FLOUR-MILLING CASE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 22 July 1925, Page 7

FLOUR-MILLING CASE.

YESTERDAY’S RJUICE EDINGS. (.15 V T HI, EG IIAIML.- —PRESS ASSOCIATION.) WELLING lON, July 21. Before both divisions ol the Appeal Court the hearing was continued today of the appeal in the Hour-milling CK.-e heard in Dunedin, in which penalties are sought lor alleged breaches of the Commercial Trusts Aut, 1910 (relating to 'monopolies), by the Crown v. The Milling Company, Limited, of Dunedin. hourmillers, Fleming and Company. Ltd., the Invercargill Hourmillers. ” the Allas Roller Flour and Oatmeal .Mills (Evans and Company). The Lima,ru (lone-millers. Wood Brothen s. Limited, the Christchurch Flourmillers and Distributors, Ltd., of Uir.iistehurch, the Hourmillers’ agents of which companies are respondents in the present proceedings. , The offence alleged was that respondents had conspired together to monopolise wholly or partially the supply of flour, bran and pollard in New Zealand. and to control its price and supply. such monopoly of control being of a. nature contrary to the provisions of the Act.

Sir Francis- Bell, resuming his argument. said that in the sugar ease Lev in and Co.. Ltd., occupied a. position similar to that of Distributors Limited. It was the agent for the distribution of goods. Tiie Court need not wait for actual harm to ensue before deciding that a conspiracy or a- monopoly was illegal. Mr. Fair said the Crown contended that Distributors Limited prevented bakciv* in. Southland ancl Dunedin, obtaining the flour they desired land prevented a reduction in the cost of flour and consequently of bread; also that the agreement was a breach of the Act. and being illegal was contrary to the public interest. Distributors Limited could have obtained flour from other milks to supply the bakers’ dohia.nds. Laurenson, who was one of the strongest opponents of the monopoly. wins unable to obtain Oamaru Tour and bad to roly on the 'local article.

Ho .said bakers were prevented from going to tbe Northern Mills, where they could get- good flour. On November 30. 1923. the flour stocks in New Zealand totalled 32.000 tons. That was sufficient to- carry bn till February. when the new crop was available. Did I'ibutor.s Limited did not have to bother to remedy defects ;r flour, knowing that their customers must take it. For five months Flemings were- turning out inn inferior flour, vet the clause providing for a. reduction in price was not put into operation. Instead of the ope,ration of Distributors T.imited securing; o-cnomv they bad led to an increase in the cost of distribution and dearer flour. The hearing ha.s not finished.