South Canterbury Times. SATURDAY, MAY 6, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2844, 6 May 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. SATURDAY, MAY 6, 1882.

The old controversy on Free Trade v. Protection Las been revived by the recent sayings and doings of Mr Graham Berry, in Sydney. The protectionists of New South Wales invited Mr Berry, as the exponent of their doctrine, to undertake what we may terra a “ mission ” in the interests of Protection. He was to convert many and edify nil. There is no evidence, that the protectionist principles are going to over-ride free trade in the older colony. In the meantime, however, the utterances of Mr Berry, if not remarkable for good sense or moderation, constitute nevertheless the exposition of the principles of a very powerful faction, and on that ground must command attention. This craze of Protection dies very hard. It is not until a country has been reduced to the lowest possible state and the place has become almost uninhabitable through high prices that the people begin to, awaken to a perception that an out and out protectionist policy is a wretched mistake. The protectionists, with a great flourish of trumpets, declared at the initiation of their scheme in Victoria, that the vision of a local market for local productions was about to be realised, and as this vision became a substantive reality, another still fairer vision was rising behind it, —that of a profitable export trade. The vision was realised, but it proved by no means an agreeable reality to the general public. It was all very well for the politicians. It suited the promoters of local industries. Above all it pleased the working man. But how did the consumer fare ? He simply found it very hard indeed to live, for he was compelled to pay ruinous prices for every thing. Then only it was that a great deal of public feeling was diverted into a more reasonable channel, and many of the extreme protectionists took a more moderate view of the position. Not only was the cost to the consumer ruinous but the export trade was really not a profitable one since the taxpayer was paying an amount at least equal to the profit made upon the exports. When the question of federation comes up, this matter of protection will bo found to be a very great stumbling block while stump speakers continue to influence public opinion. Before federation becomes mi fait accompli, it will be necessary to decide whether Victoria (as her protectionists advocate), shall institute a protective tariifof her own to operate against her sister colonies as well as against outside countries, or one protective tariff shall be constructed to embrace the whole federal union—or whether protection is to be, once for all, banished from the colonics. Certainly our experience oi the past does not afford much ground for hope that protection will bear any but the most barren results. In the

United States it lias proved a failure, and would Lave proved a disastrous failure, bad it not been for the vast resources, the splendid soil, and the ever increasing population. In the colonies of Australia these conditions do not exist, and any such restrictive measure as this would prove immediately injurious and eventually ruinous.

The Gladstone Government is beginning to deal in surprises. The coercion measures hitherto employed in Ireland are to be set aside and entirely new methods inaugurated. The imprisoned agitators are to be released and the mother is going to freely forgive her obstreperous child. All the world awaits the result with anxiety. It is certain that coercion has signally failed to accomplish the end it sought. Murder and outrage go on without cessation, and popular feeling is in exactly the same inflamed state as it always has been. Coercion has failed, the Church has failed, every influence hitherto brought to bear on the people has so far been ineffectual. It is now proposed to try some other plan. The exact nature of the policy we do not yet know, but the proceedings in regard to the prisoners indicate that it is a conciliatory and pacific one. Of the probability of its success we hardly like to express an opinion, but we may say our hope is far stronger than our expectations. It will be a grand day for humanity, and a glorious triumph for the Liberal party if their expectations of restoring peace to Ireland should now bo realised. Who canforsee? Our telegramsthis morning contain one item of news which affords a spark of hope. Mr Parnell, the supreme agitator, the arch-rebel who has suffered imprisonment for his action, has promised to assist the Government in restoring order in Ireland, provided arrears of rent due by tenants are remitted. The Government having promise of such cooperation as this, have their position much strengthened, and we await, with stronger hope than we have yet been able to entertain, a further development of affairs in Ireland. In Mr Parnell the Irish have a “ true blue ” patriot, but it is more than doubtful whether the rank and file of the fraternity of agitators will submit to a course of reform snd a cessation of hostilities. For they have money and notoriety to gain by revolution, while in peaceful times they are relegated to fitting obscurity. There will be some trouble in stamping them out; but stamped out they must be and that quickly and effectually. Then, and not till then, there may be a chance of mending matters.

We are constantly hearing from all quarters instances of absconding. A man becomes financially involved, and seeing no prospect of reinstating himself, be betakes him beyond the reach of his creditors. This is the short history of the case. It is plain that some remedial measures must be adopted to put a stop to a growing evil. For there is not merely to be considered the actual loss sustained by individual creditors ; there is also to be taken into consideration the injury done to commerce generally by the feeling of distrust and suspicion engendered in the community, and the accompanying circumstances of many of the cases we are referring to, such as the desertion of home and wife and family, which have effects far beyond the immediate consequences. In the first place then, employers ought to gravely regard the obligation that rests upon them to keep a careful look-out upon such of their servants as occupy positions of trust. Employers of labor are never backward, but always most exact, in scrutinising work done by their employes, but the very man who keeps a sharp eye on his day laborers or his porter, is quite content to leave his confidential clerk unwatched. This temptation is unfairly placed in the way of the individual. He may be honestly disposed but he may be so deeply involved ns to lose his head and (when under pressure of creditors) to make use of any funds within his reach to stave off calamity. Again, the creditors often do not exercise sufficient caution. In their anxiety to do business they allow a man to get into their debtto an absurd amount. Or, it may be that in pure good nature and confidence they do it. In any case it is wrong and they are only helping the debtor to ruin and themselves to serious loss. They rely upon the law to see them righted, and, when the evil day comes, they set the law in motion. But it is then too late. The law can only punish the delinquent, it cannot set the creditor right, and in nine cases out of ten, loss of time, anxiety, pecuniary sacrifice without return are their portion. Some of our most eminent men have. expressed themselves favorable to making debt nonrecoverable in law, for the simple purpose of making creditors careful and debtors honourable. The creditor under such a regime would be careful whom ho trusted, while the debtor would find honesty to bo the best, because the most profitable, policy. At present, there is undue recklessness on the part of creditors, while undue facilities are afforded to debtors ; and a ridiculous laxity is shewn by those employing persons in positions of trust. It is parallel! with the reprehensible conduct of tradesmen in exposing their wares within easy reach of dishonest or needy passers-by.