Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

“THE MISSING WOOL CONTRACT”

EIGHT MILLIONS INVOLVED. Mr W. J. Poison (president) reported to the Dominion P.xocutivc of the New Zealand Farmers’ Union at Wellington yesterday on what lie termed “the missing wool contract.” In conformity with a resolution passed last meeting, the executive, ho stated, had endeavored to obtain the necessary information from the Government to -enable him to state a ease for legal opinion for the guidance of tho executive regarding the Imperial wool contract; hut ho regretted to report that so far ho had been unsuccessful. He had asked for information regarding sales and contracts, the amount of surplus wool sold at loss and profit respectively, and whether the Government would view favorably the institution of a friendly suit against the Imperial Government to clear up any points in dispute. Mr .Poison detailed how lie had approached the Government, first through Mr 0. J. Tlawken, M.P..- chairman of the Producers’ Wool Committee, and then through the member for his district, and commented strongly on the delays that had met him at every torn. He said he had not time to wait cap in hand on the steps of Parliament House begging information that they should have as a right. He asked the executive to relievo him from that- responsibility and appoint someone in Wellington to undertake it. He did not suggest that the Government had any object in delaying the matter; but be did submit that such procrastination extending over years lent color to a suspicion existing in tho minds of many people, that there was something to con ceal. Air IV. B. Matheson fF.ketahiina) said that the executive should, in view of the president’s statement, press the Government for a frank answer to his questions. It was an extraordinary position that the Government would not bo frank. It was a matter of a written contract. The woolgrowers were mosi closely concerned in it, and they had a right to sec the contract.

Mr G. L. (Marshall (Martnn) understood that tho Prime .Minister had said that ho was going to get a legal opinion on the matter, and it all depended upon that opinion. The. Chairman stated that if the, decision was in the woolgrowers’ favor the profits they were entitled to would run info some £8,000,000, which was more than the price of a whole wool clip at present, and if they got it it would he a very great thing for the producers’ of the Dominion. (Hear, hear.) Mr J, H. Jnl! (Hastings) understood that Mr Massey had skated that English lawyers were emphatic that the woolgrowers had no claim; while New Zealand law,ycvs were just as emphatic that they had a claim.

The president thought there must he some mistake about that. He did not think the Prime Minister had made such A statement.

Mr W. G. Leadley (Ashburton! said that ho had seen a. cony of the contract in the hands of a legal gentleman, who held the opinion that the whole thing depended upon whether tiro Imperial ’Government were the purchasers of the surplus wool or the agents for the sellers. If they were the agents for the vendor they were reBoonsible, but if not tho woolgrowers had no case! That opinion was endorsed by some of the legal lights in Wellington. If the Imperial Government were the agents they ought to account to the woolgrowers for'the whole of the proceeds. After further discussion it was resolved that the secretary be instructed to take further action on the lines of the chairman’s report, in order to get an answer to the questions the chairman had asked.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD19220324.2.20

Bibliographic details

Evening Star, Issue 17927, 24 March 1922, Page 3

Word Count
604

“THE MISSING WOOL CONTRACT” Evening Star, Issue 17927, 24 March 1922, Page 3

“THE MISSING WOOL CONTRACT” Evening Star, Issue 17927, 24 March 1922, Page 3