LONDON.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16487, 28 February 1914, Page 9

LONDON.

THE WORLD’S MARKET. ADDRESS BY MR J . H. ESTILL. HANDLING THE GREAT TRADE. Yesterday afternoon Mr J. H. Estill, representative of the Port of London Authority, delivered an address at the Canterbury Chamber of Commerce on the subject of London v. other ports as the terminus for the frozen products of the dominion. Mr E. G. Staveley, president of the Chamber, presided over a fair attendance of members. The Port of London Authority, the speaker said, was a statutory body appointed by Act of Parliament to manago the' whole of the docks on tho Thames and the warehouses within tho docks. It acted also as custodians of goods imported. In that connection it had warehousing accommodation for over 1,500,000 tons of goods. It controlled the navigation of the river and was responsible for the dredging of the River Thames and for the raising of wreoks. It was its duty to see that tho river was not polluted. In short, the Port of London Authority was tho appointed guardian of the River Thames and of its docks and warehouses. The water area of the docks of London was 746 acres and there were upwards of forty-five miles, of quayage in the port. Several emissaries had been sent out from other minor ports in the United Kingdom with a view to booming their own particular port. A healthy rivally between ports conduced to general benefit of trade, and if those gentlemen had not made inaccurate and disparaging statements about the Port of London the Authority should have no cause to object. But since they had given and were giving circulation to so many damaging statements it became necessary for him as the accredited representative of tho Port of London' xfuthority to put the facts before shippers,. The Port Authority had considered it necessary to correct some of the mis-statements that had been made in regard to the handling of Australasian produce in London; to make clear the true position in regard to the existing facilities; and to bring to the notice of shippers the very large extensions and improvements which were now being undertaken by the Port Authority to provide for future requirements. ALLEGATIONS MADE. It had been stated by unscrupulous parties that the Authority put meat into leaking barges, bruised carcases and broke shanks in the unloading, and generally treated the meat as though it had a grudge against New Zealand and those who sent it. Then in the wool trade some statements had been made that the Authority kept wool littered about the quays with no covering except a tarpaulin; and put dairy produce in dirty, musty barges and let them drift up the river at the mercy of the tide. He had seen these statements repeatedly quoted in the Press. Some critics wished to promote companies; whilst other critics paid a day’s visit, gave a superficial glance at a huge port like London, and then presumed to preach a sermon on it. FROZEN MEAT. To a very large extent frozen mutton was discharged from the steamer •by means of electric elevators, which delivered the meat to endless band conveyors under cover. These band conveyors carried the meat to a sorting table, also under cover, whence it was most expeditiously take direct to insulated railway trucks alongside the 'steamer for' despatch to the provinces, to insulated vans for Smithfield market, to insulated railway trucks _ for I conveyance to the Port Authority’s cold stores, or to insulated barges .-.for

conveyance to private stores. Though the Port Authority handled about 60 per cent of the total meat imported into London, it barged practically none of it—less than 1 per cent. It was landed direct on to the quay and dealt with as he had described; it was absolutely incorrect to assert that ’the meat was mis-handled and damaged in the hands of the Port Authority. Barging of meat was done in the port, but it was the private, cold store owners on the river who adopted that method, but in fairness to them he would say that insulated barges were invariably used. Was it credible that the London importer, whose very bread and butter depended upon tho condition of his meat, would tolerate for a moment the abominable condition of affairs which was stated by the port’s critics to exist? The Port of London Authority was

anxious to handle produce in the best possible way. It was now spending upwards of half-a-million pounds on additional facilities for the ■ meat trade alone, and was building a new dock, largelv for the Colonial trade, at a cost of a further two million pounds. The new dock would be adjacent to the present Royal Victoria and Albert docks, where the bulk of New Zealand produce was handled. The new and additional accommodation at the Royal Albert Dock for the meat trade would consist of . two insulated sorting sheds each 500 feet in length, kept at a temperature of 15 degrees Fahrenheit. At the rear of, and connected with the sorting sheds a new cold store was being built, having a capacity of 250,000 carcases of mutton. Adjoining Smithfield meat market the Authority was erecting a new insulated warehouse with the capacity of 80,000 carcases. Meat would he worked from the hold of the steamer by electric elevators on to electrically driven baud conveyors under cover/ by which it would be conveyed to the sorting sheds. After the meat had been sorted, it would be delivered under cover to insulated carts, railway waggons, or, for. those who wished for storage accommodation, by endless band conveyors under cover'to the cold stores behind. Thus it would be seen that the meat, would bo subject to the minimum amountvof atmospheric influences, and except for the necessary process of soi’ting to marks, all man-handling would be avoided. The Authority’s present cold storage accommodation was equivalent to 820,000 carcases of mutton. The completion of these new stores would bring the accommodation up to 1,350,000 carcases. The present accommodation in the port was equivalent to 3,000,000 carcases of .mutton. FOUR CARDINAL POINTS. In speaking of London as a depot for frozen meat four cardinal points had to be borne in mind, points which, when choosing a port, were as necessary as the finding of the foundations before building a house. The first was the enormous local market of eight millions of people within a radius of ten miles of the docks, a population nearly eight times greater than the whole of New Zealand, a population for the most part wealthy and ready to pay for the best that the world could produce. Secondly, owing to London being a world market, buyers were attracted from the four corners .of the kingdom. Consequently the maximum amount of competition existed;. Thirdly, the excellent accommodation for trade already provided in the port, and the very large amount of money—-up-wards of nearly half-a-million pounds i sterling—which was being spent by the Port Authority on further facilities for the meat trade. Fourthly, Loudon possessed an excellent and unrivalled distributing system equalled by iio other port—nine trunk lines all radiating from London and all connected with the dqcks. In no other port in the world was such a combination of ■ advantages to. be found. • Representatives of some of the ports'

talked glibly of the eleven millions or so of people their port could serve, but they did not say that those millions were from 150 to 175 miles behind the 'port, nor did they tell of the small local market and how it would be glutted if asked to absorb more than half a ship's load of meat. It was stated that if produce were shipped through these particular ports the meat would be subject to less handling and less railage. Seeing that the meat would have to bo railed, says 150 to 175 miles, before the large population was reached, the statement in regard to less railage fell by the board. There were eight millions of neople at the Port of London, practically within earshot of the steamer’s siren, while the other ports had to rail their produce 175. miles. before their millions were reached. Liverpool already took 45 per cent of Australian meat exported to the United Kingdom. It could not, therefore, be stated that the northern counties were not well looked after, A BUSINESS PROPOSITION.

If the conditions, had been so rosy, and such El Dorados existed at the outports.. would not the smart business meh of England have discovered them, and now he . making fortunes, instead of being centred in London? The Americans were' credited with being exceedingly smart business men, and leave very few corners unexplored, but even they had recognised that the outports were very, soon satisfied, and the bulk .of their produce was-..sent lo London to get the, prime price on that local market before being distributed from there to the provinces. The American producer did not send his meat to London because he loved. London or Londoners, hut his. keeu business instincts enabled him to. find the best market, and his experience in that, market confirmed his choice. LONDON AND BRISTOL RATES:

Avonmouth’s cold storage accommodation was equal to 60,000 sheep, about one-third of the total carrying capacity of one meat steamer. The store was situated about seven' miles from Bristol, and yet New. Zealanders were asked to make this port one cf their principal depots for . meat and dairy produced. It had been stated that Bristol could supply . London cheaper than the Port of London itself. The maximum cost of conveying meat from ship direct to the Smithfield market through the Port of London was 14s 7d per ton, but .it 'could be done cheaper than that. The figures included port, rates, wharfage, loading, carting, market tolls and pitching, in fact the rate was inclusive of all charges. The comparative rate from ship, Bristol to Smithfield market, was 28s 7d per ton. The/ rail rate alone from Bristol to London was 2.1,s lOd per ton. Even then the traffic had to be sent in three-ton lots. For smaller lots the cost by rail was 34s 8d per ton. and that included cartage in London only. , But one of the greatest points "n London’s favour was that the meat could always be sold, and need not be hung up for weeks waiting for purchasers. The comparative rates for placing butter and apples on the London market are as under:—

As previously mentioned, it had been stated that the Authority placed dairy produce in musty, , leaking barges, which were allowed to drift aimlessly with the tide. A considerable quantity of butter was barged to a wharf near Tooley Street market, but in all fairness to the wharfingers by whom it was so handled, it must be stated, as he said before, that insulated barges were invariably used, as neither the insurance companies nor the brokers would tolerate such mishandling as was reE resented by the critics. The produce andled by the Port of London Authority was landed direct on the quays, and was conveyed by either rail direct to the provinces or carted to the importers’ own premises or despatched' to the Authority’s cool stores. 1 Quite apart from the immense central market offered by the metropolis and without taking into consideration the superior distributing facilities of the Port of London, there was another and a determining factor which bound and would continue to bind the greater hulk of the colonial traffic to London. It was the dependence of the trade upon the mail steamers for quick transport. London was a passenger port of the first rank and the mail steamers to India, Australasia and the East sailed from the Thames. If, therefore, colonial dairy produce was to reach the/British market as quickly as possible, it must come by mail steamer, and consequently to London.

AYOOL. It had even been said that the accommodation for wool was ' defective, that the Authority showed wool in sheds and stored it in cellars. The accommodation for wool in London was not equalled or rivalled hv any other port in the world. The Port Authority alone had eight acres of show , floors all fitted with excellent top lights and twenty-six acres of storage warehouses. In fact, the storage accommodation was almost unlimited., The markets were attended by buyers from all parts of the world, and the maximum amount of competition existed. London was neutral ground for the whole trade, foreign and British alike, and all could read for themselves what was the actual pulse of the wool demand. As there were six series of sales in London extending over the whole year it was a considerable advantage to the manufacturer to be able to buy at six periods of the year instead of having to buy all 'at one shot. 1 ’

The facilities for distribution were excellent and cheap. .To take Bradford alone. The coastwise companies competed keenly with the railway companies, consequently there existed the maximum amount of efficiency in handling with the minimum amount of cost. There was also a daily service to practically all parts of the Continent and the cost of transport was very, low. The London wool brokers had had many years’ experience ig the judging and handling of wool, and it was generally conceded they could not be surpassed in the knowledge of their trade.

The Port of London Authority was only' created about three years ago but very large strides in bringing the port up-to-date had already been taken. The programme- provided for an expenditure of £14,000,000, out of which contracts for £5,000,000 had already been entered into. Shippers would realise that facilities and' arrangements for dealing with produce in the Port of London would not be lacking. On the motion of the president, seconded by Mr A. H. Turnbull, a vote of thanks was accorded to Mr Estill. Mr Turnbull said that there had been a crusade of false statement about the certain'ports and against London. He had proof of the fact that many of these* statements had been discredited long ago. Some of the statements were disproved by the pamphlets issued by ; the different port authorities. As acolonial he' wanted to see New Zealanders get the best priced obtainable for their produce■and it was not a difficult matter for any one to ascertain, where the best markets were. The general public.' should know these tilings. The Port of London Authority had done a wise thing in sending Mr Estill out to Australasia.

Apples. Butter. s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. London . 10 8 to 14 10 10 11 — Bristol . 20 1 „ 22 7 21 0 to 28 0 Liverpool . 30 io — 29 6 — Hull . 25 6 „ 30 9 28 4 — DAIRY PRODUCE. .