CEMENT COMMISSION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16571, 2 November 1921, Page 8

CEMENT COMMISSION.

COSTS OF PRODUCTION SOUGHT. (Per Pres* Association.) WELLINGTON, November 2. At the Cement Commission inquiry Air W. Perry, for Mr R. Masters, M.P., applied, for an order for the production of balance-sheets and statements of cost of production of the cement companies. Air M. Myers said the balance-sheets were available, but he would not, except by an order of the Court, produce the cost sheets, although the Commissioner could see them all. These particulars were submitted to the Board of Trade when the price was increased. Air Justice Sim said he would not make the order asked for at present. He might find it necessary to do so as tho inquiry proceeded. Edward Boulton, secretary of the Golden Bay Company, stated that when the price of cement was increased by the Board of Trade he was surprised. It was more than he expected. W itness declined to express an opinion as to whether the increase in price was in the interests of the company. He doubted if the cost of production could have been reduced in 1920 owing to the difficulty of getting coal, labour and materials. The price was reduced in April of this year before the agreement to close the Golden Bay works. No notice was given to the agents of the intention to close. Boulton said he knew that the Milburn Company did not charge the extra 36s allowed by the Board of Tracje. The manager of that company told him that it was not thought that ithe rise was justified, nor did witness think it justified. It was Air Luttrell who approached the Board of Trade and gave it information on which the rise was based. Witness did not think that, even if the Golden Bay works had been kept going, the price' of cement would have been any lower than it was now. He was present at the interview between Air E. S. Luttrell and Air Robert Masters in May. hut did not i*emember Air Masters threatening that unless he waS settled with he would expose the agreement in Parliament. The Golden Bay Company’s profit for the year ended June 30, 1920. was* £599. The cost of manufacture went on rising till December. 1920, when the increase in price was applied for. Since its inception in 1907,' the company paid only two dividends of 6 per cent and two of 5 per cent. He thought it could have paid more. A large amount had been set iside for depreciation and expenditure on th e plant out of nrofits. The shareholders carried a liability on their shares of £45,000, and a large overdraft has been obtained.