THE WOOL COMMANDEER.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVIII, Issue 18412, 19 May 1920, Page 6

THE WOOL COMMANDEER.

Ii ia not easy to work up sympathy for New Zealand wool-growers in connection with the terms of the commandeer, and yst there axe pomt3 in the statement on the subject which we publish this morning that ueem Lo call for inquiry. We thought at the time the terms of the commandeer •were arranged, and we think so still, that the New Zealand growers showed a greedy spirit in haggling for 55 per sent over pre-war values, aa against 45 'ger cent offered Jby the British

Government. The ' sheep-farmers might reasonably have been oonbenfc, and more than content, with the original offer, which would havo brought them greater war profits than most people are able "to reooncilo vvith patriotism. As it is, the wool-growers hare prospered enormously and tho approaching end of tho period of the commandeer finds the great majority of them in circumstances of affluence beyond anything they had previously experienced or anticipated. At the same time, the list of grievances which they now are voicing present a case that calls for an answer. In the first place they complain that the basic rate upon which the 55 per cent advance was fixed should have been the values obtained on the British market, or at least the average of British and local returns, whereaa tho basio rate adopted was tho value obtained at New Zealand 9ales, notwithstanding that not much more than half the clip was sold in this country. It seems rather late in the day for tho discovery of a misunderstanding, or an alleged misunderstanding, on this point; but although, as wo urge, tho growers have done handsomely, wo suppose they feel entitled to have tlto full benefits of their bargain and to have the bargain interpreted as it was understood by tho British Government. However, we cannot extend much sympathy on this score, because we think tho primary producers have already taken very much more from the British taxpayers during tho war than they ought to havo taken. But there is strength in the argument that while the price to growers has beeh restricted the manufacturers of wool appear to havo been allowed a free hand in juggling with the product to their advantage. Certainly the prices of woollen goods are out of all proportion to the return allowed to sheepfarmers, and the fact that the farmers havo had a large share of war profits is no justification for other people to be allowed a still larger share. Mr Massey will, no doubt, realise this, ond he may be depended upon to do his best for the phteep-farmors, whoso interests have ever been his special care.