Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ALLEGED PROFITEERING.

PROFITS ON MANCHESTER GOODS. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. The hearing of a charge, of profiteering brought by the Board of Trade against Messrs George and Kersley, Ltd., was concluded at the Magistrate's Court before Mr. E. Page, S.M. David James Constable, in charge of the Manchester Department of the defendant firm, said that No. 5 Shetland flannel was .purchased at Is 7y B d, and four other flannels in stock were purphased at Is BJd to Is ll%d per yard. The flannel had to be sold on texture and weight, and No. 5' was much better in that respect than the other four samples. He endeavored to get 50 per cent, on other flannels, but found "he could not get that, and, therefore, had to quit them at Is lid and 2s 3d, which would leave no profit, and No. 5 Shetland a,t 3 3 3d would not make up the profit.'

Alexander Pringle South, managing director of James Smith, Ltd., said English flannel of No. 5 Shetland quality would cost 4s landed. Goods costing Is IOJd were often sold atj. 5s Cd'per yard. That was done generally in the trade, especially in the Manchester Department. Francis Leary Mather, a director of George and Kersley, Ltd., said that the Manchester was the poorest paying department of the business. ' The gross average profit of this department in the period 1914-18 was 34.41 per cent., and expenses 28.61 per cent., showing a net profit of fi.S per cent. It was generally agreed in the soft goods trade that 331-3 per sent. on the turnover was the least that could safely be relied on to yield a profit.

Sir J. 'Findlay said the Crown was asking his Worship to place an interpretation on the statute which would have the effect of destroying business. He contended that the court must look at the transaction on the basis of business as a whole. Mr. McAssey submitted that even if defendants were entitled to level up, they should have levelled up within a reasonable limit. Was it reasonable to charge for an article in demand by the working classes a price that was 100 per cent, above cost price? His Worship reserved decision.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19190916.2.48

Bibliographic details

Taranaki Daily News, 16 September 1919, Page 5

Word Count
371

ALLEGED PROFITEERING. Taranaki Daily News, 16 September 1919, Page 5

ALLEGED PROFITEERING. Taranaki Daily News, 16 September 1919, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert