FARMERS AND CO-OPERATIVE MEAT FREEZING.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 9551, 26 July 1909, Page 5

FARMERS AND CO-OPERA-TIVE MEAT FREEZING.

THE OBJECTS OF THE WELLINGTON FARMERS' COMPANY. ADDRESS BY MR J. C. COOPER. A meeting of farmers was held in the A. and P. Association's rooms, Masterton, on Saturday afternoon, when Mr J. C. Cooper delivered an address in regard to the Wellington Farmers' Co-operative Meat Freezing Company. The chair was taken by Mr F. W. H.'Summer. The chairman explained that the objects ol the meeting were to hear from Mr Cooper the objects and ad- ; vantages accruing to farmers from taking up shares in the company. He called upon Mr Cooper to address the ' gathering. Mr Cooper said the meeting was called to give the promoters of the company an opportunity <»i explain- | ing on what lines the company was to be run. It was well known that ' it was intended to make the company purely a farmers' concern, and as nearly as possible co-opera-tive. By that it was meant that ' only farmers were being sold shares, 1 and steps were being taken to provide against the aggregation of ' shares. In the articles of association * it was proposed to limit the number of shares to 300 maximum, and a minimum of 2. This should ach- ' ieve the desired object. For a long ( time an agitation had been existent ' in the district for further freezing i works, owing to the apparently inadequate accommodation for stock at the existing freezing works. It ' was undeniable that last season's ] stock in many places had been held up until they became gross and heavy • through the cause stated, although those interested in the present com- j panies had denied the fact. It seemed that in the Argentine the same thing had been experienced, although in New Zealand this district seemed to i be the only one to have suffered. < Referring to the position of the company, Mr Cooper said that the nominal capital was £IOO,OOO, and of < this it was the desire of the company to raise half, to build and equip works suitable for the business anticipated already, before the canvass bad been really, systematically commenced a big amount had been subscribed. It was proposed to run the company on the lires of i the Gisborne and Canterbury works, namely, either to freeze on owners' account or to sell on hooks on behalf of owners, less cost of freezing. ThH I companies quoted simply ran their concerns on safe business lines. By selling on hooks and on owners' account was not meant that owners would simply have [to consign, but the throwing open of the stock to the c.i.f. buyers. The speaker said already responsible c.i.f. buyers had written expressing every willingness to trade with the company on promising lines. The works j aimed at a new departure in this j district, and tended to place the meat market on the same sound lines as in Canterbury. It was felt by many that in this district there was not sufficient encouragement to farmers to breed the best quality of stack. Referring to the financial matters Mr Cooper said the shares had been fixed at £5 each, and it was proposed to extend the calls over ten years. It was believed that the best policy to pursue at the outset would be to raise ; as munh by loan as possible on the uncalled capital, and as a last resort by preference shares. It was not intended to be a speculative business, and there was no reason why it ; should not be run as safely and ; soundly as businesses on the same \ lines elsewhere. If the farmers stood , by the companies as they should ) there was no reason why ihat should 3 not be the case. Mr Cooper then t invited questions. £ Mr D. Guild said he thought it r incorrect that the Wellington works 3 could not cope with the stock of the s district. He believed the works in Wellington could cope with not only , ! the stock in this district, but in I Hawke's Bav also. Mr W. C. Buchanan said he de- " sired every farmer to understand 5, that he wished to speak as a setts' ler among settlers, with the ad van- ! s tage of twenty-five years' work in their interests, and especially on the P point at issue. He had travelled ;4 much to get the best) possible mfor-

mation on the subject in the interests of farmers and himself. Experts had said the Ngahauranga works were the best in .New Zealand. He wished this tu be taken by way of explanation. The company was nothing to him any more than a medium to export his stock. Criticising the statements in the prospectus of the company, Mr Buchanan said the one Which said Canterbury was no longer the premier export province, as to June last the exports from Canterbury totalled 1,390,233 sheep and

and lambß, as against Wellington s 934,233. The weight of meat for the former (including beef) was 55,848,3051b5, as against 48,385,3071bs from Wellington. A voice: How many went via Hawke's Bay? Mr Buchanan: Precious few. More comes this way. It was also said in the prospectus that two million carcases would probably be the export from Wellington, which statement was not being borne out. In an eight months' return there was a difference in favour of Canterbury of 292,172 carcases. The speaker wished himself that Wellington was the premier province for export. *A point for which he himself would also support a new company again and igain was that of capacity for works —if there were any call. The two Wellington companies can easily freeze 11,000 sheep a day. The )lockage on the railway was the *eal trouble. The two companies :ould in 14J weeks easily have dealt vith the whole of the stock of the ; listrict. In fact for the season the sompanies could easily havedealt with

fc - 1 ;05,000 more. These were facts cap- , ible of very simple proof. Tlie fig 1 - ires submitted showed unquestionibly that the companies could have lealt with a great deal more than hey had done. Mr Cooper's statement :hat the company was making a new leparture m freezing lor farmers to onsign on their own was ridiculous. T ['he speaker said it was in the early ' truggles of his company that this -ery point was hammered away at ' ery harden order to get shares sold, ,nd that every concession was made xcept the giving away of the comiany's brand, used only for its priate stock. From the beginning of ts work every advantage had been iven by his company. Ah a direcor of the company he could say that e scarcely ever sold anything to the ompany, freezing on his own acount. As a final point Mr Buchanan sked, who had been directors of * is company since its inception? "armers, every one of them. But it /as not big dividends that the com- _ >any was after, but to put the com- 1 iauy on a safe and secure footing, 'his would, he presumed, be the obects of the new company. But what, >e asked, did the company mean by mtting such a prospectus before setters when it did not knsw the A.8.C." o£ the buisness. ! Mr R. r. McKenzie said what truck him most forcibly in Mr Bu- ( ihanan's remarks was, if his com- 1 >any put so many stock through as * le said, why could they not do it at t cheaper rate. The speaker quoted j jgures to show that the Auckland freezing Company, with a capital >f only £30.000* could freeze at ' L l-3d at a profit, and he thought 1 ;hat when such a company could do ] ;hat the Wellington company could io their freezing at a cheaper rate, rhe speaker, in a chat with the Gisborne Co-operative Company's works manager, ascertained that over 300,000 more carcases had been put through last year than the year before, and the speaker assured his hearers that if they knew what the farmers of the Gisborrte district received in the way of bonuses—up to Is 3d per head—they would never hesitate about supporting the new

company in this district. He quoted instances to show where a co-opera-tive company would be a better investment in various respects than present avenues. He hoped the meeting would take Mr Buchanan's figures as facts, but also to bear in mind that there were other facts. (Hear! Hear!) Mr Lomax said the intention of the Farmers' Company was to get better value for their sttock. At Featherston station alone this year already 190,000 sheep had been consigned to the Wellington companies. The Gisborne Co-operative Company had been a striking success, and there was.every reason for the same to be the case here. Mr W. L. Falconer contended that the Wellington companies had been run entirely in their own interests, and no doubt with their large reserve funds would fight the Farmers' Company. The dairy companies built up large reserves, and he understood the Farmers' Freezing Company would not do so, but, however, the tullest value would be available for stock frozen with the company. There was ample room for the present company. It was well known from and to end of the province that there was a glut in the Wellington works last season, and that the companies roze their own sheep first and left 3he farmers' till too late. (Laughter). He twitted Mr Buchanan with having enlarged on the benefits he and his company were conferring on the community,at the same time having mada substantial profits. Mr Cooper then replied to Mr Buchanan's criticisms. He described Mr Buchanan's statement that he attended and spoke as a farmer was

not in keeping with his being the holder of £l7, COO odd pounds worth market value) of shares in the Wellington Meat Export Company. This company set down its reserves at £115,000, while its capital was rot £IOO,OOO. The Gear Company's shares could not be bought at anything like the face value, and from various aspects it could be seen that big profits had been made, and the Wellington Meat Export Company was practically in the same position. This contrasted strongly with the position of the Canterbury Company shares, which were slightly below face value, indicating that the Wellington Company had been run solely in the interests of the company, and the farmer was not considered. There waa a wide disparity between the capacity of the Wellington works and of those in Canterbury. If additional capacity had to be provided, no doubt the Wellington companies would provide it, but it would be at the expense of the farmers. The farmers interested in the company desired to place.it on the basis of the dairy c'ompanies. Regarding the figures mentioned by Mr Buchanan, the speaker said that in the prospectus it was rot stated that the figures, vdera based on a proportion of business expected from Hawke's Bay, where the company proposed to operate, and if these were included ihe figures would he very near the mark. He pointed out that the bulk of shares in Mr .Buchanan's company were held by nonfarmers, and Mr Buchanan himself was one of the few exceptions to the fact that large parcels of shares were held by non-farmers. It was intended by the co-operative company to grade on the lines of the Wellington Meat Export Company, which was the second best grade in New Zealand. Skins and by-products would be dealt with as farmers desired, to the best advantage of the farmer, cost only to be., deducted. The lines to be followed generally were a vast improvement on things at present in existence. He trusted his hearers would weigh the facts given them that day, and they would have little doubt about supporting the company. (Applause). Mr Buchanan rose to refute the allegation made by Mr Cooper that he held £17,000 worth of shares. The actual fact was that his shares were only £IO,OOO less than Mr Cooper stated. Traversing other statements, Mr Buchanan said the company had always done its best to encourage farmers to freeze on their own. Mr D. Guild moved a vote of thanks to the chairman and speakers, and in doing so said he wished the new company every success. This was carried unanimously, and the meeting adjourned. THE PROBABLE SITE OP THE WORKS. A STATEMENT REFUTED. Mr J. C. Cooper was interviewed on Saturday afternoon by a Wairarapa Age reporter in reference to a statement which appeared in the Foxton "Herald," in which Mr Cooper was reported to have said that Wellington was a impossible site for the works, and that.Foxton was an eminently suitable locality. This statement was copied in leading provincial papers. "You can state," said Mr Cooper, I "that I emphatically deny ever having said such a thing. The Foxton paper made the statement without any grounds whatever. I have never even suggeHted that Wei Ington was an unsuitable position for the works, much less have I ever expressed myself so strongly as to say that that city was an 'impossible place' for the Company's operations. I desire this refutation to be made as widely known as possible, and I also wish it clearly to be understoood that the question of site is still absolutely open, and will be settled entirely by the shareholders."