TESTING AT FACTORIES.

Putaruru Press, Volume VII, Issue 285, 24 April 1929, Page 7

TESTING AT FACTORIES.

DISCUSSION BY FARMERS,

Government Control Opposed,

A suggestion that the present, system of cream and milk testing at dairy factories should be supplanted by the appointment of Government testing officials met with a mixed reception at Saturday evening’s meeting cf the Morrinsville branch of the N.Z. Farmers’ Union.

Mr. M. E. Barrowclough, who raised the point, said that all dairy companies experienced a good deal of trouble through suppliers’ tests varying. For this reason the suppliers were inclined to chop and change from one factory to another, with expense and inconvenience to the factories concerned. If testing officers were under Government supervision suppliers would realise that the tests were quite impartial. The present system gave proprietary factories £ loophole to make extra profits. If his scheme were adopted the companies would bear the cost. Arrangements could be made whereby small companies could share the cost of a tester.

Mr. A. Topham : Would the tester be responsible for the samples? Mr. Barrowclojigh : I would like to include that but consider it would be a difficult scheme to work economically, and it would be impracticable. The President (Mr. G. Pirrit): Do you suggest the testing of milk or cream ?

Mr. Barrowclough : Simply the testing of the product for which we are paid. Mr. J. E. Leeson, chairman of directors of the Morrinsville Dairy Company, said one of his chief objections to the proposal would be the delay in getting out the tests. At the present time small companies could get the tests out in two days, and this was of vital importance to suppliers. In scattered districts a good deal of annoyance would be caused. In his opinion the disadvantages would outweigh the benefits likely to be received. There were and always would be complaints about the tests, and he failed to see how they were to be obviated. Certainly some bona-fide mistakes were made in the testing, as there was the individual factor, but farmers were now better acquainted with the details of their business and fewer complaints were heard. Mr. S. Ferguson, chairman of directors of the Norfolk Dairy Company, Motumaoho, pointed out that as far as test was concerned the position was fairly well safeguarded. Tests had to be held at the factory Ifor four days, and there was a Government check tester who was liable j to arrive unexpectedly at any time. I A Member : Have you ever known [ him to arrive?

Mr. Ferguson : He has come to our factory several times. “ Personally I am in favour of keeping the Government well away,” observed a supplier. Mr. Ferguson expressed the opinion that a Government grader should be (kept going round the factories for the purpose of checking grade and correcting errors. The same should apply to the graders at the ports. Mr. Leeson : There is a check grader now, and convictions have been secured against factory managers for incorrect grading. , Mr. P. S. Philpott thought the proj posal cast a slur on the present men employed at the factories. If the test was low it was (because the farmers were not milking their cows properly. (Laughter.) Mr. Barrowclough : I did not intend it as a slur but meant that the pre-

sent testers should be retained under Government supervision. Mr. A. Topham said that although a tester might be under the Government there was no check of the sample taken. However, he had not heard any farmer in the Morrinsville district complaining about tests for about two years. He thought it had died out. Mr. J. M. Allen pointed out that the appointment of a Government tester would mean additional expense for small factories. Mr. J. L. Faulkner said the position was at present amply safeguarded by the annual certification of overrun of butter and yield of cheese.