The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas e Prevalebit. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1883. The Manufacturers’ Association.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 1077, 18 October 1883, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas e Prevalebit. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1883. The Manufacturers’ Association.

'there is a good deal of what the Americans call goaheaditiveness about the people of Dunedin. Just prior to the last general election they established a Trades and Labor Council, which undoubtedly exercised considerable influence—whether for good or evil we will not venture to say—upon political events at that time. And now we learn that there has been formed in the metropolis of the South a Manulacturers’ Association, and a programme is published of tne objects this new institution is intended to further. These objects number five, and it may be said in starting that some of them point in a direction likely to benefit the colony, but in one instance at least a principle is enunciated which most people will consider, we think, is decidedly vicious. To take them seriatim, the first effort of the Association will be to “ encourage the development of the natural resources, of New Zealand,: pnd diffuse information thereon,” No one will deny the importance of this, albeit the Dunedin folk must be rather behind the time if they fancy that they are the first to recognise the need for letting people know everything possible about the capabilities of the colony. Whatever shortcomings the opponents of the Government may lay to their charge, it can Scarcely be said that they have been idle in disseminating information as to our resources, by publishing statistics as to the numerous industries existing among us. All that can be said against the first item of the Association’s. programme is that it is slightly redundant. The second object to be; strived for is the “ fostering of New Zealand manufactures and developing industries so as to afford increased and steadier employment of labor,” and the necessity for this appears as self-evident as in the first proposition. It might perhaps have been as well if it had been couched in language a little more explicit, as it is difficult to see how an association can compass the end in view. The primary object of anybody, who attempts . to develope an industry is, we take it, to make money, arid so long as a profit can be realised individual enterprise may be trusted to do its best to provide as much steady employment as possible, this Association can hardly expect men to carry on business at a loss. Item No 3 runs thus “ V the> ■ removal of revenue duties from raw material and also from goods which cannot be profitably made in this colony, and placing moderate duties upon all articles that can be so made that are now admitted.” This, it will be seen, is more complex than the two preceding ones, and the latter part ot the sentence shows that protection is still an article of faith in the creed of some politicians. No doubt it would be to the interest of consumers that the duties upon imported raw material should be removed, but. ?uch a course would necessitate a great increase in direct taxation and the advocates of the abolition of the Custom House would he the first to'cry out. Then we have the suggestion that a “ moderate ” impost should be laid upon articles that can be made profitably in the colony, and it is here that the cloven foot of Protection is thrust forward. There is no need to reproduce the argument which every economist who has studied the subject admits to be incontrovertible, namely that a protective policy can only* benefit the manufacturing class at the expense of the majority., . The specipus logic which contends that the people should submit to be taxed so that particular industries should be fostered has been proved by experience to be fallacious in every country where it has found adherents. It is all very well to talk about “moderate ” duties, but Victoria is an example to show us that whenever an. attempt is made to remove a protective impost the manufacturers threaten to put an end to the industry altogether, which would result in a large number of skilled artisans being thrown out of employment. As a matter of fact, whenever the thin end of the protection wedge is put in, it is not only well-nigh impossible to remove it, but the tendency is to increase rather than diminish the duty. Whatever may be thought of the other planks of the Dunedin Association’s platform, the one we have just referred to shows short sighted ignorance on the part of the promoters. The two final propositions need not detain usi The fourth advocates the discouraging of what is called the “suicidal ’’ policy of thb G - vernmentor municipal bodies in purchasing outside of the colony what can be advantageously produced in New Zealand ; and the fifth enforces the principle that work should be giveti to private. firms instead of being done in Governmental workshops. As to the former, there can be no question as to

its advisability, nor do we doubt that this course has been generally followed, although judging from questions put in Parliament, some of our legislators fancy that the Ministry prefer to waste the money of taxpayers by paying more than is right for material from England simply out of pure “ cussedness.” The Government workshop question, too, is to be decided solely upon the ground of economy, and if certain machinery can be manufactured as cheaply and as well by private firms, the latter should certainly have the preference. As a whole, with the exception of the protection clause, there is perhaps little to find fault with in this programme of the Dunedin Association, though it is not made very plain how they are going to act to prevent what they consider abuses, some of which certainly do not exist.