SALE OF MEAT WORKS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LVI, 2 May 1925, Page 11

SALE OF MEAT WORKS

(United Press Association.!

GISBORNE, May 1

Hefore the -M cn ( Coni mission Mr Powdroll, cunt inning, said lie thought tlie .Moat Hoard had not functioned to the fullest- extent. ft should do .something, to protect- the farmers from file combine; if should arrange marketing on the same lines as butter; control could also assist fanners financially. His beef had been stored so long in Yestoy's works in England that he had got nothing for it. but paid 30s per head for the privilege of sending the meat Home. Most of this had gone, to Vestoy's. To Mr Myers, witness said that during the last two years shareholders had been tempted to sell sleek to go outside the district. Mr Myers: “They are not loyal to the. company.” Witness: “The farmers are unable to protect themselves from (ho big interests.”

Regarding the missing journal, Mr Porter, accountant-, was re-examined. He said he was still satisfied tin* journal was among the books given to Mr Hamilton, Mr l.ysnar's secretary. .Since yesterday Mr Lysnar bad shown him leaves from the ledger relating to the Admiral Codrington. Air l.ysnar said he was quite prepared to show them lo the ('ommission. The Chairman : “Yon have told us that, before, Mr Lysnar, arid we have, told you we are not satisfied. It is no use reiterating the position. The Commission is not going to have its bands tied by any conditions imposed by you.”

Mr Lysnar said the only condition was that- the Commission should not, divulge to the. other side information deterrent to the company. The Chairman: “The Commission is going to order the leaves to be produced before it. Whether the information will be disclosed remains to be seen, but the Commission is not going to bargain with you.” Air .Myers said Mr Witters had raised doubts whether Air Lysnar was entitled to appear on behalf of the company. Mr Lysnar: “I absolutely give art assurance that 1 have authority to appear.” Air Jones: “That is not enough.” Mr Lysnar: “You can 'have it under sen 1. "

.Mr Mvers said Air Lysnar was appearing before the Commission in n dual capacity and was entitled to he cited as a party. The chairman said the Commission already had considered the point arid was not going into it further. lie was quite certain Air Lysnar would not appear before the- Commission and have the 1 , books in his possession without aut liority. Air Wit tor's evidence was then resumed: Questioned by the chairman lie said the financial position in 1923 was not. as rosy as it was to-day. Some of the directors were finding it not. easy to hioet their calls, and because, of this ilie directors were prompted to endeavour to sell the works to Mr Lysnar. The delay in approaching the, Meat Hoard was due to a desire to thresh the matter out with the Minister first. Thomas L. Powdrell, farmer, Wniroa, a director of the Wairoa Freezing Company. said that during the- hist two seasons Yestey’s had operated freely in Lie Waircfa district and were affecting his company considerably. He regarded them as a very serious combine. The Wairoa works, were losing business through Yestov. and v\ere faced with calls for further capital. The commission paid by Vesley’s to agents gave them a big advantage. He thought if Yestey’s continued to operate in Wairoa as they had been doing the Wairoa works would go ; the same way as tlio Waipaoa works.

Alexander St. Clair, another director of the Wairoa Company, gave corroborative evidence. He agreed that Yestey’s operations were detrimental to the freezing company and the farmers of the district.

George Hartley Coon, director of the Poverty Hay Meat Company, deposed that when the sale of the works was under consideration witness, with other directors, went to Mr Jolly and offered to meet the position by raising more shares. Mr Jolly replied that shares in the Poverty Hay Company were not, worth a snap of the fingers, and kept urging the directors to sanction the sale, without the consent of the snareholders. Mr Jolly insisted that the hank wanted its money. They then went to the -Meat Board, and were told by Mr .Jessop that they were lucky to- have got- Vestey's offer. Witness denied absolutely Mr Jones’s statement that, witness had said he was anxious for the sale to gothrough. Had Mr Jones said the hoard had arrived at its decision all the trouble might have been avoided. Mr Jolly met them at breakfast the next- morning and urged the directors to let the sale go through, saying the concession of £22,000 would not he given otherwise. They gave. Mr Jolly to understand (hev would rather lose their money than their reputation among the shareholders. Mm Coop, examined by Mr Myers, said if a reasonable price had been offered for Ilie works lie would have accented it in the interests of the shareholders. He was not prepared to carry the works on his back and figlht the trust at the same time. The offer of ■Vestov’s was not considered good enough and lie did not consider he was flouting tlie bank by not calling the ..shareholders together. If Vestev’s offer had not been accepted he realised there was a- strong probability of no c-ther offer being received, and the loss to the guarantors-' would have been considerably increased.