PROTECTION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1899, 18 July 1888, Page 3

PROTECTION.

TO THE EDITOB. Sir, — The meaning of the terra, »s I shall consider it, is that Promotion which ia afforded to manufacture or any prod net by having a prohibitive tax Imposed upon the imported article. It is thought by this means foreign competition will be shut out, and production at home Btlmu- [ l»ted. Protection Is always afforded r through the Cus'omn Duties, To begin : Lut ua first consider if this mode of taxation be just and rqual m its application. Persons fthoala nev^r be tax d, but always their property. If tea be tie product t»xjd a millionaire cannot drluk more tea thaD a laborer, cor acqaantly he does cot contribute to t 1 c revenue more than a laborer. If boots be the product taxed a millionare o»nnot wear two pairs |of boots, omseqaently, he contributes I little more than a laborer. If clothua be the product tsxed, a milllonftre oannot wear two eulfs. And bo on through the Ouatonu, the harden falls upen the po-T, while the rich praotloilly ercape ; for the amount of taxation contributed by a rloh man, m proportion to his wealth as compared with a laborer, ia praotloally as if he paid- no tat at al l ; while, with the laborer, the amount he is compelled to pay makes a very large reduction m his wages, especially If be have a family. It thoi appear! that the Customs tax is as unjust and oppressive a mode of taxation ts ooald be Imagined. There Is another way m which it ia unequal and unjaat Amm with a large family has not only to support all hia family bat has also to pay a tax on each of their persons, by reason of the tax he has to pay on every thing they oonaumi. A bachelor who m»y have a greater stake m the State pays only for his own person ; cooatqaen'ly he contributes muoH Ibbs.

Now if the theory of Protection wera true and good m itaolf, the manner m whloh it is applied makes it «n evil. But the theory of Protection 1b not trne nor jußt. Therefore where Protection exists there are two evils pressing upon the poor.

Protection means monopoly, therefore evil. It moans that the consumer has to support the producer, by an unjust tariff making the cost of living greater without any adequate return. To get a clear insight Into any abstract question, we have to take an extreme case, m wh'ch cause and effect stand out m bold relief. In Pert Said a bottle of brandy can be bought for one shilling to one and sixpence. la this colony the self-same brandy cannot be got under 6s. la the former Port twenty or thirty cigars oan be got for Is, which m this c >lony ooat 6i each. Tbe difference of prices is oaused alone by the fact that Port Said is a free port while we have a heavy tiriff m this colony. This illustration ahowß quite phlnly how Protection acts on prlceßand oost of living. Every oonntry is peculiarly situated, so that it oan produoe some article of consumption better than most other oountries. Also, with every country there are articles which it cannot produce to compete with others c^oept it be bolstered up by unnatural and art ficlal Protection.

It seems to me a aelf evident foo K , that every country should produoe those things for which it is adapted end for which it requires no protection, and import those thtngq whloh it cannot produoe with advantage, and for which the country and olrcumatancns aro adverse, Then we would have Viotorla importing oats, butter and cheese, from New Zealand, and we V7ould import In return from Viotorla grapes, wine, or any other article which we could not produce with advantage ourselves. Then the people of both countries would get everything produced In both countries at tbe lowest possible price. Trade wonld then bo on a healthy and natural basis. Nature would then direot what channels trade would take. But men m these days aro nit satisfied with God or nature, but m their arrogance think that they can improve on both, and so brlDg ruin and disaster upon themselves. No ono would deny that If any Government wonld Issue base coin, it would do harm to the oornm unity, Yet Protection is practically the same as Issuing base coin. Jt means that those things protected are made of more valuo than their real v*lu3. The praotioal result of both the issue of babe coin and Protection is the same. Anyone who defends the ono should defend the other also. The only difference between the two la, that the one is ooin and the other goods, A Government (saving base ooln would get the benefit (if benefit it can be called) of the difference between the real and base value. A Government issuing Protection, m the same manner receives the benefit of the difference between the real and protective or base value of the goods protected. But In this case manufacturers share m 1 the benefit with th.3 Government. Both m the iesne of base ooln, and m Protection, tbe people have to goffer th,e loss (and it is a real loss), whlph la represented between the real and base or protective values. If the principle of Protection be true and beneficial, then *hy not apply it universally J Why oocfine its benefits to International tya.de and commerce } Why. not apply it to the internal trade of a nation 1 And why uot protect the farming against the manufacturing comtnunlty, and thus put the Internal trade of the nation m a fbnrlehjng condition. If the principle be true It should benefit both to be prgfceoted again Bt caoh other, as the relaMon between them, is the *ame as between nations, v;a , one trades to the other that whloh he oannot produoe, and reoeivea m return the produo's of the other,

It Is foolish for one county or city to Import the produots of other c unties or cities white they can protect them,polyes, and thus stimulate manufuotaye and trade among themselves. But the above would be too direct an application of the bmeHtt of Protection,. People woq'd BQQn ftud ont its evils and JnQonvqnioao^.

\n yoar Issue of the 16th you have a letter from Mr David Bellhoqae, with a comparative table of wages m England, America, and Melbourne. In the first place the table is exaggerated. It is a table prepared for Protectionist. In the second placo It does not tell ua for how many iiours work the wages are for m each case, It 1b well known that they work long hoars In Arm rica. 1 herd are many other condi tions that would bo required to be stated before pno oon judge anything yf the i,able. I never take any rotico of tables m this or any other question, beoau^e people on each oide got up tables to suit themselves' and they are always contradictory. It is well known that wages aro higher m America and m the Qgloniok thatj m any of tho European for 'many reasons that are altogether out Bide of Proteotion or Froetrade. If you want to make tables to show the difference of wages indifferent countries where Proteption' ani p'olioiea aro m practice taice countries' where tho circura ataticea will be parallel m tyery other particular, That ia compare England with Germany or some other European oountry where they have a protectivo policy Protectionists now bettor than

to try Ibis As a matter of fact, there ib no Freetrado country ia the world that I k,o,QW of. A country to be Freotra^a i, i ■• ■-. i

hou'd Inve no Customs Duties. A Land and Income Tax is the only just mode of tnxaiion. A . Irbla- ».