MR MASTERS AND CO-OPERATIVE SHIPPING.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 23, 13 December 1919, Page 5

MR MASTERS AND CO-OPERATIVE SHIPPING.

(To the Editor, "Stratford Evening

Post.")

Sir,—Mr Masters has. got hig facts and figures hopelessly mixed on this question. In two "dodger" advertisements urging hjs, flblitical candidature the following sfeitginWt is;-'' made "Each year of ,the '.'. amount of produets, butter, ; chee'sej': w001,..', / ff'o meat, etc., alone was is based on the 1914 facts; ,are a<j follows; lifter 'the, seajs'dni .andiuUp,to SOfch'j 1916,, (shipping L - freights wert , heavily increased and paid on exports with the .exception of meat, which was commandeered and carried for the Imperial Government. The lowest 1 increase was on butter and cheese. In fclie early spring of 1916 additional increases .were announced by the shipping companies to take effect from Ist" Gfltobe/r-jJ,9lfi.: r - ~ Xhe'se,.; high freights were never charged or paid because the Imperial Government commandeered practically all our exports and "the shipping. It is a pity Mi- Masters has got'' so hopelessly bogged in his attempt to' handle this question, I should like to add fot in&ihnation, that > good deal, of||||k>tfss dselsnsn| towards* ?thl establißKiheht factory shipping for New Zealand. Meetings were..held!,, at.,various places in Taranaki for the purpose of ei« ( plaining the necessity of same and a schehte was submitted.'' Tke idea nlefc with very favourable support, and tiltimately a large conference of producers was held in Wellington to consider the matter. The Taranaki delegates to that conference were Messrs O. HaWken, W. D. Pbwdrell, G. Pearce, R. Dunn, A. Hunter, and the writer. A strong committee was appointed to further the question..' The committee had different proposals to consider, and finally adopted those which were formulated in Taranaki, indeed, 1 may. say, in Stratford. These proposals involved government co-operation. Mi' Massey and Sir Joseph Wftrd were away in England. Upon their return representations were made to them, but the National Government declined to lend assistance to the scheme. I do not suggest which leader was mostly responsible for turning down the scheme. It was a National Government action and if either or both opposed the request.of the deputation progress in the matter was impossible. The agitation haa done this much good: Both leaders now recognise that assured Ocean Transport is «u absolute necefisitv of our progress.—l am, etc. J. B-. RICHARDS;