MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.
R3
141 Very bikely the cultivation is not so good? In the small planter- 1 mean the very small planter Come direct to the estate to sell lus sugar cane, then mis sugar cane does not fetel the same price as it would Sometimes Ebuy if it was done through my mobation
mall planters' canes there and weil them through the same man and then 1 obtam a better price.
14,497 That because it is tot worth any factory's while to buy a few sugar caties, of course. What is the ne of it to them? they want to buy a large quantity The man who sells a small pantity never gets the prior that a man that sells a large quantity would get What is it that you complain of? Has anybody treated yon bally? Yes
14.49% What is the complaint?-The complaint is this that I was planting sugar cane upon land belong- ine to the lle d'Ambre estate and at that time the He l'Ambr· estate used to buy my sugar cane at a very low rate Then 1 left giving my sugar cane to le d'Ambre and 1 gav my sugar cane to the Espérance estate, and when I gave my sugar to the Espérance estate, the Ile d'Aubre estate did not allow me to go on their premises
14,499 Why should yon go upon their premises ?— A friend of me who is also cultivating land belonging Ile d'Ambre estate has been allowed to cut sugar cane on that estate for the last ti years, whilst I have uly been allowed to cut for 4 years and then I was turned out.
14,500, Mr Woodcock.) What rent were you pay- ng for land on Ile d'Ambre estate? No rent was large, but the sugar cane was bought at a very low rate at Rs 7 or Rs. 8
14.501 (Chairman) When you say that they did not allow you to go to the Ila d'Ambre estate, do you man that they did not let any land to you any longer? -It is not like that.
14.502. You say they would not let you go on the Ile d'Ambre estate, because you were selling the cane What do you mean when to the Espérance estate.
you say they would not let you go on the estate? – All of the others cut canes for six years, whilst I was turned out in four years, so I have lost two years.
14,503. (Mr. Woodcock.) What business had you Con il canes grown on land belonging to that estate, for which you paid no rent, to another mill?-Because I sold sugar cane belonging to my own property. belonging to my own land, to another estate. I was turned out by the Ile d'Ambre estate.
Of course.
angar cane belonging to the Ile d'Ambre estate 1 only Bold to the lle d'Ambre estate as before, but as regards sugar cane planted on my own laud, I did not continue to sell to them.
14.504. (Chairman.) Was not it a condition that if you were allowed to cultivate the land belonging to the I d'Ambre estate, that you must sell to the estate the whole of the canes grown on that land and on your own land? Was not that the arrangement or the con tract between the parties -There was no such agree- ment between us.
14,505. What rent did you pay for the land which you were cultivating belonging to the Ile d'Ambre Patate-1 did not pay any rent.
14,506. Then what complaint have you got to make ? They let you cultivate the land, and then they did not let you cultivate the land P-My complaint is this, because I did not sell my sugar cane grown on my own laud to Ile d'Ambre estate, they would not allow me to cultivate the land for six years.
14,507. I know that They let you cultivate their land without paying any rent, and then one day they maid: Now, we are not going to let you do it any 1 uger. Very well. You paid no rent for the land, what complaint have you got?—I had incurred initial expenses in cultivating that land, and after four years I had nothing.
14.308. Had you got any arrangement with them to y that you were to occupy that land for so many years!--No, there was no agreement between me and
the factory, but other people are allowed to cultivate that in for six years, while I have been turned out in four yours
14,509 ( Wooddruck.). Do you know of any custom of the country by which, if you cultivated the land. you have a right to cultivate it for so many you? There is a loval custom like that, that if a man plants sugar cane upon land belonging to someone else, then he is allowed to cut that for 5, 6, 7 or 8
years, until that land has to be planted over again.
14,510 And is that entirely in the discretion of the owner of the land, as to when it is to be planted over again - If there are expectations that certain standing sugar canes will give a very good crop the next year. thep those cants are allowed to stand, and no new plantation is made As regards my own case, after I had cut sugar canes for four years there was sufficient sugar cane standing which would give a good crop next year, and yet I was turned out and the sugar cane that was planted by me was transferred to someone
Ime.
Mr. Woodcock to Mr Manital i 1 am asking you this question as a lawyer. Do you know whether. according to the law in this Island, a custom of that kind is recognised by the courts and would be enforced by the courts?
(Mr. Manilal.) I do not know that. (Mr Woodcock. Have you no idea?
(Mr Manilal.) I have no idea about it.
11.511. Chairman, to the Witness.) You say you
are allowed to cut for 5, 6, 7 or 8 years; it is not a custom of the day to be allowed to cut for 5, 6, 7 or H years
What is the exact term P-1 only know that I was allowed to cut sugar cane for four years, and that another man has been cutting for the last two years and will be able to cut again.
14,512. (Mr. Woodcock.) I am going to usk one more question and then I am finished. Was there any distinct agreement at the time you commenced this cultivation that you were to enjoy the cultivation for at least six years ?—No, there was no such agreement.
14.513. (Chairman.) Would not you have been perfectly satisfied if the other people had been turned out sa well? I would not be glad if other people were turned out like I have been, but I wish that I had been allowed to continue to cultivate the land.
14,514. Quite so, but you would not have complained, would you, that you were turned out if the other people were not allowed to remain ?-It is not a grievance confined to me alone; there are two or three other men who have been turned out like me.
14,515. Then apparently some were turned out and some still remain, but if you do business without any agreement, you have only got yourself to blame?-1 am not the only person who does that; almost everybody does like that. There is no agreement and they culti Some of them are vate land belonging to the estate. turned out and some of them remain.
(Mr. Manilal.) If you would like to ask the witness any question about the balance, he would be able to answer you. He used to sell certain sugar canea through the intermediation of the small planter; he knows something about the balance if you wish to nek him any question.
15,516, (Sir Edward O'Malley.) Do you mean by whort weight? Do you mean that there were false weights used in weighing any of the sugar sold by you? -The scales belonging to the Espérance estate were not right. I used to buy augar for the Espérance sugar estate.
14.517. What do you any about the balances ? Do you say when you sold your canes to them that they did not weigh them in a proper way?—No.
14,518. (Chairman.) Do you want to say that there was any cheating with the balance when it was under your management ?--I was not there at the time of the balance, but there was a clerk belonging to the Espérance estate. I do not know that there was any cheating done on that balance.
The witness withdrew. Adjourned till to-morrow at 10.30.
TWENTY-EIGHTH SITTING.
Tuesday, 17th August 1909.
At The Castle," Beau-Bassin.
(22.)
The Hon. GASTON ANTELME, called in and examined in private.
17,265. (Chairman.) We shall be glad if you will kindly give us the information which you desire to do? -You know that I was the member who proposed the Motion for the Advance in Aid in 1907, and that I was seconded by Mr. Ritter in terms that you can see in debates of the Council. I did so because I was pressed and urgently solicited by the banks and by all the people to have assistance immediately from the Govern ment for the crop, and you will see, by and bye, that 1 was not wrong in saying that the position was a very difficult one, because two firme had had to shut down and great families had been ruined, and if the Commercial Bank had not, at this time, got immediate assistance from the Government, surely the bank would have stopped payment and thousands of people would have been in a few days without any money. I have seen that Mr. Ritter has said in his evidence that we are not As I was the member who now wanting any money. proposed that the assistance should be given, I wish to say that I do not agree-that it is not my opinion, and that there are not many people in Mauritius who know the business of bailleurs de fonds as I know it now. because I have seen very well how they do business in the place, and, as I think you have not been very well informed about the business of a bailleur de fonds, I wish to tell you how they manage. In the fall of the house of Mr. Regnard and of my cousin, we, the estates. had been ignorant of the position until the moment they have suspended their payment.
17.266. (Mr. Woodcock) Do you mean that you were ignorant of the position-absolutely ignorant until the suspension came; you did not foresee that it was coming ?-Not a bit, and we had consigned our sugar for a small quantity of money from them.
17,267. (Chairman.) When you say "them," who do you mean, the bank -No, I am speaking of the bailleurs de fonds.
17,268. (Mr. Woodcock.) Were those two houses bailleurs de funds?-Messrs. Leopold Antelme and Regnard were bailleurs de fonds to a large quantity of estates here, and I borrowed money from Mr. Antelme for my estate, and I was absolutely ignorant of the position until he had suspended payment. I wish to call your attention to the fact that the bailleur de fonds has no risk in Mauritius, and that the risk in Mauritius is for the estaten.
17,269. (Chairman.) Are you speaking of yourself as a planter or as a bailleur de fonda? As a planter.
17,270. (Mr. Woodcock.) I think you are not a bailleur de fonds at all ?—No.
17,271. You are a planter managing property on behalf of yourself and those of your family! Exactly.
17.272. And na such, you took a loan from Antelme's a bailleurs de fonds P-Yes. You see the way the bailleurs de fonds proceed towards us and towards the merchanta in this. This is only to prove that they had no money, and how they do business on credit you will see by and bye.
17,273. (Sir Edward O'Malley.) What was the date of the failure? The date of the failure of Antelme'.
firm was in November 1907 and also of Messr3. Regnard.
17.274. (Mr. Woodcock.) Both of them in November 1907 - Yes.
17.275. (Chairman.) On two successive days?—Yes, after the assistance had been refused. You see the bank had stopped their credit and the two firma were obliged to suspend payment.
17,276. Do not you want to say that these two firms which had eventually to suspend payment, had no money of their own; they were advancing that money which they had got from the bank, and suddenly the bank refused to give them any more and then they had to suspend payment?-Yes, they got a part of their money from the bank; not all their money, because when they had to shut their doors, Leopold Antelme was liable for Rs. 1,500,000 personal unsecured debta to all the people of the place, and I think that Mr. Regnard was liable for nearly Rs. 3,000,000 to all the people in the place.
17,277. (Mr. Woodcock.) In the form of promissory notes or bills of exchange -No, credit notes. You go to the merchant and buy rice and when the moment has arrived to pay, he says: Let it be till the crop is over, then I will pay, and if the crop is not That is the way good the money is not sufficient. the business is done in the place, and I will show you. To these firms we had consigned all our sugar. All the sugar was to be sold to reimburse them for the advance they had given. When they shut their doors all our angars were sold and we have been obliged afterwards to pay the banks, and to pay the chiero. graphic all the money the bailleurs de fonds bad taken from them to give to us, and we were obliged, there. fore, to pay this because our sugar had been sold and the money had not been put to our credit, and when they shut their doors we had been obliged, na we had given our signature on the bills, to pay the banks and to pay the chierographic.
17,278 (Mr. Woodcock.) Will you stop there for a moment, I want to understand that. The firm of Antelme, bailleurs de fonda, had advanced you money?
-Teo.
17,279. They. in their turn, had had to borrow money from the bank P-Yes, they had borrowed money from the bank on their signature and mine.
17,280. And you had had that money ?—A part of that money.
17,281. A part of it only ?—Yes.
You
17,282. I think perhaps we can get this clear. had had a part of the money only for which you had signed ?--Yes.
17,283. You had signed for a great deal more money than you had actually received ?—Yon.
17,284. Is that a wise business proceeding, or is it the common practice in this Island P-It is the practice in this Island.
17,285. Very wall. Then having had only a part of that money from these bailleurs de fonds, they suspend payment ? Yes,
17,286. As you put it, the debacle comes?—Yen,
F 2
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TTIC.O. 882
9
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.