FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1918
1918 - 0896.PDF
count??* Th^e..t th\idea °* any large supply of dope being required in thisbe amnl'fl i^tu lnouBht a quarter of a ton per day of acetate of cellulose would t>re«^nB- mVf purpose, but I understand that ever since that they have beenthine l&^S « more' until the>' are now Pressing this company for some- in whirh r,, °r tons a week- Therefore, what was first a small company, MJrr * I2°.ooo was put up by debentures, with / 4,ooo of capital in six-these fid «h?' s naturally grown, and the puWic are'Interested in seeing that worth whit thS are now worth £r4 'OS. Nothing of the kind. They are exactlyinouiriVcT h y Were when ttey were 6d., a"d no m°re- J understand from amnn<r«7 thTf/6 made that the &.000 of shares were made 6d. shares for divisionIt was an e p^Isons who put up the £120,000 worth of money in debentures, tatinn that way of dividing them into small sums, and there was no expec-rennrt ,7™ My£r?fit would be made. No profit has been made, but from that £°UId fr*1'? tmnk that Possible. No excess profit has been made,undtd f th tt h i y htrennrt ,7™ My£and no n™£°UId fr? Possible. No ess p h b , time win h ui * understand from the accountant, who in a very shortat Drwrn a^u to get °ut the balance-sheet, that there is a considerable loss material Th A S *en ever since the company was established, in making thisa half wiiii u^ L £eiltlemen, out of their own money, found over a million and tioni tr. t. to set UP vo-ks at the earnest request of the Minister of Muni- in length 3 ?",' tms'valuable product. Their works near Derby are a mile mtl th %!a mile broad ^d the/ have ^en Put UP at a cost of approxi- ?, valuable p y matelv thr %!•a mile broad> ^d / hav n t U t t f approxi reaueTt nf ,h "H1"005 °t money. Th h b d bll t h / P P pp t nf , °t . That has been done absolutely at the urgent a*ain bejrmvf fo^ernment and the particular Department, who have again and position y sflould turn out more and more of this peculiar com- debentur the Whoie sto?y- At ^^ il was <Juite a smaU thing, a"d £120,000 inthe cornmnv sf/°?> *° sixPenny shares seemed to be a right kind of size for concernst A .U men connected with it were men connected with largehavp hZl'~ IJ ey ™d not 'rouble about increasing it in any way. No shares themsel™ °," the Stock Exchangewhatever. They have kept them amongstchief hint' a , Wben the>' wanted money, money was advanced. One of the conned) *?.. 1'ondon. I believe, advanced £900,000, and also one of the firmsas well h? u tbe c°ncern put in £500,000. Therefore, these shares might just thec™T aveDeen £50 shares. It makes no difference. It was only to show whatbank a^w^' WaH worti*< and for the Purpose of paying back the debts to the arbitraTr fi m the alteration in the company took place whereby an stand r tf^T0!^14 Ios- was chosen as 'he amount at which the shares shouldT^ ReP°rt of the Committee which has been criticised in manyhe Report o Committee, whic case of th ~r i> % Slxtn RePort of the Committee, does not fairly represent thef avmir IK r?"ulose Company. There are a great many things in the company's twVs, i • ave never been mentioned. They had not the slightest idea that hih VIwhich wa VI >?de were ^ing examined behind their backs and giving evidencebooks Th ^7yUTeconcilab'e ^'n the f acts> which can be disclosed from their ow the Hous« of Commons is the fairest inquest i f acts thei and all th 1 o n the world,ask the Pv 1 H™se of Commons to do is to suspend judgment, and they of intuof?6^ ° not to mak« comments tfpon the matter, until this Committee I anf a ££?n has thoroughly examined it on oath.their hr^t S3y that eveiT help that the company can give, by means of tion h,**L°T elr offioals, or theirrecords, they will give to such an investiga-takm 1 u-y complain that the Chairman of the Committee should have to thf fv mnMeIf rather more than he ought to have done in absolutely writingever^h^6SS t letter> and under-marking in blue all the way through the Report the edit ( affected the British Cellulose Company, and asking, I believe,h^t-rTt • J* - those papers to comment upon it. That may or may not have until thU-'C-j' but aU the company askis that judgment should be suspendedtc thp R rS °f the case has ^^ heard- They have put in a detailed answer Minitt»Y?» of the Conimittee to-night to the Minister'in charge—namely, thethatViTf • Mun«ions—and they are willing to back up that reply in every way show fh ,lnTestlgation thinks fit. I think I have said enough to the House tocarepr<rkL- je ls another side to the question. These men have honourable thine-th them. They are men of large positions, who have done every- anrf th t °^n to suPP'y the Government with wiat was absolutely necessary,SceM they have been unjustly attacked in this Report. I should invpntiay S^.me thias aDolIt cellulose. I am no chemist, but it is an extraordinaryIt k th acetate of cellulose. The base of it apparently is cotton or paper, tiraliiS.™1110 P'ec«s, ground up, and mixed with this chemical until it prac-nati7i Decomes a flour. It is then turned back from being something of a floury 7n\™% «? ," Is la tae 0Ttn ol a ieU"y a°d transparent. They have practicallythl.fi * dlfl8c"Itv which Mr. H. G. Wells put in one of his books as one of „" , 3nd most desirable things that ought to be invented after the War,win KT' I •ass tnat "rtl bend, and they have practically turned out glass that "£" oend in any direction. In addition, it will mak« a synthetic silk of ther™V Quality, and I have got some in my pocket now. Further, it makes un- Dreataue films, and Messrs. Pathe Frtres use nothing else than cellu ose, and,f t oave said, it is absolutely necessary for the purpose? of dope this company reeis very strongly the remarks which have been made in this Report, and theyask rorjustee at the hands of the House of Commons. "-oJonel Collins : The right hon. Gentleman has asked the House to suspendjudgment on the Report issued by the Sub-committee on the Ministry of Muni- •iTt ii. ave tne honour to be the Chairman of that Committee, and I am sureuiat the request of the right hon. Gentleman will be appreciated and accepted y Committee In view of his request and f the statement made at th<> o inquiry into this case, I have no intention of now speaking to justifyine Keport, but I can say that, at the proper time, my colleagues and I will attempt to justify every "statement therein made. At the beginning of hisj60 e r'£ht hon. Member referred to my action when the Report was issued, ana rather inferred that I had issued a copy of the Report to the Press before itwas made public. That I desire to contradict emphatically. On the day the Keport was issued I sent to the Vote Office for several copies of the Report. I7hVe "f^d that the right hon. Gentlemanihas suggested to Mr. Speaker that H substance of the Report was published in the Glasgow Herald on the daytiiat the Report was issued in London. th • Bul1: No ; the ReP°rt was issued in London at two o'clock. It wasmen in the Vote Office, and it appeared almost in full in Glasgow on the next morning. vi~** • ^'o110' Collins : The Report was issued in London at two p.m., and appearedW a Glasgow paper the following morning ; that i« only natural, because it would oe sent along the wires in the afternoon. I desire to deal witn that point, be-cause it had been stated to Mr. Speaker that I infringed the privileges of the Mouse by sending a copy of this Report to the Press before it was issued toMembers of this House. Ijlid not take any such action, and I am glad the right non. Gentleman has seen fit to withdraw any suggestion which be conveyed to«r. Speaker in the earlier part of the afternoon. The second reference to myself consisted in the fact that, as Chairman of the Committee, I sent a copy ol theKtport to the Press with certain sentences specially marked. I admit at once tnat I did do so. It was a long Report, and I conceived it my duty, as I shallconceive it my duty in future, to see that the substance of the Report is referred to in the Press. The Report, as I say, was a long one, and unless someone hadtaken the trouble to mark the salient factors it might not have been dealt with satisfactorily by the Press at short notice. The right hon. Gentleman seemedto think that I was animated by some bias against the company. But I marked tne Report carefully myself and I purposely omitted marking any referenceto two gentlemen, one an officer and the other Sir Trevor Dawson, to whom re- ference has been made here. If the right hon. Gentleman had gone throughtoe marked copy he would have seen that I did not mark those names at all. I AUGUST S, 1918. might further mention there is a reference to myself in page 2 of the Report ina complimentary sense, and I did not mark that reference. The reference in question was in the Report presented to the House by a Sub-committee of theWar Office. My sole object in issuing this Report and marking the paragraphs » was to draw public attention to these matters. My Commiftee had spent agood deal of time on this question, and I considered it advisable to take the action I did under the circumstances. It might be said that 1 have exceededmy duty in so doing, but I think in view of the action of the Government, and in view of the general practice of hon. Members when sending/a copy to thePress to mark it for their convenience and in order to draw attention to the salient facts—in so doing I was not doing anything unusual nor was I attemptingto cast blame or otherwise on the persons mentioned in the paragraphs. 1 only desire to make that personal explanation. I hope the House will accept myassurance that I was only influenced, in issuing the Report and marking it, by the public interest and by a desire to draw the attention of the public tothe work which the members of the Sub-committee had been doing for many months—a thankless and difficult task. We have endeavoured in our Reportto hold the balance fairly between all the parties, and when the Committee appointed by the Ministry of Munitions comes to investigate the Report I feelconfident myself it will be found that we have in this Report dealt justly with all the interests concerned.The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Munitions (Mr. Kellaway): It is not necessary for me to enter into the controversy which has arisen betweenmy two hon. friends who have addressed the House, but I think it desirable that I should state at slightly fuller length thau I was able to do at Question Timethe course which the Ministry of Munitions intends to adopt on this matter. This contract, the centre of so much criticism, was entered into early inthe War by the War Office. The country then found itself in this position, that it was dependent for its output of aeroplanes on a particular ingredient,small in bulk, but absolutely essential to the carrying out ot our aeroplane programme. It found that this product was not being made in thiscountry and that we were entirely dependent on imported supplies of cellulose aoetate. The War Office at "that time decided that if it was at allpossible tbe"-necessary arrangements should be made for producing cellulose acetate in this country. It was obviously undersirable that for an essentialmaterial of this kind this country should be dependent on foreign sources. The War Office then got into touch with Dr. Dreyfus and his company, who were oneof the two firms on the Continent among neutral and Allied nations who were able to produce cellulose acetate, and, as a result of the long negotiations thattook place, a contract was entered into between the War Office and Dr. Dreyfus as representing this neutral company. They made a contract under which Dr.Dreyfus was to erect works in this country which would be capable of manu- facturing cellulose acetates.It is not for me to defend, and I have no intention of.daing 30, the action taken by the War Office at that time. The essential thing was that the stuff shouldbe produced in this country. It might have been possible, with all the informa- tion we now have, to have adopted some better course. It might have beenpossible to have had two or three alternative sources of supply, but these happen ed. to be the only people, so the War Office were advised, who were capableof producing cellulose acetate of the necessary quantity, and this contract they made witi them.—Whether it was the most ideal contract that could have beenmade or no, 1 am not concerned to state, but that contract was entered into •with that motive, and the motive was a good one. It was not until February,1917, that the Ministry of Munitions bad any concern at all in this business. In February, 1917, the Ministry of Munitions took over the Aircraft ProductionDepartment, and it was then that the Ministry had to take over the contract then made, and the responsibilities attaching to that contract. Negotiationswent on for some time. The demand for cellulose acetate went up by leaps and bounds. The programme of aircraft production multiplied 20 times com-pared with what it was at the time when the War Office first entered on these negotiations, and it was inevitable in those circumstances that the expenditureshould multiply to a degree which was not anticipated when the original esti- mates were made. The question of whether the Ministry were right in followingup that contract, and in adhering to the process, which was first adopted by the War Office, is one about which there might be some controversy. But aboutthis there is no controversy, that the particular process which was adopted for this country—that is what I may call the Dreyfus process—has since beenadopted by America, France, and Italy, and in America there is the Kodak Company in existence which the Government have been told might have beenan alternative source of supply, and in France the Usines du Rhone Company. Therefore, these other countries have adopted the same process that has beenadopted to this country, namely, the Dreyfus process, and, whatever may be tbe defence in regard to this contract, this at any rate is certain, that at no timehas the great aeroplane programme of this country—20 times what it was at the beginning ot the war—been held up for lack of this essential material. Those, I »dmit, are only large considerations which do not touch, to anygreat extent, the particular criticisms made by the Select Committee over which # my hon. and gallant friend presided. But they are criticisms which shouldbe in the mind of Parliament and in the mind of the country in view of the sweeping criticism—^something amounting to denunciation—which has beenindulged in in certain quarters. I devoted my week-end to the study of the Report, and of such documents as I was able to read during the time, and, asa result of that study, I came to the conclusion that, whilst these large con- siderations might be held fairly to justify the broad lines which the Govern-ment have pursued, still, in view of the conclusions of the Committee and certain statements made in that Report, we could not allow the matter to rest whereit then was, and, as a result of a conversation I had this morning with my right hon. friend the Minister of Munitions, we agreed that we would immediatelyset up in the Ministry a strong competent body to examine the three recom- mendations which the Select Committee has made, and to report at the earliestpossible moment in regard to those recommendations. I make no criticism whatever of the Report of this Select Committee. On the contrary, I think theMinistry of Munitions is under a debt ot obligation, as indeed is Parliament, to the Select Committee for the manner in which it examined every detail of thiscontract. I am not concerned with what may be the attitude of the company towards the Select Committee, but it was impossible, in my view, that theMinistry of Munitions, in view of a report of that kind, should let the matter rest. That Committee will be set up in the course ot the next two or three days.It will be given terms of reference to confine it to the recommendations which the Select Committee has made, and, as soon as we have received the Report,we shall not hesitate to take such action as may be called for. Mr, Koch : Will the Departmental Committee's Re] ort be available to thepublic ? Mr. Kellaway: As it will be a Departmental Committee Report, I shouldnot care to say at the moment whether it will be ma .e puDiic. But I should say that all conclusions and the action taken thereon will be made public. Ithought it necessary to make these observations, and especially those in the first part of my remarks, because I should not like the House or the country tosuppose that this contract has been of such a nature as could not be defended on broad lines. The broad considerations are those which 1 have put. But Ialso recognise, as I have shown, that there may be other considerations which should be taken into account, which,-so far, have not been taken into account.I am most anxious that the Ministry, and especially the financial side, should give Parliament the assurance that in regard to all these contracts involvinggreat expenditure the most scrupulous care should be taken to see that the country gets really value for its expenditure, and, so far as my hon. and gallant 894
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
