THE WOOL SALES. LONDON, January 22.

Otago Witness, Issue 2396, 1 February 1900, Page 15

THE WOOL SALES. LONDON, January 22.

At the wool sales better competition was manifeeted. Merinos show a hardening tendency. January 24. At the ■wool sales competition is quiet, , and there have been heavy withdrawals, j The sales close on Friday. The following j are amongst the clips sold :— " Teemete," j 9d ; " Temakoe," 9gd. I January 25. I Wool is quiet, and prices are unchanged. \ The Akitio clip sold at B|d, and the Kapu- i tone at lOgd. I January 26. At the wool sales there is better competition, but prices are unchanged. Bradford tops are unquotable. The market is lifeless. January 28. ' The wool sales closed with prices firm ] and unchanged. The total number of bales catalogued was 106,275, of which

'• there were sold : To Home buyers 43,000/ Continent 36,000, America 4000, and carried forward to the next series 57,000,. Compared with December rates merinos declined 5 to 10 per cent, (medium and inferior suffering most) and crossbreds , from par to 5 per cent. .The decline was most marked -with the finest sorts. MELBOURNE, January 25, At the wool sales sympathy was shown with the London market. Xn merinos fine crossbreds declined from Id to l£d per lb, and coar.se crossbreds fd, compared with prices at previous sale. j Messrs Dalgety and Co. have received tha following cable from their London office. I dated 22nd inst: — "Wool firmer; slightl; demand." The Present Babbit Acto TO THE EBITOR. Sip, — The same objections to our Rabbit Act appear again this year. What we want is justice. The following case will give an idea of the working of the act: A farmer ia served with a notice to kill his rabbits. Ha immediately does so, in the present case having laid pollard poison twice. The rabbifi agent has determined to make an example of this particular farmer, whether hie ■ kills his rabbits or "not, consequently the farmer re- _ ceive3 a summons, and is fined several pounds on the unsupported evidence of a rabbit agent. If one farmer is fined for rabbits wha kills them, why not those who do not? It appears that rabbit agents make up thei* minds to sue so many in each part, as an. example to the others. This sort of thing does no good. The money spent in rabbit I inspection 'is thrown away, and, in many [ cases, only provides a livelihood for failures i at all other occupations, or in other wordaj an extensive benevolent institution. Th< sooner the expense borne by the country in keeping up such'a useless affair as the Rabbiji department is put to a better use the bettef both for the country and our farmers. If the inefficients among the inspectors can't make their own living, and must be. sup' ported by the revenue, why not form them "into a cavalry defence force and put them to "a better use? — I am, etc., Sufferer.