Rangitikei Advocate TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1907. SECOND EDITION.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8776, 2 April 1907, Page 2

Rangitikei Advocate TUESDAY, APRIL 2, 1907. SECOND EDITION.

NEW ZEALAND manufacturers have often complained that people in this country do not patronise home-made : goods to tlie extent that might reasonably be expected, but are inclined to allow a preference for imported articles which, according to our manufacturer."!, are no better or cheaper than the colonial prodra- ions of the same hind. The Canterbury Industrial Association has proposed a remedy for this state of affairs which wo must admit hardly scorns likely to prove a solution of the difficulty. The suggestion is that to encourage the sale of local manufactures the Government are to ‘‘institute a system of grading and testing local manufactures of high merit with some distinctive official mark, so that high class colonial goods may be recognisable as such.” The mover of the resolution referred to the grad-

ing of articles for export as being a precedent for such a course, but it is evidently quite a different matter to grade all the butter or hemp before , it is shipped from having an army of inspectors prowling round the country putting tho official stamp on boots and clothing not to speak of all the other multifarious articles made in the colony. You may take a horse to the water hut you cannot make him drink, says the proverb, and similarly you may cover an article with Government brands and' graders’ marks, hut unless the buyer approves of it ho will not be tempted to purchase. Instead of appealing to Government for aid we should prefer to sec a little more .self reliance ~in manufacturers. If .they have a good and cheap article for sale they pped; no Government stamp to push it off. But if, as in many cases, the goods! offered are a little loss attractive and a little dearer than similar imported goods they will vainly demand support for home industries oil patriotic grounds.

WRITING on tho Land Bill flie ( .. ~,rarapa Daily Times said (lie other day: “In the Mastorton electorate wo have to consider how far (ho Government proposals, as far as, wo are able to guess them, are for;

the benefit of both town and country. 1 \Vo at once admit that the subdivision of large {‘.states, in favour of {■lose settlement, would benefit both town and country; but if wo ask ourselves whether th Government proposals would bring agent such subdivision the answer must be that they will not do so. It would be foolish to put iiul aer powers in the, hands ~f the Government unless there was a certainly of their being clxcctivo..

‘ We don't want doubtful remedies, and it would be absurd to wait ten ivr fifteen years to discover, whwt is already patent —viz, that the McNab measure will not promote closer e-t tie me ut in the Masterton electorate. If there is to be a change, let it be a well considered one, that will promote closer settlement audf satisfy the demands in this electorate ■for the next five and twenty years.”-