THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, MAY 29, 1880.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1954, 29 May 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, MAY 29, 1880.

The Chamber of Commerce had before it yesterday a rather extraordinary document in the shape of a petition to the President of the United States, with reference to a decrease of the duty on New Zealand wool imported into that country. The peculiarity of the document did not consist in its purport, but rather in the way it came before the Chamber. It must bo recollected that the subject dealt with is an exceedingly largo one. As it was pertinently put by the chairman, a mere handful of people wore asking a groat nation to entirely alter a fiscal policy it had adopted for a long period. Supposing that the readiness to grant the request made was admitted, the manner in which it was proposed to bring it before the United States Government would at once preclude any chance of such acquiescence. The petition itself did not emanate from any recognised commercial body, though the Auckland Chamber endorsed it, nor did it come to the Canterbury Chamber through the recognised channel— i.e., from a kindred body. It was got up—as indeed was the whole agitation on the subject—by a Mr. Beardsley, agent for the Pacific Mail Steamship Company at

Auckland. Now, giving this gentleman every credit for disinterested patriotism, it scarcely seems likely that on the one hand the American Government would attach great weight to a request so promoted, or that on the other the Canterbury Chamber of Oommerc should be called upon to accept petitions forwarded to them by privato individuals dealing with subjects of what we may call national importance. It was, therefore, impossible for the Chamber under the circumstance?, though fully alive to importance of our products finding a good market, to endorse a petition originating as did the one before them. If the Chamber had felt at any time very strongly on the subject, it is presumable that they would have taken the initiative in the matter, and have obtained the co-operation of all the other Chambers in the country. The present discussion has done good so far as to awaken tho Chamber to a sense of its duty in the matter. As to the method to be pursued, considerable latitude of opinion may be allowed. One section may hold that the Now Zealand Government is the proper channel through which communication should lie made, another that our Chambers of Commerce should communicate direct with the principal Chambers in the United States. There are in all the principal cities of tho Union, Chambers whoso function it is, like our own institutions, to watch over the mercantile interests of tho respective cities. To them, therefore, might tho appeal bo made, because they, being on the spot, the recognised organs and mouthpieces of tho commerce of America, would, if they took the same view of it that the promoters of the petition do, bo able to bring a largo amount of influence to bear direct upon the United States Government. Of course all would depend apon the method in which the Chambers in America were approached from this side. It would be necessary to put clearly before them the facts of the case, and tho reciprocal advantages to be gained by tho alteration, endeavoring by this means to enlist their sympathy and support. If tho committee to whom, as wo take it, rests the whole subject of the desirableness or otherwise, of moving in the matter at all, decide in favor of the former, it will then be necessary to arrange for joint action on tho part of all tho Chambers in Now Zealand. The question is very wide and important, and energy is required. Experience has taught us that tho woolgrowers themselves are marvellously apathetic in all such matters. Tho only element that stirred when the Chinese wool trade was before the public was tho commercial element. To that section of those interested in tho trade will, to all appearances, solely bo relegated the moving in the present undertaking. The woolgrowers in the two Houses may, perhaps, by great exertions, be induced to exert themselves in their own interests ; but even that is not certain.

We must congratulate the ratepayers of the North-east Ward on the fact that in the person of Mr. H. Thomson they have a candidate for their suffrages well worthy the position he seeks to attain. We have not at all times agreed with that gentleman in his views on public questions, but it is undoubted that he has done good service for the city and is capable of doing much more. Ho has filled with great credit the Mayoral chair. He is at present chairman of tho Hospital and Charitable Aid Board, and, as such, is in possession of information which won’4 naturally be valuable to him if elected a Councillor, His experience in municipal matters, is wide and varied, and he is a thorough North-east Ward man. His interests are not divided, as both his residence and place of business are in tho ward. “ Where the property is there is the heart also,” might well be a civic adaptation of a well-known text. However much a man may wish to be impartial, it is well that ho should be identified as much as possible with tho ward for which he is elected. It is not of course possible in all cases, but the nearer the theory is adhered to the better. On all grounds therefore we trust that Mr Thomson will bo returned.