246 KEPORT ON COOPERATION IN AMERICAN EXPORT TRADE.

is responsille in great measure for Australia’s present unimportant
standing as an exporter of manufactured goods. There is hardly a
country in the world which is not situated more favorably for marketing
 its products in the crowded communities of the Northern Hemisphere.
 To these, Australia sends to-day practically nothing but
staples, raw materials for mills and factories, of whose output a fair
proportion finds its way back again to the originating source. But
despite these conditions, which apply about equally in all the States,
Australian producers have undoubtedly, in some instances, resorted
to consolidation as a means to restricting competition and maintaining
 prices. Agreements of this nature, when existent, are based
upon verbal understandings among the persons interested, but they
are rigidly respected and nonparticipants therein find their independent
 endeavors seriously hampered.
“Understanding ” in coal and coke trade.—This is apparent in the
coal and coke trade of New South Wales. One of the “outside”
operators has assured the writer that in the case of coke the situation
 is peculiarly acute. By an “understanding” among the cokeoven
 proprietors all coke destined for the Statc of Victoria shall be
sold at a price of more than $15 per ton. The price of coke at the
ovens is not more than $4. Efforts to purchase coke without disclosing
 its intended destination with a view to combating the “ understanding
 ” have been met with searching questions, and upon its
being ascertained that the coke was wanted on Victorian account the
sale has been refused. Even could purchase in such circumstances
be accomplished, it is practically certain that cargo space in vessels
from New South Wales ports would be found unobtainable. Another
indication of the existence of a tentative “ combine ” is cited in the coal
trade. An independent producer having stocks on hand at a time
when the industry was suffering from a strike of miners was asked to
supply a certain vessel with a small quantity for bunker purposes.
This was done. Later, when approached with an offer of further
* independent ” coal this vessel’s owners said that they did not dare
place any further orders with outside producers. The business of the
* independent ”’ mine owner was therefore curtailed and he has since
informed me that he has found it practically out of the question for
him to sell his output in competition with the allied mines. And yet
there is no direct evidence that any black and white contract binds the
proprietaries of these allied mines to act only in concert.
The coastal steamship situation.—Apparently. there is also an
agreement under which the coastal steamship services of Australia
are operated. To all intents and purposes the several companies
constitute, in the consolidation of their interests, a trust. Fares and
freights are regulated along noncompetitive lines and passenger
tickets are interchangeable. Time tables, too, are systematized in
such a way as to equalize as far as possible the benefits to the different
owners. And yet the companies, all of the limited liability class, are
ostensibly independent, there being nothing to indicate joint control.
Each has its own board of directors and each maintains its own offices
or agencies in the various cities of the Commonwealth. If there be
any interlocking of directorates it is well concealed. The chief
factors in this indirect alliance are the Australian Steamships
(Ltd.), the Adelaide Steamship Co. (Ltd.), the Australian United
Steam Navigation Co. (Ltd.), and Messrs. McIlwraith, McEachern