Boycott Fails.

Fiji Bananas in Keen Demand.

THE threatened boycott of Fiji ban anas by Sydney and Melbourne fruit distributing houses came to nothing.

The first shipment of 1000 cases ar rived by the “Niagara” on December 31 and was eagerly purchased, orders com ing from as far as Western Australia.

Despite the promise of some 70 Sydney and Melbourne distributors to Queens land and New South Wales growers that they would not handle the fruit, a Syd ney house was eager to undertake the distribution. Of the first shipment, which opened in excellent condition, 675 cases were re-shipped to Melbourne, the remainder being consumed in Sydney.

Major Clive B. Joske, President of the Fiji Banana Association, came to Syd ney by the “Niagara”; and, in an inter view with The Sydney Morning Herald, pointed out that had the boycott suc ceeded, it might have caused Australia to lose a very profitable trade with Fiji.

“Queensland, which stands to gain more than any Australian State from the Ottawa agreement, is doing its best to get behind that agreement where Fiji bananas are concerned,” Mr. Joske averred.

Fiji, he proceeded, was a valuable customer of Australia.

Because of Australia’s exclusion of Fiji bananas, a trade agreement was negotiated with New Zealand and efforts were made to divert trade from Aus tralia to Canada. At Ottawa, an attempt was made to remedy the position, and they in Fiji had to agree to put Aus tralia on the same footing as their good friends New Zealand and Canada, in re turn for the right to send a very small quantity of bananas to the Sydney and Melbourne markets. The quota, 50,000 cases, was most meagre. Australia’s consumption was about 2,225,000 cases per annum.

“It seems reasonable to expect a coun try which supplies two-fifths of the total imports of another one to recipro cate to some extent,” said Mr. Joske’s colleague, Mr. A. C. Barnes, Director of Agriculture, Fiji, “and certainly to pur chase more than a mere £64,000 worth of goods in return for trade valued at nearly £500,000 per annum.”

Commenting on the boycott the “Fiji Times and Herald” accuses the Queens land growers of “carrying their opposi tion to the Fiji quota to ridiculous ex tremes. Even were the Sydney mer chants susceptible to the threats of a boycott, it would not be a difficult mat ter for Fiji to get round the boycott and dispose of the shipments.” After show ing many ways of doing this the article continues: “It is pleasing to note that the Federal Government does not intend to submit to any intimidating tactics by the Queensland growers, and in taking up the attitude that the growers are only attempting to bring discredit on Aus tralia’s name, the Government has also indicated that it will take firm measures to ensure the Ottawa agreement being honoured.”

The article concludes by warning the Fiji shippers that only the best fruit should be exported, as, in the present position of the industry, no outlet, how ever small, should remain neglected.