The Gold Duty.

Cromwell Argus, Volume IV, Issue 204, 7 October 1873, Page 7

The Gold Duty.

,' f * Mint | y In speaking to MrO’Neill’s motipn tp the effect that the gold duty be reduced 6c]; per ounce, and also to Mr Sheehan’s amendment that power he given to Provincial Legislatures so to reduce it, if they found it expedient, Mr Pyke is reported in Hansard as follows ; Mr Pyke had to apologize for intruding himself upon the’notice of the House so soon after taking his seat, but honorable members would excuse him when they considered the importance of the subject, and the known interest which he took in it. He apprehended that the matter immediately before the House was the amendment. He could not vote for it, for, in the first place, it seemed to him a total avoidance of the question at issue; and, in the second, it was giving to the Provinces something which they already had, because, if the Provincial Legislatures thought fit to reduce the duty on gold, they could do so by allowing an equivalent drawback to exporters. Therefore they might thank the mover of the amendment for nothing. Another objection which he had to it was that it would be throwing a bone of contention among the Provinces ; and, while it would no doubt lead to quarrelling between the Provincial Legislatures, it would also have the effect, if the Legislature of one Province reduced the duty and the Legislature of another did not, of opening a wide door to smuggling. Therefore he should record his vote against the amendment. With regard to the main question at issue, he had not had the pleasure of hearing all the remarks of other honorable members on the subject, and, if he trod over ground already occupied, this must be his excuse. He had heard it argued that day that this was not a class tax, and could not think the honorable member who used that argument was well acquainted with Johnson and the meaning of the words “class tax,” because if they meant anything they meant a tax imposed upon one class of the community alone. The gold duty was so imposed, and was therefore a class tax in the true sense of the word. He would as soon oppose an export duty upon wool as upon gold. If it was wrong in the one case it was wrong in the other. Each was a class tax. They had heard a great many reasons w T hy this tax should not be reduced, by honorable members who happened to represent impecunious Provinces, on account of the. effect which it would have upon those Provinces. That was the action of the bushranger, “Stand and deliver,” Because these Provinces were impecunious, you must give them the duty. “We want; you have ; deliver unto us.” Why should the prosperity of one Province be crushed by a tax in . order that another might exist with the aid of it ? The honorable member for Egmont was reported in Hansard to have said, “If the honorable member for Hokitika could show him that one ounce less gold had been dug, or would be, dug, out of the ground on account of the duty, he would give him his vote.” A great many ounces of gold were not dug out of the ground through this tax. Perhaps the honorable member did not sufficiently recognise the fact that, under this tax, he paid most who got the least. The man who got a few pennyweights of gold a week—and there were thousands whose weekly earnings did not exceed 20s. or 25s.—could not afford even a small proportion of it to he taken ; while the man who was sweeping in pounds weight a week did not feel the tax at all. It was easier to give a slice from a loaf than a few crumbs from a slice of bread. It had been argued that the distillers might just as well raise a cry for the abolition of the duty imposed upon them. Why, the distillers were protected by foreign duties, and there was no reason for their doing so. The same argument had been used by the tobacco growers, and the reply was the same. They bad, in the gold miners, a class which had contributed more to the prosperity of New Zealand than any other class within its borders, and they asked that they should no longer be placed under class taxation, but under the same standard of taxation as their fellow-subjects. On these grounds, he should certainly record his vote for the original motion, and against the amendment.