Warning that shops in Britain may soon be without meat (1950)

The National Federation of Meat Traders had sent Mr John Strachey, the Food Minister, a declaration stating that any meat delivered would be paid for only at the prices prevailing on January 23 and that the proposed extra surcharge of seven pence on wholesale prices was unacceptable.

The federation, representing all but 10,000 of the 40,OOO butchers' shops in the United Kingdom, wired local buying groups advising them to send a similar notification to the ministry's selling agents.

Mr A J Jackson, general secretary of the federation, told the press: “The Executive Council of the Federation has advised its members that only prices prevailing on the 23rd January should be paid for the meat. It will then be entirely up to the Wholesale Meat Supply Association to decide whether they will provide the meat.”

Commenting on a decision of the Liverpool butchers not to accept meat subject to the surcharge, Mr Jackson said that there was no question of association members “striking”.

Councillor J G Granby, president of the Liverpool Meat Traders’ Association, had said that that week's ration was assured, but unless there was a change in the position there would be no meat in the city the following week.

Earlier in the day a letter signed by Mr Jackson was handed to Mr Strachey’s private secretary.

Stating that the minister’s decision was not one which his council could advise their members to accept, it stated: “I am directed to protest in the strongest. terms against a decision of this kind having being dictated to our representatives before their views had been heard or considered by yourself.

“As my council are given to understand, you are offering to sell meat to the retail buying committees, who, in turn, will offer the same to the butchers. The chairmen and committees of the retail buying committees are for the most part our members.

“Any meat delivered by you or your agents will be paid for only at current prices prevailing on the January 23, 1950, and no acceptance of meat is to be deemed to imply a contract to pay anything more than the current prices, notwithstanding the memorandum or purported direction which your staff circulated this week to retail' buying committees and others.”

Support for the federation’s protest came from the Association of Multiple Retail Meat Traders, whose members owned 10,000 chain and co-operative shops.

“We are holding further discussions so as to avoid hardship to the public,” said Mr B G Arthur, the secretary.

Councillor C Newman, chairman of the Brighton Builders Retail Buying Committee, told the Brighton, Hove and District Butchers’ Association that he had written to the local manager of the Wholesale Meat Association stating that butchers in the town would not pay the surcharge.

“He informed me this afternoon,” said Mr. Newman, “that, on direct instructions from the minister, unless I was prepared to withdraw my letter no meat would be issued and unless he received the withdrawal by 6.30am tomorrow morning next week’s supplies would be stopped.”

A Ministry of Food official denied later, however, that any instruction had been given to stop supplies of meat to the local butchers.

“We know of no such instruction,” he declared. “If such a statement has been made to the Brighton retail buying committee, I can definitely say that it was without the knowledge of the Ministry of Food. No one within the ministry has had authority to give such an instruction.”

The Northern Ireland Master Butchers’ Association, at a meeting in Belfast were expected to adopt the recommendation of their national executive council that the new profits levy is unworkable.

Northern Ireland butchers, reported the News Letter, were represented at the meeting of the executive council in London when it was decided to inform the ministry that their members were unable to pay the increased surcharges.

The News Letter added: “In Great Britain buying for the trade is done in bulk from a wholesale body under the authority of the ministry. As the retail trader in Northern Ireland deals directly, with the ministry, the levy here would be withheld individually.”

An official of the Northern Ireland association told the News Letter that that it was felt that the imposition on the unfortunate trader could be avoided by large-scale saving in other ways.