THE FLOUR CASE.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIV, Issue 278, 4 November 1924, Page 6

THE FLOUR CASE.

MR. MCDONALD’S APPOINTMENT. (Per Press Association.) Dunedin, Nov. 4. continuing his evidence Tn the flour case said on Juno 20 he was at a meeting addressed by Air. Myers. Nothing was said at this meeting about his position in the future. Subsequently ho saw the minute of a resolution parsed at a meeting of the millers’ committee offering him the position of managing director of Distributors Ltd., at £2OOO a year. If lie had known about this at the time he would have refused to accept the position because of Tne terms of appointment. Nor did he subsequently accept these terms. His attitude to his ministerial heads on the matter had been quite candid. The possibility of his joining th® millers liad been discussed openly. H© had accepted the appointment on September 26 office on November 1. He had absolutely refused to disclosp to the millers the output of each individual mill under the control scheme. He had quarrelled with them because of this. There wa» no limitation of output under the Distributors scheme. They had sold all th© flour it was possible to sell. The basis of the scheme was that if the millers were in open competition the prices paid would kill the industry. It was thought better that each miller should get a proportion of' the trade at stabilised prices. There was no fixed quantity of trade in the agreement, which allowed for a low variation in the demand, which would be expected to arise for any particular brand under the Distributors scheme. The proportion of the manufactured article was fixed as nearly as possible on the proportion of what each miller received under the Government scheme. Distributors Ltd. endeavoured to provide Os far as possible for the flour of each miller to go to its old cystomers. Mam* agents had arrangements covering'piirchases of certain brands before they became agents for Distributors Ltd., in some cases binding contracts for seven years.