MERCHANDISE MASKS

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 108, 8 May 1923, Page 7

MERCHANDISE MASKS

INDELIBLE BRANDS FOR IMPORTED FOOD

NEW ZEALAND LIKELY TO BE

AFFECTED

(rxosi ock own cokmspoxdi.it.)

LONDON. 22nd March,

Sir James Allen is now considering the new legislation contained in the Merchandise Marks Bill, -which' passed its 6econd reading in the House of Commons last week. The Bill has been referred to a select committee, of both Houses, and representatives of the Dominions, as members of the Advisory-! Councillor th» Board of Trade, have an opportunity to express their opinions concerning the measure.

Mr. E. G. Pretyman, in moving tha second reading, said the principle und«rlying the Bill was that anyone, in this country who desired to purchase anything should, if possible, be able to. ascertain its place of origin. While thera were undoubtedly difficulties in the. war of carrying that principle into effect, he (Mr. Pretyman) believed they could ba overcome. It was not claimed that all products produced in this country were necessarily better than those produced abroad; but the consumer ought at least to know which was the British article and which was the foreign article, and be free to judge as to which was the best value. He instanced the case of food products which, if produced afe home." would be fresher than those imported from One difficulty iv carrying out the principle ,of. the. Bill was. as to the practicability of making the measure sufficiently watertight to be of real advantage to the country.The Bill provided that imp.oned articles, or the case, or package in which they came to this country, must be indelibly marked,so that the Customs officers might-know where they came from. Sinca the war there had been a real and permanent advance in small ■cultivation in this country, and in small food production. Thq conditions of ordinary farming did not apply to small cultivation, because those engaged- in . the latter were for the most part-not wholly dependent upon it for a livelihood. Surely it was worth while to do all they could to help these small people to keep a market for their produ.ce. The Bill was certainly watertight as regarded eggs. There was very consider^ able variation in quality between British and imported eggs. Mr. Hayday had told him an incident which occurred in his constituency. An old lady had a broody hen, and not having sufficient agga to cut under it, she bought half a dozen "fresli new-laid eggs." When hatching time came, out of four of these, eees emerged, four lizards. (Laughter.) They came from China,- but , had been sold as "fresh new-laid." BRANDING OF MEAT:. ; A good deal of discussion followed on. the subject of eges. Mr. Hogge (Edinburgh East) said the only, possible way of securing 'an indelible mark on meat was to develop some characteristic streak in the cattle. He pictures home breeders so developing cattle that wherever the carcass was cut it showed, the Uin'oii Jack. Why, he asked, was it propose*! to exclude from the Bill that mystenous, article the sausage—the most perfect coalition.' (Laughter.) Perhaps it was a plot to get, rid of the Labour Party in that House. He did not : believe there was any such thing as a-fresh-laid egg. A member who had reached Westminster by selling eggs hail told him that, the "fresh-laid"'eg;; supplied to. the markets was collected once a week. He asked why every- imported egg should not have a passport, duly subjected to the visa. (Laughter.) •How were powdered and liquid eggs to be marked? ...

Mr. T. Duffy (Whitehaven,"Lab,) supported the Bill. He said the pig-breed-ing and bacon-curing industry in Cumberland had almost disappeared because there had been no compulsion to mark foreign bacon. Mr. Morris (Bristol, E., N.L.) said he ..had ■ soma misgivings as to whether, fruit and vegetables should be included in the , Bill, because he feared the effect would b« to raise the. price:' Lieutenant-Commander Kemvorthy said the Bill was a round-about attempt to get perfection for agriculture. It was a ridiculous measure, which would causo irritation and loss to many people. "BARRIERS ROUND AN EGG." Mr. Pringle (Penistone, L.) thought that some members during the last General Election had given pledges to support the measure without maturely considering all that it involved. Undoubtedly the object of the Bill was to do good to agriculture. ■ It was: tha trumpery "remnant of the policy of agricultural reconstruction put forward by the late Government. (An Hon. Member: "It is a bad egg.") (Laughter.) The rural life of England was. to be reI created by. marking Brussels. sprouts,, t Jerusalem artichokes; * Russian eggs,;; condensed milk', plums, and'leeks. (Laughi ter.) The inevitable result would ba to raise prices. There was nothing in the Bill to provide that in the retail j shop thore must be a label on a foreign, tomato or Brussels sprout, a French bean or Spanish onion. (Laughter.) , The claim, with regard to fruit and vegetables, that the consumer would benefit was an open imposture." It was"clear that on the basis of last year's' imports of eggs, the cost of stamping them would be £59,600. The poorer classes were interested solely in the cheap foreign eggs, and the Bill would increase the price of them. The way to improv* the position of the poultry farmers was to encourage them to follow the example of a country like Denmark, where there were better commercial methods and a different system of land tenure. ■ Mr. J. Jones (Silyertown, Lab.) said the House was engaged in trying to create barriers round an egg. Yet we sent our commercial travellers to Denmark to ask the Danes to buy our machinery to enable them to produce the eggs they sent to us. (Laughter.) He objected to a. measure which would raise prices when the poor could not afford to pay existing prices. The second reading of the, Bill was carried by 183 votes to 100—majority, 83. v ' r ,

IMew Zealand is particularly concerned with the clauses likely to affect her staple products—meat, butter, cheese, fruit, etc. The High Commissioner, as a member of the .Advisory Council of the Board of Trade, is naturally interested in putting forward the New Zealand point of view.

He will consult with experts, including Mr. W. Wright (London representative of the Dairy Division of the Department of Agriculture) and Mr. T. E. Lees (secretary of the Meat Producers' Board). So far as the Dominions are concerned the Bill will probably require the boxes in. the case of butter, cheese, and fruit, to be branded with the country of origin, and brands to be made on the coverings of meat or tags attached to the carcasses themselves. Indelible marks on the produce itself are not favoured.