DIAMOND CONTROL

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 102, 4 May 1925, Page 2

DIAMOND CONTROL

GIGANTIC FKOFITS FOR COM BINED MONOPOLY:

Mr. Beyers, South African Minister of Mines., when moving the second reading of the Diamond Control Bill, made a direct and slashing attack on the London Diamond Syndicate, which, lie aliened, controlled the policy of the De Beers Consolidated Mines, reports the- Capetown correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph. Thofigh its members oiily held a minority of the shares in that corporation, they dad been able In pocket millions in extra profits at the expense of the producers of diamonds. The Minister Bind it had been represented that the .Diamond Syndicate was a wonderful organisation, able to guarantee the industry against wild fluctuations in the demand. During the .slump in 1921 the syndicate, however, avoided the lorees which would otherwise have accrued to it by inducing the producers not to enforce their agreements. Consequently the syndiate came, out about even, while the producers suffered. Fortified by this success, he said, the syndicate dictated terms to the producers. The present Government had inlervened, owing to the failure of the efforts to obtain an agreement more favourable to (he producers, and had threatened State action i" certain contingencies. The result was. Hint thu producers were freed from their obligation to ! -eli only Hi rough the London .syndicate, ami better terms for the Son Hi-West Africa output were obtained from the.Anglo-American Svudicato uiulev a five years' agreement. 'Consequently the syndicate bad perforce to pay higher prices for the Do Beers output, . ■ .

Dealing with the competition of producers otitsidc the Union, Mr. Beyers declared it did not niiitler. as all "the diamonds really worth having were produced in South AfnVn. lie "admitted that the Government had no intention of carrying out the Bill unless the necessity arose. It was dimply a sword ol' Damocles, which would lie held over the Diamond Syndicate to ensure fair treatment. The Government were determined that the South African producers should get the best price possible. The Bill was an attack on De Beets only in so far as De Beers had allowed its interests to be subordinated to those of the syndicate.