An Argument for Protection.

Cromwell Argus, Volume III, Issue 127, 16 April 1872, Page 7

An Argument for Protection.

(Auckland Southern Cross.) Mr Burke, of Wakelield-s trust, is a bel-lows-makor. If not a very high, it is still a very respectable branch of manufacturing industry. Mr Burke is a modest, unassuming man. ile lias ini desire to pull' the pr >ducts of his handicraft into notoriety ; but he speaks in a mild, sensible way as follows : "i.am a maker of bellows. They will blow in well and last as Jong as the very best imported. 1 employ labour in their manufacture. F use wood grown in our own forests, out into planks by oui own mills. T!:e leather used is from the hides of our own beasts, prepared by our own tanners. All that lam protected by the (lovernment tariff is one shilling per cubic foot. Three pairs of ordinary hoti e-heliows, when they are packed in (piantities, will measure afoot. This is equal t> fourpence a pair. Tire cost of labour in the Province, aa compared With labour in England, is more than fourpence. Let the Government, then, increase the tariff ever so little, and there need be no more bellows imported in New Zealand. Of course 1 don't expect the (ioveruiUent to take hollows specially into consideration, alhough I do not see why they should not. But if they will just call at my shop during working hours, 1 will tell them of a few other things, which, by slightly protecting, would cause a wonderful increase to our local manufactures. There are, for instance, cabinet ware, furniture, brushware, turnery, and a few other things of simple manufacture, for which we possess the raw material. At a very trilling annual loss to the revenue, quite f>o'.) men would iind employment; in this town alone." This ; s what Mr Rm-ku says. He says also, but with great meekness, that perhaps he may be wrong, and, with cqunl humility, that perhaps after all ho maybe right. He also says that even under the present protective tariff he could make bellows at a fa : r profit, at the cost or which they are imported, if commercial firms, instead of sending home, would order from him. Sir lhirke is asked why ; and this is his answer, although, to use the words previously employed by him, perhaps he may be right, or perhaps he may be wrong; but he speaks thus: '• ..ierchants sending home get a commission for buying them, interest for money, and a L nger credit than 1 can afford to give."'