THE MEAT TRADE

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7319, 24 December 1910, Page 2

THE MEAT TRADE

LONDON METHODS OF HANDLING. ME LYSNAE’S EEPOET. A EE PLY FEOM LONDON. A London correspondent of the toralists' Eevicw” lias replied to Mr Douglas Lysnar’s report on the methods of handling New Zealand meat in London, and the reply puts quite a nettlight' On the matter, though it does not hy any means disprove the truth of the New Zealander's main contentions. Ihe London critic says, in the first place, that the suggestions are as old as the hills—nothing of novelty in them. Ihe sorting shed idea, for instance, ivas taken up twenty years ago, and was discarded because of the expense, ihe Dock stores offered to put up such a shed if the importers would pay so much a head—3d per carcase. If, says the “Keview’s” correspondent, Mr Lysnar will get a. guarantee from New Zealand shippers that such a sorting shed as ho recommends would ho patronised and paid for, plans tt'ould bo out tomorrow, . The correspondent admits that the London system is _ faulty in part. Mercantile London is very scattered; docks, stores?, market, are far apart. Other trades, wool, for instance, suffer in consequence, too. London’s facilities,. in short, for handling merchandise, are' far from ideal. Tho same thing can he found, no doubt, allotting for different circumstances. In New Zealand.

The answer to Mr Lysnar’s contention that tii© corporation of London should provide proper cool stores at Smithfield is not..conclusive. Ho says: “I fear that the .governing hotly of London could not welcome the' idea that the symmetrical idea of.the central markets buidling should he' ruined by Superimposing cold stores!” The best answer to this is that a committee .of the governing- body has since, in • consequence of tho New Zoa-> land report, recommended the cool storage provision asked for.. As to the suggestion, of Mr Lysnar that the small middleman should bo eliminated and the produce- controlled by only strong and reliable agents, the correspondent points out that if New. Zealand shippers sent forward their meat on "consignment they would he cn- . titled, to find fault with the market Si-Jo system. As it is, something like 75 per cent, of New Zealand meat when put on hoard is the property of British buyers, who are entitled to sell it as they like. Then, the correspondent contends, that probably ■ not 25 per cent. of New Zealand moat passes through Smit-hfiold. The “Eeview’s” authority points out that the " American meat houses, considered very smart people, have their meat handled similar to Australasian-, but they; do ‘not complain. Does Mr Lysnar know, he asks, that in 1909 .1,258,000 carcases, of mutton ..and lamb fi-ojn South America were shipped 'to : London out 0f,3.352,000, and that an increasing/propo’rtion of: Argentina's ship-, mlents are bedh-g directed ,to London, port I-. " ;, " ■The correspondent also disagrees with Mr Lysnar’s suggestion that Liverpool or Bristol‘should-be.'the principal port for .New) Zealand meat.-, New Zealand mutton, on .the average is superior, he points out,- in quality to any other, frozen; mutton imported, , lamb unquestionably superior. Per high-grade meat, any person versed in the trade will , tell us that .London, is far and away better than any other market in the country. There is no comparison, either as to prices obtainable or as to capacity to absorb large quantities of meat. No practical person would ever suggest that .anyplace hut London should .be made the chief port for New Zealand, meat. The report seems to- suggest that New, land meat for London might be landed’ at‘ Liverpool and railed to London 1 But the railway- charge—about id per lb—would financially overwhelm such procedure. Practically no Argentine frozen, meat is so sent. Some Argentine chilled beef .is, railed from Liverpool, because the vessels coming to London from Australia cannot carry ail the chilled beef required for this port. . Now that tho quality of South American mutton Has improved so much, it is a fact that meat shippers ; there are developing -their direct London trade at -the expense 'of Liverpool. : It is admitted that Mr Lysnar’s observations 'about the barges are importantbecause hero there - is a definite issue He controverts the statement, however, that meat is conveyed to river-tide stores in leaky and water-soddened barges. He ban been assured that any dampness is noticeable, straw is placed on tho-floor.of the barges, and that in regard to the barge ''Prince,'' in.-which; Mr' Lysnar eays lie saw 6| inches of water, the men in charge were washing the barge, and they: state they told Mr Lysnar so. The correspondent says he heard occasionally of meat being injured in. very hot weather,, when barges . have. been delayed in their up•river course, but otherwise no , com- ■ plaints'arlo, made by , consignees. The reply indicates that there is something to lie said for the other sider bnt it does not. get over the fact that the method of handling our moat in London is not as. satisfactory as it should be, and c-Voii if the weaknesses Mr Lysnar found on,:- his investigation have , not been removed have’ been, known, it is well that a man of Mr Lysnar’s energy has been discovered 1 to direct proper-at-tention to them, -and thereby impel those responsible to take some effective measure.. of reform, if only in partial improvement of the present unsatisfactory state of affairs.