BUTTER AND CHEESE FACTO BY.

Temuka Leader, Issue 9418, 15 June 1882, Page 2

BUTTER AND CHEESE FACTO BY.

A meeting was held last Tuesday evening for the purpose of electing the provisional directory of the proposed Butter, Cheese and Bacon-curing factory. Mr John Hayhurst! occupied the chair, and there were about 20 persons, principally farmers, present. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Mr Tworaey proposed—" That Mr Guild be elected a member of the provisional directory," He said Mr Guild had considerable experience in butter and cheese factories, and would be a gretat acquiaition to them. Mr Pilbrow seconded the motion, and it was carried. The Secretary then read a list of tho» who had agreed to act as provisional directors. Mr Pilbrow would rather start tha factory on the co-operative principle. He believed if started on that principle it would be a success. If atarted as a com*

piny men who bad neither cows nor milk might take up a large number of shares and derive the profit therefrom, while men who had many cows, and could produce a great deal of milk, might not be able to take many shares and would not have the profit they would have if started on the co-operative principle. If a company, the producer of milk who could not buy shares would only get the price of his milk, while the large shareholder who had no cows would reap the beDefit. To be successfully carried out the co-opera-tive principle should be adopted. Mr Twomey would be glad to see the co-operative principle adopted, but the question was, would it work ? If started as a co-operative factory it would preclude any man other than farmers taking a share in it, and the question was whether the farmers would start without any assistance. If it was found that they would, it should be started on the co-operative principle. However, even if cemmercial men took up shares in it, he felt sure they could not lose by them, as there was very little doubt that the factory would be a success, and when it was it would be very easy for them to sell their shares to farmers desirous of partaking of its profits. Dr Hayes understood that Mr Pilbrow's principal objection was that 3d per gallon for milk would not pay the farmer. He had a conversation with Mr McCaw, manager of the Springs etatiou,who had a great deal of experience in butter and cheese factories, and he told him it would pay farmers remarkably well. There were two ways of supplying the milk. The farmer could deliver it,or a man from from the factory would call for it, but of course the man who delivered it would get a better price for his work. Mr Eilbrow said that the only way it would pay was by all the producers of milk being shareholders. If »elling milk at 3d per gallon did not pay them they would make it up in the dividend they would get. Dr Hayes 3aid that Mr McCaw had shown by figures that it would pay. Mr Twomey wished to make a few remarks. Mr Connolly had told him that at present he could make no more than £1 10s per week oat of his cows, while by selling milk to the factory as proposed he could make £6 per weee excluding Sunday. That was a farmer who had gone into the thing; examined how it would affect himself, and that was the •result he had arrived at. If Mr Connolly would find it so profitable, why should it not be equally profitable to other farmers? He also wished to point out an article quoted in the Temuka Leader from the Town and Country Journal on the subject. From that it app3ars that in a district subject to a drought, in New South . Wales, farmers found it profitable to sell their milk at 3d per gallon. Their agreement with the factory was that they should get 3d per gallon for it except when butter was one shilling per lb in Sydney then ; they were to get 4d for it. If they conld afford to sell milk at 3d per gallon in a district subject to drought, surely they could sell it here more profitably. But it was.probable more than 3d per gallon could be given for it. According to Mr Sando's showing, after buying milk at 3d per gallon, manufacting it into cheese, and sending it home to London market, there would be 4d per lb profit on it. "Every gallon of milk produced more than a pound of cheese, and if there was a profit of 4d why not give a part of that profit for tha milk ? At that rate, by buying milk at sdper gallon, there would be 2d per lb clear profit on the cheese to go to the shareholders and he considered that more than ample to pay interest on the money invested. The price of milk could not be fixed until it was seen how it worked. Mr ' Irvine thought that if confined to farmers it would work well, but he was afraid a sufficient number of them would not take it up. Three pence per gallon might pay those who had a large quantity of milk to dispose of, bat it would not pay those who had only a few cows, Mr Wareing said it would do well in summer, but the factory would be idle in winter for the want of milk. He would have those who had promised to supply milk bound to supply a certain quantity of it. Dr Hayes disagreed with Mr Wareing. The working, of the factory wonld require veiy tew hands, and even if idle for a time it would not cost much. As regards confining it to farmers it would be very good if they took it up, but, if they did not, take everyone's money and let the most enterprising reap the benefit. Ver y probably more than 3d per gallon coul d be given for milk. Factories proved very successful elsewhere, and why should they not succeed here 1 The Chairman said that 3d per gallon was the usual price given in America and Australia for milk. In England more was given for it. The quantity of milk which the. best authorities say a cow would give in 12 months was between 500 and 1000 gallons. The average being 700 gallons. The cost of keeping a cow for 12 months on land for which £2 per acre rent was paid was set down at £6. Mr Gray said they would do no good while talking. All the information they had went to prove that the thing would pay first rote, an.d it was better to let

talk alone and go to work. The best thing was to draw up a prospectus, and float a company. He thought it would be well to have all farmers on the provsional directory, and so would move—" That Messrs S. Cain, J. Austin, E. Pilbrow, J. Hayhurst, W. Postlethwaite, John Paterson, M. Quinn, A. L. Barker, Guild, and T. Connolly be appointed the directory." He did not think it advisable that anyone who was not a farmer should be on the directory. Mr S. Cain moved as an amenmdent —"That Messrs Gray, Twomey and Dr Hayes ba added to the list given." The amendment was seconded by Mr Irvine, and it was carried after some discussion, Mr Hayhurst did not think that the amount of capital stated already would be necessary. He thought that instead of £SOOO between £ISOO and £2OOO would be sufficient.. Several of those present evpressed themselves in favor of reduciog the amount of capital, but the question was postponed for the consideration of the provisional directory. Messrs Gray, Twomey, Sando and Dr Hayes were appointed a sub committee to draw up a prospectus. The Secretary was instructed to call a meeting as soon as possible after the prospectus was drawn up, and the meeting adjourned with the usual complimont to the Chairman.