NEW ZEALAND LAMB.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20713, 5 November 1930, Page 13

NEW ZEALAND LAMB.

ENGLISH DEALERS FINED. ARGENTINE FOR "CANTERBURY." NINETEEN CASES THIS* YEAR. [FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT. ] LONDON, Oct. 3. During this year, to date, tlic New Zealand Meat Producers' Board lias brought twenty prosecutions against butchers in various parts of England for selling meat as " Canterbury " which has conic from elsewhere. Nineteen of these charges have been successful, and one was found " not proven." Populous centres concerned have included Manchester, Liverpool, Sheffield, Newcastle, Portsmouth and London. The London representative of the board, Mr. R. S. Forsyth, holds that these prosecutions should bo instituted in the interests aliko of the public who ask for Canterbury lamb and mutton and of (ho honest butcher who really does sell the genuine article for—what it Is. Shipments of New Zealand lambs during the last year have totalled nearly 7,000,000 carcases—a million more than last year—yet the stocks on hand aro litlle, if any, higher than they were a year ago. At Newcastle, Mrs. Alice Howard and her assistant, Stanley James Heap, were each fined £3 for displaying Argentine lamb as " Canterbury." Mr. A. Hawkes, prosecuting on behalf of the board, stated that an official of the board visited Mrs. Howard's shop and asked <lie assistant for some Canterbury 'lamb. Heap produced a carcase bearing the mark "La Blanca 4" —an Argentine mark. The official also said that there were at least two tickets in the window indicating "Canterbury" lamb, although lie did not see any such lamb in the shop. The assistant stated he was under the impression that he was selling Canterbury land) and still believed (hat Ibis was so. Harmful to New Zealand Meat. At South Shields, H. 13. Rettler was fined £1 and five guineas costs for applying a false trade description to a forequarter of lamb. His assistant, George Shaw, was also fined 10s under a similar summons. Mr. A. Hawkes (prosecuting) said the alleged offence was that of applying a false trade description under the Merchandise Marks Act. It was the application of description " Canterbury " lamb to a forequarter of lamb which was of South American origin. The best imported lamb was New Zealand, which sold at 2d or 3d iper lb. higher than the more inferior meat from South America, and it was prejudicial to New Zealand meat producers that meat of inferior quality should be sold as New Zealand lamb. A representative of the board, who made a purchase of lamb from Pettler's shop, was given a receipt on which the. assistant marked " Forequarter Canterbury." The official further stated that the words "Canterbury Lamb " were displayed, but he could see no New Zealand lamb in the shop. In cross-examination, the official said that the term " Canterbury " was applied to lamb from all parts of New Zealand. Canterbury actually was the first place in New Zealand from which lamb was shipped to England. Pettier stated that in general usage by the public " Canterbury " lamb covered frozen lamb. A customer who asked for Canterbury lamb would expect -to receive frozen lamb. " Canterbury lamb " was similarly used in the trade. If he telephoned for Canterbury lamb he would be satisfied to receive frozen lamb. Mr. H. M. Dorman. of the Sansenina Meat Co.. said that in South Shields people called frozen meat Canterbury," whatever it. was. He admitted that if he was asked for " Canterbury " lamb lie would not supply any other than New Zealand. Argentine Sold as Canterbury, A. E. Silk. Portsmouth, was summoned on three counts for selling meat not of the quality, nature or substance of the article demanded. Mr. G. D. Roberts, prosecuting on behalf of the board, stated that an official" of the board went to the. shop, asked for a leg of Canterbury lamb, and was sold one of Argentine origin. The price charged was not excessive, but it was not fair to the public to receive meat misrepresented, nor was it fair to the genuine seller of New Zealand lamb. The Bench found defendant guilty and a fine of £7 was imposed, with three guineas costs. • George Albert Cooper, of Southsea, and his assistant. Charles Mills, were each summoned for unlawfully applying a false trade description to meat. Mr. G. D. Roberts again stated that a representative of the board went to defendant's shop and asked for a leg of Canterbury lamb. Mills served him with a leg of Argentine lamb, charging Is 2d per lb., which was a fair price for " Canterbury," but about 2d per lb. dearer than Argentine meat. Mr. Granville, for the defence, said that Mills was an errand boy, 18 years old, who had been dismissed as a result of the case. He served the official of the board because the manager was engaged, and he did not know the difference between Canterbury and Argentine meat. Counsel pleaded not guilty on behalf of Cooper and guilty on behalf of Mills. Cooper was fined £5 and £3 3s costs, and Mills was convicted, but the summons was dismissed under tlio Probation of Offenders Act. A plea of guilty was made in the next case when S. Cooper and Henry Pond, his assistant, were similarly summoned. The board's representative visited defendant's shop and was served with Argentine lamb after asking for Canterbury. Cooper was fined £5 and ordered lo pay £3 3s costs, and Fond was fined £l.