FINANCE AND COMMERCE.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20788, 23 February 1933, Page 10

FINANCE AND COMMERCE.

MARKETING OF WHEAT. WITHHOLDING OF GRAIN PROM SALE. WHEAT PURCHASE BOARD'S OBJECTIONS. The Wheat Purchase Board has recently been approached by various branches of the Farmers' Union with the suggestion that tho board should compel growers to withhold 20 per cent, of their crops from the market and thus deal with the surplus. Apart from the fact that the board has not sufficient authority to adopt and put into operation such a scheme, the proposal is, in the opinion of the board, impracticable for tho following reasons: — (1) Much wheat has already boen dealt with and could not now come under a new scheme. (2) The grower is not the only one concerned in the disposal of his crop, as many firms have made advances on the security of the wheat crop, and these lien holders may desire to realise as : quickly as possible all that is to be . secured. (3) If the scheme were to apply to milling wheat ijnly there would be much difficulty in deciding, before threshing, what wheat was f.a.q. milli ing. Even the total quantity of all grades produced by each grower could ; not be ascertained before threshing. ' It would also probably be considered unfair and uneconomic to prevent the . sale of one-fifth of a grower's production iu cases where his crop is of a doubtful quality and not of a nature suitable for holding. Moreover, the pro- " dtiction and demand in different districts and of different qualities and * varieties does not reasonably allow of a uniform policy of enforced retention by the grower. (4) It is a the scheme would be of any real advantage having • re gard to the detrimental effect the holding of a large surplus in the country may have on next year's crop, even if the harvest for 1933-34 is approximately only equal to tho national requirements for the year. (5) A difficulty would arise if any .attempt were made to force growers to - hold a considerable proportion of their crops to gamble against next year's prices. (fl) The difficulties of administration and control to ensure tho prevention of the sale of'more than four-fifths of a grower's production are very groat. No decision has yet been made by theboard in regard to export, and no such decision can be made until more ' information is available both in respect of the production of milling wheat from this year's harvest and in regard to the prospects of any substantial reduction in the area to bo sown in wheat for 1933-34. The board will not export to a greater extent than appears desirable in all the circumstances.

ii ll—ii i i ■ ■■ ■ ■ ! . METHVEN RESOLUTIONS. DISCUSSION BY FARMERS" UNION. > Proposals from the Methven branch at the Fanners' Union, suggesting that wheat growers should hold back 20 per coat, of their crop on their £anns, tbat the Wheat Purchase Board should control all wheat, and that a special grader should be appointed, wore briefly discussed at yesterday's meeting of the executive of the North Canterbury branch of the union. The full text of the Methven resolutions wan as follows: — "That it bo a recommendation to the Wheat Purchase Board to investigate the possibility of growers holding back SO per cent, of the wheat on the farms, thus allowing the advance payr meats to be nearer 4s 81d, until the board ham ascertained whether there is * surplus, as this meeting of tyheat growers considers it would be more beneficial for growers to hold it than to put it on the market." "That the Government be approached with a view to conferring power on the Wheat Purchase Board to take control of all wheat grown ia the area controlled by the gazetted rgonlations.'' "That this meeting of wheat growers asks the Wheat Purchase Board - ■ to'appoint an authorised grader under the-Board's regulations, who shall be independent of and apart from the graders Usually operating, to whom growers can submit their wheat to de«id«>..whether it. is f,a.q. or not." Members of the executive expressed the-opinion that it was a little late in : the se&soA to begin holding wheat, as j so many, growers had already disposed of their crops. It was decided that the chairman should get in touch with rMr W. W. Mulh'olland, the executive's representative on' the board, and ask him to report to the executive on the questions raised. CARGOES, PARCELS, AND FUTURES. LONDON, February 21. Wheat cargoes opened oasy, about 3d down for all descriptions. Owing to the prospects of war in the Far East there is talk of tho possibility of Australians being diverted to Europe. There is littio buying interest, sellers inter being firm at the decline. Bar- - eels are 3d to 6d down, owing to pressure to soil PJafces and lack of British and Continental enquiry. Futures are quoted:— Feb. 20. Feb. 21. a. d. a. d. London (a quarter)— February ... 10 6 19 6 April 19 6 19 5 Liverpool (.a cental) — March ... ... 4 (ij; 4 0$ May 4 72 4■ 7J July ... ... 4 93 4 9J October ... 4 113 4 11| Spot erode is slow. Australian, ex ship, 25s lo 26s 6d. CHICAGO WHEAT FUTURES- • (Received February "22, 7.1,2 p.m.) OHICAIK). February 21. Cents a bushel. Feb. 18. Fob. W May ... 47 i '4B : Jwly ... ' ... m 48* September ... 49A 49* Xew Tori (eash) ... o6J 574 Tiw« market* will be dosed on Wed-

ERUIT EMBARGO. AUSTRALIAN ANXIETY. FURTHER ACTION LIKELY. umbu oub own cobeespomdeut.) SYDNEY, February 16. There is ample evidence of considerable anxiety in Australia at the failure to reach a settlement with New Zealand over the Dominion's embargo on the importation of Australian fruit. Many interests are feeling the effects which have follewed the drastic action taken by New Zealand, and it is regretted on many sides that the trade relations between the two countries are not sufficiently friendly to enable a quick' readjustment of the matter, in dispute. It would be useless to disguise the fact that there « considerable jealousy in the matter "L®and it is felt here that thc Dommion Government has been misled by New Zealand interests winch see in the Australian measures against hrebngnt a fiscal move. Australia holds that tireblight must be prevented, at all costs, from, reaching Australia, and it is recalled that New Zealand itself has taken action in the past to prevent the extension of this serious disease from one province to another. It tins was necessary,- it is argued, surely Australia is entitled to do what it deems necessary to prevent the spread of the disease across the Tasmnn Sea. If fireblight was non-existent in New Zealand Australia would provide an open door. . It is officially explained that the Australian embargo is being continued at the earnest. request of all the fruitgrowers in every state. An' assertion from New Zealand; that' no negotiations have taken place ,has caused a surprise, described •in one quarter as ''painful." The Minister for Health (Mr Marr) said that undoubtedly there had been negotiations, and on January 18 a comprehensive letter was sent to the Prime Minister of New Zealand by the. Prime Minister of Australia (Mr Lyons). New Zealand had been asked to reconsider the position, ,but no reply had been received. The Federal Government at its meeting in Sydney next week would go into the whole matter once again. The Minister for Trade said that conciliatory efforts had always come up against the real difficulty—the danger of, introducing the dreaded fireJilight if New Zealand fruit was allowed to enter Australia. > He hoped that' the position was capable of an early adjustment. ,

EXCHANGE QUESTION. BUSINESS MEN REPLY TO MR . COATES. ' (vasaa association tjelegbav.) WELLINGTON,' February 22. A reply sent by the Business Men's Committee to'the. Et. Hon. .J; G. Coates says that it has already directed attention to the fact that exchange,depreciation was very liable to affect tho market fojf the county's export. This, is particularly likely to happen, it thinks, in the case of a country such as this r ,wiosc .'only important market; at present',is glutted. When sellers are in..a-weak, position, and buyers in a strong one, there is a tendency for any export bounty to pass to buyers in reduced sale values. It docs not aupposo it will be contested that the exchange depreciation policy ia "not onlyto, give'a .bounty to~e*pt>i;teM, but also to impose a serious handicap on British manufacturers exporting to New Zealand. It sqems only natural that British farmers should resent the dumping on the Home market of bounty-fed dairy produce, sold at less than the cost ,of production, while the fact of exchange depreciation in reducing British exports will, at the same time, deprive us of the sympathy of. British industrialists and incline them to less sympathetic consideration .to the demands of their own natural that such a situation should be created. It was clearly foreseen and publicly expressed by the committee on a previous occasion, arif it thinks a serious load of responsibility lies on the shoulders of the Government for bringing about such a state of affairs. The committee resents the imputation that it is doing poor service to New Zealand. It considers that in fighting this issue it is acting in the interests of the country and endeavouring to counter-balance what it thinks is a wrong method of assisting-the primary producer. PRICE OF GOLD. (Received February . 22, 5.5 p.m.) . ' • LONDON, February 21. Gold fa fine ounce) is quoted as follows -- . 7 ..." £ . S. d. ' February 21 6 0 6J. February SO 6 0 6| .February 17 6 0 5 (nominal) Februaryl6 ... < ...6 0 1$ February 15 ... ... 5 19 9$ February Id ... ... .5 19 9 PRICE OF SILVER. * (British- onricui, wibslxss.) ! RUGBY, February 21. Silver (pence an ounce) is quoted: Feb. 20 Feb. 21. Spot . • ... 1615-16 17 3-10 forward ... 18 17$