THE MEAT COMMISSION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19041, 11 June 1925, Page 11

THE MEAT COMMISSION.

MR. LYSNAR'S ADDRESS. ' I : ' f::V - ; v ' ■•, ' : : • NOT YET HALF-WAY THROUGH. MINISTER AGAIN ATTACKED. Tby telegraph.—press association.] WELLINGTON, Wednesday. At the Meat Commission to-day Mr. Lysnar said that the position of the Poverty Bay Farmers' Meat Company was not hopeless when the;> National Bank effected the jale-to Vcsteys, and that the company could have carried on had it been permitted to do so. The company kept the bank fully acquainted as to its position and position was as hopeless as Mr. Jolly had suggested, was it reasonablo to expect that Mr. Jolly would advise the company to carry out improvements ? The bank at no time raised any objections to work being carried out by the company, and the only matter in dispute was over calling up of shares. The bank always received the balance-sheets and annual reports of the company and it never took any exception to what was stated therein. He urged that Mr. Jolly had not placed the true position of the company before the Minister for Agriculture. There was no doubt that Mr. Jolly's statement influenced the Minister, but the statement was not one that was borne out by the facts. He could stand before the commission with confidence and "ask it to return a finding to that effect. In reply to a question by the commission, Mr. Lysnar stated that was charging the company 7 per cent, interest, a charge which bore rather heavily an the shareholders. The rate of interest started at per cent, and crept up to 7 per cent. The shareholders had asked for a reduction and the bank gave a promise that when times were better and when the company's account had been reasonably reduced it would consider the request for a reduction. Alleged Misuse o 1 Figures. Mr. Hislop cited figures to show that, the bank's loss was at least £40,000. He characterised Mr. Lysnar's statement to the contrary as a gross misuse of figures and an improper deduction to draw from the evidence before the commission. Mr. Lysnar contended that he had proved his point by analysing Mr. Jolly's own figures. Mr. Hislop said that Mr. Lysnar had arrived at his result by taking figures out of one statement and putting them into another. The Chairman: The commission will look carefully into the matter. Later Mr. Lysnar, replying to an interjection >by Sir John Findlay, said that the Minister having let one competitor in, and that the greatest and most dangerous of all the trusts, he should have let them all in. He (Mr. Lysnar) would either keep them all out or let them all in. Sir John Findlay : So long as they will pay enough. Mr. Lysnar said that he had been putting stock through Vesteys while the commission had been sitting. He admitted it. He mado no bones about it. He had to put stock through Vesteys of else make a still greater sacrifice. Was he to blame for that ? He: maintained that he was not, and that the Minister was'to blame for allowing Vesteys to be there nv that position. The Minister was failing in his duty in allowing Vesteys to operate, but since the Minister did allow them to operate he held that lie (Mr. Lysnar) was legitimately, legally and rightly entitled to use them. . The matter could not be settled by counsel merely waving their hands and saying; "You use the works." The Minister's Responsibility. ' There was nothing in Sir Francis Bell's evidence, contended Mr. Lysnar, to suggest that the Minister for Agriculture had not pqtoer to refuse the license to Vesteys if he, considered that the facts justified such a refusal, and both Sir Francis Bell's evidence and that of Mr. Nosworthy showed that Cabinet and Sir Francis left the decision to Mr. Nosworthy. The responsibility for the decision, therefore, he held, rested entirely upon Mr. Nosworthy. The Government was not responsible, and from tho first ho (Mr. Lysnar) had refused to hold the Government responsible. Sir John Findlay: But Sir Francis Bell distinctly said that he accepts responsibility. Mr. Lysnar: I don't care. .The Government was not responsible. Mr, Lysnar maintained that it was the Minister's duty to refuse a license unless Vesteys could show causo why it should have been granted. At this Sir John Findlay laughed aloud. Replying to a question by the chairman at 3 p.m. Mr. Lysnar said ho must' insist that ho had not yet got half-way through his address. (Laughter.) He was quite willing to go on. Sir John Findlay remarked that he could not but admire his friend's capacity for going on, but he must confess that his (Sir John's) power to sit listening to him was not equal to' Mr. Lysnar's power to on. (Laughter.) . Sir John Findlay: We 'have Mr. Lysnar's assuranco at any rate that ho will not" disappoint us by finishing tomorrow. Mr. Treadwell, to Mr. Lysnar: Will you finish this week. (Laughter.) The commission adjourned till tomorrow.