ARMOUR & CO.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 46, Issue 14241, 22 October 1920, Page 6

ARMOUR & CO.

REPORT OF COMMITTEE. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Thursday. In the House of Representatives this afternoon/ the Agricultural, Pastoral and Stock Committee reported on the petition of H. B. Aeland, of Christchurch, and 107 others, praying that a meat export license be granted to Armour and Co., of Australasia, Ltd. The Committee said they could not recommend that a meat export license be granted to Armour and Co., as, in the opinion of the committee, they are a subsidiary company of Armour and Co. of the United States of America, where it has been shown that they, together with other companies, carried out practices inimical to both the producer and the consumer.

Mr G. W. Forbes condemned the recommendation of the Committee. He declared that all that had been brought against Armour and Co. was in connection with an American Trust, but in New Zealand they had traded on ordinary lines, and no exception could be taken to their proceedings. The only objection to them was that they were an American firm, and he asked if this was fair. Was it sensible, when we wanted to get our meat into America? The opposition to Armour and Co. arose, not from the producers or consumers in New Zealand, but from the big freezing companies, which were making large profits, and who wished to squeeze their competitors out of the market. Mr Vernon Reed said that the effect of refusing Armour and Co. a license would be the driving of them underground, by trading through agents and otherwise! They should be watched. Great care should be taken to prevent foreign capital from obtaining control of our freezing companies. Mr R. Masters outlined the practices of the American Trusts, and asked members if they were prepared to permit similar practices in New Zealand. If a license were granted to Armour and Co., a license could not logically be refused to Swifts, and all other branches of the American Trusts. The Minister of Agriculture quoted from an official American report, and a decree issued by the United States Attorney-General, in connection with the Packers’ Trust case, and said, it was mainly these documents which had influenced him in refusing a license to Armour’s. If the Government of the United States had taken drastic steps against Armour’s, he felt that the Government of New Zealand was justified in refusing a license to trade in this Dominion. The discussion was proceeding when the House rose at 5.30 p.m.