THE NEW SOUTH WALES TARIFF.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 12, 15 April 1871, Page 7

THE NEW SOUTH WALES TARIFF.

[Sydney Morning Hekald.] It is a sad day for the colony now that wc have to compare to our disadvantage the Tariff of Victoria with that of Sydney How are we fallen from the tariff of Deas Thompson! We are not going to burst out in the language of Cowper and say, " Weep, oh Muse, weep for Port Jackson." But the advice we should give to Sydney is to fight with tooth and nail against those items of our tariff which are in such ridiculous opposition to those of Victoria. In the free list of that colony is included apparel, cottons in piece, hatter's' felt, hoods and silk plush, linens (in piece), paper (printing and wrapping), pitch, plants, printing materials and ink, sewing machines, silk, mixed doeski us, tweed trouserings and coatings not containing more than two per cent, silk, wool, woollens (in piece), besides several important, items connected with shipping. Such is part of the list of free goods admitted into Melbourne, but subject in this colony to an ad valorem duty of five per cent, and on which it was intended to e.xact a'duty of ten. The object of this free list in Victoria was to leave unchecked the kinds of industry which had already been largely introduced. The greater part of the wearing apparel, excepting the most costly, is made up in that colony. Large workshops have been erected, and the employment of women has become an extensive branch of manufacturing industry. There are moral questions indeed involved. These, however, may be differently estimated, and indeed wear very different aspects. But, of course, every obstruction being removed by the Government—the material of manufacture being entirely untaxed—a great advantage is given to these branches of trade. They have the stimulus of the very ad valorem duties, which they do not pay, bepause, in a comparison of profit in various employments, an impediment to the exercise of one calling is an impulse to the adoption of another. We have an example in our own colony of this. Our cigar manufacturers are benefited at the expense of the public by the lower duty on their raw material compared with the higher duty exacted upon the manufactured article, and, therefore, industry is directed to the branch which is thus for the moment most profitable. This was contemplated by the Melbourne tariff, and, although the stimulus may in the end produce great distress, it is undoubtedly operative for a certain time.

But let us look at the list we have just recited in its bearing on local industry in comparison with our own. The clothier here pays the duty upon woollen cloth. In Melbourne the article comes in free. The tailor here purchases all the smaller articles .used in his trade under a duty. In Melbourne, if he requires a sewing machine, it is imported without duty. The hatter there buys his felt, and the silk plush with which it was covered, and all the interior materials, without a farthing duty. In Sydney he has to pay the ad valorem duty of five per cent. Doeskin and tweed, or other materials for coats and trousers, as well as minor articles—undescribed materials used in making up—all come in free in Melbourne. In Sydney they are subject to a % duty. In Victoria, cotton goods of all kinds, linens of all sorts in piece, out of which the poorer classes commonly make their clothing, are exempt from taxation. In Sydney they are taxed five per cent.

If the two countries were a-thousand miles apart, the difference between these tariffs would be mischievous to New South Wales. People here would rightly complain that the natural progress of industry was not only loaded with duties, but that they were.so imposed as specially to impede that class of business which was carried on with the least capital, and gave the most employment to the people. It would be fair to pursue the contrast between the legislation of the two countries, as it affected their power to compete in foreign markets. It is quite evidentthatthe agent of a clothing establishment in this colony cannot meet the agent of a clothing establishment from Melbourne. The one man has had all bis material free, and the other has paid upon it an ad valorem duty, Even

a clear five per cent on capital will turn the scale between profit and ruin. Every merchant knows that this is true, even if the Government do not. When the late Treasurer promised to abolish the ad valorem duties, one of the largest importing houses was preparing to enter into, the clothing trade. They erected a large workshop, and would have set on many bauds. The continuance of the five per cent has this purpose. The imposition of the ten per cent would have annulled it.

But this is not the whole of the case. By a convention with the Melbourne Government we admit their goods across the Border duty free. A navigable river reaches near to our territory. A large breadth of country thus becomes easily accessible. Without any encouragement, many would obtain their goods from Melbourne, but we are practically offering them a five per cent bonus to induce them to compete with our mercantile and manufacturing population. We say to them : we not only open the market to you without obstruction, but yoa shall have the advantage of five per cent on everything which comes over the borders which your workpeople have wrought up while ours have been idle. And what has been the result of this precious legislation—that commercial travellers from Melbourne visit every town in the southern interior as far as Goulburn. A little more encouragement, and we should find them at Sydney—not only competing with our population, but in fact stopping our Customs' duties at the port. This, we understand, is facilitated by lowering all the downward fares in the railway, and charging a higher rate upward! It will be necessary for our readers to analyse these two lists to credit that we are not misrepresenting- them. It seems perfectly incredible that men of sense should frame such a tariff. It would be impossible if they had any knowledge of t}ie subject on which they legislate, or any concern for the welfare of this city. Their scheme embraces everything wrong in principle and.mischievous in practice. It is as if Manchester imposed a duty on raw cotton, and admitted piece goods free; as if Birmingham admitted Paris articles duty free, and charged a high rate upon all manufactured on the spot.

We shall be told, no doubt, that nothing was intended but to get revenue. The same thing is always said by the Turkish Gevernment when it swoopsi down like an eagle upon its prey, and offers the protection of a strong arm, on condition of receiving fifty per cent, of the stock. The Government must have money is the plea. The moneywanted is there in the stock of the trader. The Treasury is suddenly enriched by transferring the stock of the trader to the coffers of the Sultan. The only difficulty is that this process cannot be often repeated—that the Treasury is a cistern and not a fountain. The Government destroys the very source of its- wealth in reaping it, and like a devastating army quits its prey when it is reduced to bones and ashes. Our Government has proceeded upon the Turkish principle in matters of finance. They had better take a leaf out of the Berlin portfolio. - Neither a private firm nor a Government can long survive systematic profusion and neglect of accounts, and it can only accelerate its own ruin by schemes of blind and extravagant taxation.