THE MEAT MARKING COMMITTEE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2273, 23 September 1897, Page 14

THE MEAT MARKING COMMITTEE.

MR H. C. CAMERON'S EVIDENCE (Fkom Ouk Own Courksfokoknt..)

London, August 7

The Selecb -Committee of • the House of Commons on the Colonial Produce Marks Bill ktill continues its sittings, and » largo amount of evidence has been taken. The principal feature of tha past week's evidence ha? bean that given on behalf of New Zealand by Mr H. O. Cameron, the London inspector of produce lo the New Zealand Government.

Mr Cameron said ho had been f -ir years connected with the New Zealaud meat trade. He was inspector of produce to the N»3W Zealand Government, and examined ail produce received here. They had a system of marking. The sbeep and lambs came in bogs, and were marked with bags. Over here New Zealand mutton brought a higher price than Australian mutton. They bred sheep purposely for thia country, and farming was conducted in a nisDner similar to that in England and Scotland. Every care was taken in breeding and feeding, whilst only the bcit ,were sent over here. The price was much below the English. New Zealand mutton did nob apparently hurt the English farmer. English prices went up and foreign prices had gone do an. The New Z aland me*t trade was not very profitable, and f*rmer-» were always complaining. This year 1,64-7,611 sheep had arrived from New Zealand. The New Zealand trade in mutton far exceeded the Australian trade. Their freedom fzonn disease was complete. There was .no evidtuce to nupporb Mr Digby'a aIU-gitiou that froz-in cattlo communicated cancer and other terrible diseases.

Mr Brigg asked whether there was »uy special prevalence of car.cer amoDg the people of New Zealand, and Mr Cameron replied emphatically in the "negative.

In reply to a question from the Chairman, Mr Cameron said he was prepared to give evidenca that frczsn meat was sold as English. He bad a large retail shop a'; Manchester, the object of which was to introduce frozen metvt to the public. The meat ho sold w»s marked for wh*t ib was, and the public know what they were buying. There was nobbing ab all harassing ia the bill. At present ho did all that the bill required, and he was in no way harassed. Ib was to the iutereab of the butchers that foreign meat should be retailed ly them without any announcement as to what ib was, because there was a great prejudice against foreign me*t. If retailers had to announce openly that they wera dealiug in foreign meat the customers would take objecH' n, beo»u~e their prejudice against foreign meat wa9 so strong. He saw no reason why "foreign" should nob include the flesh of fill animals from abroad, whether alive or dead. Those who w&sbed Amnrican c»ttla killed here to be classed as English did so from interested motivtts.

Mr Cameron emphasised vc-rv strongly the obj«cciou entertained by New Zeal&nders to having their meat sold bs British, pointing out that their produce was ot such excellent quality that their great denre was to see it given a fair chance on its own merit*. H-* did not vraut colonial meat classed as "British." He wanted each colony to stand for it-elf. Let New Zealand meat be classed •• New Zealand preduce," and Canadian produce be classed as " Canadian," and so on. Everything other than colonial produce should be classed as v " foreign."

Mr C*meroa went on to pay th<*l there was originally a strong prejudice against bis firm's New Zealand meat store at BSfcricbesber, bub their sales were increasing. The purchasers were nob tbe working classes — just the opposite. The iutentioa was to introduce the f rrzen meat to the better classes. His store was not on the style of those rough shops where the prices were 4d and sd. He sold it in an attractive manner in a first-claps shop. The working classes preferred the cheaper meat. They wasted quantity ivnd not quality. His prices were lower than good British, but bigher than the prices paid by tbe working men for the inferior British meat. The working classes would not pay him his extra price for frtzsn meat. There was, no doubt, a very strong prejudice against foreign meat. If ib passed, the bill would be advantageous to the British farmer, because at tha present tima there was a great deal of foreign mutton and (especially) beef, which wae sold by butchers to customers who wanted English meat. Therefore, the British farmer would have a bebfer chancs of success. The anira&ls which arrived at BirUcnbead were much knocked about on the voyage, and the Ilcsh was not so good as tbafc of the animals arriving chilled.

In reply to Mr Abel Smith, Mr Cameron said he could not see any argiincenb in favour of claute 15. The bill would not be harassing to straightforward dealers. He bad always had signs over his shop door notifying th*t he dealt in frtzen meat, and his meat was marked with tags divulging its brand aud origin. He also advertised the fact. It would bs impossible to brand every chop, but if c. customer saw legs of mutton, shoulders of mutton, &c, marked " foreigD," they mighb rightly conclude that the small pieces iv the immediate vicinity were a'so foreign, and from thoie carcases. Five or cix marks on & sicgle carca?e would be sufficient protection for the customer. He believed in those who dealt in foreign meat beirg registered. Why be ashamed if they intended to deal honestly and not surreptiMously ? There was a large quantity of foreigu beef sold, but ii was not sold iD shops which admitted that they sold it. If the bill resulted in registration of all the butchers, then so much the better. When a butcher sold meat without any statement at all concerning it, the inference was that it was British. Mr Dinby, the notorious promulgator of the ••cancer" libel as to New Zealand meat, next had a turn at the New Zealand expert In reply to his questions, Mr Cameron said ha could not say whether it w*» or w&s not possible to detect dieease in frozen carcases, but he could inform the committee that before frozen meat left New Zealand it was careEully examined by inspectors. If the carcases were not up to the mark they were at once rejected. He was in favour of having all things sold for what they were. He wanted fair trade, and this, he thought, would be beneficial to the English farmer

Replying to various questions put by Mr Bi-igg, Mr A. Smith, and other*. Mr Cameron said ho was in favour of the bill with some amendments. At present foreign, meat was sold in Euglish shops at the anme price as English, meat. If the meat were marked, then tbe prices for foreign meat would be reducsd. ,OJc course the cost of English mea.b would be a little higher, and the consumer would have to pay the difference. Many customers would rather p»y three-pence or fourpence a poua«l: more for English meat/ Tho tendency of the bill would be'*in favour of lowering colonial meat, b'C*use it w»s no<v sold ab English prices. He considered that the chilled American me»t was quite as good as the average Eoglish meafc. The dt-mand for Euglish me*t would be increased if meit werouiarkoi. Ou an average he did not tbink the bill would m&ke any difference in the prico of niea*.

This concluded Mr~C*merou's oxamina v ion. But ib had one very important immedi%tß result, for Hit Digby took the opportunity of retracting and apologising for bis utterances iv the House of Commons, which had oa«t such an undeserved diicced t upon Now Zealand meat, and had given such deep offence to colonists generally.

Mr Digby further stated that in connection with the question as bo whether fiozou in* at W aa M nutritious aa Eugliah moat, and whether it was used in the hospitals, he had during the meeting that day sent, a memorandum aerosa to St>. Thomas's Hospibal. The reply was to the effecb thab several of tbe large hospitals need frozen mcar, though St. Tboinss's did nob ; and tha writer instanced tha case of one institution where nothing bub frozen msafe was consumed, and where everybody thought ib wa* English. — (Laughter).

Some of tbe British witnesses " showed their hands " with, a simplicity that was quite touching. For instance, Mr Andrew Hutch*son, representing the Highland and Agricultural Society, virtually admitted thct bis objecb in desiring meab to be marked wa» as a profc ctive move against imported meat for the benefit of local farmers. H» entirely objected to h*vinc English or Scotch m«»t marked, " because," ha aaid, " marking is not a thing which we ought to ask our own countrymen to submit to " ; further pressed he objected because he thought that marking the meat depreciated its value in the eyes of some consumers, and if there was any depreciation then ib was not righb that the Home meat should suffer.

A meat marking demonstration was given to Ihe committee by Mr Beech, Mayor of Bridgworth, and & member of tha Royal Collage of Veterinary Surgeons. He produced a mutton chop, and forthwith gave tho committee » practical idea *-s to how ib was possible to m*rk tbe meat. The machine, which was quickly made ready for the operation, left a brown impression on the f*b of the chop — a. m»rk about as big rouud as an ordinary lead pencil. The wibne?B stated that it was possible to mark a carcase as quickly as a man could pats his hand over it — tay, in 15 seconds. Tbe cost of the iustcuiueufc to mark the meat with would be six or seven guineas. His instrument would make an impression on the lean a« well as the fat of the meat.

Serera.l witnesses wbo professed to bo able to' discriminate between British &nd foreign me»t were tested with some hamp, of which they declared they could readily discriminate be-twt-eu tbe honae-growß and foreign. Unfortunately, rach of Ihe witnesses without hesitation chose the American ham ss Iri»h, much to the amusement of tha committee.