Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1869. THE FATE OF THE THREATENED BREAD TAX

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 14, Issue 713, 30 August 1869, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. MONDAY, AUGUST 30, 1869. THE FATE OF THE THREATENED BREAD TAX

In committee of ways and means on Monday, the 23rd invt., the Colonial Treasurer, Mr "Vogel, brought forward his proposal for the imposition of a duty on all cereals imported into the Colony, of 9d. per cwt. when unmanufactured, and Is per cwt. when ground or manufactured, whenever the average price of flour was below 21s per cwt. His speech was rather apologetic than argumentative. He said the question had acquired undue importance, as if the question of protection were involved in it. The Go\ernment did not affirm that piinciple, and though individually he was in favor of the principle to a limited extent, he proposed this tax to meet the exigencies of the country.

In the debate which followed a large number of members took part, and some rather singular arguments were used, and statements made. It was, however, finished the same night, the bill being thrown out by a majority of three against the Government. The numbers stood as follows r—for the proposed duty, 22; against it, 25. Thus it appears the Colony has had a very narrow escape from the infliction of a tax which, as Mr Stafford showed, would practically raise the price of flour in the Colony to £2l per ton, a price much higher than it usually rules at—it would make the people pay at least £2 per cent, more for flour than the} T had been accustomed to pay, and therefore simply meant a tax increasing the price of the necessaries of lite. Other members, as Mr Cums, took the same ground, as they thought such, necessaries already overtaxed; while Mr M'Farlane showed that it was actually necessary to import foreign wheat, as that grown in the Colony was not of a sufficiently dry character to be made into bread alone. Other members regarded the proposal as the " thin end of the protection wedge"—that it was, in fact, the bonus offered by the Government to the representatives of the agricultural interest at the expense of the rest of the country, and that as long as the Colony was unable to grow sufficient corn for its own consumption, the necessaries of life should be imported tree of duty.

Mr Jtiehmond placed the matter in its true light. He showed that while practically all the grain consumed hy the Colony would be equally affected in price by the proposed tax, only one-sixth part would give a revenue to the Colony, while the other five-sixths woul 1 give a revenue to somebody else. Tims, while tlie Government might raise £14,000 or £15,000 by means ol this tax, it would be felt by the Colony as a burden of six times that amount. He did not know what effect the paltry sum expected from this source was likely to produce on the whole sum required—from threequarters to one-and a-half million*— to raise which the Government must after all go into the money market.

Mr Fox's speech was a marvel of ingenuity. He was a free trader, and could never have supported the resolution from a protectionist point of view ; but his honorable colleague thought that the sum mentioned could be conveniently raised in this way, and he swallowed his free-trade principles as he would a dose of physic, The money was in fact wanted, and he did not see how else to iaise it. Let it pass, he said, as a tempo vary measure. The Government did not make the question a ministerial one, but would vote for it as a Government.

Among the curious arguments and assertions emanating from the ministerial side of the House, we notice those made by MiGraham. 11(5 denied that the tax would affect the working classes, but added that, if it did, " the working classes of this country were, of all others, the best ab]e to bear taxation." Others, again, seemed by some singular invemon of first principles, actually to believe that it would prove a benefit to the Colony. However the House and the country did not see it in that light, and some other " ways and means" must be piovided by the Government for the raising of this £14,000 per annum if it be, as stated, imperatively required. We are indebted to the Independent's report of the debate for the above information, the lateso authorized reports to hand not extending beyond the 19th inst.