ALLEGED SUGAR TRUST.

Mataura Ensign, 24 April 1913, Page 5

ALLEGED SUGAR TRUST.

FEB UNITED I'RESB ASSOCIATION rni WELLINGTON. April 24. Iho .htiainng of the alleged Sugar Irust case- was continued Mr Alyors (lor Levin aiid Co.) eoutrii d-.d that the nublie was not pro~ mdieed l>y the combined huving by the Merchants' <m tho' contrary, he Mii.ji::tt'■■:! tb'st c.ini! :!!<•:! buying was beneficial to the nu'riic, inasmuch as it tended to low.'.r tlie price not only of sugar but. of oi.her commodities. He further contended that in considering whether t,h<. tranfc.K-tio.il was contrary to tho public interests the court should not test the matter by the husino.-s methods vinplorcd by r-airhairn, Wright, and Coinp.aiiv but according to ordinary business methods Hon A. L. H :■!•;:;.;: n (;oi- the Crown) roiled. H, said i,!i:it b. wish; d to refute iho suggestion that there were two rival corueins iightin-r for control, of the Miiiiir ir.ide. Vairbairn, Wright and Company were acting only as h'-gi-tiniaie merchants while the alleged conibijio was acting as a ring, sugar being ;'■:•:'.•:.; •■! |..- ,I, ■■ y'u-.nr Company direct to individual members of f/.ie r.iig vie. u directed and rarclv beii'ii .i .uid'ed bv mem'.ers of the Vini'. M-lid,. ;S of the lip..'. iheivforo, a'bta.nied a decoiiiH f<,- ; - nraciicallv doing nothing. This shouv-1 a fundamental difference between the methods of rV..lrbairn, Wr.'-ht and: Co. and those of tin, alleged ((.inline.