MARKING BUTTER.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20215, 18 April 1931, Page 10

MARKING BUTTER.

A REPRINTED ARTICLE. THE BLENDERS' GRIEVANCE , (from oue owk correspondent.) T.X)NDON, Marcli 12. , The "Grocer'' republishes in its issue of February 28th an article from New Zealand. No comment is made, and the republished article appears under the heading of "New Zealand ButterAttacks on Butter Blenders.'' ' In the course of an that has the appearance of being inspired from tlys side, the writer says:—j. ' "The;only sensible course to follow,ihere£ofe/is to endeavour to sell English blenders as much New Zealand butter as possible.-for the simple'-teiison that jjt w<k jdott't,, do so somebody- else willi. absurd 'to put such' , a statement ifit'o print. Yet, from what we learn, the ilffw. Zealand i ; and Produce Boards have, for months past, gone out of their way to antagonise and jeopardise the goodwill of this large and important section of the English trade. They have done their utmost to force . of Parliament which is being'"fctr&hgly objected to" by blenders. It is,, ig&ljf doubtful whether the Bill will- be--come law, and equally .doubtful;' that,l even if it reached the Statute it" would be of any benefit to New Zealand and Australian producers.'"-" : What Is certain, however, is. that by-their. cluinsy attacks.the.London Executives.of these, two Boards have rendered'..a * .distinct dis-service to the dairy the Southern Hemisphere'.' sible should certainly supply, the British consumer with- jp»,much New Zealand butter as potwlitfe under, the name of New Zealand/better, but to, do so at the risk'of*losing a large"portion' of our established trade is senseless and suicidal:"

It is not,-necessary to consider the indiscretion of the writer in criticising the action bit t)ie; two Boards. Theifr representatives ,in London are both well able to J gauge ~w&at will be the"'reflult of their carefully considered campaign. They have 'no'-fear that the blenders' will boycott Zealand butter, for the • simple rea#&& jil|ati v tie blenders would prdbably blenders if they did not have Australian and/or New Zealand butter.- Human nature being what' it is, and business being business/ the blenders will con-, tinne to buy these particular ; makes.' Without them tlj'ey would find AgreatJ diificulity in producing their proprietary brands. , 1 5^ When the writer- talks about a Billbeing forced throughvSParliam'eftt "lie "'is' somewhat off the' rails. The action taken/was an a^plic^i^V^tt ß Ordp|f in Council'under'the Merchandise Marks Act of 1926. Already 154 Orders for marking have been granted under the Act. The hearing before the Special- Com-' jnittee was Concluded a week ,or two ago. , As the official report of the hearing contains 374,000 words; the'decision i is not likely to be given for some time. I It. may. perhaps here" be ' mentioned that great strides have lately been made in getting New.Zealand [butter into the North of England market. The Board has been supplying 1000 price tickets to retailers per wee'-. The low prices have provided an excellent, opportunity of forcing the pace. Three factories are in favour of the - New Zealand producei (1)" A great rpgard for Empire produce; (2) The unprece-dented-depression in the North; and (3) The discrepancy of' 2d and 3d* a lb- between •.■the price of ; New "Zealand ? and Banish butter.