MEAT WORKS SALE.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LII, Issue 16946, 30 January 1926, Page 2

MEAT WORKS SALE.

COM PAX VS SKUTOUS PORITTON. PROTEST FROM DIRECTORS. “fIRAVF INJUSTICE: OF VETO.” uSpficia] to the Herald.) M WELLINGTON, this day. sjpiong letter to the Minister of Agr:aiture has been sent, by the directors of He Wellington Meat Export Company ylihst the decision to refuse Borthwicklid Sous a meat export license in respect Atfie-company's works near Wellington, inch UortliwK-ks’ proposed to purchase. Ipe directors -pointedly asked the Ministiy to .slate los reasons tor the retusal. JV llawkeu intends answering their !nijnuniea.t:on, but is not at present ■bparecl to discuss it. -The directors express to the .Minister tori' astonishment that .'his letter of resal was communicated first to the ess. ‘‘They consider that in a matter this kind, which is. after all. a busi•Ss one, a communication such as your Lt«r should not be handed to the- press mr to its being communiea,te<l to the ■rsnn to whom it is addressed, states 6 letter. ‘ Indeed, they question the oprfcty of such a letter being divulged any time, and such a proceeding is rtainlv contrary Jo ordinary business stlipds. Tour letter states that you ke your refusal of the transfer on the pilhd of public policy. Aon do not tte-wliat these grounds of public policy e, and l am directed to respectful.}' k, that you be good enough to intimate pm to me on behalf of the company. '‘The directors arc, as you must reae‘, trustees for the shareholders, and ey consider they are entitled to ask. d to know, the specific grounds on rich you base your refusal of the trans|>p: I shall, therefore, be pleased to ?eive as early as possible the details rich are asked for, dealing generally ith your refusal and its effect on the mpaiiy and its shareholders. Tam strueted to say that my directors ron■'ter. that a grave injustice has been urn to the shareholders. CUTTING THEIR LOSS. {‘May 1 remind you that the company $ been in existence for 45 years, has ken considerable part in the developent of the meat export trade in New nil,land, and its share capital is held by mixed shareholding of farmers and ornary investors, but the latter hold over > ,'per cent, or, roughly, two-thirds ol e sha res ?

“In recent years the carrying on of e business of the company lias been iry difficult, and the company was faced ith the alternative of selling or closing, ,wn.. in the interests of the share--ijtders. it was'deemed advisable by the rect-ors to sell. The. proposal to sell as readily confirmed by the shareholrs. and the effect of the sale, if it uld have been completed, was that the lareholders would receive 8s in £l. he vetoing of tlio transfer of the license eans that the sale must- now he candied, apd the position of the company more difficult than ever. It is well ibwn there are no buyers for such a incern in New Zealand. I lie company ied to sell, without success, to other ew Zealand interests prior- to offering le business to .Bortliwick and Sons, rimited.

HUTTING OUT BRITISH CAPITAL. “In offering to, and agreeing to sell > that company the directors consider--1 they were selling to a British firm ; old standing, and of good repute, Inch already owns three small works l. New and which has been a uyer of meat in New Zealand, and a •Her for distribution in the United kingdom since the inception of the •ozen meat trade. Your refusal to coninfc. to the. transfer to this company lias limited in your slnvtting out from the lominion- British capital, and in so doing is submitted 1 you. have created a dan erous precedent, which must assuredly 3act prejudicially to the general irilrrits of the Dominion.

"The immediate effort of your (Incision » far ns my company is concerned is iat tho company ran not scill its n.ssots. here are no buyers in New Zealand, nd outside buyers are vetoed. The sse.ts, then, arc- practically valueless, idess the company ran carry on and ;iy its way.” The letter adds that if the company forced into liquidation, the shareolders will receive- practically nothing, nd will -have) a just .grievance against le Government. Tho directors queson the status of the Meat Board in ssisting to decide the matter, as the .atnte names the Minister as the author•y- ---• .MKAT BO'ABU CRITICISED. "The members of the Meat Producers' bard were not appropriate advisers to sHsult,” continues the writer. "It (ost be remombored’ that some, at least, f the rnemhers of that Board are not isihterested in meat works or freezing jmpanics. Some are directors in a mat company in direct opposition to iy"’ company, and my directors feel,that owever fair-minded such men may eneavor to he, it is 'difficult for them not > be biased on the question they were •insulted about.” .The directors conclude by asking rc* onsideration of the decision in the inirests of BGb shareholders. The general manager of the company :iited, in an interview, that Bortli'icks' only reason for considering tho roposal to purchase the Wellington feat Export, Company’s business was i ensure a. regular supply of the Wclngton Meat Export Company’s lambs, f, which they make a feature in their istributing trade. NOT FULLY CONSIDERED. TRANSFER SHOULD BE ALLOWED. fINERAL MANAGER’S OPINION. fPer Press Association.} WELLINGTON, last night. Interviewed this afternoon with rear'd to the refusal of the Government a approve the transfer of the WeiDgton Meat Co.’s license to Thos. lorthwick and Sons, Ltd., Mr. .7. Illne, general manager of the comany, said that his directors worn so apprised at tho action of the Minister that, they could only assume that, wing lo recent Cabinet changes, this rftportaiit matter had not received he consideration il deserved.

Tho depreeintion of any ansols by n aft of llie Government without bvnprnsntion is jso far without proiitlerit in Now Zealand, and the only OgHon given—public policy —is eortiinly too indefinite to .justify such a Ofir.se of action," remarked Mr. Tilne.

“The firm of Borthwicks is so well pci favorably known both in New lealand and. in England that the directors of the Meat Export Comij|ny fplt confident no obstacle would p'e put in the way of the transfer. If he Minister had in mind tlio curailing of the operations of Messrs, lorth wick and Sons in the North Maud, ho is certainly not going to do p by his action. The firm in quesion already owns two small works oil von ice tly situate;? to good shipting ports and there is ’ nothing to ircvpiit tlieiii enlarging the capacities if these works to enable them to draw •jtteusively on the stock in the Wol* jngton province Avith very little ■xli'a cost. “Tlie extraordinary part the justness, therefore, is that, while the X-.:

value of the assets of the W’ellington Meat Export Company are seriously depreciated by the action of the Minister, Messrs. Borthwick and Sons are in no wise restricted as to the development of their operations. Their present licenses enable, them to operate in any part of New Zealand and their competition generally has been welcomed by the producers. ’ ’