Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ALLEGED ELOUR MONOPLY.

FURTHER EVIDENCE AT . DUNEDIN. Dunedin, Oct. 31. The Crown evidence was resumed in the flour milling case. Frederick Ta&ner, baker, stated that when Distributors, Ltd., was formed he had a contract for Ireland's Oamaru flour. After Distributors stopped his contract the price of this flour rose ten shillings. One one occasion witness complained to the secretary of the Master Bakers’ Association that he could not get Stevens’s flour in consequence of getting two tons of the latter. Mr Hudson, local director of Distributors, told witness that Stevens’s mill was a hundred tons oversold on its quota. Hudson said, of don’t think you’re going to run us or get the flour you want. If we have been beaten by the bakers wo will fight. Hudson further said ho was determined that witness should get only his fair share of the quota. On September 1922, before Di* tributors started, he w.as paying ten shillings less for Oamaru flour. John Gold, baker, Balclutha, also described his difficulties getting flour he wanted. Witness paid five shillings more ofr Oarmaru flour since the formation of Distributors. Francis Joseph Campbell, secretary of th© 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 were the. difficulty in getting the brands desired and the poor quality of the flour supplied. A statement in a letter from Distributors that bakers would be supplied if orders were placed before the first of the month covered a workable plan if Distributors carried it out but thev sheltered behind the phrase “if the flour is available.” In answer to the Judge, witness said there was no question of quote. They were assured bv far. McDonald that if orders were in l)v the first of the month thev would get the flour required. His Honour said the whole point was whether it was in the public interest that a baker should be required to take flour he did not want. It is probable that the defence will open to-morrow.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HBTRIB19241101.2.43

Bibliographic details

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIV, Issue 276, 1 November 1924, Page 7

Word Count
347

ALLEGED ELOUR MONOPLY. Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIV, Issue 276, 1 November 1924, Page 7

ALLEGED ELOUR MONOPLY. Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIV, Issue 276, 1 November 1924, Page 7

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert