sign-in
Home
/
Wheat (1) - Part 2
/
Image 191
Wheat (1) - Part 2
Image 191
image 92 of 100
If you need a symbol, fraction or a wider dash please highlight, copy (Ctrl C) and paste (Ctrl V): £ — ¼ ½ ¾ ⅓ ⅔ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ⊚ 🡹 /|\
for the Scheme to get the maximum of wheat loaded direct into the truck and sent to the depot?—Exactly so. 4188. If trucks are in the yard, and there is a portion put in a temporary stack, it is not better to get the trucks away at once?—This year the Scheme were getting more trucks than they want at this particular time. If the trucks are to be kept on demurrage at Spencer's Brook, or wherever the depot is, it is better to wait until next day. 4189. Have you been full of work right through at the depots since the strike?—We have been kept fairly well going. Recently we have dropped off. During the coal strike, of course, we could not get wheat at all; but after the effects of the coal strike had worn off we were kept fairly well going until about the end of May, I think it was. We have not been kept going since that time at the depots. I was just dealing with some of the difficulties we have had in working the season under our agreement. The difficulties originated right from the inception of the Scheme when I was first appointed by Minister. As a matter of fact before I was actually appointed the Westralian Farmers wrote in objecting to the appointment—that it was rather strange that a firm having handled the wheat should take on themselves to dictate as to who should manage them, and commenting on the appointment and referring to statements made in the Press, in a joint letter signed by myself and other firms. In that letter they stated—Mr. Murray stated—that we said the Westralian Farmers could not carry out their contract. I have re-read that letter which was sent to the Press some months ago, but I cannot find anything in that letter to show or to intimidate that we thought the Westralian Farmers could not carry out their contract, and alleging that the statement was made so as to bolster up their case, and that it naturally followed if they could not carry out the contract I would be instrumental in trying to block them. They said the letter was full of spleen against the Westralian Farmers. As far as I can see, the points of the letter were fair comment, and if any spleen was shown at all it was the letter written by the Westralian Farmers commenting on my appointment. It was as dirty a letter as I have ever seen written. They did not content themselves with writing to the Minister, but they stumped the country—Mr. Murray and Mr. Taylor, and sometimes Mr. Taylor and Mr. Harper, addressing meetings of farmers, pointing out that I was connected with Dreyfus & Co., and that Dreyfus & Co. were antagonistic to co-operative principles, and that they were not getting a fair deal. I think many of these remarks by the Westralian Farmers have caused a great deal of the criticism to the Scheme. I think they have been father to most of the criticism. It is a peculiar thing that the day before Mr. Solomon gave evidence in reference to the Badjaling stack, the Westralian Farmers rang us up as to the price at which the wheat was sold. 4190. By the CHAIRMAN: Mr. Solomon gave the price as £100 less than the minutes gave?—The price on paper was £275. 4191. Mr. Solomon said it was £175?—That is accounted for by the fact that the Westralian Farmers did not get the price. It is a peculiar thing that the matter should lie unnoticed so long and the day before Mr. Solomon gave evidence they should ring us up. The whole criticism has been caused by the Westralian Farmers. At any rate, the main objections, I think, is that they prefer to have someone with no knowledge of the wheat business over-seeing them; that they would rather deal with the Government officials without any technical knowledge. Also, Mr. Murray attened a deputation to the Premier, Mr. Lefroy, with the Chamber of Commerce. asking for an Executive Board, also they attended a deputation of poultry farmers to Mr. Baxter asking for a cheaper price. On one occasion he wrote a long letter to the Minister complaining about unfair dealings on my part, and also on questions of mismanagement, and I understand be sent a copy of that letter to the members of the Country party. With regard to his remarks relating to Louis Dreyfus & Co. being antagonistic to the co-operative spirit, Mr. Murray says that I was once employed by that firm and that I would go back to them, also that I was bound body and soul to Dreyfus & Co. Assuming I were bound body and soul to Dreyfus & Co., that would not make them antagonistic to co-operative companies. Dreyfus & Co., so far as Australia is concerned, are wheat people wholly and solely, and all the co-operative companies in the world could not get a better price for the farmer for his wheat than could Dreyfus & Co. This firm have a capital of about £6,000,000 sterling. At times they may have one million pounds worth of wheat on hand in Australia and they will not have one penny overdraft in the bank. The cash required in their business is sent from London. They have their own offices in all receiving parts of the world. If they effected a sale of wheat to Barcelona, they would cable to Barcelona direct. If a co-operative company was effecting a sale to Barcelona, it would first be to the Westralian Farmers, Ltd. Then the Westralian Farmers would have to communicate with their London agents, who would employ a broker in London. That broker would cable to a broker in Barcelona and the amount of brokerage which would, in such a case, have to be paid, would be considerably more than a fair profit. Further, Dreyfus & Co. employ only their own capital, and when they first established themselves in Western Australia. I understand the price of wheat jumped up 2d. immediately. When I was in the wheat business with Dreyfus & Co., we always paid more for wheat than it could be sold for on the London market. We sold very little wheat in London; it was sold to out ports where we could get a better price. When I was in South Australia for them, I bought thousands of tons of wheat from the South Australian Farmers' Union. We were able to pay them a higher price than they could get anywhere else, and we paid them in cash. When things return to normal, and the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., are buying wheat, they will find that the same procedure will obtain. I am just mentioning these facts to show that Dreyfus & Co. take as much notice of the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., in a competitive sense, as an elephant would of a fly. 4192. Dreyfus & Co. merely want the wheat; they do not care where they buy it; they make their money by selling the wheat?—Exactly; they sell it on the other side of the world. I have no bad feeling against the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., and I never have had any. As a matter of fact, when we first started operating for the Scheme the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., had not had much experience and they did not know the procedure of book-keeping. I told them we were getting fresh stationery prepared, and I said to Mr. Taylor, "You can go to my printer if you like and get copies of all the printing which I am having and get copies of all the printing which I am having done." Barnard was the printer, and I instructed him that he could give to the Westralian Farmers, Ltd., copies of all books, stationery, returns, reports, etc., which he was printing for Dreyfus & Co. Since I have been here I have done my best to help along the Westralian Farmers, Ltd. Personally, I believe in co-operation to a certain extent. Even at the present time I have no ill-feeling against the Westralian Farmers, even though one or two particular men connected with that company have gone and still go out of their way to injure me personally by imputing motives and making statements which are not in accordance with facts. But, on that account, I would not condemn the 4,000 shareholders of the company. They are not responsible for the action of one or two misguided individuals. Speaking to a man from Dumbleyung the other day, I was informed that Mr. Murray and Mr. Taylor had addressed a meeting in that town, at which meeting I was generally condemned. The meeting was not reported anywhere, but my friend said to me that when they had finished speaking the only conclusion that those who were present could have come to was that I was a rogue. My friend, who knew me, was, however, able to tell those present that what they were led to suppose was not the case. That kind of thing has been going on all over the country. Similar statements have been made by Messrs. Murray and Taylor at Kellerberrin, Narrogin, and Wagin. It is simply asking the Scheme to do what is quite impossible whilst these people are going around the country doing their utmost to undermine our efforts. 4193. By Hon. J. F. ALLEN: Was your position with Dreyfus & Co. on purely a salary basis?—Yes. 4194. You had no interest in the wiping out of competitors?—None whatever.
Save edits
prev
|
next
|
all images
|
history