The Oamaru Mail WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE NEW ZEALAND AGRICULTURIST. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1879.

Oamaru Mail, Volume IV, Issue 1077, 2 October 1879, Page 2

The Oamaru Mail WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE NEW ZEALAND AGRICULTURIST. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1879.

W'e have not vet committed ourselves to any condemnation of the protectionist movement ffidvh we recently noticed as having originated in 'Jhrisichtirch. So tar we have felt it our duty te eac.H-'ragc it rather. The journalist can have j:>> interest in stilling discussion. and if any considerable portion of the community consider they have any scheme to propose calculated to revive our drooping commerce, and widen the area of reproductive employment, we shall welcome them rather as fellow laborers in the same field with ourselves until it is conclusively shown that they are totally wrong. The pamphlet which we noticed so recently w;u of a very tentative and rudimentary kind. It warned us of some at ic-.-vit <>f the perils which beset our path, and pointed to the development of native industries and manufactures as the most nbvious remedy. We anticipate some more exhaustive and comprehensivu treatment of the subject, and regarding the matter moreover as s"F> j>"t. meanwhite suspend our judgment. We are promised a Parliamentary Committee which will investigate the whole matter, and rro think it injudicious, if not uni;s;i\ to attempt t& bias public opinion at this stage. Oar contemporary, usually sw thoughtful ana considerate, has recently, on several cccasitjK; shown a very | market! animus when alluding to ih:e subject which we very sincerely deplore. Jt ■ wottld be better on every ground to wait. It may yet appear that the economic conditions of New Zealand are not precisely thoseof Great Hritain, where such thunderbolts as oar able contemporary huris at ; this question so incontinently, were forged. We very much t|ucation whether even in England those conditions remain the same, and there are evidences of a v.-ry palpable; change of public opinion, more especially in those manufacturing town* chiefly affected by the influx of American manufactures. Our contemporary, however, sticks manfully to the oM rftguments and the old paths. Let us n»s-;nj him that we entirely agree with him, subject always to the modifications which, in our opinion, should ever accompany a condition of things in their very nature shifting and transitory. He entirely misapprefwnds the question, however, as, apptied to young communities like New Zealand and the Ansrratian Colonies, j Fret» trade is unquestionably :lu.-o- , retiealty tlie wisest and the t>-v:. | Hut wiser*} dw you iuij it I In j Knglaitd I >V. In any pari world I So. What we do rind is in : tic- i trade. but trade fettered and bound by | irtiticial obstructions. .Not free trr.de, j

t i>nt r»> thoroughfare ! lit N t."« Xeat.iml j j i-7.:n T C violate the ftrat principle »f freel Ib-a.de in a great many re*pi:eta, as r.e sh:.!. j ' :5m /xtafi to point out on some future »oca- j vnai. Oar ikcal policy is su unscientific ditnnsy, and as imliscrinjinating .-vs | Wl >B ,be conceived. It w neither a free tia. 'ie .tariff nor a protectionist tariff— i

neither fish, flesh, nor good red herring. If it can be shown, as the protectionist partv avers, that our local manufactures can be promoted and a large wagesearning population maintained without indicting injury upon any individual or any class, conferring immense advantages moreover upon the whole community, surely such a proposition is worthy of our best attention. Why stifle it at the birth ? I.s it considerate to assail such a proposal with the rusty and threadbare weapons of ;i r>y.">i;c era ai-d a past state of things with which w<: have so little in common ! V.'hitlur our contemporary likes it or not. the question is one which is :iire.:'lv assuming large dimensions, and in a very few months will be the question of questions in New Zealand. If it can be shown that any modifications of our fiscal policy can produce such important results as they so confidently assert, we shall not hesitate in giving such a measure our warmest support. In England protection meant the obnoxious corn laws ; it meant the navigation laws ; it meant Customs duties upon raw materials entering into their manufactures, and for England's colonies it meant absolute prohibition. Not only were they forbidden to manufacture any commodities for themselves, but they were forbidden to buy them in any other markets than those of the mother country. This was protection in Great Britain. How odious surely. Is it extraordinary that the word stinks in our nostrils? But does it imply the same thing in this hemisphere and in this age ? So far as we can judge, the proposals of the party in New Zealand, have nothing in common but the objectionable name. Mure, we understand, it is held to mean the development of the productive resources of the country, without injury to to any one. The gallant charge, therefore, of our esteemed contemporary too nearly resembles Don Quixote when he mistook a flock of sheep for a regiment of soldiers. Wc recommend him to be patient, and we shall see what we shall