Notes of the Day.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXX, Issue 3588, 30 July 1912, Page 4

Notes of the Day.

THE BOROUGH METAL SUPPLY

It is we think, ■ safe to assert that nothing for a considerable period has caus'd such .a flutter in the municipal /lnvecotes as the article winch appeared in this journal yesterday with 'reference to the’-Gentle Annie tramway. nis "nr its facts and figure* on.official documents the “Times,” it will be re- ! membered, cast considerable doubts as ; [" the success, from any point of view | of wlmt lias always been a very vexed ■proposition. As might have been ex- j ported the portion of our remarks , which excited the most comment "as ihi about which so little bad hitherto | keen known, via., the financial aspect, j Holding the position of chief citizen, , Mr Pettie, it would have been thought, ( would have liked to have had a few words to sav- on the subject, but oddij j enough ho declined to eommrt himKtdf- With his usual impetuosity Or. Collins has, however, taken up the cudgels on behalf of those who profess to have no doubts on the matter His facts and figures, too, might not unreasonable lead one to suppose that he has had. access to “the very best sources of information.” But after he lias said all that he can say, has he shown that the “Times” was very far (if anything) out? Me think not. To Win with it is not necessary for us to defend Crs. Wade and Smith for they are well able to look after themselves. As to the quality of the stone that is in the quarry, Cr. Collins has, of course, no right to expect the ratepayers to take his dictum on the point. We come now to the financial aspect of the concern for the current year based on the figures. in respect of the last quarterly period. The position was stated in the “'Times” as under, i —Charges Against the Department. ! Quarry expenses at the rate [ of £BB9 par quarter ...- ... Tramline expenses at the j rate of £7OO per quarter ... £2BOO i Interest on outlay ‘ (.--‘o j Depreciation (say) ! Other expenses (say) ... ... £“-> ! Total approximately ... ,£BOOO j —Revenue. — I Estimated receipts (as per j the Borough Estimates) ... £oooo : Leaving an apparent deficit of £3OOO I Now, what Cr. Collins says in reply ; does not help the position, which he is j supporting. His figures for quarrying ! and hauling are the same as appeared (in this journal. (There was no item • “interest” on the statement presented | to the Council by the Engineer, but iwe stated it separately.) So tar so j good. If the item “interest” is left ’out- of consideration for the moment I the item quarry charges (for the year) j £3556. must stand. Then, as to the | tram line, it will be seen flint Cr. I Collins also inserts an item for “inI forest” under the general charges, j Leaving if out of consideration for the ■ moment, his total for the ordinary i charges does not differ from that gi- ! ven in the “Times-” The item tramj line charges (for the year) £2BOO j must, therefore, also stand. If “in- ! terest” he taken bv itself bow do i things stand? The'“Times” allowed i £787 in respect of interest, but Cr. . Collins lias made the case worse by ■ allowing an intere-st charge on the whole proposition of no less a sum than ■ £1092. Coming next to our item dej predation, say £750. he has made no ! allowance at * all, except a compara- : tivelv small sum which he declares is | a profit made by the concern and ) which he declares finds its way into | tire general revenue of the borough! I Nor '"does Cr. Collins make any pro- ■ vision in respect of the extra expenses | of £75 which we showed should be al- ! lowed. We come now to the revenue side of tiie proposition. Or. Collins. ! it will he seen, makes some caic-ula--1 tions on a basis which, as far as j know- has never been laid down by tlie ! Council. For our part we were content i to take the item—Estimated receipts (sale of metal quarry £SOOO from tl ? \ Council’s own estimates for the yen". : One would have thought that th'rt j vrotild be the simplest way of getting j at the estimated amount of revenr ? j from the concern! Boiled down thc i j all Cr. Collins says is that the receipts I will 1>? mueli higher. But wliy dm s ] be not give wliat be considers shoo'd be the proper estimate? We are ■ afraid the ratepayers will take a fit j of convincing that the proposition is a -, profitable one. Nor is what t'-e quarry turned out in a given six weeks |to the point. Mr Paterson takes the I output at 17,090 yards of metal, bej sides screenings, in his road constnmI tion report. That we should think is : sufficiently reliable data. Hi ere is i doubtless something in the explan-:-j tion as to why such a large propo-- ! tion of the Kaitaratnhi gravel rernainI ing in sight has been sold for private , streets. But it is surely remarknb'" j if it be the case that th? Railwrv j department practically forced the B ■- ! rough into selling nearly half of the ! gravel left in the pit to outsiders m | order to allow it sufficient trucks 1 o : handle the balance. Upon another o•- ! easion we shall deal with the concern j from some other aspects.

THE COMMERCIAL TRUSTS ACT

! The Commercial Trusts Act, 1910, under which proceedings are being j taken by the Government against The Colonial Sugar Refining Company, am, also against several big wholesale houses in Wellington, is, as its full title—“An Act for the Repression of Monopolies in Trade or Commerce”— j implies, an attempt, and the first leg- ' islative attempt in this country to prevent trusts getting such a baleful grip on the commercial and social life of New Zealand as they have in the United States. The Act is very wide and embracing in its terms, a commercial trust being defined as “any association or combination of any number of persons whether in-New Zealand or elsewhere having as its object (1) the control or determining or influencing the supply or demand or price of any goods in New Zealand or elsewhere or (2) creating or maintaining a complete or partial monopoly in the supply or demand of any goods or the acting with any such object as aforesaid.” The goods to which tile Act applies are - limited to certain articles. including agricultural implements, coal, meat, fish, flour, petroleum, sugar, tobacco- Clause 3 of the Act, under which these proceedings arc being taken, makes it an offence to give or offer concessions discounts or refunds in consideration of exclusive dealings with any person or corporation, or to act in connection with any trust; or to refuse to deal with or supply to any person with goods who will not come into or act with the Trust. Monopolies in selling goods and the Celling of goods at prices fixed by a trust,\or the selling of goods at the direction ipf or in conjunction wi.lv a trust” atm price which is unreasonably high* are also offences under this Act, penalty for a

breach is very severe:. any person committing an offence is liable to be fined £SOO, and each person implicated is severally liable. The Attorney-Gen-eral has to institute proceedings, and in the case now !adore the court presumably the late Government caused these proceedings to be taken, as the late Attorney-General, Sir John Findlay, K.C., is leading the prosecution for the Crown. Clause . 8 of the Act is likely to cause considerable legal argument and to necessitate evidence from commercial men, and this Clause provides that for the purpose of the Act the price of any goods “shall be deemed to lie unreasonably high if it produces or is calculated to produce more than a fair and reasonable rate ol commercial profit to the person selling the goods or to any Trust- of which that person is a member.”