THE STANDARD. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 1873.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 82, 27 August 1873, Page 2

THE STANDARD.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 27, 1873.

“ We shall sell to no man justice or right: We shall deny to no man justice or right: We shall defer to no man justice or right.”

No question was ever submitted to a deliberative assembly that received less deliberation on its merits and demerits, than the question of the present session —the alteration of the customs duties from measurement to value. It is true there was a show of opposition outside the Hpuse; but that arose less from a disagreejnent with the principle involved in the proposed change than from a rooted dislike most commercial men have to fiscal alterations which interfere with their established habits of business.

The questions of centum and decimal calculation which have often been introduced for acceptance by colonial traders —and which are pretty generally adopted in English and Continental houses —find no favor with them, not because they cannot, or will not, see their ad vantages, _ but simply on account of the modicum' of trouble necessary to revolutionize the customs (or their customs) of commerce. But there is one man among them who says “It must be, and it shall be. I want a change (because I want more money). If you don’t know how to do your own business, allow me to show you. The Tariff bears with unequal pressure on the community; therefore, I beg to suggest such improvements as wall favor the and the Treasury at the same time.” And he comes swooping down upon astonished Senators with proposals (backed up by arguments of the most innocent audacity) which they seem to be powerless to refuse or oppose. That an ad valorem duty is more equitable as a tax upon dutiable articles, we allow; and having entertained that opinion for some considerable time, we are right glad to see that it is now passed into law; but we deiqjir entirely the

rate fixed, and to both the manner and the method chosen by Mr. Vogel to pass the measure through the House, without either giving the country time to pronounce upon it, or caring whether it were acceptable or not. The Premier has evinced in this business a petty, tyrannical spirit, which clearly shows how little he cares for public opinion when he has a majority at his back in the house. And of the majority—the 41 who divided with him—can they be said to represent their constituencies ? Can they be said to represent trade at all, in voting against Mr. Johnston’s amendment to reduce the taxation, because their leader chose to make it a Ministerial question at the eleventh hour, and threateningly to hurry it on with most unbecoming haste ? None knew better than Mr. Vogel the consequences of delay; noses were counted, and the “ life or death ” of his Government depended therefrom. The innocent ascription to him of appealing to the country in case of an adverse vote, could only be conceived by men who know him not. There was as little chance of him going to the country with an extra taxing bill in his pocket, as there was of him being outvoted on a division, and he knew it; he knew his strength, and he used it mightily. Considering these things, it is not to be wondered that the real effect of the Premier’s proposals is only shewing itself after the evil has been consummated. It is only now that the people are beginning to see how thoroughly duped they have been by the assertion that no appreciable augmentation of the revenue will accrue from the alteration in the tariff; and that feeling is not lessened by the knowledge that Mr. Vogel’s ignorance of cause and effect, led him to use inducing assertions second-hand, and forced him from his vantage ground to make concessions by reducing the rate from 15 to 12|, and finally to 10 per cent, and to acknowledge that he had been led into error by the Customs’ officers. We propose, shortly, to-day to introduce one or two arguments which we think will conclusively prove that the Colonial Treasurer is wrong in his calculations as to results. We have before us a few statements obtained from two distinct sources, showing the difference of duty payable under the old and new tariffs. The first we reprint from a contemporary, entire, as follow : —

—By this it will be perceived that in an amount of £165 12s lid under the measurement duty, the excess at per value under the new tariff is £305 17s 7d, or about 190 per cent. The second we have received from our own local merchants, consisting of various items taken indiscriminately. The duty on one invoice per measurement ■would be £5 8s 2d, while at per value it is £2l 5s 9d, or nearly 300 per cent, more; whilst the following shew that on some articles the duty under the new tariff is less than under the old one:—

—These totals are equalized by the articles mentioned above, for instance —

“ sacks and wool-packs ” by measurement would be £3O 10s Id, and ’by value only £2B 4» 4d. “ Oilmen’s Stores,” by measurement, £3O 10s ; by value, £l6 7s 3d, which plainly indicates the prudence of instituting a valuation basis. But when we consider that the Colonial Treasurer first allowed only £48,000 at 15 per cent, as the increase of Customs’ receipts over those of 1872-3 ; that he subsequently sprang from that and admitted an excess of £62,000 with the duty reduced to 10 per cent. ; when we see that on the majority of goods a large increase is to be levied, ranging from 100 to 2000 per cent.; and when we read the statements of business men that they, individually, will contribute an excess varying from £2OOO to £20,000 during the financial year to the Customs’ revenue, we think we have good grounds for doubting the Premier’s figures, and cannot be deemed captious in so doing. Taking the Customs’ receipts for 1872-3 at £852,000 —all of which it is true was not according to value—plus the average per centage shewn above for 1873-4, it is impossible to arrive at any other conclusion than that the end of the year will shew a greater excess than is contained in the Treasurer’s explanation; or, if there be a diminution in the revenue, it will be the prohibitive duty which will prevent the importation of valuables and articles of luxury into the Colony ; or confining their enjoyment exclusively to the wealthiest among the people.

Old £ Tariff. New Tariff. 8. d. £ 8. d. Invoice of Nails 4 0 0 8 16 0 „ Window Glass 4 9 0 18 5 0 „ Sheet Lead ... 3 8 0 7 4 0 „ Paints... 1 0 0 1 8 0 „ Vestas 1 4 9 5 2 6 „ Starch 1 10 0 2 15 0 2 cases Moleskin Trousers 4 1 0 9 0 0 1 case Men’s Felt Hats... 6 6 0 11 5 0 2 cases Ladies’ Straw Hats 5 5 0 8 5 0 1 case Silks 3 11 3 75 5 0 1 „ Ribbons 7 7 11 53 5 0 1 „ Laces 4 0 0 24 2 6 5 cases Ladies’ Dress Goods 22 10 0 51 17 6 5 „ Men’s Shirts 17 10 0 27 5 0 3 „ Men’s Clothing ... 11 10 0 29 15 0 6 „ Hosiery .... 26 10 0 40 2 6 5 „ Haberdashery ... 19 10 fl 32 2 6 2 „ Tweeds & Cloths 13 10 0 49 5 0 1 case Calicos ... 3 10 0 5 10 0 7 cases Oil Floor-cloths 5 0 0 11 0 0 Total ... £165 12 11 £471 10 6

< )ld Tariff. New Tariff. £ 8. d. £ 8. d. 2 cases Axes 0 7 0 1 13 0 1 case Ironmongery 0 6 0 2 10 0 2 nests galv. iron Tubs... 0 5 0 0 11 0 6 coils Cordage 0 19 6 1 12 6 3 cases Marmalade 0 4 7 0 14 10 1 case Brushware 0 11 6 2 0 1 1 case Carpenters Tools 0 2 6 3 10 0 31 kegs of Nails 1 11 0 4 6 0 3 cases Wax Vestas 0 11 11 2 4 7 29 bales Corn Sacks, and Wool Packs 30 10 1 28 4 4 75 pks. Oilmens Stores ... 30 10 0 16 7 3 2 bales Blankets 8 18 0 8 19 0 1 case Thread 2 6 4 3 1 0 1 case Hosiery and Haberdashery 5 5 0 5 0 6 1 case Cutlery 0 6 9 6 2 0 Total £82 15 2 £86 16 1