CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 23 June 1925, Page 7

CORRESPONDENCE.

BUTTER FREEZING CHARGES. (To the Editor.) Sir. —We wish to "bring to public notice the unjust, unnecessary and excessive charges made, by the directors of the Taranaki Producers’ Freezing Works Co., Ltd., to some exporting firms and butter factories, who are practically compelled to ship their butter through these works owing to the company mentioned having the only grading stores gazetted by the Department of Agriculture for North and Mid-Taranaki. The extortionate nature of the charges of which we complain are exemplified by the following comparisons for freezing 100 boxes of butter for first month: —

This represents an increase at New Plymouth of 42.8 per cent to non-share-holders.

Nor is this all; shareholders also receive a semi-secret rebate of approximately 3 ‘/bd per box. This was not pajd to non-shareholders, so that the cost of freezing to the latter is 172 per cent, above the cost to shareholders. Put in another way, on every 100 tons of butter put through tlie Taranaki Producers’ Freezing Works by a non-shareholding factory, who is denied the privilege of becoming a member, there was charged in' the 1023-84 season a sum of £lOB 6s 8d in excess of the net sum paid, by a shareholding factory. This is equal to £1 Is 8d per ton. We claim that this discrimination against non-sliarelioldeTS is not only unjust but is discreditable to the directors of the company, who, while holding what amounts to a Government monopoly at this port, are abusing what should be regarded in the light of a trust, ami under these conditions the management of a work of public utility is being directed to the grave disadvantage of a section of the industry whose well-being it was intended to foster. The firms in question have repeatedly made application for either a reduction of the unreasonable charges or asked that shares be allotted to them. Both requests have been treated with scant courtesy and refused or shelved. The Taranaki Producers’ Freezing Company is the only one of its -kind in the Dominion gazetted as a Government grading store that adopts this unreasonable attitude; all others allow any exporter to become a shareholder. When the attention of the Department of Agriculture was drawn to the extortionate charges being made by this company, strong in the strength of a monopoly, they referred the matter to the company’s chairman, but tlie departments action proved to be of no assistance. Their complacent attitude in reference to this abuse is in unpleasant contrast to that of the same department a few years ago when the original Moturoa works were being established under private enterprise, assisted by considerable sums of money as subsidies from the Government.

Under private control exporters were encouraged to ship their produce through the port of New Plymouth, and all sections of the industry received fair and impartial treatment; but under the cloak of co-operatioii the works have become a close corporation whose directors, backed by their Government monopoly, are imposing a scale of charges and making a profit from their fellow farmers who choose to market their produce through, private . firms that is as exorbitant as it is unjust. Every endeavour has been made by the firms and companies affected to get the matter adjusted/but without avail. We now ask that you give publicity to the matter through your columns and trust that it will lead to an inquiry ' into tJie whole question.—We are, etc., ' BUTLER DAIRY CD., LTD.

’For ShareFor Nonholders. Sli ar eholder s New Plymouth £B 18 4 £4 3 4 Palea £2 IS 4 £2 18 1 Lyttelton .... £2'10 0 £2 10 0