STILL MARE'S-NESTING

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2138, 2 May 1914, Page 4

STILL MARE'S-NESTING

By means of scar; headlines ami an extraordinary jumble of misstatements, tho local Wardist journal yesterday endeavoured .to create the impression that it had unearthed soma villainous manipulation of tho Customs Tariff to the det.ripie.nt of tho honests teiJar whom Mm Ciovcnv , meat bad promited to It

was. a quite remarkable effort, in so far as' it demonstrated how simple a thing it is for attywie' sufficiently biased or sufficiently unscrupulous ov ignorant, to build up a mountain of inaccuracy and.deception out of it very few grains of fact. Tho grains of fact in the present instance aro that parliament last session passed a Customs Act consolidating the existing law and removing certain. anomalies. Thd anomalies in question related to the charging of duty on certain classes of casing or packing material in which goods were enclosed, and tho deduction of the cash discount on goods purchased abroad when assessing tho' dutiable value of the goods. Out- of these slender facts the terrible story of tie Government's Wrong-doing was invented. In the first place, it was alleged the Bill had bco-n rushed through Parliament without members knowing what was being done. Parliament had been deceived over the matter, and the result had been that Customs duties had been reduced- - dreadful thing— to the advantage of the importer. The reduction iii. duty was put down as anything .up to £•300,000 a year, and this,loss of duty had somehow to be made up out of the "common people," ana so tire ' story went on, being suitably embellished, of course, with appropriate denunciations of the perfidious Masses Government.

The actual facts place a very different. complexion on the story; The Bill, which, as stated, was a consolidating measure, did come down late ia the session, but it wsta not rushed through Parliament as the Vardi&t journal states. On the contrary, at Sir Joseph Ward's suggestion: it was referred, to a Special Committee for consideration. On that committee! were Sir Joseph Wahd and other stalwarts of the Opposition, 'including the Hon. D. Emm and Mr. Witty; also a-Labour Oppositionist,, Mrt.. Vkjtch. That committee had b«foro it expert opinion from the Customs Department, .and the proposals which have now provoked tho angry outburst from thd Opposition journal were fully explained and unanimously endorsed bv the committee. Sir Joseph Ward himself stated in the House that the Bill had gone through the committee "without any division fro® beginning to end, a«d upon the Wbfi-le it is a consolidating measure." ' Here it is plain that Sin Joseph Ward recognised. that it was not entirely a consolidating measure, for he sn-ys "upon trie whole it is. a consolidating measure." Later, in the same speech, fee makes this still clearer in a little exchange with the Pn.i.Mi: Minister, when, ho seems to have laboured under the error that it was proposed to increase Customs duties by the abolition of the right -of the importer to deduct 2j per cent, (representing the cash discount he received) front fire dutiable value of his goods. The following dialogue ensued: —

Mr. Massfly: It js a slight decrease, Hot flu increase. .

Sir Joseph Wards Pardon mo, I mitlefstaiid tire g.| par cent.-is usually .deducted as fat as the merchants are concerned.

'Mr. Massey: Bat the Customs propose to alltnv the deduction.

. Sir Ja&p.h Ward: In iiiat case I understand tiles position. That makes it quite clear.

Mr, Massey: That is a reduction of taxation. ...

fcir Jesefih Ward: It Would "be" fr.om that pcHiit of view; I thought it was tho other way.

Mr. .Massiy: It is rlouo to meet the wishes of tho comuie-roiat people.

Sir Joseph Wards The iiatttt bcittg bow quito clear to me, I s-hal'l bo only 100 glad to facilitate the passage of what Is aft important consolidating Bill.

Here it will be seen that the reduction in taxation which the Ward' ist journal declaims ag&siflSt with such an expenditure of virtuous indignation inot with the hearty approval of Sin JosEi'U Wahd himself, and the, unanimous support of the whole committee, Opposition members included, set up to inquire into the proposed change. It may be a little difficult, perhaps, for those of the publie who are not familiar with fcho ways of the journal in question to understand how, in face of the dialogue quoted above, Parliament could be charged with haying reduced taxation "without knowing what it was doing.'' It may he equally puzzling to fliem, also, to understand why a journal which accuses the' Government of shirking its promise to reduce taxation should mctaphoric* ally' speaking: shriek itself hoarse in denouncing the Government .when it does reduce taxation.' It is true that it complains that this reduction of taxation benefits the importer. Obviously all Customs taxation first affects the importer, and, through him, the public. It surely woiild be 100 stupid for anyone to suggest that the public can be relieved of Customs taxation without first, relieving the. importer who brings into the country the goods which the public pay for. As to the- removal pf duty on the packing cases in which goods are brought into the country, this is in exactly the saffi© category as the other matter, and gets rid of. an absurd anomaly. Unhappily, the inaccuracy of the Opposition journal extends to this phase of the matter also, and the amount of duty saved to tjio importer, and, through him, t-o She public, has been absurdly exaggerated. It is a. case of another marc's nest. Summed u.p., the position is that in placing the Customs duties on a soundef'and more enuitable basis, the Government has. been able to make a induction which, under existing competitive trade conditions, must bis ot benefit to the general consumer. Mff. M.assjey should be grateful to the,. local Opposition organ, lor having once mo:re focused public attention cn the good work his Government is doing.