THE AUCKLAND MEAT TRADE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXV, Issue 96, 22 April 1904, Page 3

THE AUCKLAND MEAT TRADE.

INTERESTING TALK BY FARMERS. At the Farmers' Gnion Conference this moruing. Mr Sturges moved: "lhat it is desirable that a out amending the slaughtering Act should be ifitroaueed, sa tnat animals slaughtered in any registered abattoir where stock is slaughtered under Government inspection may 0e sold in the local markets.' He pointed out that unless some ainenunient were made in tne law no animals slaughtered for export in the proposed Auckland works of the Waikato freezing Company could be sold in Auckland. Mr Wiley seconded. ilr Kirbtbride, M.H.R., supporting the motion, said the Waikato Freezing Company was formed partly for the purpose of regulating the price of stock in the local markets, but it could not possibly carry on unless it was allowed to sup ply meat to the local markets. Many animals were rejected at freezing worlcs for trivial defects, such as being too heavy or too light, and these were quite suitable for the local market. ilr Fawcett said many animals were rejected for nothing more than a slip ot the butcher's knife. ilr Sturges said there was no doubt there would be strong opposition from some quarters, and they must combine to resist it. Mr ivirkhride: Where do you expect the opposition to come from? Mr ."iturges said the proposal had been before the Auckland City Council and rejected. The City Council was going to erect abattoirs, from which they hoped to get a good revenue, and the consumers would have to pay more for their meat. Other parties, he was told, would also object. Mr Kirkbride said he understood there were to be public abattoirs in Auckland and every other city in the colony. If these abattoirs were built at great expense they would be white elephants, unless the butchers were compelled to slaughter in them. He supposed the objections anticipated to come from the City Council were based on the fact that if Messrs. Hellaby and Salmon and the Freezing Company were allowed to slaughter at their own premises there would be such a small amount of slaughtering left to be done that the public abattoirs would not pay. The motion was unanimously carried. Mr Salmon then entered the room, and was invited to speak" on the question. He cordially supported the proposal, and said the interests of the farmers in this matter were identical with his own. The site chosen for the city abattoirs at Otahuhu was, in his opinion, the worst site that could be possibly selected. It was on a mud flat, and subject to a great deal of bone taint, which would be very detrimental to the public of Auckland. It would cost £60,000 to £70.000 to erect the abattoirs, and there would always be trouble and friction in slaughtering in one place for so many butchers. That was already the experience in Christ* church. Messrs Hellaby and themselves were doing the majority of the Auckland trade, and he could say that if all the butchers were compelled to slaughter in one place the price of meat would go up idfper lb at once. Mr Kirkbride asked how the existing freezing companies put their rejects on the local marketsMr Salmon said these rejects were erroneously supposed to be condemned meat. But this was not the case. They should rather be termed over-weights and under-weights. because they were all passed by the Government inspectors. He did not know how the Christchurch freezing companies were dealing with their refects. They had large preserving works, which would utilise the rejects, and that course would have to be adopted by the Farmers' Freezing Works in Auckland. Other animals rejected were train-bruised animals, which had to be tinned. After Mr Salmon had left the room Mr Garland said that as a consumer he could assure the farmers that their freezing works were viewed with great favour by the general public, and if they entered into the local trade there was big business waiting for them.