COMMERCIAL.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 917, 12 February 1881, Page 4

COMMERCIAL.

Subjoined are the latest quotations for colonial produce :—- Wool. —The fourth and last series of the present year, which commenced on November 23, was brought to a close on December 11. The following quantities were catalogued :— Sydney, 21,891 bales; Victoria, 28,040 ; Adelaide, 9,522 ; Swan River, 266 ; Tasmania’ 1,416; New Zealand, 25,380; Cape and Natal, 37,459 bales. Out of a total available stock of 131,879 bales, about 10,500 bales (500 Australian and 10,000 Cape) went forward direct to the provinces and the Continent, and it is estimated that about 15,000 bales, of which 9,500 are Cape, remain in first hands for future sale. The quantity bought for export is estimated at 50,000 bales. About 15,000 bales of new clip (1880-81) have come forward in time for these auctions, a larger instalment than has ever come at so early a date. The series has been well attended by Home buyers, but the foreign trade was represented only to a limited extent, many of t e leading French and German spinners being absent. Messrs. J. T. Simes and company remark that ‘‘.for all cross-bred wools of the broader type, of which there has been a large supply, more particularly in New Zealand produce, the demand has been growing weaker, but a strict distinction murt be made between these and quarter-bred wools, ♦W m “d second remove from merino ; these quarter-breds have sold well through! out. Messrs. Webster, Darvall, and Co state that “There was little New Zealand produce, but the quarter-bred sorts were rather dearer than in September, the lower grades more closely Hpprrmmstjng+oEnglffih being unchanged.” ' 6 ’

Whoever it isthat lays poison indiscriminately, or otherwise, in the towhahip, for the purpose of destroying dogs, ehduld be made aware that they are committing an illegal act, and one that entails punishment in more ways than one. Since the Dog Registration Act caihe into force on the Ist of .January several complaints have been made by the owners of dogs whofee animals have been killed, though registered, by poison ; and the last case of the most reprehensible nature happened on Thursday last, when a gentleman, resident in the town, lost a very valuable gun and water dog, under circumstances that look very, suspicious, and which certainly demand investigation. The animal was collarlesß, it is true, in consequence of some thief having stolen the badge, and the owner was having another made with a lock and key ; but the worst of it is that the fact of a dog having no collar on his neck is a justification for his slaughter without enquiry, if found on any person’s land. However harsh such a law may operate in cases like the present, it certainly does not warrant a systematic, wholesale destruction of animals, such as may be inferred from a person taking poison with him for that purpose. Such, we are informed by persons who have left their names at ouy office, is the practice of Mr. Faram, the Inspector of Nuisances and Ranger forthe Borough of Gisborne. We should discredit this but for the bona jides of the communications, and we feel it our duty to draw public attention to the matter. The destroying of any dog, for its owner’s breach of the law, is not sufficiently comprehended in the mythical “ any person, or his agent,” laying poison for it in any such manner as is likely to lead to serious consequences to others. If Mr. Faram does keep himself armed with a deadly poison for the purpose of despatching dogs of defaulting owners, the practice is so reprehensible that we trust the Borough Council will cause him to desist. We can hardly think that a man of Mr. Faram’• judgment would lend himself to such an excess of zeal; but, as he will shortly be called upon to answer to the accusation in another form, we shall say nothing further on the point now. Under any circumstances the law as it stands is very arbitrary, and opens the door for a large exercise of vindictiveness and personal ill-feeling. Thus, dogshaving no proper registration labels on them are, prima facie, held to be unregistered, and “ any person, or his agent, “ upon whose land such dog may be “ found, or any person duly authorised “ by the local authority, may destroy “ any such dog.” But the law regarding the removal of the collars is stringent, and we trust some of these petty pilferers will be brought to justice. .Mr. McLean’s dog was of such value, intrinsically and domestically, that money cannot replace him ; and he has paid the penalty of some one’s perfidy. The Act prescribes that any person so offending is liable to a penalty of £lO, besides costs and theyhZZ value of the dog destroyed. We earnestly hope that these delinquents will be caught, and the fullest and heaviest swoop of the law be made to rain forensic thunder on their evil actions.