AUCKLAND WOOL SALE.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20198, 28 March 1931, Page 12

AUCKLAND WOOL SALE.

SLIGHT DROP IN PRICES. ? ' V-" . JAPANESE BUYERS STILL ACTIVE. tTHU MUWB Special SerHoe.] AUCKLAND, March 27. Although prices kt the third Auckland wool sala showed an improvement Of from 24 to JHd per pound on those Of the last Auckland sale, there was not the strength in the demand for certain grades many sellers had expected, values generally being from ft farthing to a halfpenny below anticipations. The marked firmness thai has characterised the Australian market was not reflected here, and there Was a slight reaction compared with tho tone of the Wangaaui sale. Mne wool held firm at southern rates, but average top-makers' and inferior wools were from pat to a halfpenny a pound below Wellington rates. I The top price was lljd for a line of fine crossbred hogget wool. The average price for {food crossbred wool was about 6|d per pound, or approximately £9 2s 4d a bale, as Compared with 4d and £5 10s respectively at the January sale in Auckland. An instance of the change in prices was given by one broker who took over 800 bales of good average crossbred wool at an average price of 4d a pound in January. To*day tho price for similar quality wool averaged CJd. There was a big bench of buyers, the Continent and Japan being well represented. Japan was very active, bidding with practically no limits for lines of well-classed fine wool. Bradford buyers gave steady support up to limits. France was chiefly interested in pieces and lambs. The following table gives the prices realised with the January prices for comparison:—

CHEDDAR CHEESE. ■ •.« ' . ' ' 'K'' v. . NEW ZEALAND BOARD'S v PROPOSAL. (WHTfcp WWSS ■ ASSOCIATION—BS CIfXOTSM MJiEOAASH—eOPraIGttT.) (Heeeived March 27th, 6.S p.m.) LONDON. March 26. In answer to ft question in the House of X&jftmoaa. Mr 0. Edwards a*Jd a Parliamentary Secretary. Ministry, for Agriculture already had given attention to-the report of the New Zealand Dairy Board tifopoßihg to' describe its standardised cheese as eheddar. , Thtttifth unlike British cheddar, it was not-full cream oheese. He undertook to seek thii Empire Marketing Board's report oil the subject. j ' * BANK OF PORTUGAL. -' / ' ' • ' AN APPEAL CASBI , , ./ tttfrfcriiD - pbbbs Aiaocutios—#* mjscmhc <tiitaQ**»a««Hsofvßidnjp.) LONDON, March 26. "After' an eight-day hearing qi' the ndjustment of costs, the majority bf £hd Judges the ttourfc of Appeal ro» dubedthe fiattjt of Portugal's damages to ' £300,000 against Wateriow's, anddi&ftiijaed thu bitnk's cross-appeal i& respect o! the deduction of £ So,ooo, with costs against the A stay of execution vpS grafted on behalf of Waterl6\v's pending aft'appeal to tlie , EtfiittSe of Lords. ■■■■; Sack to 1913 prices. COMMODITIES IN BRITAIN. -Commenting on the index of sterling wholesale prices inthe United Kingdom at damnify 31st, the "Statist", re.marked that the figure for the lAontb ' WM less than 1 £er'cent,-above tho avcr< age for lflljJ, so that wholesale ' prices (fOi raw materials)' may thus bo said to have revetted to their pre-war level. - ■ Comparing tho various group index number* \vith their Id 13 equivalents, the ;.WStatist" observed that vegetable foods la. January were 1.3 per cent, above the 1912 average; animal food prices, on the other baud, "still showed an incroa&o of '33 per cent, over the pre-war level, •wWlfl; groceries were lower by 18.4 per. oeat. Mistrals were 0.3 per eeut. lower, while the-fall ill textiles Was to a level 10.81 per cent, below the 1913 average* Sundry materials ofl'the other hand were up by 8.6 per ceiit. ' A Cable meaaage published 6n March 10th stated that for the first, tim" since July.££{29, the EconomistV index nuntber ef wholesale prices at the end of February showed a slight" upward move(neat. . r CEREALS AND SUGAR. LONDON, Miroh 30. ■ I?i6iir—-Cem«id <ls <}ulet. Australian, ex stcira, IS# 6d to lSs -paf jsnelt. Oats we tending to become easier, ud the demand ,fsr peas »ad bee&s is quiftt. -Best Sugay—Atfrjl delivery, (5s *Jd ser •**» , '

March, 1031, Jan., 1931. a. d. d. , d. Medium Halfbred— s Super .. 9J to 10 to 8 Average .. 8$ to 94 6 to 6J Inferior .. 7 J to 8 4J to 5i Coarse Halfbred— Super .. 8 to 8i fli to 0Average , . . tJ| to n 4i to 5 inferior ... Si to H 31 to 4 Pine CrossbredSuper .. 74 to 84 5 to 5 A 'Average 6J to 7 41 to 4J 31 Inferior .. 5 to 6 3 to Medium Crossbred— Super .. 6$ to 4J to 4f Average. .. G to 3± to 31 Inferior . . 4 J to 54 2 to 3 Coarse Crossbred— Super .i 6 to 7 4 to 44 Average .. 54 to 0 3 to 3i Inferior .. 3| to 5 1| to "i Low Crossbred— Super .. 6J to '7 Average ., 5 to e 31 to 3f Inferior .. 3J to M2 to 3 Hoggets Extra super "" to 114 Halfbred .. 71 to 8| 5| to 6} tfilie 4 . 7} to 84 4| to 51 Medium . . to 7 . 4i to 54 Coarse .. -5$ to 6i 3J to 4 i Lambs—t Fine .. 1 to if. to 41 Medium .. 6} to 7i 3 to n ' S66dy and inferior .. 3} to Bellies and Pieces—* 6 1 to 2 Crossbred good to . super i. 5 to -ci &{t to 4 Low to medium 3 to a 1 to 2i Grutchings— > Medium to gdod' 4 to' 41 . 2 to 34 Inferior to " seedy .. 1} to: 2J 1 to 2 Looks — " - Crossbred ». 2 to H to u