MEAT COMMISSION

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLV, Issue 126, 1 May 1925, Page 12

MEAT COMMISSION

NON-PRODUCTION OF PRIVATE l JOURNAL. „ Per Press Association GISBORNE, April 30. The Royal Commission of inquiry into the sale of the Poverty Bay Farmers’ Meat Company works to Vestcy Bros, was continued to-day. In the morning the commission made an inspection of the works. When the sitting was resumed the question arose as to the non-production of a private journal. The commission had previously taken time to consider whether certain loose ledger sheets should be produced. Mr Lysnar and his accountant, Philip Hamilton, were examined, but denied all knowledge of the existence of a private journal. Frank Porte’ - , formerly accountant to the Poverty Bay Meat Company, was shown certain ledger entries and said that they had been derived from entries in tho missing private journal. He had handed all the books in his possession to the receiver. He described the dimensions of the missing book, which was supposed to have been placed with other books in Mr Lysnar’s strongroom. For the National Bank, Mr Myers, and for the Government, Mr Taylor, insisted that the missing journal was most important, as it contained the closing entries in regard to the Admiral Codrington up to August, 1923. Hamilton Irvine, receiver to the company, stated that he had given journals and a ledger to Pnilip Hamilton, but ho, didn’t know whether the journal referred to was amongst thoso books. In reply to the /chairman, witness said the missing book contained important annotations as to why the transfers of certain balances were made. The information was important. George Witters resumed his evidence on certain parts of the works, stating that after an inspection, when Vesteys rook over, the buildings were in reasonably good condition. Witness denied the statement of witness Jolly that tho works had been starved prior to Vesteys taking over. Had Vesteys effered to buy the works at £65,000 and had the Minister of Agriculture agreed to it, ho (witness) would not have objected a 3 it was only a question of price. In answering Mr Jones, witness said he personally had not examined the charges made by Mr Lysnar and did not know if tho directors had discussed them. He contended that the Meat Board had not acted fairly in regard to the Admiral Codrington, stating that Mr Jones had not included the vessel in a shipping contract, Mr Jones then contending that the application was not formally made. Witness submitted that Mr Lysnar had made verbal application to Mr Jones for the inclusion of the vessel in the contract, but the offer had not been given the consideration expected. Witness further stated that he would at least have expected Mr Jones to have wired the company when the contracts were under consideration.

The proceedings were adjourned till to-morrow.