PRICE ORDER CHARGE

Grey River Argus, 15 May 1943, Page 2

PRICE ORDER CHARGE

INSPECTOR’S ALLEGED TRICKERY DENIED STATEMENT BY MR JUSTICE - HUNTER. P.A. WELLINGTON, May 14. Mr Justice Hunter, president of the Price Tribunal, referred to-day to a Press Association message from Gisborne dated May 12, with reference to a prosecution concerning an alleged breach of a Price Order governing the price of iodised salt, and which had been withdrawn by leave of the Court.

His Honour said that this case was reported to the Tribunal by an Inspector as a breach of a Price Order and a prosecution was authorised and commenced. Later the inspector reported that he had made a mistake, the salt purchased by him being of another brand not covered by a Price Order. .The Tribunal thereupon instructed ijs officers . to arrange for proceedings to be withdrawn..

There was perhaps some excuse for the inspector making this mistake, he said. In the course of his journey he had travelled hundreds of miles, visited hundreds of shops, and reported many breaches. A more serious matter was the allegation made in the Court on behalf of defendant to the effect that the inspector had tricked him into selling the salt in question, with a view to attempting to obtain a conviction, by stating that he suffered from goitre. “The inspector is at present in the South Island in the course of his duties,” His Honour said, “but has been communicated with by telephone and denies that he made any such statement as attributed to him by the defendant. He says that nothing at all was said about goitre. He merely asked the price of the salt and bought it in the ordinary way." He added that the Tribunal would not for a moment tolerate any trickery or subterfuge by its inspectors in the course of their duties, and this was well-known to inspectors.