WOOL CIRCULAR.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 14, 29 April 1871, Page 6

WOOL CIRCULAR.

We have bad the following important circular placed in our hands for publication London, 6th February, 1871. g IE< Since the committee of .your association, in March last, considered the reports made after the inquiry into the sale and warehousing of wool in London, I have residing in Sydney for four months, and during that time I have consulted wooigrowers and others, verbally and by letter, and have received dodumentary information which it was impossible for me to obtain in England ; since my return also I have received much information bearing very closely on the subject. I have therefore to ask you to bring before your committee certain points, which have been urged upon me over and over again during my stay in Australia, and since my arrival in this country.

Warehousing.-—On the subject of warehousing there is a strong feeling of dissatisfaction, the combined charge being considered excessive, and the wasteful and reckless way in which the wool is treated being condemned on all hands. . . One warehouse has particulary distinguished itself of late for gain in weights over the shipping weights ; but as it does not make an allowance in its rates, it is not used to the extent it ought to be. , . By a comparison between shipping and sale weights, the loss or gain in weight of each warehouse can be easily ascertained, and the. same warehouse varies so little from year to year, that one ■ can tell by the result of the examination which warehouse any particular lot of wool has been in by the loss or gain in weight. The only variation is, that occasionally there is an excessive deficiency in a lot; in such a case, when complaint is made, the excuse is, that there must have been an error in weighing before shipment. I know one person who suffered in this way who had his wool weighed before witnesses and took certificates, so that when the usual excuse was made, he tendered his certificates, and demanded payment. Since then he has ordered his wool to be placed in the warehouse alluded to above, and it now alioays gained in weight. If this change from one warehouse to another will give a gain instead of a loss in wool, it clearly indicates that some remedy ought to be applied, and that at once. Tare. —The subject of Tare is but a small evil in comparison with the last, but it is an irritating one, as it is made to work against the wool owner. It is considered that an alteration for the better could and ought to be made. ' Draft. —If the Draft were abolished the subject of tare as at present worked might be conceded. Every one in the colonies cries out against the iniquitous deduction for draft It is made to work most unfairly against those who breed sheep with the finest wool and wash their fleeces the best. From a bale of 3£cwt worth 3s 6d to 4s per lb a deduction of lib per cwt is made (about 12s 3d), whilst from a bale of common greasy wool only the same weight, at 6d per lb about 2s in value only is taken off. The margin of loss in weight to the manufacturer on the greasy wool may be great, but on the fine clean wool the loss iB trifling. Nothing will justify this custom of the trade. The loss on tare is at least £lb per bale, on 668,670 bales the clip of Australian and Cape wools received last year is equal to 2,674,6801bs wool at Is 6d—£200601. Samples.— The mode pf drawing samples from the corner of the bale, where the coarse part of the fleece is generally placed, is bad and if the present mode of sampling be continued every lot of ten samples ought to be weighed, and the exact weight returned to the merchant as well as to the broker. -Excess of weight in the sample, like the draft, works heaviest against the finest and cleanest wool. As the samples regulate the lotting, too much care cannot be taken in the fairness and correctness of the samples drawn. I heard complaints in the colonies on the irregularities of the lotting ; even in the greasy and coarse wools, much loss may accrue where a bale or two of inferior wool in a lot pulls down the price of the whole, but in fine clean wools the less may be very great if the quality of the bales in a lot is not very even. It is quite impossible for a broker to attempt to do justice to his employer when he undertakes to sell the enormous quantities he does in one evening; the number of bales sold per day having on on the average increased during the last ten years from 2,500 to 6,500, the broker cannot properly examine and lot any such quantity ; the lots being made too large, and much of it must be done at haphazard and the risk of the wool owner, nor can the buyer do more than lpok at a portion of the wools put up each day. I am told that in 1870, four brokers sold 414,971 bales, out of an aggregate of 652,795 bales offered, leaving 237,824 bales amongst the other brokers, of which four other brokers sold 203,018; thus giving only 34,806 bales for the rest of the trade—practically therefore eight brokers have had the trade in their own hands. The small brokers who will sell less quantities can do more justice to their constituents, but in the sale room they most unfairly have to follow the giants of the trade instead of being allowed their turn first by rotation. Fine wools ought to be lotted from the bale, and the samples of each bale ought to be put back into the bale and sold separately. I take it, according to my estimate, at least ilb of wool is lost by the present mode of sampling, and as all wools used to, gain from 51bs to 71bs per bale on the ship ping weights, and now seldom gain at all, I think at least 3fclbs per bale disappear as waste or sweepings. These two items making another 41bsper bale—£2oo,6ol, oi together 14500 bales, worth £400,900, To this must be added two-qhirds, of a pound per

bale for which the broker pays, another 1000 or 1100 bales. * These wools, I have been informed, are sold under the name of sweepings, &c, and although, as a rule, they are said to be quite equal to any other wools, are sold at reduced rates at the end of the sales, and compete with the wools purchased at the saies for resale to the manufacturer. The wool thus taken is a direct loss, and this competition indirectly causes a second injury to the wool owner. The enormous quantity of wool now annually received strongly points to more frequent sales, or greater freedom in effecting them. If sales were more frequent the market would be seldom gorged as it wasin November last, and the long interval between the sales puts it quite out of the power of the manufacturers with moderate means to buy in London, and this class of competitors is kept away. More frequent sales would help to reduce the warehouse charges, as then the average time for wool to be in store need only be two instead of three months as at present. Frequent complaints were made to me in the colonies about the capricious and irregular prices obtained for wool at the periodical sales, and to test this shipments have been equally divided, and slight alterations made in the marks, and the two halves sold in the same sale, and through the same broker, have varied from 2d to 3d a lb. This has been tried by the same shippers several times, and two lots have never realised the same prices. Again, eases have been brought under my notice of greasy wool being bought on joint account, and after washing, being equally divided and shipped separately under different marks, to different consignees, but sold in the same series of sales by different brokers, and the lots have differed so much as 3d to 4d a lb—the less price always fell to the same person whenever the speculation took place. The consignee of the wool which brought the high price understood the value of wool, and watched its sale at each stage, and he saw that it was properly lotted.

Another buyer of wool at Sydney purchased two lots for a resident in London as a remittance, one lot cost lid. per lb. and the other 13d., but the cheap lot sold for more than the other by Id. per lb., although any moderate judge could see that it was the inferior wool. I could bring forward other cases of irregularity, such as where a shipment of wool has been divided here, and one half given to a small broker who thoroughly attended to the lotting, &c., and obtained a better price thereby, although he had to sell at tne close ot the evening when a large broker had finished his quantity. Where the broker buys through his own clerks there is a strong feeling, I am told, amongst buyers that it is useless to contend against such, bids, and they give in in disgust, and lots are said to pass the hammer below their value. This practice not only works badly in this way, but is, I believe, illegal. No broker ought to be allowed to buy either directly or indirectly at his own sale. If these points which I mention were attended to, some of the eccentricities of price would disappear. The charges on the sale of wool have m some respects been wisely reduced, but the agitation will not be allowed to drop unless the grievances I have stated are at once dealt with, and a proper remedy applied. Your committee could do much, and that soon, if it took the various matters in hand, and unless it does so it will be regarded as a party to the irregularities. Knowing, as I do, and personally respecting many members of the committee, I am most unwilling to think that they do not feel as I do on these points, and I cannot but believe that they will act. If the committee is too indifferent to the interest of the wool growers, and are unwilling to move, they ought to make for some other body of men who will do what is required. I have always advocated the employment ot a merchant to look after the interests of the wool growers, and expressed an opinion against the consignment of wool to a bank or a broker, but I cannot do so in the way I could wish, when I see the indifference displayed by those who ought to be the first to detect and put down abuses. —I am &c, Daniel Coopeb. Joseph Moore, Esq, Secretary of the New South Wales and "Van Diemen’s Land Association.