THE NEW TARIFF.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 186, 4 August 1873, Page 2

THE NEW TARIFF.

To the Editor op the Nklsou" Evening Mail. Sir — It i3 quite refreshing to see the solicitous csre wherewith our merchants aud importers guard the interests of the working man. If the same solicitude had been exhibited sooner, how many privations ifc might have saved the latter, and how much more noble would the task of tbe former have been if they had come to the front to bear their fair share of the burden. As such an effort has never been mado, I must be excused if I look upon that part of the petition, which has reference to the working man, as a piece s of miserable clap-trap or humbug. In this opinion I am still more confirmed by the closing sentence, which does not pray for % ajnodification or adjustment, but for a rejection of the ad-^valorem tariff, to return fo the old. and iniquitous system, which fixes tbe' fruty\by measurement instead of ad valorem. ' Tj6 show the unfairness of the old system a few examples will suffice. For instance, the common blue shirt worn by » the poor man, would, when packed occupy the space of about four or five dress > shirts, and the duty paid for the dne^-ky the poor man would consequently be/four For remainder qf nevAsee fourth pige.

or five times greater than that paid by the rich man for his fine shirt. Again, if we take wincey and silk, or common print and fine muslin, we shall find that four or five yards of the expensive stuff occupies no more than one yard of the cheaper fabric, and consequently that those who wear silks pay only about one-fourth or one-fifth the amount of duty paid by those who bave to content themselves with the* cheaper stuff. I think it requires no explanation to show that the only way of equalising is to increase the duty upon the fine stuffs four or five fold, which, however, would hardly press upon the poor. The Examiner in an article on July 31, says: — "The increase it will occasion in the price of boots and shoes illustrates the grinding taxation — a taxation, which will fall heavily on the working classeß." And in Saturday's Mail we find the following: — "Pendent, in graceful festoons, over the head of the honoured guest will be several . pairs of moleskin trowsers and watertight boots, bearing brilliantly illuminated tickets, showing the prices for which they were to be obtained before the new tariff, and the amount asked for them now." Let us see this crushing difference. lam told that you may pack about tespairs of moleskin trowsers in the space of one cubic foot, for which, by old tariff, you would have to pay three shillings, or rather better than threepence half-penny per pair. By the new tariff you have to pay twelve and a-half per centum on value of invoice, that is supposing the cost price to be four shillings per pair, (they are now selling here for less than seven shillings), the duty would amount to sixpence per pair, or the trowsers would cost twopence half-penny more, in other words if a man wears three pair per annum, he 'would have to pay an extra annual tax of aevenpence half-penny for trowsers. Now for the boots. Watertights are rarely imported. Bluchers are the most of the imported. Of these you can pack about seven pairs in the space df' one cubic foot, which would yield a duty, by old tariff, of eightpence half- - penny per pair. By new tariff, if valued at six shillings per pair, the duty would aesount to Mnepenee, so that your boots » would cost ycu one half-penny more. As these are the chief articles, which are said admit that the vorking classes, you will j to affect the additional burden is not so / very crushing. / The memoranda supplied by the im/ porters show an enormous increase of duly you will say, but pleas* to remember thjft this is only the case vith those articfes which paid only about of thfeir " due. under the oid tariff, « shown befpe in the cases of wincey v. s3k, and print v. lawn, broadcloth v. moleskn, &c. Thpse memoranda are furthermore of suchla nature as to afford very littlt informat&p to the uninitiated. Please to note the following quotations — Old Tariff. flew Tariff. / . Messrs. N. Edwards and ' ' Co. on Tweeds and I Cloths £12 10 0 -£<& 5 07 . Messrs. Morrison and ; I Sclanders, Tweeds I and cloths -£4 11 3 £6 12 ,;d from which you can prove \hat the dut4 on tweeds is reduced from 300 to 400 peil cent, or that it is only increased by less! than 50 per cent, and I have no doubt that cases might be cited where tins difference is the other way. Altogether, these memoranda do not supply the neceispry data, inasmuch as they do not tell ni i_ what relation they stand to other articles of the same kind, but different quality Thus it is stated — Old Tariff. New Tariff. Men's Bhirts ;.. £17 10 0 ... £27 5 o but we are to guess whether they represen ; dress shirts or common blue shirts. The chief increase in the duties is, a i shown by these memoranda, upon fanc^ articles or luxuries, and I certainly do no ; see how this will seriously interfere witl :• the trade and progress of the place, bu i am rather inclined to think that our pro gress would be more rapid if less mone; • were to leave the country for those luxu ■ ries, and were to be kept circulated her ) instead. In conclusion, I beg to say that I knol rseveral people who have in a hurry $4 '- tached their signatures to the memoria , ■ but who repent it already at leisure. P thjnk, furthermore, that in a case like thii * a public meeting would have been prefeaal ble to a memorial, framed in a hurry bpt [ members .of only one fraternity. [ Trusting that the subject will plead asf . an excuse for the length of my letter, /' > I am, &c, / , H. A. L./