THE PORT OF LONDON

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 8680, 13 March 1914, Page 2

THE PORT OF LONDON

FACILITIES COMPARED WITH BRISTOL’S.

Writing to the Christchurch “Press,” Mr H. D. Vavasour, of Blenheim, after stating the reasons leading up to the formation of the Bristol and Dominions’ Producers’ Association, says: “ Mr Estill (special trade commissioner of the Port of London _ Authority) tries to argue that it is cheaper to ship to London than to Bristol, in the majority of cases it is not so, and then he does not state that in the oases he quotes the reduction has been made since he'left London. As a fact, taking the charges as a whole, Mr Lysnar’s assertion that you can land produce in 'LopdoU from Bristol cheaper than direct, is correct. Then, again, Mr Estill states that London serves a population of eight millions. Bristol is in close touch and can serve cheaper the whole of the West Coast up to Manchester, a population of twenty millions. The formation of the Bristol Company must have a beneficial effect on the frozen produce trade. Anything that will relieve the congestion or the trade in London and help to break up the rings must enhance the value of the produce. . The Australians are exploiting the Americans at San Francisco, and that will help the prices in London. Argentine is a considerable shipper to Bris-

tol. The Bristol Company hope to be able to exploit the Continent of Europe. Anything that will relievo the congestion in London must put up prices* therefore bank every movement that will help to break down the Smithfield meat ring thut are winning fortunes out of the supine New Zealand producer. In frozen _ meat I do not know any bona fide independent broker; all are buyers themselves. Is it human nature that, that being so, a shipper would get a fair deal ? The Bristol Company fill the want, and_are pure .and simple brokers and distributors. ~ London deducts 21b per carcase on mutton and lib on lamb: Bristol deducts nothing. The rise this year; I attribute to the formation of the Bristol Company, as naturally the Smithfield ring wish to prevent as much meat as possible from going to Bristol, and ■thus endeavour to induce producers not to ship on their own.. “1 consider the Bristol movementwill have a far-reaching effect for the betterm©n't of ■fclxe, ‘trade. Tbo wlxolesfilo price of mutton in London is, roughly, say, 4d per lb, and Englifh. mutton is, say, 8d; .both are sold at the same price. Query, where docs the other 4d go to? We want to chase it. We have to thank'Mr Lysnar and Mr Wilson for the hard work, energy, and the time they have, given to this business. Mr Lysnar has spent a large amount of money out of his own pocket in this matter. I have heard it stated that he has made a good thing out of floating the Bristol Company. I can assure

your readers he has not received one penny. Wheu he sent in the account for flotation to the board in Bristol, the board wrote and told him that he had nOt included his personal expenses, and to kindly do BO at once. Mr Lysnar implied he did hot wish to charge anything. The board wrote again expostulating, and begging him to do so. He cabled hack, ‘ I decline to do so.’ This correspondence has been before me, and 1. can.assure your readers that to this day he.has hot received one penny. As he says, ho is a large shipper, and h“ is content to come in with the rest of the producers in the enhanced value which he expects to receive for his mutton and lamb,”