The Oamaru Mail THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1903.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8288, 17 September 1903, Page 2

The Oamaru Mail THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1903.

The Trades Monopolies Bill, a copy of which lias been telegraphed by the Premier to the Press for general information is the realisation of the> Government's promise to legislate for the repression of trusts and combines. The full text of the measure was given in our last issue, and it cannot faii to have impressed our readers by its drastic character. But any measure which proposes to deal effectually with trusts and combines must necessarily be> drastic and comprehensive in its terms. The main thought that should guide people in determining whether or not the Bill is such a measure as should become operative law is as to its necessity and its possible, effect upon industrial enterprise and the reasonable relations that should subsist between manufacturer and consumer. What the Bill aims at is to prevent consumers being exploited by producers through the medium of rings, com.bines, and trusts. But it does not. propose to forbid combination altogether 1 , for so long as any combination does not seek to destroy a competitor or squeeze out of consumers more than a reasonable trade profit the law would remain inoperative. In a word, the Bill aims at preventing the creation of great monopolies and protecting legitimate .and free competition. Thus trade monopoly is declared to be illegal, and the term is defined as' comprehending any agreement to "destroy, restrain, or prevent the reasonable trade competition/ of other traders" or to "enhance the price of goods sold by tlie parties to such agreement" beyond the price reasonably obtainable under conditions of fair and .free competition. "Trade monopoly" is further defined to embrace any method of conducting or carrying on trade, whether by an individual or a combination of trades whereby competition is restrained or prices inflated beyond the limits which reasonable competition would determine, and the word "method" as employed in this connection is made to include the "formation of a trust or combination of any sort, whether corporate or unincorporated, with an abnormal capital or abnormally extensive operations for any particular trade." The determination of the existence of a trade monopoly is proposed to be. vested in a Court, consisting of the Chief Justice and a Judge or Judges of the Supreme Court, and tliat- Court will be invested with comprehensivei powers for punishment of offenders and the complete dissolution of the trade monopoly, but it will also have full authority to do justice to a- defendant whom it finds not guilty by awarding him full costs and expenses as against the Crown. Very considerable powers in the matter of preliminary inquiry are also to be conferred upon the Solicitor-General and the Auditor and 'Controller-General or any Crown Solicitor and Audit Inspector appointed by them, and a penalty of £3OO is provided for failing to produce such bdoks, papers, contracts, letters, etc., as they may demand. Them it is proposed that the fact of prices for goods sold by a defendant having been abnormally high since the. commencement of the monopoly shall be prima facie evidence against him. The initiation of any proceedings requires first the presentation to either the Minister of Labor or the Minister of Commerce of a petition signed by not less than fifty respectable persons setting out that there axe reasonable* grounds for believing that a trade monopoly, exists, and before any proceedings are actually entered upon a report is required from an Inspector of Police and a. preliminary investigation, must be held by the SolicitorGeffleral and the Auditor and Controller- ■ General or their appointees. Such are in brief the main provisions of a Bill that cannot fail to elicit considerable discussion in the country "as well as in the-House. Whether it will be passed during the- current session is-highly problematical. Itwill probably be objected that things have not yet reached such a stage, in this colony as to justify so drastic a law as that, now proposed. But the test of the necessity for legislation of the kind does not lie so much in the existence of a great evil as in a knowledge of the trend towards the creation of trusts and combines. There can be'no gainsaying the fact that in recent years there has been an alarming tendency to the creation of vast monopolies and controlling rings, and that- there is need for the adop*tion of effective measures to check the development of an evil which threatens the well-being of p'eople and the interests of the nation. It may be admitted that so far New Zealand lias not been afflicted withthe grasping spirit of monopoly, but that admission does not dispose of all need for repressive .legislation. The wise and' prudent statesman does not wait for action until an evil has become rampant. He knows that it is easier and more advantageous to the country to. check its development in its incipient, stages than it is to eradicate it when it has become established, just as it is easier to extinguish a fire' at ife outbreak than when it lias become> a conflagration. If there is no trade monopoly in the colony calling- fof repressive measure® no one" will be hurt by tlie of the - Bill; and its. presence, onythe;-Statute-vßook will- act as a" wholesale check upon tlio evils of trusts arid combines obtaining ■ a footing in " the colony. . -