Peace Again
At the end of the war I did not return to legal practice. I had virtually made that decision in 1939 and my period in uniform did nothing to alter my decision. Instead I became absorbed in other activities: in directing a newspaper, in consular affairs, in attempts to regulate an international industry, and of course in racing. I had frequently appeared with some success as counsel against Truth in libel actions. In our last contest Bob Menzies was retained for the paper. The cause of action was seemingly trivial and the Truth’s advisers were supremely confident. As sometimes happens in such cases everything went wrong with the defendant’s.
Ezra Norton, the owner, had come from Sydney to hear rather optimistic predictions and was somewhat less than enthusiastic when the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for £1,000, adding; as they had no right to do, “with costs”. The retainer which I received next day led to the creation of a Victorian Advisory Board on which I was a member.
After the war I was offered by Ezra Norton a highly remunerative post with car and driver on the side. I spent many enjoyable years in control of Melbourne Truth. The paper was not highly regarded by the ‘best’ people, mainly because of its policy of reporting in detail those court cases which more conventional journals ignored or compressed into much less space. I cannot claim to have completely altered policy but I was able to modify it. With the assistance of a well known man-about-town, I developed a column which refrained from scandal but predicted with considerable accuracy important pending happenings in the business, legal and political world. No names were ever given but sufficient was stated to put an intelligent reader on enquiry. Our forecasts sometimes embarrassed the repositories of what were fondly regarded as well kept secrets. The column items were severely compressed, and eventually journalists of other papers were the first buyers of Truth in search of tips for elaboration in their own papers.
The success of this column was of course due to the ability of my collaborator and myself to mix daily with those with intimate knowledge of the worlds of politics, law, business and high finance. Occasionally we would constitute ourselves public censors and deliver rebukes to all individuals guilty of what we regarded as anti-social conduct. I had always regarded Labourchere’ s London Truth very highly and his very personal journalism appealed to me greatly. This was in part due to its being the only style in which I had any proficiency.
The crusades of most newspapers were futile because of fear of libel actions, the inability of the average journalist to avoid unnecessary adjectives and adverbs, and a tendency to make general allegations instead of restricting the defamation to what was capable of proof. Hitherto Ezra Norton’s experience had caused him to lay down very strong rules to prevent libel actions. The result was inevitable: stories which should have been published were pushed aside as too hot to handle, and the miscreants went their way unmolested. These embarrassing rules, however, were relaxed for me. Throughout the whole of our association he retained the utmost confidence in my judgment.
On one occasion I was nervous of the possible reaction of an article I contemplated, reflecting very greatly on the management of a Home for Boys. I knew my denunciations were warranted but ability to translate my knowledge into legal proof was quite another matter. I telegraphed my estimate of £3,000 as the claim if the culprit elected to litigate. Ezra did not even acknowledge the telegram and the trenchant article was published with far reaching and beneficial effects.
Rapacious money lenders, profiteering milk vendors, licensed victuallers who withheld supplies to customers in order to sell their beer more profitably to sly grog sellers, were all attacked. We gave offender’s names, telephone numbers and addresses, with photographs, campaigned successfully for Royal Commissions in several matters, and generally stirred up the city. From time to time we would challenge the subject of our attack to test our assertions before a Jury with intimation that the office boy would attend an hour earlier than usual to accept service of a writ. It was schoolboyish but diverting, and the public responded. Our circulation increased most satisfactorily. As the utmost care was taken to select individuals or companies who were preying on the public, libel actions were unknown.
There was one exception. A promoter named Rubenstein had attracted much attention by his financial schemes – visionary plans which were not actuated by desire for personal gain. His fantastic notions of finance could have been read by anyone interested; they were contained in a book which he had commissioned. As with Hitler’s Mein Kampf one bothered to treat the nonsense seriously. Rubenstein succeeded in promoting many companies, most of which were listed on the Stock Exchange and soared to unwarranted prices. Large sums were invested, and ignorant speculators showed no signs of appreciating the truth. I determined to crash the empire and wrote four articles exposing the unsubstantial basis illustrating the interlocking by diagrams. The attack was sensationally successful and the papier-mâché structure fell apart within days. Rubenstein entered into a composition with his creditors, and most serious losses were sustained by his financial disciplines.
In Victoria – in my opinion quite wrongly – an action for libel can be brought until six years have passed since publication of the alleged libel. On the last day of the sixth year, Rubenstein issued a writ against Truth, myself and a friend of mine who, according to the plaintiff, had conspired with me to defame him. Against me the sum of £360,000 special damages were claimed. This trifle excluded anything recoverable as general damages. I am not unduly perturbed as to how the £360,000 will be provided. There were some preliminary proceedings which were determined in favour of the defendants, and my friend was discharged from the cause.
Charlatan herbalists and dishonest bookmakers advertising in Victoria for finance provided good fun. In justice to the Ring it must be stated that this type of advertising was resorted to only by ‘hot’ boys who had no intention of fulfilling their obligations to the unwary investor.
The advertisers were both wary and dangerous. Our most successful scoop at their expense was effected by our providing “Auntie Mary” purporting to be a Tasmanian visitor whose naïve letter must have appealed to the sharks for whom we were fishing. An afternoon tea appointment was made for them to meet Auntie Mary in the lounge of Menzies Hotel; our staff had a fine view of the miscreants. Auntie Mary explained that she was unable to hand over her hundreds because they were stored about her bosom, but arranged an evening meeting. Our photographer did his duty as the ‘boys’ left their tea cup and scones, and an amusing article followed. For over a week emissaries of the irritated victims haunted the streets around our office in the fond hope of encountering ‘Auntie Mary’.
The average politician lives in abiding fear of hostile press publicity. A striking example of this occurred during the Premiership of my friend John Cain. John was a very good, honest man and a capable Premier. Truth newspaper, of which I was in control at the time, had been carrying on a bitter campaign against money-lenders and denounced their exactions. The money lenders had formed a defence fund, and I had no idea of the purpose for which they intended to apply it. The legislative assembly then altered the relevant Act and so nullified the other reforms which we were strongly advocating. There were suggestions that some votes had been cast in favour of the clause for other than public motives. I waited upon John Cain one day and was taken into the library. I showed him what we intended to publish in Truth within forty eight hours. It read something like this:
“Sacred to the memory of the Victorian Labour Party, buried in the Legislative Assembly on the night of – by a, b, c, d and f” (naming the particular members to whose vote we took such vital exception). He exclaimed in horror, “Surely you wouldn’t publish anything like that”. I assured him that not only would we dare but that it would be boxed on the front page. Whatever the merits of our suggestions or insinuations, the Bill was resubmitted within twenty four hours, the offending clause was removed and the Money Lenders Act was passed, greatly mitigating the evils of which there has previously been so much reason to complain.
It was about this time that I received an offer of a Supreme Court Judgeship. I was sensible enough to give the offer no publicity, even to my friend John Barry. The Attorney General for the time being was not a lawyer, but an ardent countryman. He professed the utmost gratitude for what had been done by the Primary Producers’ Restoration League and indicated that if I wished to accept the appointment it would be made available to me. I had sense enough then to recognise my unfitness for an appointment of this kind, particularly at this stage, and I thanked him most profusely. Later, another opportunity occurred when I was appointed a temporary Judge to exercise Bankruptcy jurisdiction. This led to a strange happening.
My association with Ezra Norton ended over what most would consider a trifle. During my long term as a Committeeman of the Victoria Racing Club I had come to understand something of the difficulties attending the discharge of the duties of stipendiary stewards; Alan Bell, their Chairman, had no superior in the world – a wide but accurate statement. It so happened that Ezra was well disposed towards Darby Munro, a great Sydney jockey; and it was Munro’s misfortune to accept a ride in Melbourne on a well-performed horse whose performance in a race convinced Alan and his colleagues that Darby had done considerably less than his best. His disqualification followed. Ezra’s loyalty to his friends was proverbial; and mightily incensed by the stewards’ action, he sent from Sydney an article which was very critical of the stewards. I daresay my handling of the matter was not tactful. I am sure that a reasoned discussion with Ezra would have caused him to withdraw the offensive matter. Instead I made the reply “To be printed exactly as typed”, included it in the week’s paper, and immediately forwarded my letter of resignation. So ended a highly paid and interesting appointment.
The end of the story was happier. After a few months we resumed our friendship which endured until his death. Later he sold his interests in all his newspapers for an immense figure. He was a first-class newspaperman with superb mechanical knowledge, and despite the huge price he received for his interests he was never quite reconciled to the passive role he was thereafter compelled to ill.
In 1949 I became Consul for Greece in Victoria where the post involved tremendous work. Not only were thousands of Greeks coming into Melbourne as assisted migrants, creating a variety of problems, but my duties included the disentanglement of extremely involved Greek wills; the wills were probably simple but I had to ascertain whether daughters or sons in remote Greek mountain villages were still alive or whether they had been carried off by Communists into the territory of a hostile State. I must confess to my secretary, Pam, for her enduring patience with individuals who spoke little or no English.*
• I have had only two secretaries throughout the whole of my life. Kathleen Dynon, who was with me for years and then married, and later Pamela Nicholson for 25 years, during which time she has taken possession of my office, organised my affairs, organised my travel, and generally controlled my life in a kindly solicitous way which, for very many years, has made mere living a pleasure for me and has caused me to be completely ??? in attending to matters which often ??? have to do for themselves.
The demands on our time, both day and night, were back breaking. I tried, in addition, to live the life of the Greek Community, giving attention to the innumerable separate clubs and organisations formed by Greeks according to their place of origin and to going almost weekly to Sunday picnic parties. Eventually it was a case of quit or break down. I made persistent representations to the Greek Foreign Office that the time had come for the appointment of a Consul de Carriere. I was assured, instead, that everyone was very happy with the existing order. Unfortunately I was not. As compensation I was made a Knight Commander of the Royal Order of the Phoenix, but I persevered in my determination. I had to go twice to Athens before I convinced my friends there that the time had come to end the honorary consulate. I resigned in l955.
I have retained a great affection for Greece and Greeks, and accept, without attempting to justify, their political instability; they approach politics with an emotion that baffles and sometimes irritates those unable to understand the reason for their passionate excitement.
My association with the Greeks has continued unimpaired; and my position as Chairman of the Australian Dried Fruits Export Board and later Presidency of the International Dried Fruit organisation, enabled me to pay annual visits to Greece. My close association helped me considerably in the long negotiations with Greece and Turkey to arrive at an international agreement for selling the dried fruits which are such an important product of both nations: It was in 1956 that I was approached to accept the position of Chairman of the Australian Dried Fruits Export Control Board as Government representative. I was interested and the matter was eventually arranged through Mr John McEwen, then Minister for Trade. The idea really centred around the election of the Government representative as Chairman, with no very onerous duties other than an attendance at the Board’ meetings approximately every six weeks. The role of the Board was to determine, after local demands had been satisfied, where fruit for export was to be disposed of and at what minimum price. I was not prepared to act a passive role and after familiarizing myself with general conditions and enough knowledge to enable me to form positive views, concluded that the lot of the Australian producer was likely to remain parlous so long as he had to sell abroad in competition with the United States and large production from Turkey, Greece and Iran, particularly in years when crops were bountiful. The proposal that we should investigate means of getting closer to our competitors was not acclaimed with particular enthusiasm but I was allowed to go ahead. A visit from Californians helped the cause along and subsequently I began to make visits to Greece, Turkey and Iran. The system of Mediterranean selling greatly differed from ours. In Australia power to decide the disposition of fruit and prices rested with our Board which did not own the fruit. In the competing countries the trade was in the hands of exporters, speculators and shippers and of others who frequently treated the product as a means of speculation. In times of keen competition or money stringency the only way in which fruit could be sold was by reducing its price both internally and against external competitors.
I well remember our first meeting with Californians, Greeks and Turks in Paris. The year was a disastrous one and the price of fruit was at its nadir. A suggestion that we call Greece and Turkey to a Conference was not well received, and our experts pointed out the impropriety of a body such as ours daring to approach a Government direct. My own view was that if we paid the necessary money the cable company would send the message, and that the odds to the price of a cable were very long. Accordingly we summarised the acuteness of the world position, sent off our cables to the Government of Greece and to the Government of Turkey; and to our amazement, within four or five days, received information that each Government would send five representatives to confer with us in Paris. The Americans were hastily summoned, and the conference started after objections by Turks to meeting at the Greek Consulate and by Greeks to meeting at the Turkish Consulate. We hurriedly engaged a hotel room.
To our disappointment little more was done during the two days of the meeting than listen to abstruse and almost angry debate between Greeks and Turks as to the respective merits of their fruit, the Greeks claiming that certain Greek fruit was inferior to its alleged corresponding Turkish grade and that consequently they should be allowed to sell it cheaper. The Americans withdrew after the first day and on the second I had the pleasure of presiding over a meeting of Turks and Greeks where, with the assistance of an interpreter, I did my best to understand and arbitrate over a debate conducted in Greek, Turkish and French. No agreement was concluded but strange to say some result did come from this meeting and it served as a jumping off point from which others could be arranged.
Within a year or so we took the initiative in calling a meeting of all world producers in Rome. It was the first meeting of the kind ever held – everyone turned up – the usual platitudinous pleas were made that the producers of the world should unite. The only trouble was to agree upon the terms of the union.
Another meeting was being held, when news reached us that Turkey had fixed its fruit prices at £11 per ton less than ourselves. Greek prices occupied an intermediate position. This was devastating. We waited upon Turkish Government representatives wherever they were available, making the strongest representations, offering to go to Turkey for consultation, but summarising our statements with the threat that we would enter into fierce competition and sell below Turkey. In fact this was what happened. It became obvious that no satisfactory agreement could ever be arrived at by us with the various trade components and that nothing effective could be accomplished unless an agreement was made on a nation to nation basis. Our Board, of course, had no formal authority from the Australian Government to represent it, but in the course of the next year or so we again visited Greece and Turkey and eventually in the year exasperated beyond measure at our failure to make progress – stated bluntly that we realized that there was no use talking any longer with trade interests and demanded interviews with the respective Ministers in charge of their product. It must be mentioned here that the importance of the grape products in Turkey, Greece and Iran was very much greater than it is in Australia, where the industry does not affect the national economy to the same degree as it does in the Mediterranean.
Finally, we contacted the Turkish Minister for Commerce. Unfortunately his tenure of office did not prove to be long, but we made great strides. Going on to Greece we again encountered difficulties but finally met the Minister for Commerce, Mr ??? , who in the course of a few months was to become temporary Prime Minister. He had no intimate knowledge of the industry, but he speedily acquired it, and we were in business. Both nations now indicated that they were prepared to enter into an agreement with Australia.
I have vivid recollections of the meeting with the Turkish Minister. After we had come to terms he asked me did I wish to have everything we had said reduced to writing or otherwise. I explained that in debates between gentlemen writing was of the least importance and that if he would condescend to shake hands I would regard that as much more important than the affixing of a red deal to a carefully prepared document.
Progress became easier. A meeting was arranged in Athens for Greeks, Turks, Californians and Australians. There was acute debate but finally we reached a decision on what came to be known in the industry as The Athens Agreement. The chief provision was that no producing country would allow its fruit to be sold on the export market at a price less than a price which we then determined. The possibility of an agreement had been ridiculed. The news that one had been achieved had little effect as the cynics throughout the United Kingdom and Western Germany professed a firm belief that such a strange marriage would not last.
Fortunately the crops during that season were light and the agreement did work. Prices rose at the beginning and continued to rise throughout the year. The question then arose of a permanency. Further meetings were arranged at Rome where Australia was thrown into consternation when, without any prior warning, the Mediterranean nations indicated that the meeting was held three months too soon – a rather bitter statement by myself that we would have appreciated getting this information prior to getting our ‘plane tickets did nothing in the way of conciliation of our colleagues. The meeting adjourned without a decision to Munich, where the agreement was renewed for two years.
I have followed a regular itinerary of overseas visits in the last eight years or so since I became Chairman of the Commonwealth Dried Fruits Export Board. Each year I have been to Iran, Turkey and Greece, and a Continental City for a conference and then on to London, ostensibly for business but with a few rubbers of bridge at the Portland Club on the side.
Last May (1965) I started again, stopping first at Hong Kong where the Stewards of the Jockey Club were kind enough to lunch me. I had a couple of interviews there with representatives of China Resources who buy for Communist China. I knew I couldn’t do any immediate business with them but I wanted to make acquaintance. If the world becomes less mad during my lifetime I don’t want to miss any chance of trading with China. I then spent some time in Teheran. To date I have only had kind words and no action from Iran, despite my sustained pressure for them to join the International Agreement which Greece, Turkey and Australia have made and which the United States support. I had an interesting half hour with the Iranian Prime Minister whose predecessor had been assassinated a few months earlier. I said my piece, assured him that our Cabinet meetings opened with a prayer for Iranian prosperity, emphasized the importance of Australian travellers to his tourist promotion and begged his co-operation. I am still supplicating and Iran is still outside the field.
I moved on to Beirut for a day or so. The recently destroyed Casino had been re-erected and I marveled as I always do in Beirut at the speed of life there. My friends in Turkey were as kind as ever which does not prevent their being most and persistent negotiators. At Izmir we dined, we wined and there were no clouds foreshadowing the rumpus which was to blow up after our Brighton Conference. I am always at home in Athens where the usual protestations of friendship are sincerely exchanged. This doesn’t avoid numerous complaints about departure from Agreement terms, but it enables us to carry on.
Selection of a city for the Annual Conference always raises hell. Australia is prepared to go anywhere but Greece won’t go to Turkey and Turkey doesn’t want to go to Rome, Greece doesn’t favour Vienna and my old friend Setrakian has a preference for some city where the best hotel is nearly good enough, and so we stutter and stammer until it is astonishing that we ever get past the first obstacle of “where to meet”.
After discarding all European capitals, Spas and Casino cities and mountain resorts where did we meet? Of all places, Brighton, England. One consolation was that the Metropole Hotel had a Casino to which we could resort on many evenings. There was the usual tremendous argument between our Greek and Turkish friends over the respective crops and their fruits and the concessions that were provided. As always the irresistible met the immovable. Neither party could give way; both had instructions not to yield. Farewell speeches were made with tear jerking hysterics from Sox. I joined in the lamentations. Everyone expressed the hope that some day, somewhere, the nations would come together again. Then something snapped, and face-saving formulas were adopted and we sailed into peaceful waters. Documents were signed and exchanged, and off we went.
The peace didn’t last long. I had hardly settled down to a run of cards at the Portland when S.O.S. signals came in from the Continent. Someone had discovered that Australia paid its agents a 2% commission. As this practice had been in existence for forty years and had been exhaustively discussed at prior meetings, the discovery was somewhat overdue. The conflagration got out of hand and swept to all relevant parts of the Mediterranean coast. I think I have a sense of humour which enables me to explain to my more serious colleagues that failure by some of our competitors to observe the Agreement strictly is much less disastrous with fruit at £137 per ton than would be vigorous under-selling with the price at £100.
A supplementary conference at Vienna merely added to the confusion. Meantime we all claim to be observing the Agreement and that any variation therefrom is due to the other fellow. We have all agreed to meet in Australia next year, and my ambition is to refrain from provocative action likely to endanger this meeting. The anxiety which is responsible for the present situation is, of course, a direct result of all of us having a harvested record crop with consequential fears of inability to make satisfactory sales. It was to abate this neurosis in years of abundance that the Agreement was first made.
We of the dried fruit industry decided that we would make the visit of our visitors memorable and spared no expense on their entertainment even to the extent of paying substantially for their accommodation. The Agreement we had with the nations they represented has been in force for some three or four years. It is reasonably firmly based but we felt that nothing would do more to establish its permanency than to adequately entertain our visitors. The results we believe fully justified the expense.
My old friend Setrakian, head of the U.S. industry, was the outstanding figure. He is in his early 80’s and is Armenian by birth; his family were murdered during the Turkish persecution of the Armenians and he himself is alleged to have participated in an Armenian terrorist organisation which disposed of two individuals including one of the notorious informers. He devoted to his industry, theatrical in his language and extraordinarily emotional. For some reason he was always well disposed towards me and I was usually able to handle him in even his most difficult moments. Over years and years I had never found a hotel in Europe which was completely suited to his needs. In his Melbourne hotel he was tolerably content.
In Melbourne, everything went very well, we renewed our agreement for the new year and now I find myself in August condemned to a trip to Rome in September. It is far more than I wish to undertake.
In my youth I had had little instruction in Art: in fact that is a complete under-statement – I knew practically nothing of it at all. I was brought into the inner circle by contact with my friend John McDonnell who from his early days had developed artistic tendencies and eventually acquired sufficient reputation to be appointed to Scheaf after the end of World War II to assist in retrieving the masterpieces which the Nazis had stolen from the French. His services proved to be valuable and the French awarded him the Legion of Honour. Subsequently he was appointed as the London adviser to the Felton Bequest. Based in London he wandered around the world examining propositions for submission to his trustees in Melbourne and as I was a frequent visitor to Western Europe – mainly in my role as Chairman of the Australian Dried Fruit Export Board and was in constant touch with John – my fate was to accompany him through many miles of galleries. I listened to his patter. My own views were rather inconoclastic but I did develop a certain taste sufficient to make me journey to Madrid to examine the works of Goya to which I had become extremely attracted. On more than one occasion I made a special visit to Amsterdam to see Rembrandt’s works and those of painters of his period. I conceived a great admiration for Rembrandt despite the caustic comments of John Ruskin.
I was for some twenty seven years a member of the VRC Committee. It brought me in touch with hundreds of cheerful and mainly good people, but it took up a lot of my time because my Chambers for many years were in the middle of the city, opposite the V.R.C. offices, and I received innumerable visits from gentlemen who had been punished for alleged breaches of racing laws and by others who desired to have some influence used on their behalf. I cannot say I regret a moment of these many years and my affection for the main body of professional racegoers is undiminished. I have on more than one occasion given offence by saying that, after many years experience, I felt more confidence in their word than in that of many allegedly virtuous business men whose main claim to repute was that they never repudiated a contract before taking legal advice.
In 1964 I decided that the time had come for me to retire from the V.R.C. Committee. I had acquired a position of some influence and was conscious that leaving my Committeeship could easily create a vacuum in my life which I would find it hard to fill. On the other hand I had strong views that one should not lag superfluous on convinced of the wisdom of retiring when a lot of people asked why I was doing this rather than refraining until a number wondered why you stayed. Everyone was extremely kind. There were protestations from all racing sources against my action. The country people sought to orgainse a deputation to persuade me to remain, the V.A.T.C.
???? Ends….