THE PRICE OF FLOUR

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 6219, 27 May 1907, Page 5

THE PRICE OF FLOUR

FACTS ABOUT THE MILLERS* ASSOCIATION. In a letter to the "Lyttelton Times/* strongly condemnatory of the decision of the Fiourmillcrs* Association to increase the price of flour to «£9 15s per ton, Mr T. E. Taylor calls for prompt interference by the State. He recalls the fact that the association was the subject of inquiry by a Special Committee of the House of Representatives in 1903, and thus summarises the committee’s findings : , • 1. That the amount of capital invested in flourmilling plant in New Zealand was so excessive that the then flourmillers could produce three times the quantity of flour required by the colony for home consumption. 2. That the Millers’ Trust practically controlled’ the flour market, so far as output and price are concerned, > th£ exception of portions of the North . Island. 3. That a combine of the principal mills had been effected by means of an elaborate written constitution. •1. That the constitution of the Trust, provided for a deliberate restraint of trade, and penalised any flour-miller belonging to the Trust who dared produce more floor than was allotted to his plant by the terms of the agreement. , , . 5. That the restricted or regulated output of all the mills within the combine was pooled, and each mill credited with its pro-determined portion of the aggregate monthly output. C. That the price of flour was cleverly regulated so that each associated milling plant received a profit upon its capital value, although its power to produce flour was restricted by the enforced though regulated idleness of the plant. 7. That compulsion was employed to force small and financially weak millers to join the combine. 8. That a conspiracy was organised between the Millers* Trust and the; Master Bakers* Union to regulate the; price of bread and compel free or cutting bakers to charge the public whatever price the “Price Committee ** fixed. 9. That a majority of votes on the Price Committee were cast by millers* representatives. 10. That the Millers* Trust boycotted "free** bakers by refusing to sell them flour in an effort to force such bakers into the conspiracy designed to fix uniform prices. 11. That after severe losses, a few millers and bakers succeeded in attracting sufficient public attention to the methods of the Millers* Trust as to force the organisation to suspend some of them, to avoid n public uproar sufficient in its magnitude to ensure Parliamentary interference. FLOUR, BREAD, AND . POTATOES. (To'the Editor "N.Z. Times.**) Sir,—Your corre* pondent, "E.J.O.,** calls for legislative interference on account of the high price of these commodities. Ho would have done better nad ho framed a definite proposal. I can only once more point out that in this avowedlj" democratic country wo are loaded with an absurdly high tariff, and that those end other equally important commodities help to produce our much-vaunted surpluses. I have grown almost weary of reiterating the • uly practical remedy—the abolition of duties on necessaries and the taxation of land values. It is out of the soil that everything comes, and commodities can scarcely be cheap while land is made artificially dear by reason of the most pernicious variety of gamblingspeculation and trafficking by which a small number of idlers are enriched and labour depleted of its fruits. The taxation of land values would bring land t > its real va'ue by compelling the utilisation of unused land. A man would then be able to get land .without naving to pay a gambler's price, and the utilisation of land would cause a demand for labou- that would do for the - worker what coddling legislation can never do. Cn the other hand, the abolition of duties would in itself be tantamount to av all-round increase of wages, for cheaper commodities would bo the same thing as an advance In wages. All this should.be clear enough to anyone who will think, and such a programme would have been realised in • practice long si-ice wore it not for the . manner in which the Labour party al- ! low© itself to be humbugged by proteci tion. Some protectionists tell us that * they favour the xeduction of duties on necessaries; but if they were sincere we should not continue to be confronted with the scandal of artificially dear *ood. Free-traders alone mean business in this connection, and although we may bo in a minority now, we hope for better things latex on. Our policy *is clear, definite, and simple—we demand Aie abolition of du* ies and the taxation of land values, and we shall yet have both.—l am, etc. P. J, O'REGAN. May 25th. Sir, —An attempt is being mad© to get the City Council and Harbour Board to reclaim Evans Bay to provide cheaper land for the poor manufacturer; and the Council has appointed a committee to go into the subject. It seems to me that the manufacturers are doing very well. Several of them are letting houses to poorer people at exorbitant rentals. It would be more to the point for our City Fathers to set up an inquiry into the price of bread, and especially to discover, if possible, why the Wellington bread-winner is to be plundered by an increase of id per 21b loaf while the Christchurch and Dunedin bakers are satisfied with a rise of id per 4ib loaf. —X am, etc., STRAIGHT DXNKUM.