FRUITGROWERS AND COOPERATION.

Nelson Evening Mail, 29 July 1916, Page 6

FRUITGROWERS AND COOPERATION.

(To the Editor.) W,—Replying to Mr H. G. Hill's letter in. a recent issue of your paper :n ■which he Teveals certain parts of the business transacted in committee at the recent meeting held at Upper Moutere. and quotes as his authority several very well known business m-:Ji, it- should l>e noted that this is not the first- occasion ©a which particulars of the proceedings of committee meetings connected with the fruit industry have been made public ■without the consent of all members of the committee. Now that the matter has been made public it becomes necesPatv .to give the whole facts of wh it , took place in order that shareholders j mav understand the position. The meetwent into committee to consider a letter in. which Mr Hill offered to undertake the duties of general manager of the v -combined companies, in conjunction with another gentleman, whom I am not permitted to name. I strongly objected to the suggested dual control. I therefore suggested that- the salary offered should not be less than £SOO, and that no question of joint managership be entertained. Understanding that we wen In committee, I further stated that while j knew something of the qualifications of -die gentleman proposed as joint manage* with Mr "Hill. I knew absolutely noth*U£ of Mr Hill. Several Stoke gentlemen warmlv supported Mr Kill, and findinc that nothimr would be gained by further obstruction, I agreed to the scheme m a general wav, and promised that although I was not present as the representative of any company I would bring the pronosals before the directors of m} company at their next meeting, ■understanding, of course, that each company have the right at a later stage to reconsider.the whole scheme, which was obvioush- oclv tentative and mcomp.ete, the extent of the- revision depend ins 01: the number of shares subscribed and the amount of responsibility undertaken by <the. companv if successfully iloated. As alreadv stated m your columns, it soon became apparent that for the directors of the Nelson Co-operative Fruit Companv to refrain from- registering their compairv would be a mistake, and in thr interests of their shareholders they decided- to register, and discuss -amalgamation afterwards. I am, etc.. F. E. NOTTAGE. Tasman, 22-7-*l6. tWith a view to brin<zing this correspondence to a close, we have reierre-i the question of the- Moutere meeting to one of the growers mentioned by Mr Hill, and- he rtates that- the proceedings ■were not conducted in camera, and that -J3.d not :Mr Hill withdrawn while the position of manager was being discussed the proceedings would have appeared v. the minutes {which Mr Hill was takinnnd circulated in the ordinary way.) There has apparently been some misun-flerstand-njt!.