LONDON MEAT TRADE

Waipa Post, Volume 31, Issue 1765, 1 June 1926, Page 6

LONDON MEAT TRADE

TRADERS’ RECENT CRITICISMS.

shocking conditions

Some remarks made by Alderman Wyles, of Coventry,, criticising the way in which meat was sold in London, led to a lively debate at the annual general meeting of the National Federation of Meat Traders’ Associations at Sheffield.

Alderman Wyles had declared that he knew of no place in this country or on the continent where meat was sold in such a disgraceful way as in London, and that there were places in London where meat was sold in the gutter under shocking conditions. In the end the conference passed with three dissentients a resolution expressing disapproval of the offending remarks,, and’ this’ had a sequel in the 'resignation of Alderman Wyles from the Executive Council.

The protest on behalf of tne London delegates was raised by Mr A. C. Knight, president of the London Union, who vigorously demanded that the conference should dissociate itself from Alderman Wyles’s remarks, which, if unchallenged, would convey a wrong impression to the public and the Government, and would do a great deal of damage to the trade and to the Federation. He was told that meat was sold in some parts of the Continent under far worse conditions than any to be found in London. As to meat being sold in the gutter, he emphatically denied that it was sold under anything like shocking conditions. Meat was sold in London under conditions laid down by regulations.

The president ('Mr Allen Watt) said the Press had reported only what was said, and there was ample opportunity for a statement to have been made against the criticisms. He was, however, sure that Mr Knight had done bis duty towards the London Union by raising the matter. Alderman Wyles, on being called upon, said he thoroughly agreed with the report of his remarks in the Press. It was an extraordinary thing .that his London friends did not challenge his statement when he made it. The Federation’s policy was to advocate a better way of dealing with meat throughout the country. His remarks applied not merely to London, but to any other part of the country where meat was sold under the same conditions.

A Delegate: Why didn’t you say so? (Cheers.) Alderman Wyles: I am saying 60 now. (Dissent.) Prominence has been given to this question, and it didn’t suit London.

Several delegates (in chorus): It is not true.

Alderman Wyles: It is for you to prove it not itlrue. I say again tliat meat is sold from stalls in the gutters in London. Whatever you may do about covering the stalls, you cannot do away with the unsatisfactory way of disposing of v the meat. Mr Clarke (London) challenged Alderman Wyles to name a street or a butcher’s shop wheire meat was sold under shocking conditions. Mr Wyles, he said, had always been in the limelight and wanted something sensational. That charge had got to be repudiated, and unless it were denied he was afraid London would not be able to support the Federation in future. The president said he would like threats kept out of the discussion. ”We in Yorkshire are not used to threats,,” he added.

Mr Oliver (Sheffield) said he had been struck in London, even in the poorer parts, by the cleanly way in which the butchers had been dressed, the beautiful way in which they handled their meat; and the proper way in which they wrapped it up.

The Resolution disapproving of Alderman Wyles’s statement was afterward carried as stated. Alderman Wyles thereupon wrote his resignation, stating in his letter, which was read later, that he Regarded “the overwhelming vote re my remarks as a vote of no confidence.” The letter was received with regret and it was agreed to ask the alderman to reconsider his decision.

A resolution wac adopt d declaring that Canadian cattle should enter this country on the same terms, and conditions as those from the Irish Free State. Mr John Edwards (London), the mover, said they 'had won this fight, but they had been tricked out of two-thfrds of the fruits of the victory.