Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1871.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 18, Issue 1190, 6 December 1871, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Times. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1871.

Mr. Vogei,, in the Committee of Ways and Means, perpetrated several egregious fallacies of argument, both in relation to the new stamp duties and the new duties of customs. In the first when the tax on cheques was under .discussion, in reply to Mr. 0. M'Lean, who said " that there was no part of the world in which 2d was charged Upon a cheque, and it would practically amount to a duplication of the duties upon receipts," Mr. Vogel argued that the cheque tax would be paid by the person giving the cheque, and the receipt tax by the person receiving payment, and that it would be absurd not to make both parties pay alike. When, however, the amendment of Mr Oreighton—that workmen receiving wages under <£f> should be exempt from the receipt tax—came on for discussion, Mr 'Vogel seems to have quite forgotten ■what he had just before said about the receipt tax falling on the party receiving payment, and replied that "the employers of labor were well able to pay the (double) duty," knowing well enough at the same time that the tax would fall upon the workman in accordance with the principle he had before laid down. Equally illogical was he on the question pf the new import duties. *' He hopecj they would be spared a debate upon the relative merits of protection and free trade. The duties required were for revenue purposes, and were such as were absolutely necessary to pe imposed, considering the fiscal policy of fhe neighboring Colonies." Did ever anypne meet with a more complete non sequitur ? It was as if he had said, f c I $o not propose these duties for the pro tection of any class, but because I must raise a certain amount of revenue, and J do ngf see my other way in which it can be done" This to the free trade section pf the House tp disarm them of opposition to his proposals. Nex* turning to she protectionist section,—" I propose f&ese protectionist duties because neigh-

boring colonies hasfe adopted a similar policy. They protect their agriculturists in their o'yn markets against ours, and We must protect ours in our own markets against theirs." Truly Mr. Vogel has a peculiar talent for becoming all things to all men that he may gain some friends on every hand. The fallacy of Mr. Vogers reasoning will be still more apparent if we consider that if we fall into the policy of protective duties, we do so; and the result is exactly the same whether the intention he "revenue" or "protection." It ib sheer folly to say to the people, " 1 do not want to tax your bread," when the bread is taxed ; and the agriculturist who gains his favorite move will laugh at the way the Colony has been gulled into the adoption of the policy of protection.