FLOURMILLING CASE.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume L, Issue 16579, 7 November 1924, Page 9

FLOURMILLING CASE.

(Per Press Association.' DUNEDIN, this day

In the flour-milling ease, Mr. Solomon, addressing the Court, quoted judgments in support of the argument that the raising of prices was not necessarily pernicious if an important industry was thereby preserved in the interests of the public. He contended that the contract was reasonably necessary for the protection of millers and the milling trade. He submitted that the scheme originated with the concurrence, even at the suggestion. of bakers, and started even with the knowledge and tae.it approval of the Government. Distributors had: made possible the equal distribution of flour. The inconveniences caused were accidental, and not incidental to the scheme. The formation of Distributors overcame a grave menace to the flour and wheatgrowing industries, and had conferred a national advantage. Mr. Myers said the millers, if they 1 ikied, could have made a merger like the bre work's, which would have had all the advantages to the millers of the present system, but would have the result of great disadvantage to the public, with which the latter must have put up. For example., in the event of a. merger all the mills’ output would have borne the same brand. So long as- a duty existed on wheat Distributors would he of great advantage in maintaining the essential wheat growing industry.