PRICES TOO HIGH

New Zealand Herald, Volume 78, Issue 24141, 6 December 1941, Page 12

PRICES TOO HIGH

BREACHES OF LAW OVERCHARGE FOR NAILS PENALTY OF £lO IMPOSED (0.C.) HAMILTON, Friday For charging/Is for one pound of nails, or 2d in excess of the price fixed by the Price Tribunal, Edmund Mills, hardware dealer (Mr. T. C. Orr) was fined £lO, and £2 12s costs by Mr. W. H. Freeman, S.M., at Hamilton today. Mr, J. R. FitaGerald, who prosecuted, said tho maximum price that should have been charged was 9Jd, plus id for freight. The offence, he said, was regarded as a serious one. Mr. Orr asked that in view of the small amount involved the penalty should be a light one. The magistrate said the excess was 20 per cent above the fair price. The offonco was serious, particularly in war time. SALE OP ORANGES FRUITERER PROSECUTED A statement that he was prepared to increase penalties in cases concerning prices of goods was made by Mr. F. H. Levien, S.M., yesterday, after hearing a charge of selling oranges at a higher price than permitted by regulations, preferred against P. I). Lata (Mr. Fraer). The charge was admitted. The magistrate said the public must be protected, especially in the purchase of oranges. Mr. G. S. R. Meredith said there was a marked shortage of oranges in Auckland in October, and an inspection had been made to find if any fruiterers were taking advantage of the position. Defendant, and two others who had been charged last week, had apparently offended. Defendant had sold oranges at a price equivalent to 3s a dozen, an over-charge of 7d a dozen. Mr". Fraer said defendant had found that 18 in the 176 oranges in the case he had purchased were bad. He was endeavouring to make up his loss. A fine of £2 was imposed. 3TIRM FINED £25 COMMERCIAL STATIONERY [BY TELEGRAM —PRESS ASSOCIATION] WELLINGTON, Friday A fine of £25 and costs was imposed to-day on Whitcombe and Tombs, Limited, for' breaches of the price stabilisation emergency regulations. _ There were five charges, to all of which the defendant firm pleaded guilty. Mr. W. R. Birks, who prosecuted, said the five charges were in respect of five different lines, but investigation reVealed that in no fewer than 18 lines of commercial stationery unauthorised increases in price had been made. He said the price tribunal regarded these breaches a%serious. First, for the number of lines affected, 18; secondly, they were not luxury lines. Almost all were articles essential to the carrying on of commercial offices. They were books required in business, and increases might have resulted in unnecessary increases in overhead costs of other traders. . ' Mr. Birks pointed out that the sale on which the greatest margin of increase was shown was made to a public institution, the v Wellington Hospital Board. ~ , For the company, Mr. D. W, Virtue said the facts were not in dispute. The charges were brought merely for increasing prices without authority. There was no charge of profiteering. The firm had thousands of lines to be looked over, costs were increasing, and the firm took what was admittedly a wrong course, but still a very natural one, of attempting to adjust prices to those it thought would ultimately be sanctioned. The magistrate, Mr. W. F. Stilwell, said the firm had "chanced its arm" and a penalty must be imposed. However, he felt justified in dealing with the charges as a collection of offences.