MEAT MARKING

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 51, 1 March 1934, Page 14

MEAT MARKING

WORK OF COMMITTEE

PROPOSALS IN DETAIL

The Standing Committee on Heat has just issued its report upon the recent inquiry into the application of the National - Farmers' Union of Great Britain for the compulsory marking of all imported meat ■with,'the Official mark of the country of origin, wrote the London correspondent of an Australian journal under date of January 4. The committee stated that it seemed to them that there were three fundamental questions involved, on which it was incumbent upon them to come to a conclusion before they would be in a position to decide whether or not they would, in principle, be justified in recommending that a marking order in respect of imported meat should be made. These questions were: (1) Was there any real need in the public interest to impose compulsory marking requirements with, the object of providing the purchasing public with a means of distinguishing between home-killed, Empire, and foreign meats; (2) were the requirements of the Sale of Food Order, 1921, at present in operation, sufficient ■ for the- purpose; (3) was the method of marking proposed by the applicants or any similar method of marking a practical method of marking, namely, could such a mark be applied to carcasses of meat effectively and without causing injury or disfigurement? There was a further question' under section '2 (1) of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926, whether the imposition o£ such marking .requirements would prejudice the trade of the United Kingdom or the, trade generally of other pafts of his Majesty's Dominions with the United Kingdom. '■ . . : . With regard to the first of these questions the committee came to the conclusion that it was, as a general rule, difficult, and in some cases impossible, for the ordinary purchaser to distinguish between home-killed meat and imported meat. They were satisfied. on the evidence that there was a growing desire on the part of purchasers to be placed in a position whereby they could be confident that they would not be misled in regard to the origin of their purchases. They were satisfied that "substitution" did take place, and were of opinion, on the broad issue, that some mark of origin was desirable in the public interest, although it was only'fair to state that they were satisfied on the evidence that no substitution was' practised by importers or wholesalers. " ■ ; ■With regard=to the second question, the committee thought that the evidence indicated that the principal obstacle to the satisfying enforcement of the Sale of Food Order, 1921, was the difficulty of the identification of imported meat, and for this reason ,the order, ivhich required a notice to be placed in a conspicuous position in the shop bearing the words, "All Meat Imported Unless Otherwise Marked," was of little use as a protection for the public. The committee was satisfied that under any system of marking there must- be parts of a carcass which would not bear any part, of the. mark", at all, and they appreciated therefore that any marking arrangements' which might lie inipbsed would not be complete unless marking by means* of tickets or labels was included. The results of experiments satisfied the committee that there, was no disfigurement of the marked carcasses caused on dechilling, or de-frosting owing to the running, of ■the ink, or■ otherwise. .■:■■>, ■".. •'. Therefore, the 'committee recommended that an Order in Council should be made, prohibiting the" importation, 'the sale, or. the exposure for sale, wholesale or by retail, of chilled beef, frozen mutton and lamb, frozen pork; unless such meat boars an indication of origin. The form and application of the mark should be as follows: —Each side of chilled beef should bear the indication of origin, branded or stamped in ink or stain, durably and conspicuously, in a continuous .series of words, on the outside of each "side in three ,'cblumns longitudinally—-(1) From the hock".'joint .to the neck, passing over the round aitch bone, rump, and'then continuing at a distance of about 2in from tlie chin bone to the neck; (2) from the hind leg or the shin to the. foreshin, in a line drawn down the middle of the side; (3) from the forerib or crop to the sticking in a line drawn midway; the indication of origin to be so marked in letters of not less than half an inch in height. Each carcass of frozen mutton and lamb should bear a similar mark of origin on the outside of the leg and saddle or-chine of each hindquarter, and on the outside of the best end and should of each forequarter, comprising four marks on each side. .'. ■ . ' , Each carcass of. frozen pork should bear a similar mark on eacli side oft"he carcass, on the outside of the leg,'loin, foreend (spare rib and bladeborie)- and hand and spring,'comprising four marks oh each side. ■ • • .. ■ . : In the case of the importation of any part of a side of chilled beef, or of a carcass of frozen mutton or lamb, or off rozen pork, such part should bear the same indication of origin as if it had formed part of a marked' side or carcass. The committee further recommend that the importation should be prohibited of boneless beef and veal, salted beef, salted pork, and ediblis offals unless the container or package in which such meat is imported bears an indication of origin.. The Board of Customs and Excise had been consulted; and had indicated that they foresaw no insuperable difficulty in administering an order. ' - '