BUTTER FOR FRANCE

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 91, 14 October 1922, Page 8

BUTTER FOR FRANCE

A SHIPPING DIFFICULT^

REQUEST FOR DIRECT EXPORT

DEMAND FOR ONLY THE BEST

QUALITY.

M. Roger Barthelemy, of the firm of A. Barthelemy, Bacuet, Barthelemy Fils, sworn brokers, Paris, is anxious to establish a direct trade with France in [New Zealand butter. His firm is, he says, a purely broking house carrying the guarantee of the French Government. It does not, cannot, speculate in provisions or any other commodities. It knows New Zealand butter well and favourably, having drawn its heavy requirements through London, via Dunkirk. M. Barthelemy wishes, however, to have direct shipments from New Zealand to France. That is where the difficulty arises. He finds he is unable to come in between the shipping companies on the one 'hand and the National Dairy Association on the other, the parties to the freight/contracts, with respect to the carriage of butter to Great Britain. The shipping companies and the National Dairy Association, however, are decidedly friendly to him, and radily appreciate the advantage of New Zealand having direct access to the French market—with its population of 40,000,000 of potential consumers. M. Barthelemy assured a representative of "The Post" in conversation on ihe French market for New Zealand butter that the article Nwas in great favour with consumers; but it would always be a "high-class trade. There would be no outlet, or very little, in France for second-quality butter. For cheese, none. The people preferred their own soft cheese, such as Camambert, Roquefort, bon dons; they imported a little Gruyere from Switzerland, a little Gorgonzola from Italy, for the trade in the South of France, and in Paris, as in all large cities there was a market for Cheddar or Cheshire, and Stilton cheeses, but it was a luxury trade. With butter the matter was altogether different. So far as New Zealand butter was- concerned, if it were shipped direct from this Dominion to France it would be worth to the exporter about £180 per 1000 boxes more, and that premium could be obtained for it. This was evident from the fact that savings of freight from London to France and London Dock dues and handling charges connected with transhipments would be effected; also broker's commissions in London would be saved; and, in addition, the extra duty of the, French Government of 2.20 per cent, charged on .the butter because it came in as a transhipment, and not direct from the country of origin, would also be saved if the butter went direct from New Zealand to France.

\ The. question was asked why France, being an exporter of bntter to Great Britain, should require to import? M. Barthelemy replied that that was easy to explain. Brittany had long had a trade in butter with England, and it was cheaper to send it from, say, Cher'boui'g or other Channel ports to Southampton than to send it by rail to Paris; but the trade was not a large one when' one came to consider the magnitude of the imports of butter by England and the requirements of Franco. Besides, the export trade of France—prohibited from 1914 to 1920— was dwindling, so far as England was concerned. There was a canned butter trade done by^French packers with the French colonies; it was not of great ex-

$1. Barthelemy said his firm was desirous of not overdoing the trade in ■Australian butter. It did not wish to overload the market, but preferred to build it up. Even so, he had been successful in Australia in arranging for two boats a month to call at Dunkirk with 5000 boxes <each trip—lo,ooo boxes a month. That was all the space he could get in Australia, but it was a beginning. It was not, however, enough. The trade had a great future— of that he was sure. New Zealand should have the French butter trade as a second string to its bow.

Speaking of the French market in the matter of taste, M. Barthelemy said it wanted unsalted butter; it did not object to the use of preservatives, but woukHprefer, the butter without, and would pay £d to Id per pound more for it if it was free from preservative. Moisture content was also discussed. M. Barthelemy said the French law permitted 20 per cent.," but buyers would naturally prefer that the moisture should not exceed the British and New Zealand limits of 16 per cent.. Last year his firm sold 30,000 boxes of New Zealand butter in three months. It was well liked; and now that it had seriously challenged Danish butter in the London market and could command a premium in price, there. was no reason why, shippjng facilities being available,*" New Zealand butter should not reap the benefit of high prices in the French market. Imports by France of butter from Siberia and Finland were no longer possible. Italy, instead of i supplying France,-as formerly, had all it could do to keep its own markets going. Besides, France, having acquired Alsace and Lorraine, had added to its territory a thickly populated area which consumed but produced no butter. The dairying industry of France had been ■geriousty affected by the war, especially in the destruction in the North of the great herds of dairy cattle.

So far as the New Zealand direct butter trade with France was concerned, everything was ready. The produce could be had, the credits could be arranged; there was nothing in the way but the matter of shipping. The same financial facilities as were given by English houses can be given by French, by Barthelemy's. It is for the producer- in New Zealand himself to say if this trade in butter with France is worth enlarging as a valuable aid to the already great English trade. It is all a matter of' direct shipments.