LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VI, Issue 1736, 6 September 1919, Page 8

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

BUYING IN THE CHEAPEST MARKET. To the Editor of THE SUN. Sir, —In Wednesday's issue of THS Sun there appeared a cablegram from Home announcing that the Germans were placing goods on the- market at prices far below those of British manufacturers. No doubt, some of our big fiims will be rather concerned at this, especially if the German articles turn out to be of as good qua]ity a» the British. Also, I expect there will be a great outcry—from our firms—that no patriotic Britisher should buy German goods, and that every man, woman and child should boycott the Hun product as if it waß infected with a deadly disease. If every one of us did boycott the German stuff it would be very nice—for the British retail firms and manufacturers. They would still be able to charge enormous prices and reap huge profits. I wonder whether the British public is going to be fooled any longer with this talk of patriotism. Can a man be truly patriotic when he' sells a working man or a returned soldier goods on which he makes 100 per cent., or more, profit T Has a big firm which doubles or trebles the price of goodß bought in pre-war days any right to cry the • -slogan, "We've won the war"! No! Certainly not.. A man who will do things like these is really a traitor —a war profiteer is too mild a name. For his own avaricious gain he is robbing and ruining a large section of the public; the-British working man, the British soldier and- his dependents. Mind you, I do not include all retail firms in this. Some have played the game. There are others who have not, and the following is how I learned the truth. I have a particular friend who buys and sells goods for a large wholesale firm; he has been at it for over 20 years. During a walk aronnd the city, he stopped before the windows of one of the. largest drapery concerns. He pointed out different articles which had the prices attached, and told me their landed cost prices - , in New Zealand, also at what price they were sold to this draper. I was amazed. In nearly every case-this draper was selling' at over 100 per cent, profit, in some cases it was ove* 250 per cent. One. line of eoods he pointed out were sold by his firm ' ! at 1/6 per dozen. These same things were being sold here at. 1/6 each! Now, sir, is a man who will do things like this a patriot or & traitor! It's a .Stab in the back for a soldier's dependents to be robbed in this manner. I am a Main Body soldier and have just been demobilised, and my savings during the past five years have been exceedingly small. For two years I drew only 5/- per day. Also, lam permanently unfit, due "to wounds received on active service, therefore I can no longer work on the land, which was my previous occupation." Having to start my life afresh, there are a hundred and one things that it will be necessary for me to buy—and my cash is limited. Now, sir, this is the point. If German firms can sell me these things at half the price and are content with 50 per cent, leas profit than the British firm's, from whom do you think. I am going . to buyt I think the question hardly needs nns-w«rinff. I, am going to buy from the firm that sells, me the best article at the lowest price. The Hun individual fought for his country and he now has to trade in order to pay off the huge indemnity that the Allies demand. If he trades well and fairly, I, for one, am going to deal with him. " As for the Britishers . that demand 10 and 12 guineas from demobilised soldiers for "civvy" with tnenrl> 'Wh.a(j<3b*£ou say, Diggers?—l am. etc.. TOMMY FERNLEAF. (The v'nippro of our correspondent's language detracts, rather .than adds, to the force of his argument. We have published his letter because, having fought for his country, he Is quite entitled to express an opinion on questions affecting the public 'welfare. It is a pity, however, he is not a little more specific in. his allegations. The air is thick with wild charges of "profiteering," but it is very seldom . anyone prodrces evidence on the subject that will stand analysis, and after all, you cannot hang an alleged profiteer on suspicion. It is perfectly true that high prices are being charged for certain -classes of goods, and they are caused in.most Instances by the goods being in short supply. We ere satisfled that most of the so-called profiteering is confined to goods which are really nonessential, and if people like to pay fancy prices it is entirely, their own affair. For instance, there is no necessity whatever to pay 10 and 12 guineas for a suit of clothes. Good serviceable suits can be got for half the money, but if our correspondent prefers to patronise the most fashionable and expensive tailors, he has no one to blame hut himself when he Is cnlied upon to foot the bill. So far as the charge of making 100 per cent, profit,and upwards is concerned, our correspondent does,: not mention the nature of the goods. ' In any case a gross profit of 100- per cent, on a pair of socks or' a hat is whittled down very considerably when the article is charged with its fair share of rent, wages, Interest, etc.. Finally, the Government comes along and takes 37 per cent, of the net profit, so that the draper may not be getting away with very much plunder in. the end. High prices, as we hove frequently pointed out, are due to (1) diminished supplies of goods resulting from resWcted outputs and difficulties in the way of manufacture and importation; (2) to excessive costs which are piled up every time watersiders, coal-miners, and others stop work, go slow, take holidays, loaf on the Job, and' heap, up distribution expenses; -(3) to the inflation of the currency and the flood of paper money which automatically depreciates the purchasing power of money; (4) to the abundance of money in circulation as the result of the Government' raising huge loans and spending the proceeds like water on providing soldiers' pensions and allowances, buying farms and so forth. The truth is that people in these days have money to burn—and they arc burning it. Does U ' not occur to our correspondent that every soldier wiUi a cheque to "knock down," and every girl clerk who took a soldier's job that gave her' perhaps £3 a week she never had before to spend on dress is "making the pace" In the matter of expenditure that the civilian with a family to keep on a small salary cannot possibly follow? When the-money is all spent' and a flood of cheap German or Japanese goods arrives to oust the products of our highly-paid labour and close up our industries a great change' will' come over the scene, but it will be a change for the worse, and to a man who has lost his job, a German piano at £3O, or a German suit at £3, is farther out of reach than the higher-priced British and locally-made articles arc to-day. —Ed. The Son.] DRESSMAKERS' WAGES. To the Editor of THE SUN. Sir, —Will you please allow me space in your paper to reply to the representative of a leading draper and dressmaking firm referred to in your paper last evening. I am guilty of no misleading statements. I never denied that a girl who now starts at 8/- receives 17/- at the end of her third year. What I did was to point out that girls who started 5/-, before the increased scale of wages was introduced, are only receiving 14/-. Why they should not benefit by the new scale is a point the representative of ■the trade does not explain; but I know positively that one of the largest drapery and dressmaking establishments in Christchurch employs all girls in their fourth year at 14/- a week! They are too old to start at something else, and have not reached "the point where their salary is decided on merit," so must grin and bear it; but it is quite time that a union was formed, where \ equal work will receive equal pay. Thanking you for your interest, —I am, 'etc, 1 JUSTICE. ,