ARBITRATION CASE.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume LVII, Issue LVII, 15 March 1910, Page 5

ARBITRATION CASE.

The hearing of the Arbitration case, iin winch Mr J . Speight claimed from tlie Jiakaramea Dairy Co. the sum of £450 tor breach of a butter-milk conj tract, commenced on Saturday, was concluded on Monday. E. Gilshnan, secretary of the respon1 dent company, was the first witness called, and stated that the higher prices being paid by other factories tor cneese were, apparently, the cause for tne agitation tor th© change from butter to cheese. Messrs Edgcombe, ixemp, Speight, McDonald, and practically the whole ot the Manutahi creamery suppliers were those who advocated the cnange. Mr Speight was the foremost agitator tor cheese-making. On, June lv, iyuß, a resolution was passed j deciding to invite tenders for the purchase of butter-milk, and on June 15, iyOB, Mr Speight's tei:cier was accepted. On March 30, 1909, a committee was set up to ascertain the reeling of the suppliers on the question ot cheesemaking at the main tactory and at the creameries. On April 14, 1909, a resolution was carried requiring the secretary to visit certain cheese tactories and obtain particulars of the cost of the erection and equipment of cheese factories j also as to the comparative amount paid out for cheese and butter during the past five years, and to call general meeting of shareholders to consider the yubo^oii. On May 12, 1909, a resolution was carried calling a general meeting to consider secretary's report of installing cheese plants at factories and creameries. The resolution was moved by Mr Washer and seconded by Mr Speight. On May 2ti an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders was held, when Mr Speight moved and Mr Edgcombe seconded a motion that cheese-making be adopted. An amendment was moved by Mr Pairweather, and seconded by Mr Galligan, that butter-making be continued. The - amendment was carried. Mr Gilshnan pointed out that it was the intention of those interested to put in cheese plants at the main factory, and also at the creameries. There was a certain section^ of suppliers wlio were in favor of cheese-making at the main factory, but - not at the creameries, because these factories were too small. The factories did not pay as creameries, and would pay less as cheese factories. Reverting to the resolutions, Mr Gilshnan said that Mr Gibbs afterwards proposed that the company be wound up, and that the directors take steps to that effect. The motion was carried, the voting being: For the motion 43, against 12, informal 1. There were 57 shareholders present. One shareholder did not 'vote. On. June 5, 1909, at an extraordinary general meeting, Mr Speight moved and Mr Kemp seconded, That the directors be instructed to invite tenders for the company's main factory, the Alton, Petch road, Gentle Annie and Manutahi road creameries. This meant the purchase of the land, buildings, plant and all equipment. On June 9 the secretary was instructed to call tenders for the sale of the company's assets. This was* at a directors' meeting. The secretary 'was also authorised to engaged Mr R. Hunger as valuator, and give an estimate of the company's plants machin* cry, and rolling stock, and to ask Mr W. Aitcheson to value the buildings; the whole property to be scheduled and valued as for removal. At the same meeting the secretary was ordered to obtain legal advice as to the liability of the directors in the matter of selling. At a special meeting of directors on July 19 a resolution was carried that Mr Gibbs' tender be accepted for purchase of road metal at the Alton creamery. The resolution was seconded by Mr Speight. Another resolution was also seconded by Mr Speight that 16s per share be the price at which shares in the Freezing Company, Egmont Box Company, and Patea Purchase Boat be sold out. Mr Spratt asked, What had all these resolutions to do with the case? 'Die witness replied that he desired to show that Mr Speight was a persistent advocate for the change from . butter to cheese. . Mr Goodland asked the witness if Mr Speight was the chief advocate among the suppliers for the change to cheese. Witness: I don't think I would be libelling Mr Speight if I said ho was tho principal agitator. . Mr Goodland: Did Mr Speight at any time intimate to you that he intended to bring an action for damages against the company. Witness: Not a syllable. Mr Goodland: How long after it was decided by tho company to make cheese . was it before ho mado the claim-on tho company. Wtiness: About four or five months. Mr Goodland: Did Mr Sneight give you any reason why he allowed this application for compensation to lapse. Wittaess: None whatever, He simply sent in the claim. Mr Goodland: Was thero over any attempt made to settle the claim\ Witness replied that at a directors' meeting it was thought that if tlio company offered Mr Speight from £70 to £75 without prejudice that that would be squaring the claim. Mr Goodland: What was the amount of Mr Speight's claim at that time? Witness: £450. Further answering Mr Goodland, the witness, said that had Mr Gibbs known, that Mr Speight's action was pending 1 he would probably have not moved the ■ resolution for the company to go into liquidation. Witness said the directors, considered Mr Speight's, ciaiin was un- > just in principle an« most extortionate , as regnjued ifie amount of it. 1 Replying to Mr Spratt, witness said Mr Speight was not sole agitator for ■ the change from butter to cheese. Witness admitted that it would take Mr • Speight about three months .to estimatehis loss. Mi- Spratt s That, is the reason why he did not put in his claim. Replying to other questions from Mr Marcnant (umpire), the witness said his report of March 30 was in favor of [ cheese-making, and answering Mr -, Spratt witness thought his report might ; have influenced the company to tho , making of cheese. r D. Kemp, farmer, Patea, in the r course of his evidence, said ho had ar- » ranged with Mr Speight to take the ; butter-milk from the factory every [ other day. Mr Speight had informed ! witness that lie required milk for fecdr ing store pigs. 1 Mr Goodland : Practically he said ho placed no value upon tho butter-milk. Witness: No, or else he would not have given it to me. Continuing, witI ness said ho had tendered to the new I company for butter-milk at 14s for a. ; fortnight Mr Speight had also ten- ; dered at 10s. Witness was once on Mr i Speight's property for a short while, - and had not noticed any pig styes, cxi eppt one or two tumbled down old ones. 3 Witness considered that Mr Speight's 5 claim for loss was very much exaggerati cd, for ho did not think it was possible ' for him to have made over £1000. Mr Speight never took all tho butter-milk - home, lotting some of it go down the ; stream. Would not swear that 600 gallons were not taken in one day..

Thought a brooding sow would require 18 gallons of buttor-milk a day and a fattening pifr not less than 10 gallons. Was satisfied' that thoro was little value in butter-milk for pigs unless other food was given with it. Did not tbnik it was possible for a pig to increase us weight from 100 to 1501bs iv a fortnight, feeding on buttor-milk alone. It°would take from 8 to 9 weeks to get tbat increased weight. To Mr Spratt, witness said that when Mr Speight told him that the buttermilk was not worth much to him the claimant also added, "at that- time. Replying to Mr Marchant, witness stated tbat butter-milk would be of value in "topping off" pigs if used with poas ; jt would not be- of much use tor fattening purposes. A. Hopcroft, manager of the JNormanby Dairy Company, gave evidence that it was not possible for more than 300 gallons of butter-milk to bo taken from tlie factory per day, as the trough only bold 300 gallons. This closed the evidence tor the defence, and Mr Goodland banded ma copy of. tho agreement between Mr Speight and the company. Ho said the company did not dispute liability, but tho question for the arbitrators to decide was tho amount of compensation Mr Speight was entitled to. Tho arbitrators, after consultation, were unablo to come to an agreement, and the matter was placed in the hands of Mr Marchant to adjudicate upon.