H.—44A.

[MR. MYERS.

had it from Mr. Boyd and Mr. Thomson that in practice the manufacturer cannot enforce the agreement, by reason of the fact that persons who mean to continue to use the particular lines for the purpose of selling at reduced prices can adopt all sorts of methods to circumvent the manufacturer and other persons interested in the goodwill. That being so, there is only one way in which the fixation of prices by manufacturers can be maintained, and that is by some such method as the P.A.T.A., which it is sought now to establish. It is the only method by which the interests of those concerned in the goodwill can be adequately protected. I submit that by the operation of the P.A.T.A. the public have an advantage, and it is in the interests of those concerned in the P.A.T.A. to see that too high a price is not charged for any particular article which is being placed on its list, and that it would use its endeavour to see that not more than a reasonable profit is obtained. Now, it was said by Mr. Gresson —and I think he was followed on this point to some extent by Mr. Kennedy'—that the P.A.T.A. is of no use, because it cannot check the manufacturer's cost. Of course, it cannot check the manufacturer's cost, and no other scheme could do that unless the Board of Trade takes the power under the statute to examine into the books of the manufacturer. As to whether there is a P.A.T.A. or no P.A.T.A., the manufacturer's cost cannot be ascertained other than by steps taken by the Board of Trade ; but there is one thing that the P.A.T.A. can do, and it is this : it can see that, so far as costs of distribution are concerned, once the article is sold by the manufacturer those costs shall not be excessive so far as the public is concerned —in other words, that neither the wholesaler nor the retailer shall exact more than a fair and reasonable profit for the service he renders in the distribution of the goods. How can it be said that the operations of the P.A.T.A. will result in an increase in the cost of living ? I submit, with respect, and I submit with confidence, that it will have no such effect. It certainly would have no such effect if the cutting traders—whether grocers, fancy-goods shops, or traders—play fairly with the public and carry out the plan which they have formed for the benefit of the public, because, as I have already pointed out, they would have just as much to give away to the public—probably even more—by way of concession or discount on the necessaries of life, and therefore the matter is entirely in their own hands. If they are altruists, which they suggest they are at the present time, the people would get the benefit and the cost of living would not be raised. What I mean is that the same concessions would go to the public, and the poorer people would get at least as much benefit, if not more, because it is not the poorer people who buy these proprietary articles, but the people who are more favourably circumstanced. Ido not think that I need trouble the Committee very much with the suggestion that the institution of the P.A.T.A. will have evil effects, because I have already dealt with that question in the course of my remarks to the Committee. My submission is that there is no validity whatever in that suggestion or contention, for many reasons : first, that the P.A.T.A. will not have anything to do with foodstuffs ; and another reason is that there are very wide powers, as I have pointed out, of the Board of Trade, and, if there are any evil consequences commencing to result from the P.A.T.A., steps-—and very properly, too— would be taken by the Board of Trade to prevent any such evils of trading. Then, it has been suggested that if some particular trader did not join the P.A.T.A. other members of the P.A.T.A. might take steps to have the first-mentioned trader boycotted. It has already been explained that there is no compulsion on any person to join the P.A.T.A.' —he is perfectly free — and the only circumstances under which any action could be taken by a group of traders against any particular trader would be because that trader, whether a member of the P.A.T.A. or not, was breaking the prices which were fixed by the manufacturer and listed on the P.A.T.A., and so cutting, to the detriment of other traders, and, I submit, to the detriment of the public when the proper definition of the words " public interest "is understood. Now, Ido not think that I can assist the Committee very much further, or, really, any further, because I apprehend that the Committee would not thank me for doing what my friends have avoided, and, I think, properly avoided —that is to say, analysing the evidence. After all, as my friend Mr. Gresson said, we are not addressing a jury, but we are addressing a body of gentlemen who are conducting a judicial inquiry. That is what it amounts to. That being so, I do not consider it necessary to address any further observations to the Committee, and I desire to conclude by thanking you, gentlemen, for the patience and courtesy which has been shown to counsel and the witnesses who have appeared at this rather protracted inquiry, but T hope not unduly protracted inquiry. Mr. Collins : That practically concludes our public proceedings, and I want to take this opportunity, on behalf of the members of the Committee, to thank counsel and the various witnesses for attending the inquiry. We feel that we have not lacked evidence or information which should enable us to come to a conscluion. I sincerely thank you, Mr. Myers, for the reference you made in your concluding remarks with respect to the courtesy of the Committee. That, of course, was only to be expected, because we look really to counsel for a great deal of help, and that help has been extended to us to an extent that we hardly contemplated.

152