"THE REAL ISSUE."

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1619, 26 July 1887, Page 3

"THE REAL ISSUE."

During the excitement consequent on a general election impending, the newspapers throughout the colony are pretty well rilled with political news or rumors, reports of political meetings and other matters of a kindred nature which, m times gone by, possessed little or no attractiveness for the great majority of readers ; but now. thanks to the political awakening that has happily been brought about, the political matter contained m our " broad sheets " seems to have almost as great an interest for them as the other. Readers no doubt find amusement m noting m the addresses of the various candidates to their real or would-be constituents, with what facility, we might almost say with what avidity, the most valued of representatives, that is, those who have succeeded m securing the largest amount of public money for their constituents, as well as the most extrava gant members of the most reckless Government that ever swayed the destinies of the colony, m compliance with popular will nov? preach retrenchment and economy without even the slightest sign of blushing or hesitancy, just as if throughout the whole course of their Parliamentary career they had done their best to achieve the one, and practise the other. Again it is amusing to note how many have been assigned as " the real issue " to be settled at the approaching election. Major Atkinson, Sir John Hall, Sir Geo. Grey, and tbe lion Mr Ballance have each declared a widely different issue to be " the real issue." For our own part we are inclined to believe that the " real issue" will be between Protection as against Free Trade. The Government have declared tor Protection, with the settlement of population on the lands of this colony, and encouragement of local industries ; and, of course, Freetraders will constitute the Opposition. We have, m previous articles, pointed out that England's greatness was built up under Protection, extending over centuries ; that Free Trade was the outcome of manufacturers' greed of greater profits out of reduced wages and increased markets ; and we also showed that, notwithstanding its founder's confident Assurances that within ten years every nation: would follow England's example, not a single nation had done so, but m return for the admission of their goods, duty free, into the English market, they taxed British manufactures, as high as 72^ per cent m one instance, and that after' waiting m vain for forty years for the said nation to follow* their example, the men of Manchester and of Glasgow, two strongholds of Free Trade, had grown sick ot giving arid not receiving, and wished to return to Protection. It has surprised us that, after this unpleasant experience on the part of the only nation that has tried Free Trade, there should be even a considerable section m the colony m favor of a system that has brought such disaster to the Old Country. But the action of the Amuri runholders m seeking to introduce Kaffir shearers solves the. mystery. Now, though we do not approve of Trades' Unions, knowing that their tendency is to hamper and impede commerce, still we consider the action of the Amuri runl\plders as reprehensible m the highest degree, and one that will be strongly resented by the people m this colony. In support of this we need only remind our readers of the outburst of indignation raised at every threatened introduction of Chinese labor. But the proposal m question is fraught with yet even graver danger, for the alteri Chinese can be resisted by a poll-tax, while the Kaffirs, being British subjects, existing legislation might be powerless to prevent their importation. This is a serious matter, and we are under great obligations to the Amuri Lords for having, thus timely, given us to understand what they mean to do. They are allied with the party now seeking to be restored to office on the Free Trade ticket, and if our working men wish to see the colony swamped with black labor, they have only to vote straight for the Free Trade platform, whose advocates and supporteis have thus kindly given us an inkling that they are bent on pushing the Free Trade doctrine to its logical conclusion — Free Trade m labor, or, m other words, the reduction of wages. Their design they have managed to keep secret hitherto, but now " those confounded Amuri "fellows " have let the cat out of the bag. In future the champions of Free Trade will be regarded as the pioneers m a movement for the reduction of wages, and this we are convinced, will tell greatly against them on polling day.