TO THE FORMATION OF THE NEW SYNDICATE 135
Two years later, when much had changed, he was still attacking the same policy. In December 1923 he wrote to Louis:
If
the present policy of steadily reducing prices, either by better
assortment or actual reduction in price, is pursued, the
diamond-producing companies will find themselves in queer street after
this year. . . . The present arrangement between the four producers and
the Syndicate aims at control of output and sales through one channel,
principles which are essential if the diamond business is to be
preserved, but in practice the policy pursued by the Syndicate, does
not give the benefit which the inter-producers' agreement aimed at.
He
had, of course, already established relations with Barnato Brothers,
but on one point Ernest Oppenheimer was very clear in his own mind: it
was necessary to arrive at a closer working arrangement with
Barnato Brothers, whether it was a question of the future organization
of the production side, or of the distribution side. He was not, of
course, certain that such a close working arrangement could be
arrived at but it was important that it should. The whole issue came to
a head in the middle of 1923 when the entry of Anglo American
Corporation into the Syndicate was under active discussion and L.
Breitmeyer and Company were making heavy weather over the terms of the
proposed agreement. Ernest Oppenheimer wanted to join the Syndicate on
1 July; the proposal was that Anglo American Corporation should join on
1 January 1924—though that was not the only point at issue; one of the
most important was the question of whether an entire quota could
be transferred from one producer to another, or whether, if a quota
were relinquished, it should be shared pro rata among the rest—a point
of particular importance to Breitmeyer's and the Central Mining and
Investment Corporation. In a letter dated 22 May 1923, to his two
associates in London, his brother Louis and Walter Dunkels, Ernest
Oppenheimer argued the problem out. He was content to wait, as far as
profit-making was concerned, but the
attitude
of L. Breitmeyer and Company is most extraordinary, and I do not
understand why we should put up with it. Surely, if the document
drafted is offensive and unsuitable, it will be no more suitable in six
months' time than it is now, and then we will be faced with the same
position, unless we mean to put our feet down. If we really mean to
make a point of it, why not do it now?
He then came to the crux of the matter: why not a new syndicate? There were, again, two alternatives
