THE RECIPROCAL TREATY

Otago Daily Times, Volume 13694, Issue 13694, 10 September 1906, Page 6

THE RECIPROCAL TREATY

PROTEST BY DUNEDIN MILLERS.

A meeting of millors was hold at the 1 ratios Hall on Saturday evening to dis--5? SS tj o T!' ro!lt,y P ro P osals w 'th Australia. l- r™ Ste P' lens WES elected to the <rn!'' ?L C ' e wns 8 a 't° n< lanco. _ Iho Chairman, after pointing out the injury to the millers proposed by the socalled reciprocal tariff, said thcro was an altogether wrong- impression abroad abnu" the profits of millers. In the Times, of that "i 101 v.v' not 'c«i a letter railing against tho Millers' Association, the prices charged a l! which the public were allegedly being robbed. As a matter of fact, tne prices to-day were easier that at that time when there were no such associations. Tho price of flour was at all times ruled by the price of wheat. The proposed tariff was unjust, and injurious to tho millers interests.

Mr Macdonnlcl moved tho following resolution That this meeting views' with strong disapproval and alarm tho proposed Reciprocal Treaty now before the House of Parliament. This treaty proposes to admit Australian flour into Now Zealand free of duty. Such a course would mean tho nun of the flourmilling industry in New Zealand, and, ns a consbquenee, hundreds of mill operatives would be thrown out of employment, bringing much hardship to themselves and those depending upon their earnings for support. While generally in sympathy with reciprocity, wo maintain that tho interesTs of tho workers should he tho first consideration of our representatives, and any alteration to tho existing tariff would bo so far-reaching in its eflect that- it will act prejudicially' not only to ourselves, but the farm labourers also. It will imperil the very existence of so many colonists that we sincerely trust our protest will receive the most careful consideration of the Government." The admission of flour free of dutv into New Zealand would mean ruinatibn 'to the milling industry. As they all knew, the Australian miller had many advantages over the New Zealand miller. His wheat was harder and drier, and he could produce a ton of flour with at least four bushels of wheat less. Moreover, ho had a better market for his brand and pollard. New Zealand exported most of its bran and pollard, but was prevented from doing so to Australia by reason of thji duty of 15s per ton upon it. EventuallV the blowshould tho treaty bo carried, would fall upon tho farmers, who would get less for their wheat. Mr Turnrow, in seconding the motion, remarked that tho treaty was all onesided.

The Chairman said a (rood deal of claptrap was talked by people who kncwnntlunir about tlio matter regard injr the prtco of flour. At the last meotimr of the Trades Pounoil a question. originating from Auckland, eamo up in commotion with the price of flour, and one Renfleman present spoke strongly, against tlio millers. Ho was a furmtiirn dealer; next to him sat a linker. Tlio baker was very much amused by the man s tissue of misstatements. To a ton of flour in Otago there went 47 bushels of wheat, and. the price, take it all round for the' best nulling wheat, averaged about 3s 8d per bushel. This worked out at £8 8s 5d per ton. From this- there had to bo deducted the pnco.of bran and pollard averaging about £14s. The net cost of tho wheat for one ton of flour was thus £7 4s sd. To this there must bo added the cost of manufacturing, which would average not less than £1 2s 6d per ton,' bringing the cost of a ton of flour up to £8 6s lid. 1' lour wan sold at £9 per ton, less 24 per cent, discount, making the sum £8 15s 6d. There was thus the small profit of 8s 7d per ton on flour. In Svdnoy and Melbourne flour was at from £7* to £7 10s per ton, less Ss Bd discount, nu);in» it at say, £7 10s, just, £7 6s 3d. Adding to this for duty and cost of ITrmging it'over £1 15s, it meant that this flour could be landed on Dunediu wharf at £9 Is 3d Removo the duty of £1 per ton, and the same flour could lie landed in Duncdin at a little over £B per ton. It cost New Zealand inillors £8 6s Ud to make a ton-of flour. Without; the duty, Australian flour couid bo lunrled at £8 Is 3d, or 5s 8d less than it could bo made for here. Tlio millers could not "face tlio music" of a dead joss. Every man was justified in

expecting' a fail' profit on his outlay. Considering the bad and doubtful debts, the ujw art! downs of the market, and what not, tlio millers were very reasonable. According to the latest, quotations, Sydney and Melbourne millers obtained much better prices for their bran and pollard, in New Zealand thoro was practically no market for tlio bran and pollard,' much of which had. to be exported, in face of a heavy-duty .on the other side. If the duty were taken oif wheat, the millers could import. Australian wheat, and practically competo with the Australian millers. But this tlicy were prohibited from "doing by a duly of Is per cental. Under all the circumstances, tho price of flour was very low. ' , A Voice: There is nothing to grumble at with bread at' 6d a loaf. The resolution was carried unanimously. On tho motion of Mr W. Yorstonj seconded by Mr A. Davidson, it was resolved to send a. copy of the resolution to each member of Parliament for Dunedin and district. ■ ■ .