NEW MEAT-FREEZING PROCESS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCVII, Issue 11225, 24 March 1897, Page 3

NEW MEAT-FREEZING PROCESS.

to the editor. Sir, — Having seen an illustrated article in last week’s Canterbury Times on the above subject regarding an invention by Messrs Brittin and Glass, I would like to point out a few reasons which would bo against the adoption of the apparatus for general use. In the first place the freezing acrent is not always convenient, as in the cold-air system of freezing or the direct expansion-system the agent would require a separate plant; and pumps would also be required to force the agent through the Unicorn Meat-Freezer. There would also be required separate attachments for passing the warm fluid through the sheath to release its adhesion to the meat. I should say, from your illustration, that for each quarter of beef it requires two connections for the brine and two for the warm medium, which would also require pumps. In the case of works killing, say, 50 bullocks a day, it would require a plant of 200 scabbards and 800 connecting pipes. In connection with sheep-freezing, the first objection would be the disfiguring of the carcase by the puncture from the scabbard; and then the' enormous quantity of plant required precludes it from coming into general use. Take, for instance, the applying of the apparatus to 2500 or 3000 sheep a day. Bach sheep taking at least two scabbards and eight connections, the total would amount to 10,000 or 12,000 pipes, which any practical man can see is absurd. Any skilful butcher could make an incision in a quarter of beef, laying bare the bone in such a manner as to allow all the latent heat to disperse, and allowing the chill to get into the centre of the joint, at the

same time not disfiguring the meat as the scabbard would. As regards 'muttonfreezing, the paraphernalia is too elaborate for the good achieved, and, in this part of New Zealand at least, care in the cooling and freezing process should obviate all risk of bone-taint.—l am, &c., PRACTICAL.