PRICE FOR SEEDY WOOL.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 16037, 23 January 1918, Page 4

PRICE FOR SEEDY WOOL.

COMPLAINT’ FROM FARMERS. PER PRESS ASSOCIATION, . I WELLINGTON. Jan. 2Z. A deputation of farmers waited upon the Prime Minister to state their grievances regarding the price being made for inferior wools. Mr. G. V. Pearce, M.P., said that when the conference was held at which arrangements were made for commandeering New Zealand wool, a condition of purchase was that growers should get 55 per cent, on prewar prices. As the scheme was working out, it was not quite satisfactory to farmers. They were satisfied with prices they were getting for fleece wool, but not with the prices paid them for crutchhigs, pieces and seedy wools, for which they were certainly not being paid 55 per cent, more than pre-war rates. At the conference of farmers of which the deputation was the outcome, the suggestion was made that they should he allowed to send any _ seedy wool to be sold at their own risk in any country whore they could find a market. He did not think any member of thS deputation favoured that proposal. Another suggestion was that any farmer who thought the valuation of his wool very low should he allowed to hold the wool for free market at" the end of the war. A further suggestion was that farmers should themselves put up a carbonising plant, to cost about £20.000, and that the Government should assist.

Mr. W. S. Bennett, chairman of the Woolbrokors’ said the chief valuer stated at Napier that in no instance had the valuer been instructed to take into consideration the cost of cleaning yool. The buyers’ practice was to make a deduction only on account of the amount of seed in the wool, and the actual deterioration of the wool consequent upon the presence of seed. The valuer contended that the values being paid were equivalent to 55 per cent, more than pre-war prices for all kinds of wool.

Mr. Massey said members of the deputation should get rid of any impression they might have rhat the Government wished to get the better of the producer in any way. In this he could speak for the Imperial as well a* the New Zealand Government, because he had been in England, and was a party to the negotiations when the bargain was made. He was of opinion that the bargain had worked very well. It had been pointed out that the only deduction made in the value of seedy l wool was on account of the deterioration that actually took place because of the presence of seed, and he hoped a« a result of the deputation no more would be heard of the grievance. Another grievance raised lately was in regard to the draft on wool. He did not believe the deduction a fair one, bnt it had existed for the last half century, and naturally when the Imperial Government made arrangements for the purchase of wool, purchases were made upon the existing trade customs. He ill ought the custom ought to he removed bnt thought it was unfair that farmers should try to get rid of it by bringing pressure on the Government now. He would have no objection personally to farmers being allowed to hold seedy wools, hut it would have to be understood no export of wool coiild be allowed. He promised to consider the suggestion that the Government should assist in the erection of works for cleaning wool. There wore plants in existence for the extraction of seed from wool by mechanical moans. The charge made was 4d per lb. of clean wool. The Government had quantities of wool treated at these works, and it_ would bo open to fanners to have their wool cleaned before offering it for valuation.