takes
no risk in the losses. The whole world conditions are changed and
surely the producers' outlook must be to sell satisfactory quantities
which leave very big profits. . . .
The
thing that appals me is the silly talk of how the Syndicate would and
could cheat. I have spent thirty-seven vears in the business,
thirty-one of them as a Syndicate man and I think it an unheard of
scandal that such language should be employed about a body of men who
have their failings (I am not there to defend such buffoons as some of
them) but who have loyally carried out their contracts with the
producers—more of this anon. . . .
I
now come to the arguments raised in your letter of 19 March. It was
never my contention that the producers cannot help themselves without
the Syndicate as constituted and so far as South West are concerned
they always have our organization ready in certain contingencies. But I
say that it is in the interests of the producers to have a wealthy
organization such as the Syndicate, as the medium for disposing of the
diamonds.... (A) says definitely that he will not remain in his firm
and wants to go out altogether and to be quite clear his departure will
to some extent solve the difficulty. Probably solve all difficulty. The
arguments that the Syndicate make exorbitant profits is merely a
statement, it is not a statement of fact. Let me point out that there
is no other set of business men who would commit themselves to such
large sums with so large a risk. As for the point that the Syndicate
come for relief, it is also incorrect; the 1920 contract left the
producers in the position to either sell piecemeal at very low prices
or a larger sum at a better price. They chose the latter method. There
can be only one course for the producers and that is to make sure of
reasonable quantities being sold at a price which shows big profits
and, as the bad principle of partnership without risk has been
established, it must anyhow be met by a reasonable spirit on the
producers' part in so far as a reserve must be allowed in order to
cover excessive risks.
Ernest Oppenheimer, replying on 30 April, agreed:
You
comment quite rightly on the very offensive tone of the producers at
the last conference in Johannesburg. Since then a producers' meeting
has been held in Cape Town, w-hich arrived at no decision. I am in
possession of the minutes of that meeting, but don't even propose to
send them on to you, because I have never read anything quite so stupid
and offensive as the record of the proceedings of that meeting. . . .
Though
nothing positive was done during the period now under review, yet the
difficulties within and without the Syndicate had already raised the
possibility of another alternative method of disposing of diamonds: the
creation of a 'buying and selling company', to be registered either in
London or in South Africa. The proposal obviously
