POVERTY BAY FREEZING COMPANY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18990, 11 October 1923, Page 7

POVERTY BAY FREEZING COMPANY.

PROPOSED SALE TO VESTETS. MEAT PRODUCERS’ BOARD’S ATTITUDE. (From O'th Own Correspondent.) WELLINGTON, October 10. The Meat Producers’ Board met here today and sent the following telegram to the Poverty Bay Farmers’ Meat Company:— ‘‘Your telegram received. The proposal for a conference with the board came from your company, and we agreed to it. We note that your shareholders expect the Meat Board to do what, is right in the matter. This has been and will be the board’s attitude.’’ So far as can be gathered here, there does not seem the slightest chance of any way out of the company’s trouble, except the sale to Vesteys. Neither'the bank, the Government, nor the Meat Board can take up any other attitude than has been decided upon in regard' to the protests of the directors and the Farmers’ Union about the sale to Vesteys. Th© answer is that the directors themselves were agreeable to sell to Vesteys, but the latter could not agree to one stipulation made by the directors—namely, that Vesteys should take with the works the steamer which had involved the company in such a heavy loss. MEAT BOARD CRITICISED. “ WEAK-KNEED ” ATTITUDE. (From Ode Own Uonr.ES”ovpENT.7 AUCKLAND, October 10. The proposed purchase by Vestey Bros, of the Poverty Bay Farmers’ Meat Company’s works was before the provincial executive of the Farmers’ Union last night. Mr R. D. Duxfield moved that the executive should emphatically protest against the action of the Meat Producers’ Board in agreeing to the sale of the Poverty Bay Company’s business to Vestey Bros., such action being contrary to the board's policy, and depriving the shareholders of the opportunity to arrange the reconstruction for themselves. The motion also stated that while the executive was strongly averse to the establishment of trusts it welcomed the introduction of outside capital, which had for its main objeot the development of the resources and the increase of the revenue of the dominion. After referring to Vesteys’ world-wide activities, Mr Duxfield said that the farmers were not trying to keep capital out of the country, but were trying to keep out trusts. Vesteys desired to make their position stronger for their own benefit only, and if the board agreed to this the shareholders would have no chance of re-establishing themselves. Certain interests were trying to freeze the farmers’ companies out of business, contended Mr Duxfield, and the executive should protest and do all in its power to stop the board allowing a sale which could not but be detrimental to farmers. In seconding the motion, Mr A. N. M’Kay said they should protest against the •'weak-kneed” attitude of the board. The Chairman said it seemed plain that the country and the Government were under the control of the banks. The position m this case was that there was an offer to buy the works, and shareholders were asking for time to make good, but the bank saidf “No, we will not give you time. You must either sell to Vesteys or we will close you down.” The fanners should not take this lying down, Their representatives should demand an explanation from the board, and if it could not be eiven publicly, it should be given in confidence to the principal representatives. “The farmers would be a pack of fools if they took this lying down,” concluded the speaker. rhe resolution was carried unanimously, and it was decided that it should be telegraphed to the Meet Producers’ Board.