DRAFT ON WOOL

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7077, 15 March 1910, Page 4

DRAFT ON WOOL

EEFOBM AT HOME END USELESS. The futility of the requsEt of London brokers —a demand impelled by colonial action—that the draft allowance on wool be abolished, and now the protest from 250 English, 350 continental and 30 American buyers against tho proposal, p(ro>TO.;.coWslusively.that, reform is not to be expected from the Home end. Australian growers and brokers have long recognised this. They believe that the "fight for removal of the imposition will have to ; take place, in Australia, which is rapidly becoming the most important wool-selling centre in the .world. After all, the matter is in the hands of growers themselves. If all wool were marketed locally and producers loyally supported brokers in demanding that this tax they have so long been, subjected tol be Temoved, the day would be gainedThe only argument in favour of thej draft allowance —that it is a trade ous-j torn which should not be. disturbed—ia a very hollow one; and if nothing mora convincing can bo said in its defence tho weakness of the bTokers* posdtieni in' thej matter is at once disclosed. That Homei and foreign buyers aro taking such, a| determined stand in support of a com tinuanco of the allowance proves that fallacy of the argument that the tion would not benefit the grower be* i cause were it done away with, the buyes would rediice his estimate of yield by) 1 per ceni and calculate his price aoJ conßngly. It further, demonstrates that the buyers have a material advantage in the tax-they impose on growers, orthevj would- not be preparing to make such) a eftrouß stand in favour of its contfinu-* ancs.