EMBARGO ON HIDES.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17262, 1 September 1916, Page 3

EMBARGO ON HIDES.

Dealing with tho embargo on hides during tho course of his address at the annual meeting of tho Wellington Meat Export Company on Tuesday, Mr W. G. Foster, chairman of directors, had th© following remarks to mate:— “ During February last the export of hides over 451 b was prohibited, very much to the surprise and consternation, not only of those concerned in tho purchase for export, but of those most vitally interested, viz., the producers: but ns there was obviously no sound reason or justification for this amazing courso of action, it was generally felt that if tho embargo wore not for some experimental purpose its duration would ho extremely limited. Tho cat came out of tho bag shortly afterwards when a conference with tanners and dealers and one or two others was held by tho Minister, and disclosed that tho Munitions Department had without much (if any) investigation acopted representations of said tanners and dealers, to the effect that a shortage of supplies necessitated the action with a view to reduction in price from the then value. “ I may say that I was, at my own request, as representing this company invited to ntte»d this conference, and protested against so inequitable a decision, but was outvoted there. “It was stated that owing to the high price of hides tanners were compelled to raise their price for leather to a level that contractors for boots for military purposes could not pay without loss on their contracts. “The conference referred to resulted in a decision to retain the embargo and fix a minimum of lOd per lb for ox hides and 9d per lb for cow hides. This minimum, naturally, at once became the maximum. Now the Government contract was for 100.000 pairs of boots for the twelve months, and it is variously stated that one hide is required for every four to six pairs, talcing the mean of five pairs it would mean that 20.000 hides would suffice for Government requirements. The cattle slaughtered at export works and abattoirs during the preceding twclvo months amount to, viz:— “Cattle slaughtered . 350,000 “Deduct for hides under 451 b sav . . . 50,000 “Deduct number required for Government . .20,000 70,000 l “Tims leaving under embargo (hides) . 280,000 “ It is obvious therefore that the embargo was in no sense necessary, and as it meant a huge loss to the producers was distinctly inequitable. Subsequently the Minister modified the embargo to ‘the retention of 10 per cent,’ this 10 per cent being handed over to the tanner as directed by the Minister. “ At this time Australia, which required larger quantities of boots for military purposes, was a keen buyer and desirous of securing supplies from New Zealand at pre-embargo prices, but of course was debarred. In consequence your company, which at the time held a large stock' of hides, purchased oil the higher level, stood to lose somewhat heavily, but notwithstanding, although the value of the animal on foot was reduced by about 10s, the company’s prices were maintained. Very many thousands of pounds have in consequence been lost to the producer.”