THE FLOUR DUTY.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIC, Issue 13393, 17 September 1907, Page 2

THE FLOUR DUTY.

IXTKI:\IK\V Willi mi: l-A'AX*. Heaving that Mr Evar.s was in Wellington when Sir Jr.-'epli Ward delivers nw speech i.n ill'.' proposed abolition "' lh '' fiuli.i; cm flor.r and wheat, a ivpivx-enta-tiv.- c.f the, -Herald" sought his opinione; mi i lie subject. "Yiis, 1 Mas in Wellington hist week a'.the time- tlw proposed abolition of the Hour tariff was before the House, ' »«" .Mr Evans, "and I feel smc that members of Parliament have never given the mat-t-r careful consideration. The Premier Mr Mackenzie. Mr Ma»ey, and a Jew bunin.'o men and farmeiei in the Houtw buy.- a l'air grasp of the poi-jfioii. but- the insvcv and his following, appear to mo t-r( look at the- matter only Irom a political •.itaiul[i;:i:'!. Their constituents do not grow aii. wi. at, and a cheap loaf is al-\v.-ivs a. safe subject to kfep before the u»rt:ii:" man, especially Ix-iou- election time. .Sir Joseph Ward" placed the position before the House very fairly. He, as a business man. knows that if the 2Cs duty is taken off flour in Xew Zealand Australia, would flood the market with her surplus, and Now Zealand farmers would go out- of grain growing, as wool and sheep pay much better and cause the fainuis much* less worry. .Sir Joseph also mentioned the fat'- that the Commonwealth during the big drought which lasted owr some years still kept the 50s a ton duty on flour, oven when the price went up to £ls per ton, while here today the price i.; £lO f.0.b., less 2£ per unit., and wheat is .selling at 4s 9d a bushel, Millers have to compete with Australian flour coming ' into New Zealand at the present time, notwithstanding the duly. Any miller who was lucky enough to secure a good stock of wheat before the late rise can pull through at 'the present price without loss; bub those miller.? having to buy wheat- at over Ae, 6d now must get- over £ll per ton for their flour to clear them from loss.''

"It- appeals -t-o me," continued •Mr Evans, "that- millers in New Zealand are good game to be shot at by cnrpet-l)Dg politicians, labour agitators, and irresponsible scribblers. Some years ago a northern miller representing a large company refused to joint the A.«sociation for the" reason that he could do better by remaining outside, as he can. now run Ms mill full time (three shifts) while Association millers can only manage to work on an average one shift. This miller posed before the labour leaders sr> a philanthropist and indicated that the members of the Association were importers, etc., and he managed to get several labour unions to pass resolutions! in favour of buying all their flour from the Auckland mills. I, about, this time, on liehalf of my company, offered to sell the Crown mills at Dunedin to the labour unions (who were convening meetings hostile to southern millers) for £9OOO, although it cost the bank from whom we bought it- £26,500, but the agitators did not accept our offer and we managed to find a buyer elsewhere. It was only lastweek in Dunedin that two mills in the insolvent estate of Mr John Kiley were sold—one at £2500, and the other at about £6OO. These mills must- have cost. nearer £12,000 than the price they'were sold at. If milling is such a good moneymaking business why is milling property alwavs so unsaleable, even if offered at half "price? I leave Mr Hogg. M.H.R., to explain." • Asked his opinion of the sliding scale proposed by the Premier. Mr Evans said he felt sure it would not improve matters for the consumers of bread. The price of wheat and bread is ruled in New Zealand and in Australia also, by the. Values for the time being in the United Kingddm and America. If wheat is 4Cs ' a quarter in London to.day, farmers and speculators who hold wheat .will naturally sooner sell it for shipment to London than sell it to local xnjplers, under values procurable from outside New Zealand. 1-or some years past flour has averaged about £8 15s per ton f.0.b.. but flour some years ago went up to £l3, and the same"ye/ir this high price obtained—viz., £l3 in January. 1903—was reduced to £9 10s by the month of May in the- same year.

Mr Evans handed to the "Herald' for publication the following tabulated list, showing the prices ruling for flour for 18 rears—from Mav,., 1890 to May, 1907. £. s. 1890 ...-9 0 per ton f.o.b. • 3891 ... 12 0 per ton f.o.b. 1892 ... 10 10 per ton f.o.b. 1893 ... 8 0 per ton f.o.b: 1894 •■ ... 7 0 per ton f.o.b. 1895 ... 710 per ton f.o.b. 1896 ... 810 per ton f.o.b 1897 ... 10 0 per ton f.o.b. • 1898 ... 12 0 per ton f.o.b. 1899 ... '6 10 per ton f.o.b. 1900 ... 6 0 per v>n f.o.b. 1901 ... 6 0 per ton f.o.b. 19C2 ... 10 0 per ton f.o.b. 1903 ... 910 per ton f.o.b. 1904 ... 8 0 per ton f.o.b. 1905 ... 810 per ton f.o.b. 1906 ... 810 per ton f.o.b. 1907 ... 810 per ton f.o.b. In 1903 the price dropped from £l3 in January to £9 10s in May. The following figures are taken from the back numbers of the "Herald."

In May 1890 the highest price ruling for wheat was 5s Id ; in 1891 it was 4s 3d; in 1892,' when flour was selling at it little more than the present rate, wheat was Ss 9d : in 1898 wheat was at the same price as it is now (4s 6d to ss) and iiour was £2 per ton mine than at present ;in May 1900, 2s 3d was a faiivprice; and in May last the rate varied from 3s 3d to 4s. A THRESHER'S OPINION. (To the Editor of the 'Timaru Herald.") .Sir, —I see a great deal of late in your papti- about the wheat and flour duty. No one has taken up the question of a Ihreehtr's views on this matter. Well, I give my opinion on this question. What 1 am convinced would happen it' the duty wim taken off flour and wheat, is this: .First, ther? are in Canterbury some 220 threshing- mil's and the number of me,ii required io work each mill is ten: therefore: the. total number required for the 220 milk would be 2200 hands. Now if wheat and flour were to com;.' in duty free, I am quite safe in saying that one half of the- mills would be tliruwn out of employment. That- would mean that 1100 workers would be then idle and at the- same time, robbed of something like- say. £3O per man (total, £33,000) for the Reason, of about- twelve weeks' work. That i.s- an item that should be taken into consideration before letting the worker of Australia have it or any other country before New Zealand. Now what i.s to be done with the threshing machinery as it would !>..' no use to put this particular class of machinery at any other work? Tin: threshing plants df to-day. compkt-e ready for work, com £I2OO. and in some eases moiv. Nov.- take .he 110 that would l>~ thrown out- of action if the duty war; removed id an average of £3OO per plant, ami you will find that thc:e is £BBOO worth of projHViy lis'-hss to tlio owner, and in a great many cas>.:-> these men are not in a position to li:.«> tvon a. single shilling. Th y are toiling for their daily bread ji:stas much as the worker is. Would the (iovarnmenf- give these iwn compensation for their los."cr, sustained at flh-ir hands

if this was made law? What 1 have pointed out ii a'i far as CanU'vluiry is concerned, 'then there ix Xorlli Otago tha;. grows a hi! of wheat, and would a!-.o be (he Wer both in labour and in ue-- !.-sm threshing machinery. Xow ii- appears quite plain to me that: the members who voted for the. duty 1" be removed either hud not thought of the met) they wore to deprive of their living, and at- the same time- dealing a blow' that- might fsiilieii thtin for ever, fur the sake of that -Ul aloaf, which they do not- know thai the. consumer will get it after all. 1 would like to know if lh--s.' members that voted for the removal of ihe duty oil' wheat and flour would like to have their little property on' made valuehrr; by voting in the direction thev did.—F am. c;c. \(;Ki)it({K sauxdkrs. Threshing e.liil Owner. Pleasant Point-, September 16.

You often sing of England. And of lielar.d, too, and Wales. And the " P.raes of Komi.ie Scotland.'' With lu'r stirring "order Tales : P.ut don't forget New Zealand (X<> other'.'kics are bluer], And its famous household remedy— Woods' Great Peppermint Cure. ... \