The Hawaiian gazette., 1905-05-23

DelieVe that the same result will fol-
low like proceeding on the part Of
Olaa
go In the event that olaa acquires
Puma. 1t can do Herewith what It
pleases. 1t can either develop 1t now,
or at its leisure in the future.
| Or 1t can lease IL out, assuring to it.
self the profit of grinding the cane
therefrom.
| Or 1t can. by hiding its time sell It
out as a whole, at certainly no loss.
and with every probability of a profit.
at later date when the returns from
the present Hawaiian sugar crop have
more generally affected the local finan-
| cial situation
Permit me to say in this connection,
That l own, or represent by proxy,
l12,646 shares of Olaa stock of a par
value of $2,252. 800, out of a total OUT
standing issue of 219,237 shares; and
represent by ownership or endorsement
| s4I250O of the Olaa bonds a total in
terest in Olaa amounting to $2,725, APO.
| My personal interest in Puma bonds
Is so small as compared with the over
whelming interest which 1 have in
Olaa, that there is no comparison be-
tween the two, and the comparatively
small incidental benefit which / will
receive as Puma bondholder will be
as nothing compared to the benefit
which 1 will receive as an Olaa stock
and bondholder IL this proposition is
accepted.
| In the interest of myself and of
every Olaa stock and bondholder. and
/ 10 xxrho xr,tl1 H.
from carrying the present large debt,
l urge upon you to approve the prop
osition herein set forth, and IL you
approve, to act promptly thereon.
| Yours very truly,
(Signed) B. F. DILLINGHAM;.
Mr.. Dillingham; said in addition: "Mr
Damon mentioned having put in great
amount to carry this Olaa plantation
through. No one appreciates this more
than do.
Il don't wish to pose as the savior
of Olaa. I've passed through a year of
anxiety that 1 would not repeat.
I've put my utmost cent into every
undertaking that I've asked the people
to join.
Conditions were so bad soon after
Olaa started that many were unable to
carry their stock. We couldn't allow
| large blocks of stock to be thrown on
the market. l had to carry some
100000 of additional stock. 1 found
one man in Frisco who would take
hold with me, but who was not able
to make any substantial advance.
SHOULD the plantation go to the
| twa1l2 7 would no
II have poured into this company
to pay out the assessable stock-I
have borrowed and put into this COM
pany some $3,00O,O0O. Today 1 see
my way out of this difficulty.
mo man has a stronger desire to
relieve the agents than I have"
The vote was then taken on the prop
osition to acquire Puma, and it carried.
MSTOCKER'S OPINION.
There has been considerable discus
sion on the street concerning the merits
of this deal, and the former manager
of the Olaa Plantation, Frank b. Nc
/ Stocker, when asked as to whether in
his opinion, 1t was advantageous to
Olaa to take over the Puma lands
stated that it certainly was so, that
he was very largely interested in Olaa
and would certainly not favor propo-
sition which was not in his mind, adj
vantageous to the property. He said
that numerous statements have been
made from time to time of number
of those opposed to the ownership of
Puma by Olaa on the plea that Puma
could not be made paying PROPOSE
ton.
outside of the personal opinion of
Mr.. McStocker, several experienced
plantation managers, notably ]. T.
NOR, George Ewart, Mr.. Lydgate and
August Ahrens and several others,
have emphatically expressed the opin-
ion that Puma was an exceedingly
good cane proposition, although some
difference of opinion existed as to
whether 1t was profitable to send the
cane to Olaa Mill, or whether it would
be wiser to erect a mill on the Puma
property.
When asked in regard to the letter
of Mr. Watt, the present manager of
Olaa Plantation, which was presented
at the meeting and which was opposed
to the purchase of Puma, Mr. McStock-
er said it was rather a delicate matter
to attempt to criticize the letter as his
statements might be attributed to pref
udice. Entirely disavowing any such
feeling, Mr.. McStocker stated that the
letter, while technically correct, was
very misleading to the stockholders in
considering this question, and from his
point of view was rather intended to
! bolster up the desire TO turn down the
proposition which was presented, for
this reason:
In his letter." said Mr.. McStocker,
Mr. Watt states that the cost to Puma
for harvesting the cane last season was
$1.SS ton of cane This is very true,
but it must be remembered that the
cost of laying and removing portable
track was included In the cost of har-
vesting as 1t was not permanent work.
But the grading which was done for
such work, which is very substantial,
and more in the line of permanent i'm
provement, could be taken advantage
of in future harvesting, materially re-
| 4. ~