Thirteen Bag of Air 1915

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

Bag of Air

The war was now a matter of fact, with many male staff members volunteering for service with the Expeditionary Force. The directors recognised this patriotic gesture and passed a resolution that:

Positions be kept open for members of staff volunteering for service with the Expeditionary Force now being enlisted for the European war and that in the case of married men they will be placed on half pay.

Staff and shareholders have been regarded as the most important components of Farmers Co-op over the past century and it is worth recording that the Society was only into its fifth month of operation when the secretary was instructed to write to the manager of the N. Z. Farmers’ Co-op Society of Canterbury to obtain details of ‘their scheme of a superannuation and provident fund’ and ‘that a somewhat similar scheme be submitted to the Society’s staff’. This was placed into effect on 1 April 1915. Throughout the past one hundred years, in good and bad times, employees have enjoyed the unequivocal confidence and respect of the directors and executive management and have always been to the fore when making major restructuring plans. Commitment and loyalty have been intricately laced together with service longevity. When the chips were down, the staff rallied in support of their principal. It was not until the 1990s that the days of long-serving employees finally came to an end within most companies in New Zealand, but Taranaki Farmers continued to have large numbers of staff with long-service pedigrees. It is disappointing that detailed records of many long-serving early employees are lost. We can conclude though that their industry and stickability, although not rewarded with documentation, played a major part in making this company unique, a jewel in the crown of the Taranaki stock and station industry.

The first annual general meeting of shareholders of the Farmers’ Co-op, on Saturday 5 June 1915, was held in ‘the large storeroom’ at the Winter Show Building at Hawera. There was a ‘very large attendance of 150 members, representatives from practically every part of Taranaki’, from ‘Waitotara to Opunake, and all the intermediate important centres’. Chairman George Buckeridge presided over the meeting. For many shareholders this was the moment of truth; they had placed money and faith in the directors and management and now the fruits of their loyalty and commitment would be apparent. The balance sheet presented was to the year ending 31 March 1915.

Outlining the business undertaken during the year the chairman expressed the board’s pleasure of purchasing, ‘as a going concern’, Gillies and Nalder, stating ‘we feel sure the results have fully justified the purchase’. The business had shown a marked increase since it was taken over by the Society. The operation was essentially a stock and station agency. However, merchandise, motor and machinery departments had been opened, resulting in a most successful year. He spoke about

the Opunake saleyard acquisition and its very successful opening on 22 March 1915 and the plans to build and open saleyards at Inglewood ‘at the first opportunity’. The net profit for the year in all departments was £3,152. 13s. 10d., and after providing for depreciation of the plant account – £395. 10s. 3d. – and writing off £1,000 of goodwill and £300 of preliminary expenses, there remained a balance of £1,457.3s.7d., which the directors allocated as follows: Dividend on paid-up capital of ‘C’ issue of shares at 8 per cent, £525, rebate on commission at 10 per cent, and rebate on purchases through the produce department at 2½ per cent, £619. 18s. 2d., bonuses to staff 5 per cent, £204. 1s., amount carried forward, £108, 4s. 5d. In accordance with the Articles of Association the directors to retire after the first year were Messrs Buckeridge, Gwynne, Richards, Skedgwell and Barkla. All were eligible for re-election. Mr J. A. Turton, auditor, was also eligible for re-election. There was considerable praise and appreciation for the manner in which the staff had carried out their duties during what had been a difficult year. The balance sheet showed on the liabilities side:

That the nominal share capital was £500,000, and that there had been subscribed £33,510, and paid up £7,888. On fixed deposit there was £13,843, overdraft at bank £18,030. Owing on mortgage £24,000, amount at current accounts £1,457. The assets showed property £12,577, working plant and office furniture (less depreciation) £920, bills receivable £2,456, amounts due on current account £37,413, stock of merchandise and machinery on hand £3,874, stamps and stationery on hand £347, goodwill (less £1,000 depreciation) £11,000, preliminary expenses (less depreciation) £968, cash in hand £66. Total £69,625, balance profit and loss account £1,457. The profit and loss account showed: Charges £7,770, exchange £167, interest £497, depreciation £1,695. The earnings were £11,588 including, profit on merchandise. Mr J. O. Taylor, who had been rather difficult at the inaugural meeting in January 1914, was still in fine fettle and seized the opportunity to draw the attention of the meeting to a ‘tag by the auditor attached to the balance sheet, viz’: ‘This certificate is subject to a special report on the share register, which I have sent to the chairman.’

This ‘tag’ might have some bearing on the company’s transactions and Mr Taylor considered the shareholders had a right to know the contents of the report. He moved that the meeting go into committee and that the Auditor’s report be read. This motion was seconded by Mr Weir. Director James Corrigan explained to Mr Taylor and the meeting that the auditor had ‘specially mentioned that he did not desire this report to be read to the general meeting’. It referred to a private individual and had no bearing on the company’s balance sheet. The chairman added that the matter had already been dealt with by directors. The motion was then withdrawn.

An interesting comment by the chairman, that had been problematical for farmer’s organisations in the past and seems to be an ongoing challenge even today, was his conclusion that: The cost of securing business was, he considered, too high, and some of this was due to the fact that farmers required too much waiting upon. Reference was also made regarding difficulties experienced in connection with conditions created by the current war in Europe making business more difficult to transact. Capital of the company was also too small, which in turn meant that the Society had to pay interest and discount bills, which meant less profit. He considered the shareholding was quite disproportionate to the value of business completed. To substantiate this remark, there were 1,300 shareholders, holding 3,252 shares averaging £2.50 per shareholder. The turnover was roughly £300,000, or £280 per shareholder, or 56 times the paid-up capital. He made comparisons by stating that the New Zealand Farmers’ Society had 7,421 shareholders holding 110,033 shares, ‘on which had been paid-up £313,000, an average of £46 per shareholder’. Their turnover was £3,272,330 or ten times their paid-up capital.

The chairman indicated that he thought each shareholder of Farmers’ Co-op should provide the Society with sufficient share-capital backing to carry his proportionate share of the load of his own business. He then spoke on the European war which had a significant effect on the Society’s business in many ways. There was restricted banking facilities, the suspension for some time of buying and the increased prices of cattle for meat works. The large increase in the price of wool was already being realised, but the increase in the value of dairy produce was only partly realised as yet. The bonuses were yet to come. There was the effect also on the cost of feed, chaff, oats etc, and also seeds, and there would be felt, especially in the coming season, the shortage of labour for the dairy factories and for harvesting. Money was plentiful, but pending the outcome of the present war, capitalists were shy of investing in it. Prices for produce were abnormally high, and would probably remain so during the war, and would possibly for some time after, but farmers should very carefully husband their resources. History was bound to repeat itself, and depression was bound to follow unduly inflated prices.

Until now the precise purchase price of Gillies and Nalder’s ‘going concern’ operation had not been disclosed. For Farmers’ Co-op to kick off with an experienced team, on a relatively tried and true level playing field, without having to establish premises, yards and employ experienced personnel was a tremendous advantage. However, what had the Society paid for this seemingly invaluable advantage? A question from the floor prompted the chairman to explain details of the purchase. The Society had paid £12,000 to Messrs Gillies and Nalder for the plant and property and a further £12,000 for goodwill. The amount for goodwill was arrived at on the basis of three years’ profits. The Society was required to pay Gillies and Nalder £1,000 on 31 March 1915 and £1,500 every subsequent year until the whole sum was paid off. Interest on the unpaid balance was fixed at 5 per cent. The property at Turuturu Road cost £2,700, and 33 acres on Turuturu Road £2,640, Hawera saleyards of 6 acres between Glover and Egmont Roads £2,400, saleyards and improvements £1,450, Eltham 1 acre £600, Kaponga £400, Manaia £500, Auroa £250, Okaiawa £250. The new saleyards at Opunake cost £1,389.

Once again J. O. Taylor seized the opportunity to enter the forum, saying that he considered £12,000 a huge sum to have paid for the goodwill of the Messrs Gillies and Nalder business – a huge sum for something that he termed a ‘bag of air’, and especially as the Society did not have the money to give. He considered that this was an extraordinary position for the Society to be in, particularly in the face of their commitment to start out on sound lines. He also stated that ‘he was opposed to the farmers of the district running American agencies for implements and motor cars’. He said, ‘they are supposed to be patriots standing in the interests of the British Empire’ and that he took strong exception to the Society excluding British and New Zealand makers. He also took exception to the Society establishing a superannuation scheme for the staff: Is not the first thing to establish the business instead of starting superannuation funds or giving a bonus? Where is the Inglewood business? You are not entitled to go in for philanthropic ideas like this until the business is established.

Mr Todd, in reply, explained that he was the director who moved to inaugurate the superannuation scheme and it would be a fine thing for the employees. After all, he said, it was ‘they who the company depended upon to a great extent for the success of their business’. Mr Peterson added that ‘the chairman said the scheme would be fashioned on the lines followed by other societies. They had not yet worked out what cost it would be’.

Other enquiries were made to the chair regarding expenses of Mr Buckeridge whilst overseas, who advised the meeting that the arrangements were made without any knowledge of the possibilities of hostilities and war and the disposal of the Society’s produce at ‘Home’ would be available as soon

as normal conditions were restored. In relation to the £150 towards his expenses, Mr Buckeridge indicated that on one line alone that sum would have been more than doubly repaid to the Society.

As shareholders analysed and wrestled with the results of the first year, some struggling with the complexities and decisions the directors had made establishing and managing such a diverse trading enterprise, results showed that warnings expounded by two of the most knowledgeable gentlemen associated with the organisation regarding under-capitalisation had not been heeded. Arthur Gillies had publicly stated in 1906 that: ‘A great difficulty in starting a co-operative is getting the share capital. The clever man takes up one share, thus getting any benefit in the way of bonus without risking any capital.

George Buckeridge had also advised the first promotional meeting in 1911 that: ‘The farmers had run away with the idea that a business run by the farmers for the benefit of the farmers could run without money.’

It was clearly now time for farmers to put their money where their mouths were. Mr Walter Powdrell said that ‘some exception had been taken to the amount paid Gillies and Nalder for the goodwill of their business. In his opinion too much had been paid, ‘but they must now make the best of the deal’. He went on to say that the goodwill of an auctioneering business depended a good deal on the staff, the opinion the public had of the directors and the manner in which the business was done. If a first-class official left, that act alone may vary the price of goodwill considerably. Powdrell said that his main grievance against the Society was its under-capitalisation and the endeavour to do too much with the capital it had. They had launched out at Opunake, had practically promised to start at Inglewood and there was some talk about starting at Waverley. He continued by saying: Each place where they started a new business meant a further £10,000 and they were on very dangerous ground in reaching out too far without the necessary capital. The Society was absolutely under-capitalised and they must use utmost caution. If they attempted to fly too high their fall would be pretty hard. The chairman said that when buying the business of Gillies and Nalder the directors believed there would be a large influx of shareholding capital, but that had not happened and that the farmers had not supported the Society as they should have done.

Unless they provided more capital in the future, the operations of the Society must be restricted, and ‘if the directors were compelled to restrict the business, farmers must not blame the directors’. This comment moved many to a vociferous ‘hear, hear!’ Suggestions were made regarding canvassing for shares. Mr Nalder asked the chairman if the directors had considered the advisability of transferring profits to the reserve fund. The chairman responded by saying that they had, but felt that it would be in the best interests of the Society to allocate profits because there were a number of ‘rail-sitters’ in the district who had been waiting to see whether there was any possibility of the Society paying a dividend before they decided ‘on which side of the fence they were going to fall’.

George Buckeridge went on to say that he could not altogether blame the farmers because previous experience had given the impression that it had not been possible for any co-operative concern of this kind to pay dividends because profits were not strong enough to warrant it. He stated, however, ‘but we have, and that being so, the directors considered that it would be good business to allocate the dividend as we have done’. Mr Corrigan added: ‘We hope to do it annually’. The chairman continued:

After a phenomenally good year we have made a 50 per cent profit and I say that it is only reasonable to suppose that the farmers throughout the district will have quite a different opinion of the Society and its operations than they had before we made a start. Instead of sitting on the rail as they had been doing, I hope they will now come down on the right side and support the company to the full extent of their power.

This again encouraged a volley of support from the floor, and the chairman then drove the message home:

Each shareholder’s holding averages 2½ shares, which is altogether inadequate to the amount of business he expects the company to do for him, but if he would support it to the extent of the load he expects to put on that business, we could carry on along sound lines. Many farmers had not done nearly as much for the company as I have done, apart from my personal work. I am today by a good deal the largest shareholder in the company at the present time, but the amount of business I am able to put through the company at the present is not large. I hope, however, in a short time to put as much through as most of you. I have supported this Society to the full extent of my power, and if every farmer would do the same you would have the power in this country that nothing would stop. Spontaneous applause erupted throughout the assembled meeting. Further matters relating to the allocation of profits, company shares, share capital and other financial matters were raised and dealt with accordingly. Reference was made to the ‘good work done by the chairman and directors during the year’ and a proposal was made that they receive an honorarium. A Mr Blair pointed out that the Society was ‘being run purely and simply as a money-making concern, and if they had to depend on the gratuitous services of directors to keep going, it was time they closed up’. Several other shareholders spoke in support of the suggestion, but the chairman and each of the directors said emphatically that they were quite prepared to give their services gratuitously and did not desire payment. If, however, the meeting insisted in paying them, the amount would be reinvested in the Society. It was finally resolved to vote directors who had come from a distance 20 shillings and local directors 10 shillings for each meeting attended during the past year. The chairman was voted an honorarium of £50, and the directors were recommended to reimburse him his out-of-pocket expenses during the time he was organising the Society. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The election of directors resulted as follows:

G. H. Buckeridge 273 Jas. Barkla 246 H. Skedgwell 200 A. T. Wills 196 J. Swindlehurst 175 G. Gwynne 96 H. Richards 89 J. S. Tosland 30 J. O. Taylor 29 The first five were duly elected.

Mr Buckeridge thanked the shareholders for again placing him ‘in the proud position of being at the head of the poll’. His humility was plain for all to see when he told the meeting that he looked ‘on this as the shareholders’ opportunity for expressing their opinion upon the guidance of the Society’s business during the past 12 months, and although elected at the head of the poll last year and not necessarily having to stand down this year, he decided to do so in order to give shareholders who might not care to speak their opinions an opportunity of expressing them through the ballot box’. He thanked them for the confidence they had ‘again reposed on him’. Mr J. Turton was re-elected auditor, at a remuneration of £100. Following a vote of thanks to the staff for their services during the past year the meeting concluded.

James R. Corrigan at Waitui, Inglewood. From left: Jack Scott (manager), James. R. Corrigan, sitting in car Dorothy Corrigan, lady standing unknown.

COURTESY ROSS AND CLAIRE CORRIGAN

One of South Taranaki’s most dedicated ‘robust’ co-operative advocates, founder and proponent of the Egmont Farmers’ Co-operative Association Limited in 1906, provisional director and organiser of The Farmers’ Co-operative Organisation Society of N. Z. Ltd, resigned from his seat on the Society’s directorate in a letter to the board on Thursday 1 July 1915. Mr James R. Corrigan addressed the board meeting, ‘dealing very fully with his stock transactions with the Society’. His resignation from the board came at a time when every ounce of experience was necessary to guide it through what seemed the proverbial ‘minefield’. The reason for his sudden departure is unclear. However, pressures brought to bear on the Society and the directorate in the early days were enormous, with great expectations and demands from almost every quarter of the farming community. While James Corrigan was a loss to the Society, he continued to play a major roll at annual general meetings and his services to the South Taranaki farming fraternity were not lost. This man preferred to lead rather than be led and this change in direction may have been a blessing in disguise for the people of the district as he committed his forthright debating style, repartee and his generosity to many other co-operatives, companies and organisations. He was without doubt a colourful character. His interests were not wholly in dairy farming: he bred and widely exhibited stud Lincoln, English Leicester, Border Leicester and Shropshire sheep; and was a director of the Hawera Co-operative Dairy Company from 1906 to 1917, continuing as chairman until 1934.

Contemporaries admired his ‘down to earth’ leadership qualities. They elected him to the position of first chairman of the Federation of Taranaki Dairy Factories in 1924, an organisation

that eventually played a significant part in the formation and co-ordination of the dairy industry within the province. Other positions included: director of the Egmont Box Company from 1919 to 1921 and chairman from 1932 to 1934; director of the New Zealand Rennet Company 1923 to 1934; the West Coast Refrigeration Company, a Patea coolstore and the South Taranaki shipping company operating out of Patea port. He also served on the Patea Harbour Board, and was a director of the Hawera Winter Show Company and its chairman from 1922 until 1934. Wartime prices boosted James Corrigan’s fortunes, but he considered this ‘blood money’ and provided many personal guarantees to soldier settlers. The slump in 1921–22 meant many guarantees were called in and James Corrigan honoured them despite other financial losses. It has been claimed that he was possibly the first to transport a trotter by lorry in New Zealand, incidentally enabling it ‘to win at Addington and Hawera in the same Easter weekend and confounding bookmakers’. His interest in the trotting industry saw him purchase the Australian horse Man o’ War ‘for an unprecedented £1,500 and win the Auckland Cup with him in 1920 and 1921’. He became the nation’s leading owner in 1921–22 and 1922–23. His winnings for the 1921–22 totalled £8,211. It is said that he partially recovered his losses by developing his trotting interests under the supervision of his son, Alex.

Following an unsuccessful attempt to create a compulsory pooling scheme for dairy exports, James Corrigan stood successfully as a Member of Parliament for Patea in 1922 as a Liberal and a supporter of producer control in dairy marketing. In Parliament he denounced banks, shipping companies, overseas ‘meat trusts’ and ‘manure monopolists’ as exploiters of primary producers. He was an advocate of a state bank, greater spending on farm development and back-block roading, and strong producer boards. The problems of returned soldiers and isolated settlers featured in his speeches. However, his accusations of corruption stung ministers, including Prime Minister William Massey.

James described himself as ‘very much out of place’ in Parliament and was unseated in the Coates landslide in 1925. He was elected to the New Zealand Dairy Produce Control Board in 1926 and continued until 1932. He surprised the existing board’s supporters by opposing its pricefixing policy, but his clear victory suggests he was reflecting local opinion. He served his province and country with flair and distinction. Survived by his devoted wife Annie, three children and one foster child, he passed away on 19 March 1935. His energy, legacy and commitment to the farming fraternity has remained with the Corrigan family, who have continued to support many farming organisations in Taranaki throughout the past century.

It was with sadness in 1915 that the board received news of the death of two other pioneer gentlemen, James Livingston and James ‘Baldy’ Davidson who also extolled the virtues of the cooperative and played leading roles in earlier forays into the establishment of farmers’ co-operatives. Both were founding pioneers of the Hawera district and worthy of all the accolades they receive in this and other historical publications.

Considering the vast uncharted waters the board had navigated during the past 12 months and formidable challenges it had overcome, there was an air of success about it as the second year of trading began. Then out of the blue, a bombshell was dropped at the October 1915 meeting following discussion relating to a finance ‘advance’ application from a shareholder being discussed by the board. The precise nature of the discourse is unknown and we can only draw our own conclusion as to what pre-empted the following resolution by the board: ‘That the chairman and manager be asked to retire whilst the matter re advance to W. L. F. Porter is being discussed. Carried.’

Mr Buckeridge and the manager then retired and on being recalled to the proceedings were informed that the following resolution had been passed: ‘That the instructions of the directors or sub-committees to whom they delegate their power must be carried out.’

A resolution was also passed to ask J. C. Hobbs, the Eltham agent/auctioneer, to address the board

and explain why £200 worth of stock was sold and delivered to a client contrary to the instructions of the manager. The next-scribed minutes of the day record a motion, moved by Mr Foreman and seconded by Mr Gray: ‘That Mr Buckeridge be asked to resign his position as chairman. Carried unanimously.’

Mr Buckeridge advised that he would ‘accede to the director’s request to resign from the position of chairman’, and it was then moved by Mr Symes and seconded by Mr Dickie that Mr Alex Hunter be elected chairman. The following month, in November 1915, George Buckeridge resigned from the board itself. Interesting, however, is the fact that at the next annual general meeting, on 20 May 1916, George Buckeridge made several contributions to the discussion, and in the election of directors – there being five vacancies, with 13 shareholders offering their services to the board – he won his position back on the board. The results of the voting were as follows: Messrs A. Hunter 348 votes, B. C. Lysaght 260, A.E. Death 229, A. Corkill 199, G. H. Buckeridge 195, G. Preece 140, J.B. Gibson 118, D. Richards 88, W. G. Belton 80, G. Gwynne 55, J. Simpson 50, W. B. Fryday 35, J. O. Taylor 35. There were ten informal votes and at a subsequent directors’ meeting Alex Hunter was elected chairman. Although not as popular as before, George Buckeridge resumed his seat on the board. What led to his resignation the previous year, mid term, remains a mystery, although one could read between the lines and conclude there had been some misunderstanding concerning a transaction. However, his strong and stoic personality would preclude him from letting one incident cloud his huge contribution to this co-operative enterprise he had almost single-handedly promoted and brought to fruition. Coincidentally, the appointment of Arthur W. Gillies, currently acting honorary general manager, was cancelled at the April 1916 meeting of directors. These unexpected personnel problems were no doubt brought about by the huge pressures being placed on both executive management and the board as they grappled with the raft of issues confronting them as they steadily built the infrastructure of the organisation. We do know that in July 1916 Arthur Gillies interviewed the board, and that following this meeting we would hear no more of this quite extraordinary gentleman who had played a short but significant role in both Hawera’s local politics and the South Taranaki stock and station industry. Although not disclosed in any minute books or other documents, his ‘honorary’ position as general manager was probably part of the deal when Gillies and Nalder sold the stock and station business to Farmers’ Co-op in 1914.

Arthur Gillies’ departure, however, must have been premeditated as he had purchased a block of land at Kawaha Point, on the western shore of Lake Rotorua, and built a large retirement house. When war broke out he offered the use of the house to the Government as a convalescent home for soldiers but the offer was not taken up. It was also reported that Mr Gillies made an offer of £1,000 to establish an aviation school at Rotorua. He moved to Auckland where he was appointed member of the district Repatriation Board and voluntarily took charge of a scheme under which the farms of men on service were supervised and managed by experienced farmers in their neighbourhoods. He then entered into a partnership with Mr Francis Hull, ‘father’ of the Auckland Stock Exchange, and after Mr Hull’s death in 1933 he continued in the business under the name of Francis Hull and Co., in partnership with Mr J. W. Coney. In 1938, Arthur realised a cherished lifelong wish to join his brother, Sir Harold Gillies, one of New Zealand’s most eminent plastic surgeons at the time, on a salmon fishing trip to Iceland, and a visit to Europe. During the latter part of his life he resided at Ranui, near Henderson.

Acquiring sufficient capital to complete the company’s representation throughout the province was one key objective yet to be fulfilled in the coming years. Time was of the essence to retain the confidence of all who had put money and faith in the hands of the directors, with fully established stores and saleyards in their districts being a prerequisite and acknowledgement that the enterprise

had been a success. In the last few months of 1915, this continued to be the prime focus for the board. Sub-committees were appointed to deal with Eltham, Stratford and Inglewood and reports were submitted to the board for its consideration on Saturday 9 October 1915: INGLEWOOD: The following sites were inspected: J. F. Lever (Mrs Barford’s) – 20 acres Parley – 90 acres McKay [MacKay] – 25 acres Wm. Lile 16 acres Matthew & Gamlin’s saleyards & auction mart. As regards the sites inspected at Inglewood, the areas offered were really in excess of the company’s requirements for the purpose of erecting saleyards. The section offered by Lile was considered quite unsuitable, being too broken and on the wrong side of the town for the purpose required. In the other cases a suitable site could be obtained, providing the owners were willing to sell 5 to 10 acres. Enquiries are now being made from the various owners and it is possible that the northern members of the sub-committee may have something fresh to report at today’s meeting of directors. Probably the best site for the saleyards near Inglewood is a section belonging to the Estate of the late H. B. Curtis, but it is doubtful if this could be secured. Mr Corkill is making inquiries, however, and may be able to give us some later information regarding the matter. As regards the saleyards belonging to Matthews & Gamlin, these are not conveniently situated and would practically require to be rebuilt before they could be classed as up-to-date yards. STRATFORD: J. Donald’s business premises of motor garage and stables. W. M. Bayly & Co.’s business premises of grain produce merchants and hide and skin business. J. McDonald’s. These are conveniently situated being in the main street and the buildings are roomy and substantial, and with certain alterations, could no doubt be converted into suitable premises for a grain and produce store.

Patea township 1909.

COURTESY OF SOUTH TARANAKI MUSEUM

W. M. Bayly & Co. The premises are fairly conveniently situated, being just off the main street and adjoining to N.Z. Loan Co.’s buildings. The section is a corner site with a splendid frontage. Buildings appear to be fairly good and suitable for the business now being carried on. We consider, however, that the goodwill asked, £2,025 is right out of proportion. We understand, however, that the Trustee, Mr Coleman, is now prepared to considerably vary the original offer and we hope to be able to place full particulars before the directors today. Mr Coleman is desirous of interviewing the directors personally on the subject if it can be so arranged. ELTHAM: The matter of the Eltham business could be fully discussed at the same time. We may say that from enquiries made and also from voluntary information furnished us from different sources, we feel sure the opening of a grain and produce store at Eltham would be very popular with our present shareholders, both at Eltham and the surrounding districts and the prospects of good business are practically assured. In addition we feel we are quite safe in saying that a number of influential people who have hitherto held aloof from our Society would at once become shareholders in the event of the Society favourably considering the proposition. Opening saleyards, branch offices and stores throughout the rest of Taranaki became a regular topic at board meetings and with pressure now being applied by shareholders from other districts of the

George M. Taylor, who was employed in the motor department, outside Farmers’ Co-op Produce Store, north end of Union Street, Hawera, 20 March 1924.

COURTESY OF ALLISON HARPER.

province, establishing local presence was now crucial to the Society’s ongoing success. Trying to placate farmers in outlying areas as well as attempting to bed down the Hawera operation became a careful balancing act. In July 1916 a sub-committee endeavoured to secure a section outside the Hawera borough for the purpose of erecting a shed for the storage of benzine and no doubt with some uncertainty regarding the possibilities of the motor vehicle, in the same year purchased a horse and cart for cartage purposes. Premises in Regent Street, Hawera were purchased at a cost of £5,775 and in 1916 a bulk store and other premises at Patea were acquired, although there was no intention of establishing a trading outlet at this time. With the advent of Farmers’ Co-op and an upsurge of activity now being generated in the stock and station industry an Auctioneers Association was formed in the Taranaki province.

Expansion inevitably sucked up hard-won capital still all too slowly coming into the company’s coffers. Soon cries of ‘expenditure far too high’ were heard at the second annual general meeting, on 20 May 1916. Although the company was quickly developing into the province’s most talked about commercial enterprise, it was desperately in need of significant capital to enable it to gain a foothold in all districts. The chairman Alex Hunter, on moving the adoption of his annual report, remarked on what was the most pressing matter for the board: The subscribed capital on 31 March 1916, was £56,480 invested by 1,818 shareholders, showing an increase of capital for the twelve months of £20,670, and in membership 315. The paid up capital is set down at £20,316, an advance of £12,888. These figures are very encouraging, and indicate that the Society has the confidence of a fairly large number of the farmers in the district. It is to be hoped that the satisfaction arising therefrom will not induce any to ease off, but rather to increase their endeavours to further strengthen and build up the Society and place its finances on such a footing as will enable it to cater to the best advantage for farmers’ requirements. Before leaving the question of capital, I would advance the opinion, and in practice I have acted upon it, that if farmers supply capital for concerns or ventures outside their own immediate business, and I think it is in some cases their burden duty to do so, they should first and foremost assist those which handle the farmers’ produce, and especially those that do so on co-operative lines.

Afurther offer of 20 acres ‘in the land of the Moa’ at Inglewood, a property owned by J. F. Barford was considered; however, a sub-committee of Messrs Todd, Corkill and Jones was appointed to interview Mr MacKay to endeavour to negotiate a lower ‘quotation’ from him. The committee was empowered to offer up to £70 per acre for the property, with £1,000 to be taken up in shares. With regard to establishing premises at Stratford, the directors met with Mr Coleman and following consideration, resolved ‘that the offer of Bayly & Co. business be not entertained’. Despite the lack of capital, it had to make every effort to increase the number of shareholders and thereby its capital and take advantage of the momentum being created. In the immediate future the board had Eltham, Stratford, Inglewood and Waitara firmly in its sights and was preparing for the future with the purchase of property ‘at the corner of Union, Grey and Wellington Streets, Hawera for the purpose of erecting in the near future, should circumstances warrant, suitable buildings for the carrying on of the company’s business.’

Accommodating the Hawera merchandise department was becoming a problem and floor space was completely inadequate for the growing business of the Hawera branch. The produce department operating out of the Winter Show Buildings in Princes Street and Goodwin’s building on Albion Street had experienced difficulties; due to heat from the low roof in Goodwin’s buildings stored seed had germinated and the Society had suffered significant loss of seed as a result of this. A decision was made in 1916 to lease a premises erected by Mr Lockhart in Union Street, a few yards up from the railway station, with a view to securing ‘a much larger volume of business in this department’. A substantial building was constructed of concrete and was eminently suited to the Society’s business.