NEW ZEALAND MEAT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume L, Issue 15377, 12 August 1913, Page 4

NEW ZEALAND MEAT.

~—rry LONDON VERSUS BRISTOL. km FIGURES FOR COMPARISON, k 1 [VBOSI A SPECIAL COaRESrON'DKST.] Lokdov, Ju3y 4. - By the courtesy of the Port of London ; Authority a representative of the New ? Zealand Herald was given this week »§| free run of those portions of the docks •'. where New Zealand frozen produce U ' handled and discharged. Important queft- : ' tions are raised with regard to handling j& and discharging th» frozen meat from New Zealand, and critics have argued seriously gaj that shippers should j>end the r meat to Bristol and make that the distributing port for this country. It is not my object here to debate the rival claims of London or Bristol, but merely to state f uts. On the occasion of your representative's I visit, the Opawa was discharging on the north side of the Victoria Dock, and the lonic on the south side of the Albert py Dock. The work was beijsg done by the shipowners, and to all appearances it was m being well and expeditiously performed. Bjf At the Opawa the meat was being discharged on Captain Noakes's travelling chute to railway trucks or barges, and in ,', both instances the New Zealand Shipping Company and the Shaw, Savill, and ; Albion Company were sorting and hand- ,g| ling under cover as much as possible. ''-Wk Captain Noakes's chute, under present .:sj§ conditions, deals with from 700 to 800 car- 'i| cases per hour, but for the multiplicity of | marking tke chute could work iuuei more §|L quickly. So far as the Port of London Authority ||9 is concerned, a very large proportion of ,|- the meat is at present worked by eleva- '«,. ■■'* tors from the hold of the ship to endless r : belt conveyors, which carry the meat un- 'y der cover for delivery to~7-(a) The ; :? authority's cold storage chambers on the ', dock quays; (b) insulated vans for con- • : veyance to the authority's cold storage chambers at West Smithfk'ld market; . |||| (c) insulated motor or horse vehicles which 1 convey the meat from the shin direct to Smithfield market; (d) insulated railway i waggons alongside the steamer for direct 1 delivery to the provinces." Many comments have been made in re- |H| gard to barging meat in London, but, as m shown above, if it is consigned to the care of the Port of London Authority no barg- M ing need be done, as the meat handled by m the authority is passed direct over the quay. Most of the large London firms, : -:|f| however, have their cold stores further up the rker, and in their own interests M they resort to bathes. So far as could'.'.'*! be ascertained, these barges were clean, and the meat was being handled with enre. ; Perhaps one ought to add that no matter what the Port of London does in the way! of cold store accommodation, the big funis i •• already referred to will probably continue j \ to use their barges. They claim that this - 11 method suits them, and it is to their ovm interests to see that the carcases ar.p ill placed on the market in the "best possjbfo condition. The point for Naw Zealand., and an important one, too, is whether thtt Dominion Government or the producers ais a body could not make formal representations to the Port of London Authority.: asking for some sort of inspection of thf A■■">,'■■' barges. That such a. request would re- ' ceive favourable consideration is very likely. Hew Accommodation. IH In regard to the accommodation for i housing refrigerated produce in the Port.-fj of London, there is -at present accommo- ~ | dation in the port for considerably over [1 three million carcases, and when the au- i thority's new accommodation is erected f k the total capacity will be equal to 3..E00.000 carcases. s At present the ;; port authority has cold storage aocommo- r dation for 820,000 carcases, while additional accommodation, costing about 'ii§j £400.000, has been sanctioned. The construction of a new dock south <>{,&ss. and parallel to, the existing Royal Alberw&S Dock, where the bulk of the colonial pro-^j,';!, duce is at present handled, was begun Ij' l ;' just a year ago, at the cost of upwards of £2,000,000. Large extensions "to the Tilbury Docks are also being made, and oowiderable alterations and improvements to the oiier docks/are in progress. j Another statement to 4>e corrected here is that most of the New Zealand produce comes up .in barges from Tilbury. This is not eo. The huge'majority of N?>w Zealand vessels berth in the Victoria and Albert Docks and discharge there- Of course, it is admitted that they discharg* from several points in these docks; and that much of the meat is conveyed in * barges further up the river, bat 'how this is to be obviated is, as already explain.-*!, ■./■£ a very great problem. If all the L.m. don firms would agree to centralise i»i the new sorting sheds to be erected by the authority then barging would be .done ' ? ! away with. Railway Changes.

Misleading comparisons have been given. |g in regard to the charges for bringing mfeit : to the Smithfield market through the ports of London and Bristol. For in- 'r stance," it is not stated that meat can be conveyed from the ship to Smithfield mar- '.,■'.. m ket at a maximum cost of 14s 7d per ton, including port rates, wharfage, k«sd- ' ing, cartage, market tolls, and pitching, as against, a minimum rate of 26s 9d pit ton at owner's risk, and 27p Sd p?r ton s at company "a risk, via Bristol. Even then, if railed from Bristol, the goods have ' 1 to be sent in three-ton lots. The railway rati© alone for smaller lots from Bristol to liondon is 33s Ad per ton, which in- J eludes cartage in London only. Further, anyone acquainted with the "working of goods traffic over railways will appreciate that even meat cannot be conveyeo a distance of about 150 miles without considerable delay. One must also take into consideration the question or' reinsurance on the meat if landed at Bristol for sale- 3t the Smithfield market. If meat- is stored in London for" 28 days, and afterwards sold at the Smithfield market, the cost will be frosa,; 25s 7d to 30s Id per ton. This includes the port rates, wharfage, loading, cartage, market tolls, and pitching—as against a rate for similar services, if sent via Bristol, of 37s 9d. E-en the figure of 37s 9d<§| make 3no allowance for reinsurance. A?|§f v«y much higher rate would obtain if . provision were made for reinsurance and \ extra railage for lots under three tons. 5 Tlie rail rate* from Bristol to London are : At owner's risk. 20s per ton in threeton lots; at company's risk, 2ls per ton in three-ton lots; at company's risk, 33s 4d . per ton under three-ton lots. The capacity of the cold storage accommodation at Bristol is 134,000 carcases, and the present c®!d storage accommodation in London v&m over 3,000,000, and will slorfclv be Wm 3,500,000 carcases. Point About Wool. Mis-statements have also been made witb -|§ regard to the manner of handling wool in London. It is generally conceded that the warehouses ot the Port of London || Authority set apart for tbe showing and storing of wool are unsurpassed. It is incorrect to state that wool ia "often ,'w, dumped on the ooen wharves in London, and left for weeks covered merelv with tarpauh'n.'' During the late strike when the port was congested with traffic, a few bales covered with tarpaulin might Lave M been left on ike quay, but this wa3 certainly only a temporary arrange nent, and does not m any way represent the normal working of 6ach an important trade. This article has only dealt with the main points in connection with the working of Australasian produce, but it surely demonstrates that London ia* still the right and proper centre for the Dominion's perishable- products. To sum up, Ji can only reiterate that. New Zealand should ask for some inspection or method *>f control of the barges/and that it would be better if all her frozen meat could be centralised in the new sorting ebed on the north side of the Albert Dock. * : ■"■ ■ ■■■'■" ' .":■ '"M