The Frozen Meat Trade.

Otago Witness, Issue 2263, 15 July 1897, Page 22

The Frozen Meat Trade.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— "Another Exporter," in his letter : criticising my paper on above question, ex- | presses surprise at the number of mistakes he ; alleges I made, yet he does not point them out. No, Sir, not a single one ; I stated nothing but concrete facts. In replying to him I will not trespass upon your space more than I can help. He first mentions that "early in the history of the trade an attempt was made by the Dun€din Freezing Company to concentrate the selling by managing it themselves by consigning to ons firm, and that the experiment came to a quick ending." I remember the circumstances perfectly, and the meetings that were held in Dunedin to induce consignors to agree to such concentration, and I distinctly assert that it was only partially carried out, and that a majority of cousigcors would not agree to it. There are many iv Dunedin now who can bear me out iv this statement. Is iB not a fact that the chief reason why it wao Dot supported was on account of the various financial companies that were making a profit out of consignments preferring to deal with the meat through their own agents, and many of the producera were bo entirely in their hands tbat they had n# voice in the matter? The same thiug is going on at the present time. This is only one of the "conflicting interests " we hear ao much about. "Another Exporter" says: "We have also had an examples of concentration in the hands of one London public company to quite as large an extent as can ever bB expected to occur." This in an argument difficult to follow. He refers, I assume, to the C.C. and D. Comp\ny. Does not this company compete with a hundred other consignees (this is the estimated number of consignees) ? Yet he calls this concentration ! He takes exception to my remark re the " regularity of shipments or supply," and siya ib "can hardly be mads better than it hao been," and then adds, "nothing oan be easier than to arrange with the freezing companies tor extra storage, so that the shipments might be spread over the year — it means money and the loss of interest, which someone must pay. • Exporter ' would, no doubb, like this paid for him, but that is not practicable nor practical." I may inform him that I shall be very pleased to pay both storage and interest, because I believe that I should be compensated tenfold if this method were adopted. He ought to know that every mail from Home brings fresh evidence to prove that it is one of the chief complaints, this question of supply. The market is continually being forced down in London by weak men who cannot hold, and this occurs when there is a large number of sheep in store — the very time when the market requires to be judiciously fed. Exception ia taken to my advocating " ccol stores near the port of discharge," " Another Exporter '' says " no exporter has come forward to pay his sbare of the cest ; and exactly the s&rae may be said of opening up new centres of distribution." I have to-day received a letter complaining of the facilities for discharging meat in London. We have heard a great deal lately about the damage it sustains during and after discharge, also loss of time and money. Were this saved it would probably cover the interest my friend refers to and a great deal more. Often a good market is lost through delays coaspquent upon the present system being imperfect. Tnis I know to my ! own cost in a recent shipment. Besides this [ the meat could undoubtedly be dealt with more i economically in many ways. EVeryone, who j knows anything about it advocates cool storage j at the port of discharge, not only for classing and sorting the different consignments, but to save damage to meat that now occurs between the ship and present stores and ateo to facilitate delivery. y If it were not for the opposition of a few men whose interest it is to keep things as they are, we should have had a good trade by this time working under good organisation. Then there would 1 have been no difficulty in finding the funds and growers to pay the cost of cool stores and interest as well, and -improving the system of distribution into the bargain. Now I come to the question of " jealousy among freezing companies." Bless my friend ! Where has he been living lately ? What about the Southland Company and Ocean Beach Company, and Belfast and Islington, and others ? He asks which of the companies have made dividends except the Gear Company ? Why Belfa3t and Islington have recently declared 8 per cent. Belf&st declared 9 per cent, two years ago. I may be permitted to say that in my paper I did not refer to che cost of freezing or management of the works. I have always held that so far as these companies are concerned they have done their work well and cheap, especially so ia Canterbury and the Gear Company. Upon the subject of freights he says I am not either " reasonable or ingenuous." Atter showing for whom the freezing companies work — some for themselves, some for growers, — he asks, is it likely they would have entered into the contract they did for three years at Jd | and Id, when they knew "that cheaper rates were possible." Will he deny that that contract was entered into immediately previous to the conference held in Wellington to consider this question among others referring to the frozen meat trade, and that it was entered into with undue hvite for obvious reasons ? Hesaya that he knew all about the repreflentative of an Australian company to whom I made reference, and who wanted to purchase 30,000 carcases or send his steamer and convey them Home at per Ib ; but he does not tell us that he couldn't get them, became in the contract of freights referred to above a clause was inserted that no meat passing through the freezing companies' works should be carried ia any other vessels than those belonging to the shipping companies that were parties to the contract. However, lam glad to hear that this question of freights has been now satisfactorily settled, and at what I believe a fair rate. It means that the shipping companies are going to lose £150,000 a year in the carriage of moat and wool, so there is at last some evidence that it might have been carried ab & cheaper rate' thau under the contract "Another Exporter" refers to as being the best that could "be made. He apparently do.s not believe ib possible to effect any reforms, except by sending Home

good sheep. He »ays : "I don't; believe that concentration is possible. I don't beliere that any committee in London can do any | good. Nor do I believe that if we had a Smithfiold of our own, where nothing waa sold but New Zealand meat, the net result would be any better." Under these circumstances, he appears to object to every proposition .that has been suggested for the improvement of the trade. No, 1 find a gleam of hope that we may yet secure his support He says at the beginning of his letter that the " regularity of shipments and supply could hardly be made better." Ab the end of it he says : " There is little doubt that if we could regulate our shipments at, say, 200,000 carcases a month or 50,000 per week, all the year round, it would be an immense advantage, and might lead to a saving in freight." This is refreshing. Ha adds, "It means large storage, and evon then who is to suffer the loss of interest and pay coat of storage ? Probably there would be a credit balance from the operation ; but how are the hundreds of shippers to . bo dealt with and arranged with?" My answer is, the shippers would be dealt with in a business manner, and would pay the coat, which they could afford by the increased value they would get for their meat. He says himself there would probably be a " credit balance." Let me remark that the argument I used upon this question in my paper refers to what is practised every year with our wool. A wool committee determines months before sale what number of bales shall be offered at a sale according to supply, and when arrivals have reached the nurnbei: others are excluded ; but in the case of meat it probably would not require to be held more than as many weeks as wool is for month. A good woolbroker never sells wool unless he considers he is getting its value — so it should be with our meat. I have extended my remarks to a greater length, than I intended, and will only refer to one other point. •'Another Exporter" asserts "that the New Zealand grower (of mutton) probably requires\or expects the full advantage of the London market ; he expect his meat to be frozen at no profit, stored free, lifted by the steamer wherever frozen aud carried to London at the minimum cost, sold in London at minimum coat, and, if possible, retailed at 500 shops or sold by the best Smithfield salesman, without any charge for these facilities." On behalf of the grower I deny it. I may safely say he desires nothing of the kind. Ha is prepared to pay a fair and just charge. What he does objecb to is to pp-y any longer the exorbitant freight, and also for " muddle-headedness " and mismanagement of the whole trade by those who have proved themselves incompetent to conduct the business. They have patiently waited for reforms without obtaining them, and so serious has the matter become that the Government is preparing a bill dealing with the question at this end. I believe that unless those who are conducting tbo business as a whole adopt a different system in dealing with tha meat at Home, the (Government will — as it considers the interests of the country demand it — take active steps to place the trade upon a better baiis. Ib is unfortunate that we have men among us who condemn interference with their management — throw every possible obstacle in the way of improving the system. They look upon the present mode of conducting the business as near perfect as one can make it, and do their best to keep thiogs as they are. They may rest perfectly assured that the producer will stand it no longer. The freights would probably not have been reduced now had ib not been for the agitation that has been going on for two years, and for the fear of the threats of the Premier, who was determined (so break the monopoly, and will not permit the tenants of Crown lands or tho3o on private lands to be fleeced as they have been in the past.— I am, &c , July 9. Exporter.