers when first control was instituted/ and bad determined the price of wheat at a level which, tbe Government had hoped, would induce farmers to continue growing it. The Government under this system of control had to fix the price of wheat agreeable to the millers.

Mr Fair: I do not agree with that,

Mr Skerrett: “We do not ask you to.” If the Government had fixed a price not agreeable to the millers they would have produced just enough to keep regular customers. Throughout the whole period from 1917 to 1924 the maximum price for wheat, flour, and bread was treated as the minimum, without interference from the Government.

Mr Fair: We say that there were many exceptions to this. Mr Skerrett: The Solicitor-General will one day wake up to the fact that one swallow does not make a summer. Mr Fair: We have produced not one swallow but a brood. Mr Skerrett; All this scheme of Government control was not practicable unless the embargo was maintained. The fundamental principle of control was to ration wheat and stabilise the three essential industries—wheat growing, flour milling, and baking.