DAIRY CONTROL TROUBLE

Evening Star, Issue 19533, 14 April 1927, Page 2

DAIRY CONTROL TROUBLE

REPLY TO MR COATES CHAIRMAN STANDS HIS GROUND [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, April 13. The following statement in reply to the Right Hon. J. G. Coates was issued to-night by Mr W. Grounds, chairman of the Dairy Produce Control Board:— “My ‘Exporter’ review, regarding which Mr Coates has made a statement, makes quite clear the reason for which it was written. After my report to the board on my return from London upon Mr Paterson’s activities as the Government representative on the London agency, the board unanimously asked the Government to remove him. Nearly two months later the Minister replied, not only refusing to do so, but stating that they ‘ were satisfied with the manner in which he had discharged his duties.’ It was then clearly' my duty to justify the board’s request. My statements were specific and precise, and still remain unimpeachably accurate. These records of actions and opinions expressed necessitated naming the personality engaged. All men must be judged by their actions and expressed thoughts, but in personalities in the vulgar, sense, which,, unfortunately, is the usual one, I am not interested, and certainly shall not participate, 1 completely repudiate these suggestions that an injustice has been done anyone by my statements. The industry and the country have suffered a deeper injustice than can yet be computed by the actions I have reported. “Mr Coates takes one paragraph from my statement which he says is wholly inaccurate and denies accepting Mr Paterson’s I did not overload my points with evidence, thinking the barest outlines sufficient for what I had in view. I still think that adequate proof was provided, but let me now go further on the point challenged. If Mr Paterson’s guidance was not accepted, how came it that at the end of Mr Paterson’s well-known cablegram to the board, which was despatched on October 23, Mr Coates caused to be inserted the words, ‘ above message is sent with the cognisance of the Prime Minister, who requests you hand a copy immediately to the Acting Prime Minister’? He may remember that I asked him shortly afterwards if ‘ cognisance ’ under such circumstances did not indicate ‘ approval.’ This cablegram was despatched when Mr Coates had been in London just one week, during which ho was naturally preoccupied with the Imperial Conference, which had commenced its sitting. He received the first trade deputation on the morning of October 2.3, and on that afternoon Mr Paterson despatched his cablegram. Up to that point Mr Coates had not seen either Messrs Motion, Wright, or myself.

“ ‘ Facts are chills that winna ding.’ Did these not. justify the conclusion stated in my review? flaring accepted Mr Paterson’s guidance without any proper investigation it was readily foreseen that he could not jettison his guide. The mention by Mr Coates of unity among the producers is painfully belated. Did not an earlier opportunity present itself for an appeal for unity on a broader basis free from any suspicion or self-protection? Did I not urge the Prime Minister to speak for the. country when the editor of a defunct newspaper sent a misleading cablegram to the London ‘Daily Mail ’ calculated seriously to prejudice the national interests? Did ‘an earnest desire for the board’s success’ dictate no reply to my urgent representations? “ Forbearance has been displayed to a: fault in an endeavor to attainunity until the essentials in successful; marketing revealed themselves to all. This forbearance sometimes counselled silence when truth might have urged speech. Silence, oven for unity, is not necessarily golden. It may be cowardly. Unity requires certain antecedent conditions. Certain elements will not mix! When these have been carefully analysed and segregated the industry will resume its progressive development-”