COMMERCIAL.

Taihape Daily Times, 9 August 1919, Page 5

COM M ERCIAL.

LONDON WOO-L "SALES. The N.Z. L. and M.A_ Co. Ltd. have received the following cablegram from their London house, unlder date Ist August. 1919: —— Wool Sales closed. Merino and medium coar‘s‘e crossbred are 5 per cent. lower.

‘ MARTON S.ALE_ Abraham and Williams, Ltd., report on Marten sale held on TTlesday:—-We had a heavy yarding ‘of sheep, which met with a. keen demand, one small lot of extra goodwoolly hoggets'making £2 Os 6d. ‘A small yarding of‘ cattle was not "keenly competed for. we quote as follows_:—M.s hoggets 29/ to 30/1; good do. 27/-, 28/7; fair do. 23/- to 25/-; small do. 21/-, 22/3; cull do_ to 17/10; ewe do 26/7; 29/2; ‘sil__ll'all.u(lo. 21/ad; 2 & 4-th ms in lanlb27/6,27/:9;-.g2:tl1 do. good 34/-, _35/-;...m/a;do._-.23./-‘; '.p”oor do. 18/6, 18 / 9’; culls‘ -11/ 3; ; :empty,2-th :-ewes 31/~, 31/'9; 2~.th ;wethel-'5- t0,=,25A/3; empty ewes 21/—; fat ewes 27/6, 28/-; fat WW‘/_'e”the_rs 38/6, 39/-. ._Dairy cows £l3 10/{£ls ’lO/-,‘ £lo,’ £l_l;"‘p6o'f‘ do.£B, ‘£B 10s’; 2-jrlr‘ sf'eerS='£7“;‘"'a3‘nicé ’pen "of for\*§/:fél4l“d stéel"s On" "£l:éc6'lint ‘Of Mr 0. L_ Vl\la‘rshall'lllade'£ls 5-sf’ '

The yarding of fat stock‘ at’ the Westfield sale on Wednesday was "the" best as regards quality for iiionths past. ‘ Several consignments compared fzivourably with anything ever oifered at Westfield. Values were firm for choice and prime beef at last week’s rates, while plain cattle were easier in price. A record for the yards was ‘established in the sale of Messrs Buckof ‘Mr B. Reid, Waeranga. These fetched an average of £3O 18/9. Sheep in scarcely average \numbers, and in good quality, reached values which are the highest for the season. Record prices ruled for the average yarding of pigs. Thirty-two from Mr G. Peek, I"aparoa,' averag'ed~ £4 6/. Messrs Dalgety and Co. sold 15 fat cows a’t'an‘-average of £ls 6/. ' ‘ .

BIRDWOODS’ INSUFFICIENT . RECVOGNITAIQN. H bLO'NDON; Aug. 8. In the House "of Commons, Inskip protested that.Gen€ral Birdwood had not received a ;sum equal to other army cOnlnlandel"s. The differentiation caused dismay in the hearts of Australians, who rcgarde'd him with 3. devotion unique in the annals of the army.

Mr Adamson’s amelldme'nt to reduce war grants was rejected by 288 to 66.