Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1884. CUSTOMS DUTIES.

The anomalies of our Customs Dufies are at present attracting considerable attention. The Dunedin Chamber of Commerce has taken the matter in hand and given it much attention. The Chamber appointed a Committee to enquire into the subject with the result that they produced a report that surprised everyone wiio read it. The gist of the report is that some goods are liable to pay Customs Duty whilst other goods are allowed to come in free, and that the regulations are so loose that Custom-house officers find it difficult, if not impossible, to say what is, and what is not, amenable to pay duty. There is no doubt but that the prepent Ougtomp

tariff was framed with the best intentions. It was sought to gam three objects, viz., raise revenue, protect local industries, and render certain articles as cheap as possible for the poor. These are the objects evidently that were contemplated by the present tariff, but it appears that through want of definiteness, it would puzzle a Philadelphia lawyer to say whether some goods are liable to duty or not. For instance, tailors’ trimmings are entitled to come in free, and so are dressmakers’ trimmings, and the question frequently arises as to what are and what are not tailors’ and dressmakers’ trimmings. The object of allowing these to come in free is to encourage the manufacture of clothing in the colony and a very laudable object it is too—but it leads to no end of complications between the Custom-house officers and the merchants. In ironmongery, in the same way, several things are allowed in free with a view to encourage the ironworkers, and complications are again the result. How vexatiously the Customs have been managed can be gathered from the following remarks made by a Mr Brown, who, on last Monday, was one of a deputation to the Premier in Dunedin on the subject“ It is nothing unusual to be called upon to pay duty on goods distinctly named in the tariff as free, and frequently goods were admitted free at one time and made dutiable at another at the same port. It was quite common for goods to be admitted free at one port and made dutiable at another. No doubt legal redress was obtainable where the decision was contrary to the Act ; but. importers should not require to have recourse to law. .A case had occurred in which a firm was called on to pay duty on goods free by the tariff, and 10 weeks elapsed before the Government made a refund. The goods had been sold to arrive, and when they could be delivered the season was past and they were unsaleable. Another case was now pending in which his firm had been called upon to pay a duty on colored cotton shirting, which before had been admitted free. It was poor consolation to know that an action in the Supreme Court must result in restitution, as that cost money, and the goods in the meantime could not be sold. A class of cases arose from the official head having power to decide whether an article was to be charged with duty or admitted free. A slight variation in finish, pattern, or quality frequently resulted in opposite decisions, and gave rise to most ludicrous and extraordinary complications. The system of making articles dutiable or free according to the purposes for which they were said to be used was decidedly objectionable, and gave rise to much trouble and wrong.” Other members of the deputation substantiated Mr Brown’s statement and added more facts to it, and they succeeded in convincing the Premier that the matter wanted looking into, although he was not very successful in his efforts to find a remedy for it. He said it was very difficult to deal with the matter, especially where it was the intention to allow the same goods to coma free for a certain purpose and be charged duty if they were used for anything else. He did not see how it could be remedied unless “ there could be a sliding scale in addition to the ad valorem duty, so that the higher-priced goods might pay a higher ad valorem duty than the lower-priced goods.” Mr Glendinning at once replied that that would make things worse than ever, and the Premier appealed to them as experts to show how the matter might be arranged, but not one of them had any practical suggestion to make. In fact he was more or less jumped upon for suggesting that highpriced goods should be charged a higher rate, and he humbly said he only threw it out as a suggestion in the hope of eliciting more information. We are of opinion the Premier was altogether wrong in this suggestion, for two reasons : first, because it did not meet the difficulty ; and second, because it would be inconsistent with the principles of a tariff that recognises the principles of protection. Goods that can be produced in this colony ought to bear heavv duty, so as to encourage and foster local production ; goods which we must import because we cannot produce them here ought to be allowed in cheaply if not free. If high-priced goods were charged a higher rate, as suggested by the Premier, the very articles we cannot produce would come under it. For instance, we cannot manufacture silks, sealkins, and suchlike materials yet, and these would come under the highpriced goods, while they are almost as frequently worn by tne maid as the mistress. It is impossible for one who has no special knowledge of the subject to offer a suggestion : it is difficult for experts to find a remedy for such instances as are cited by Mr Brown, where he says that “ a slight variation in finish and pattern, etc., would result in opposite decisions.” At the same lime we cannot but believe that it is possible—although the Premier says it is not—to make things so explicit that Custom-house officers will be able to understand what ought and what ought not to pay duty. The Premier promised that every effort would be made to remedy the evil. We hope that in remodelling the tariff, however, sight will not be lost of the principle which it contains that is the encouragement, however feebly, of the development of our own resources.

LAND LEASING.

It gives us pleasure to learn that there is one man of sense in Canterbury, who knows what is sterling and what is spurious coin when brought lace to face with

h. Iha Ashburton correspondent of the Lyttelton Times says :—“ At the recent sitting of the Unemployed Commission at Ashburton one unfortunate man came up, not so much to ask for work or to growl nbout its ecarcity, as to ask the Commission to do what it could to have Mr Rolleston’s pet leasing scheme retained. The man was a portable engine-driver, and he felt that if he were able to lease from tiovernment a bit of land he would be able to do something for himself during the winter, and he preferred Government for a landlord to a private individual. He said he had £lO in the Savings Bank, and this he intended to stick to in the event of having to clear out. No sooner had he uttered his faith in Mr RolJeston than one evidently ultra-radical member of the Commission remarked that whoever trusted to Mr Rolleston trusted to a broken reed, but a flabbergasted look came over his radical features when the engine-driver gave a reason for the faith that was in him, and showed how Mr Rolleston’s scheme was not without its value.” A year ago Mr Rolleston’s leasing scheme was widely believed in—in fact, as widely as it was understood —but it has lately been lost .sight of completely, owing to the corrupt ideas inculcated by the Heaven-sent statesman who rules supreme now. Among those who believed in land leasing were Messrs Stout and Ballance; but what do they believe in now ? Sir Julius Yogel said it was the greatest nonsense that ever was thought of, and we suppose they must believe as he does. We have so frequently discussed this subject already, that we do not feel disposed to do so again. At the same time we are glad to find that there are people who cannot be led away by bubbles such as are being served up for us now, but prefer the solid, lasting, careful legislation carried out by Mr Rilleston.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18841211.2.6

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Temuka Leader, Issue 1276, 11 December 1884, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,428

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1884. CUSTOMS DUTIES. Temuka Leader, Issue 1276, 11 December 1884, Page 2

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1884. CUSTOMS DUTIES. Temuka Leader, Issue 1276, 11 December 1884, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert