SALE OF MEAT WORKS

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 2 May 1925, Page 7

SALE OF MEAT WORKS

SITTING OF COMMISSION. .MORE ABOUT THE COMPANY’S STEAMER. (BY TELEGRAPH PRESS ASSOCIATION J GISBORNE, May 2. At yesterday’s session of the Meat Works Commission the chairman announced that loose sheets of the ledger had been produced and were now in the possession of the commission. The commission was engaged from 5 p.m. till 10 p.m. in bearing the evidence of F. S. Bowen, an ex-director of the Poverty Bay Farmers’ Meat Company. He claimed that the shareholders of t.he company had lost £498,000, and with the bank’s loss this made a total of £541,000. The loss was due, he alleged, 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 Lvsnar dictated everybody. Of the 42 works in. cue Dominion theirs was the only one which had quarrelled with the Government during the commandeer. After the Admiral Codrington was purchased, Mr. Lysnar wanted to buy another steamer, also to open a coal mine at Codrington, on the West Coast and to construct a railway to it. Mr. Lysnar was an utter impossibility. Claims on one shipment of meant sent to America amounted to £20,000, and Mi-. Lysnar delayed the settlement for two years. Meanwhile buyers would not operate at the works. Witness detailed conversations with the local manager of the bank regarding the manner in which finance to purchase and to insulate the Admiral Co'di;ington was obtoined. He had n'ot the knowledge of the business, and did not think other directors had. He liad criticised the management, and he detailed the steps Mr. Lysnar had taken to have him excluded from the directorate. The directors had pressed Mr. Lysnar to produce a properly audited balance-sheet of 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. During the time the works were operating, Air. Lysnar had presented .six balance-sheets showing a profit and two showing a loss. He. alleged that Mr. Lysnar’x. friends had got preference .in meat Witness was satisfied the company could have been more successful by gnod management. The works were recklessly run.

Cross-examined by Mr. Myers, witness said he did not pose as a financial expert. He was one of the stoutest advocates for the purchase of the steamer, provided it was a first-class vessel, and when the Admiral Codrington arrived lie saw that his money was gone. He did not know that it was contrary to the bank’s advice that the steamer was bought. Cross-examined by Mr. Lysnar, witness said he had supported a resolution thanking Air. Lysnar for his efforts and the condition of the steamer. At the annual meeting he put the facts before the shareholders and was at the bottom of the poll. That was not a fair indication of what the .shareholders thought. He admitted unwittingly making a statement to the inspector of the bank that the company would lose £20,000. and that he had gone about discrediting the company.

GISBORNE FARMERS’ WORKS,

ATTITUDE TOWARDS A^ESTEY’S,

GISBORNE, Alay 2. When the commission resumed this ■morning, Mr W. F. Cederwall, manager of the Gisborne Slieep Farmers’ Frozen Aleat Company, stated that his company controlled three works, one at I-licks Bay, another at Tokomaru Bay, and the ’third- at Kait-i. The works were owned by farmers, but did no buying on their own account. In reference to the statement made by Air D. Jones that the Aleat Board had been responsible for a reduction in killing charges, witness did not think the Board was entitled to any credit for that, as the company entirely fixed its own charges. Hissoriipahy did not pay any commission to the merchants for buying, and this placed them at a disadvantage, but the directors strongly refused to give treatment to merchants and not to farmers. If a commission were paid it must be paid to all. This would increase the charges to producers. Witness said his company could not follow 1 Vestey’s practice of purchasing on the hook. Mr Lysnar read a cable sent by Mr Jones to Alessrs Forsyth and Fraser regarding' Vest’ey’s purchase of the Waipawa works, stating that the Gisborne sheep ■ farmers would prefer Vestey’s to take over Lysnar s works than to build new works.

Witness said he had made a careful search, but couia find nothing recorded which would give anyone any authority to make, such a statement on behalf of his company. , Cross-examined, Mr Cederwall agreed that there was no room m the district for three •large works. If Testers had constructed new works, witness believed that the two farmers’ companies would have gone out. L Vesteys had remained at Tarulieru the purchase of the Waipaoa works would not have been a good investment for anyone. This-being so. he thought the correct valuation was the market value and it might have been hard to find a purchaser. The two works could easily handle the stock of the district. Witness did not. think it profitable to have one shin to transport the output of the works*. It was essential that early and regular shipments should be made-.