Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image

Free-Traders and Protectionists alike are agreed that in a young country it is often advisable to give encouragement to the establishment of native industries by means of bonuses, differential duties, reduction of excise, or o f .her similar expedients. When, however, an industry has been fairly started the new question arises—ls it to be still en. couraged, or is it to be left to itself to make its way as beat it can? Here the Protec tionist and the Free-trader join issue. The Protectionist says virtually that it is better worth a nation’s while to pay a high price for an article that has been manufactured in the country, than to purchase the same article at a lower price if it has been brought from foreign parts. The Free-trader on the contrary holds to the opinion that it can never be beneficial to a nation, as a whole, to pay a high prme for an article that can be bought for a lower one. He holds that if the home producer of an article, after being placed in a fairly advantageous position, cannot compete with foreign producers, it is better that he should leave off producing the article in question, and try his hand at something else. In short, the Free-trader considers the giving of a bonus to a person who is about to start a new industry as a mere experiment. He does not for a moment think that the country should produce commodities at a loss. He merely thinks it worth while to expend a certain sum in trying to find out if a given industry will prove a source of profit to the country if it will afford the means of investing a part of the capital of the country to advantage. Just in the same way he would willingly see a few hundred pounds spent in deciding whether it would pay to work a certain quartz-reef or not; but if it were once proved to be unprofitable t<> do so, he would not dream of coutining to work the unpayable” reef in order that certain miners might “have work.” Some years ago the Colonial Parliament judged it advisable to try whether it would not be possible for the Colony to manufacture its own ardent spirits. The plan adopted for assisting the launohiqg pf the new industry was that of making the excise duty on spirits 6s per gallon, the import dpty on the foreign article being 12s. This was encouragement enough in all conscience. A distillery was started iu Auckland, which has been for many years in operation. It may he fairly said, therefore, that if it cannot now compete with foreign distilleries it does not pay—that those who are engaged in making whisky would be more profitably employed in niaking something else. In fact, in our opinion, the State aid to whisky-making might long ago have been discontinued. It surely cannot bp believed that the persons who entered into the undertaking dreamt fpr a moment that the State, beaause it thought it advisable to gi/e them assistance in starting their new industry, was pledging itself to continue this a sistauce through all time. According to an article which appeared yesterday in the columns of a contemporary, we are required to give assent to the monstrous doctrine that tb§ State is bound to continue virtually to giye to all New Zealand whisky distillers and their heirs for ever, half of the import duty for the time being on every gallon of spirits they produce. We believe that the Government, far from having broken their agreement, have acted much more liberally than they were called upon to dp, and that, proposing as they do to make the excise duty only 9s insteul of the full amount, they are committing an error in trying to keep up an industry that does not pay. We may feel sorry that the distillers have entered into an enterprise that has turned out amiss, but they are no worse off than hundreds of others who have been unfortunate iu business. At any rate we feel certain that they had no right to suppose that the bonus of 6s per gallon was tp ipe continued to them for ever, any more than that Mr A. J. Burns would have had a right to ask opr Provincial Government for an indefinite number of bonuses, if it had turned opt, as happily it has- not, that his cloth manufactory was not a paying concern.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18740520.2.10

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 3507, 20 May 1874, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
749

Untitled Evening Star, Issue 3507, 20 May 1874, Page 2

Untitled Evening Star, Issue 3507, 20 May 1874, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert