The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, JUNE 27, 1885. THE NEW CUSTOMS TARIFF.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1358, 27 June 1885, Page 2

The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, JUNE 27, 1885. THE NEW CUSTOMS TARIFF.

The policy of the present Government is so stupendous and bewildering that we really donotknow whether to accept orre]Vct it. We have not yet received the measures submitted to the House, and have nothing to go upon except the resume of them, transmitted to newspapers by telegraph from Wellington. Of course these reports are necessarily condensed, and possibly do not convey exactly what is meant. It would, therefore, be rather riskey to accept or reject thorn nu the infoimatiou so far to had. One thing, however, that may be safely said is; the the proposals and measures of the present Government are characterised by boldness and originality such as we have not hitherto noticed in New Zealand politics ; whether they are suitabl# to th« colony is what we hestitate to offer

an opinion upon. Taking first their financial j proposals, they must, to a certain extent commen.l themselves to us. We have hitherto held protection to be indispensibly necessary to develops the resources of the colony, and the revised customs tariff submitted by Bir Julius Vogel has a tendency in that direction. Sir Julius Vogel says the Customs duties have been increased not to protect local industries but for the purpose of raising revenue, The yearly expenditure is increasing ; the yearly revenue from ordinary sources is decreasing, and consequently the Customs duties must be raised so as to meet the inevitable deficit. We cannot by any means subscribe to Ibis doctrine. The Customs duties fall on the working classes, as directly as the property tax falls on the propertied classes, and in the present condition of the colony working people are not in a position to pay them. Sir Julius Vogel says the most logical tax is that raised through the Customs. If it is logical to shift taxation on to the shoulders of the poor, by all means Sir Julius Vogel’s logic js unanswerable, but we do not think it is. In our opinion taxation should be borne altogether by property, and the poor should be exempt. We are, therefore, altogether opposed to the doctrine laid down in Sir Julius Vogel’s Financial Statement. We disapprove completely and unreservedly of increasing the Customs duties for the purpose of raising the revenue, but we fully approve of putting a tax on imported goods which without it would prevent the same goods being produced in the colony It may be said that this is a distinction without a difference. It is not so. Fo? instance, Sir Julius Vogel has increased the duty on tea by twopence per lb, while sugar is allowed to come in at the old rates. In our opinion this is altogether wrong. Tea is an article which cannot be successfully produced in this colony ; sugar can, and to tax tea and not sugar is to discourage the development of the sugar industrys. Sir Julius Vogel said sugar was necessary for making jams, etc., and consequently he would not increase the duty on it. This is simply a contemptible idea. The proper way t<> meet this difficulty would ba to raise the duty on jams, etc., so as to enable them to be made with dearer sugar in the colony, In this way all these industries would have been encouraged. Sir Julius in his own “ hifalutin ” way said those who used exotic products should pay for them. It is a pity someone has not told him that a Treasurer who resorts to Quixotic nonsense should be placed m a back seat, Why has not Sir Julius revised the tariff so ss to prevent the use of exotic products as much as possible? Another thing Sir Julius has done is to protect industries which are thriving and prosperous, and need no encouragement. This, again, is taxing the wrong man. No industry should be protected except such as cannot get on without it—and these only to the extent necessary to make them reasonably remunerative. To fail to give such industries as require it the necessary protection from competition with “ exotic products”—to use the Colonial Treasurer’s high-flown terms—is to retard the industrial advancement of the colony. There are several articles used in this colony which cannot be made here as cheaply as they can be imported, and our best policy is to put such a duty on these as will enable them to be made locally. Sir Julius Vogel’s proposals tend in that direction, but they proceed from unjust motives, and are based on unsound principles. Sir Julius Vogel has the excuse that he wants revenue, and that this is the best means of raising it ; but this want has to some extent been created by himself. He came into the colony a little over twelve months ago, and began to cry out that the Property Tax was ruining the country ; and as soon as he got the opportunity lie reduced it. Those who wanted it reduced thought he did well ; but what must they think now, when they find he has increased the expenditure to an extent that will necessitate increasing both the Property Tax and Customs duties, so as to meet the requirements of the State ? If Sir Julius Vogel had allowed the Property Tax to go on as it was last year he would certainly not have found himself in such a difficult position this year, And it must always thus fall to the lot of the political schemer, who works not for the good of the colony, but only with the view of securing a majority that will keep him in office. s

CHEAP MONEY. When Sir Julius Vogel, in his address to his constituents in Christchurch, propounded a cheap money scheme, we told him without hesitation it would not work. He has since found out we were right, and has altogether abandoned bis proposal. In his Financial Statement he admitted the cheap money scheme submitted by himself would not work, and said that a system of mortgage debentures which had worked well in England would be introduced, it is rather humiliating for a man in Sir Julius Vogel's position to make proposals one day and in the next say they will not work. It looks as if he had not the capability to understand what he says himself, and does not know whether it is right or wrong until some one shows him its practical bearings. Why did Sir Julius Vogel propound such a scheme until he was fully sure it would work ? Simply because he wanted to curry favor, but he has since found out that any schoolboy could see that his scheme was unworkable. As for the mortgage debenture, scheme we cannot say what its effect will be ; but we say this, that it is possible for such a scheme to have worked well in England and yet not suit this colony at all. The money market of the world is in England, and if an English landowner wanted to raise money on debentures HeJ can

easily do so. Here we must send our debentures to England, and offer them to people who never saw New Zealand, and know nothing of the farm Jof land which is offered as security for them. Ic is obvious, therefore, that while these debentures may do weil for English landowners, they may be next to useless here. However, we shall be most ready to welcome and support the scheme if we can see any probability of it doing good, but we can offer no opinion on this point uut'l we have fuller information on the subject. In the meantime we may say that here we have a further proof of what we have hitbe^to held, viz., that all these cheap money schemes are mere nonsense—Sir Julius Vogel himself has admitted it now—and that a National Bank is the only possible means of meeting the difficulty. We,arc glad to find the Hon. Mr Bathgate has introduced a State Bank Bill into the Upper House, and that it is meeting with a great deal of support. This is another triumph for the schemes we have so persistently advocated. People in this district have treated our efforts with the coolest indifference, but they must see now that our proposals were practical and sound, or else they would not have met with so much attention.