Report of the Dairy Expert. 1)]9 



is to be hoped now tliat a start lias been made, all evils will be 

 tliorouglily sifted, and measures taken to remove them. It is simply 

 astounding that butter returns may be " faked " in the manner 

 described by some of the witnesses. • Of course those against whom 

 this charge has been made have contradicted it, but whether the 

 imputations of juggling with tests and cream returns be true or not, 

 legislation is essential to protect the sup])]ier, on the one hand, and 

 the honest trader on the other, from the possibility of misrepi'e- 

 sentation. 



Necessity for Standardisation. 



Uniform methods of measuring and testing milk and cream ; the 

 licensing of all persons so engaged; a standard system ni keeping 

 books showing the amount of milk or cream received, the butter fat 

 per test, and the commercial Imtter or cheese manufactured there- 

 from, the books to be accessible to milk or cream suppliers; a uniform 

 method of closing butter and cheese factory accounts, the financial 

 year to end on the same date in all cases, and the publication of 

 balance sheets on a uniform and approved basis should be made 

 imperative by legislation. 



Dairy farmers are naturally suspicious, and reasonably so, when 

 accounts are shrouded in mystery. So far back as 1897 I urged the 

 necessity for a uniform system of keeping accounts and publishing 

 comprehensive balance sheets, but secretaries did not feel disposed 

 to take the matter up. The most pronounced opponents of the 

 system must now admit that the farmers' confidence can only be 

 retained by rendei-ing unto them a clear and full account in every 

 detail. Even at the moment of writing, a very striking case occurs 

 to me, where the suppliers are completely demoralised because their 

 company has persistently withheld this information. 



History of Attempted Legislation. 



Few are aware of the many attempts that have been made to put 

 the butter export trade on a sound footing. As far back as the ItJth 

 of July, 1896, Mr. Taverner, the then Minister of Agriculture, moved 

 for leave " to bring in a bill to provide for the inspection of daily 

 produce and other products intended for export, and to regulate the 

 export thereof." He mentioned that at a conference in Adelaide held 

 on May 1st, 1896, at which three other colonies were represented, the 

 following resolutions, i7iter alia, were passed. " That uniform legis- 

 lation be sought by the colonies to provide that . . . with regard 

 to dairy produce, fruit, and wine, a uniform system of inspection and 

 marking be adopted." Mr. Taverner said fvide Hau.mrd, 29tli July, 

 1896, page 794), "We propose under this Bill not to aUow inferior 

 2)roduce to go out of the colony unless it is branded in such a way as 

 to indicate what it really is." Clause 10, subsection 2 of the 

 " Exported Products Bill 1896" provides for "inspection," "grading," 

 and "stamping of butter," and clause 12 deals with " improperly 

 using brands." This Bill met with such determined opposition that 



