ALLEGED MONOPOLY.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 1 November 1924, Page 5

ALLEGED MONOPOLY.

THE SUPPLY OF FLOUR, CASE AGAINST DISTRIBUTORS. (BY TELEGRAPH —PRESS ASSOCIATION. . DUNEDIN, Oct. 31. The case in which the Crown claims a penalty of £SOO from the Crown Milling Co., of Dunedin; Fleming and Co., Invercargill; the Atlas Roller Flour and Oatmeal Mill, Timarii; Wood Bros., Christchurch; and Distributors, Ltd., Christchurch, was continued in the Supreme Court to-day. An injunction is also being asked against’ the first four companies prohibiting the continuation of the employment of Distributors, Ltd., as the sole selling agent for aflour, bran and pollard, ana from entering into a similar agreement in future. A further injunction is being asked for against Distributers, Ltd., prohibiting them from continuing to act as sole selling agent. Frederick Tanner, a baker, stated that when Distributors, Ltd., was termed he had a contract for Ireland's Oamaru Hour. Distributors, Ltd., stopped his contract and the price of this dpur rose ten shillings. On one occasipn witness complained to the secretary of the master bakers that he could not get Sevens’ flow, and later Hudson, the local director for Distributors, Ltd, told witness that Stevens’ mill was a hundred tons oversold on its quota. Hudson said: “Don’t think .ycu’fe going to run us or get the flour you want. If we have been beaten .by the, bakers we will fight. We would rather form on the same system as breweries are run.” Hudson further said lie was determined' that witness should get only his fair share of the quota. Before Distributors, Ltd., was started, witness was paying ten shiD lings less for Oamaru flour. John Gold, a. baker of BalcluEha, f also described his difficulties in' getting the flour lie wanted. Witness had paid five shillings more for Oamairu flour since the formation of Distributors, Ltd. Francis Joseph Campbell, secretary of the Bakers’ Association, stated that his experience was that there was great dissatisfaction with the way the operations of Distributors, Ltd.,’affected the trade. The two main complaints wvi.e the difficulty of getting the brands desired and the poor quality of the flour supplied. In a letter from Distributors, Ltd., they stated that bakers would he supplied if orders iyere placed before the first of the month. This covered a workable,plan if Distributors, 1 Ltd., carried it out,-but they sheltered behind the phrase “if the flour is available.” In answer to the judge, witness said there was no question or a quote. They were assured by McDonald that if orders were in 'by the first of the month they would get the flour requird. His Honor said the whole' point was whether it was in the public interest that a man should be required to take the flour he did not want.

It is probable the defence will open to-morrow.