SALE OF MEAT WORKS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XLV, Issue 10386, 4 May 1925, Page 2

SALE OF MEAT WORKS.

FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

INTERESTING EVIDENCE.

GISBORNE, May 2. The Meat Commission was engaged from 5 p.m. till 10 p.m. yesterday in hearing the evidence of Mr F. S. Bowen, an ex-director of the Poverty Bay Farmers' Meat Company. He claimed that the shareholders of the company had lest £-198,000, and with tbe bank's loss this made a total of £5-11,000. The loss was due to inefficient management/ the purchase of an unsatisfactory steamer, and the laxity of the National Bank in controlling Mr Lysnar in connection with the overdraft. Mr Lysnar dictated to everybody. Of the 42 works in the Dominion, theirs was the only one which quarrelled with the Government during the commandeer. After the Admiral Codrington purchase, Mr Lysnar wanted to buy another steamer and also to open a coal mine at Codrington, on the West Coast, and to construct ai railway to'it. Mr Lysnar was after an utter impossibility. The claims mi th« shirnnent of meat sent to Am-

erica amounted to £200,000, and Mr Lysnar delayed the settlement for two years. Meanwhile the buyers would not operate at the works. The directors had pressed Mr Lysnar to produce a properly audited balance-sheet for the Admiral Codrington. * He presented a statement showing a credit of £27,000. The directors pressed for an audited balance-sheet, and when this was presented it showed a loss of £24,000. Lhirjng the time the works were operating, f Mi- Lysnar presented six balance-sheets showing a profit, and two showing a loss. He alleged that Mr Lysnar's friends had got preference in the meat | shipments. Cross-examined by Mr Myers, witness

i said that he was one of the stoutest advocates for the purchase of a steamj er, provided it was a first-class vessel. I When the Admiral Codrington arrived ! he saw that his money was gone. J Cross-examined by Mr Lysnar, witI ness said that he had supported the resolution thanking Mr Lysnar for his efforts in connection with the steamer at the annual meeting. He admitted ' unwittingly making statements to an f inspector Of the bank that the comI pauy would lose £20,000, and that he S Had gone about discrediting the comI No Room for Thres Works.

! The Commission resumed this morn- ! ing, when W. F. Cederwall, manager of ! the Gisborne Sheepfarmers' Frozen Meat Company, stated, in reference to Mr Jones's statement that the Meat Board had been responsible for the reduction in killing charges, that he did not think that the Board was entitled to any credit for that, as the company had entirely fixed its own charges. His company did not pay any commission to merchants for buying, and this placed them at a disadvantage. Mr Lysnar read a cablegram sent by Mr Jones to Messrs Forsyth-and Eraser regarding Vesteys' purchase of the Waipaoa works, stating that the Gisborne Sheepfarmers' Company would prefer that Vesteys should take over works than build new works. Witness said he had made a careful search and could find nothing recorded to give anyone authority to make such a statement on behalf of his company. Cross-examined, Mr Cederwall agreed that there was no room in the district for three large works. If Vesteys had constructed new works, he believed two farmers' companies would have gone out. If Vesteys had remained at Taruheru the purchase of Waipaoa would not have been a good investment, for anyone. This being so, he thought the correct valuation was the market value at the time, and it might have been hard to Jind a purchaser. Two works could easily handle the stock of the district. He did not think it profitable to have one ship to transport the output of the works. It was essential that early and regular shipments .should be made. A. C. Steele, sheep farmer, called by Mr Bov/en, said that when he was taking shares in the company Mr Lysnar informed him that the shipping would be kept entirely free from the account. He considered the shipping department was largely the means of wrecking the company. He was not satisfied about the way the works were being run, and sold his stock elsewhere. Even the directors of the company did that, so that shareholders could not be blamed for disloyalty, j

Bargaining With Armours. William Richmond, sheepfarmer, and meat exporter, living in Hawke's Bay, and operating also in Gisborne, gave evidence in regard to the practice with killing sheets. He stated that sheets for works-killed sheep usually wore snet where required, but on the per lb practice the custom was different. In that case his clients accepted his pay note. He claimed the right to say where his killing sheets should go. His clients would get the sheets direct from him. The works were not supposed to divulge his killing sheets without his consent. In February, 1923, witness met Messrs Witters Coop, Lysnar and Carney in Napier, to discuss a proposal that Armours should advance money towards paying the bank crff, and take secuntiy over the works. Mr Carney said ho could; not undertake a proposal of any description unless Mr Lysnar got the consent of the Prime Minister. At that time witness was a partner with Armours in his Hawke's Bay business but he was not a partner now, nor had ho been for two years. At a. later interview at Hastings, Mr Carney was against the acquisition of the works by Vesteys, as it would interfere With his arrangements for the season. In October, 1923, witness was in Gisborne, and with Mr Carney met Mr Lysnar. There was a general discussion on the same lines, except that the price offered by Vesteys to the bank was known, and Mr* Lysnar's suggestion was that Armours should offer the came sum. It was suggested that a joint proposal should be made by Borthwicks, Sims, Cooper and Co., Vesteys, and Armours, but that also was turned down. At no time did Mr Lysnar sugaest selling the works to Armours. The only suggestion was a mortgage and preference shares. In regard to the management of the Poverty Bay Farmers' Meat Works, witness had no cause for complaint. Ho had made arrangements to kill 20,000 shcop, and was contemplating an increase to 150,000 if the works had been carried on. To Mr Taylor: At the meeting in GislKirne the suggestion was that Armours should advance £225,000 on

loan, that the security be over the works, and that he and Armours were to get the advantage of the lowest rate prevailing at the works. If they put through 150.000 sheep they could get a rebate on that number, but they «ot this concession from other works. Witness admitted he and Armours would be getting an advantage compared with the actual shareholders. A Statement Refused. George David Lidgett, formerly chief engineer at the Povorty Bay works, gave evidence that the machinery in the mechanical portion Avas in excellent condition. He got all he required for stores. He did not agree with Mr Jolly's statement that the works had been starved for some years. That was in so far as his department was concerned. There had been several improvements in the works during his term of office. To Mr Taylor: It was possible that Vesteys might have to spend some money n \ the works, but he could not agree with Mr Rowlands' estimate thai £30,000 would be required. j