Plea For Revision of NG

Plantation Valuations

Letter to the Editor IN your issue of August you publish a letter from “Leatherneck”, about existing conditions in the copra business. I think he covers all the ground excepting his method of altering present conditions by some “passive resistance” of the planters. This, to my mind, would be more injurious to the planters than the merchants.

To review past history of the copra trade in New Guinea—it may be remem bered that the plantations were tendered for at a time when the price of copra was around £2O per ton, and it is now fixed at £4/10/- by the Copra Marketing Board. There was such a rush for plan tations that people paid high prices for their places, which was mainly caused by the high prices of copra. They also agreed to cruel conditions of repayment, under an inequitable agreement. These conditions included 8 per cent, interest, and other conditions. Some of these, which were objectionable to the mer chants, have since been removed, but there still remain the “tied house” clauses, allowing merchants to charge their prices, no matter the objection.

As the prices for copra got lower, the unfortunate planters found themselves working for the merchants, and these practically controlled the planters, and gave only such credit as suited them selves, often without salary.

All the copra supplied to the merchants is credited to them in the merchants’ books, and rations are supplied at their prices, and other charges, including the 8 per cent, interest on interest, are also included, without reference to the planter, and he gets the usual monthly statement of their charges. Under this “tied house” arrangement, there is no possibility of ever getting free Through no fault of the merchants— and planters, too, for that matter —the price of copra has fallen to £4/10/- or, with carriage paid, to about £5 odd.

This, you will see, is about one fourth the price of that received, at the time of tendering.

Taking everything into account, is this not a suitable time to reduce the prices of the plantations, and interest by half, to allow the planters to continue on their plantations? For, certainly, it will be found that merchants are not paving anything like the former bank rate, and should meet the planters. It is no longer possible for the planters to work for the mer chants under the old conditions, under an inequitable agreement. They should be allowed to draw 10 per cent, against deliveries, as there are other creditors.

The above facts, being taken into ac count, have nothing to do with the price of copra, so are not affected by the Copra Marketing Board. But legislation should be introduced now to protect present fand, after the war, future) soldiers, from the inequitable agreement conditions now existing in New Guinea.

I am, etc.,

Starvation.

Rabaul, 10/10/1941.