THE MEAT TRUST.

Wanganui Herald, Volume LIII, Issue 160732, 19 August 1920, Page 4

THE MEAT TRUST.

Apropos our remarks yesterday on the Meat Trust, the following from the Auckland Star is of interest: A strong effort is being made to induce the Government to issue au exporting license to Armour and Co., one of the great American meat packing firms. It is quite natural that Armour’s themselves should be moving in this matter, but what strikes us as rather strange is that some New Zealand farmers are supporting their request. For example, last week a meeting of sheep farmers held in Christchurch resolved, “that no obstacles be placed in the way of any firm operating in New Zealand until there is evidence that the methods of such firm are detrimental to the producers’ interests.” There is ample evidence that the methods of the American Meat Trust, of which Armour’s is, or was, a member, have been detrimental to the interests of producers in other countries, and it is precisely the knowledge of those methods that has caused the Government and most of the newspapers of New Zealand to oppose the entry of the Trust into the New Zealand trade.' When a tiger appears near an Indian village, do the villagers welcome it and give it the run of the place until it proves that its methods are detrimental? The animal may be a reformed tiger, but the villagers judge it by the characteristics of its species. So much the safer plan is to keep the Meat Trust out of New Zealand. It may be a reformed trust; we know that its dissolution was ordered. But there is no proof that it has reformed so much that it can safelybe admitted here. If the Government stood by and gave Armour’s a free run in New Zealand, the freezing companies could not prevail against the money, skill, and organisation of the firm, unless the farmers' stood by them solidly, and there is reason to fear that too many farmers would look only the attractive terms offered them by the newcomers, and pay no heed to the future. If the whole power of the Trust were brought to bear on the New Zealand market the contest would probably be hopeless. Too late the farmers might find themselves the servants, not of the present companies, many of which are co-operative, but of a vast foreign concern that had the greater part of the meat trade in its grip. The argument that New Zealand needs new markets for its meat is weak. What is to prevent the New Zealand farmer and freezing company sending meat to America? A start has already been made without the help of Armour’s. Farmers should support the Government in its policy of refusal, and not be led away by apparent present advantage.