280 WHEAT PRODUCTION IN NEW ZEALAND 
were so great as to cause our already timid legislature 
to abandon any definite policy, and the threats fell on 
deaf ears. A more rational procedure would have been 
the public purchase of all wheat supplies at a fixed 
maximum price. The State having thus commandeered 
the whole supply, it could have been parcelled out to 
the millers at a fixed price also, and probably high 
enough to pay the State for its action. As it was, the 
whole supply was raised to the consumer, and the 
Government lost very considerably, with the result 
that not only the failure of the enterprise, but the 
additional burden on the tax-payers, caused by the loss 
on the Government wheat, called forth severe criticism 
from all parts of the country. Difficulties, no one will 
deny, beset the path of the policy of purchasing the 
whole supply, but if drastic action were necessary, 
these difficulties were easier to overcome than the corres- 
ponding obstacles in the way of price control. It is not 
unlikely that the co-operation of the grain merchants 
could have been obtained, had the Government shown 
itself firm from the outset.”’ 
Bhis is precisely what the Government has now done. 
After December, 1917, all wheat for milling is to be 
purchased by Government brokers under the charge of 
the Wheat controller, who is the Chairman of the Board 
of Trade. The Wheat Controller will then allocate to 
eaeh flour-mill its due quota of wheat. Thus not only 
is the price fixed, but private dealing which hitherto 
has been a considerable obstacle to a successful policy 
of price control is abolished. If some form of control 
is necessary, this is probably the best form. If the 
Government is successful in administering the scheme 
satisfactorily any opposition will be beaten down. There 
is reason to believe that the scheme is now viewed with 
favour among the various ‘‘interests’’ concerned, and 
when the general public realise that the price fixed is 
