The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1886. TEMUKA BY-LAWS.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1470, 20 February 1886, Page 2

The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1886. TEMUKA BY-LAWS.

Some people are under the impression that if the by-laws of tho Tcmuka Town Board are upset they need not pay rates, nor register their dogs, nor attend to sanitary matters. They are also laboring under the delusion that they can allow their cattle to wander at largo. All this is a mistake. They must pay rates, register dogs, and keep cattle off the roads the same as if the by-laws were good. There are others who think it will cost the Town Board an immense sum to get the by-laws into proper working order. We have heard it stated that it would cost £SO. This is another mistake. Between £5 and £lO will do it. The upsetting of the by-laws will cause very little inconvenience, and it will take very little trouble or expense to put them right. A mistake was mads with regard to them, and it is better to pnt them straight at once than let them alone until the Board gets involved in some lawsuit over them and is let in for heavy damages. There is no difficulty in the way of putting them right. The by-laws are already framed, and now the next step is to advertise them. Not sooner than seven days after they have been advertised the Board must hold a special meeting, ami adopt the by-laws by a special order. Tho resolution adopting the by-laws must be advertised once a week for a month, after which another meeting of the Board must be held and the resolution confirmed. As soon as this is done, a sealed copy of the by-laws must be sent to the Colonial Secretary, and when receipt of that is acknowledged the by-laws must be advertised again. Seven days after they have been advertised they can be brought into force, and henceforward no power wbatsowr can upset them. This is all very easy, and will not coat such a large amount. We have every reason to believe that the advertising will not cost the Board a great deal, and, as there is no other expense to be incurred, the whole matter can be set right without much trouble.

FREETRADE IN ENGLAND. Those who are affected by the Freetrade hallucination would do well to read the following letter which recently appeared in an English paper : “ To the Editor.—Sir, — As there ban been a good deal of conttoversy of late on the question of Freetrade, with your permission I should like to say a few words on that very important matter. 1 have

looked at it, as well as I am ablfiom j different standpoints, and have enine In the conclusion that it is a disad van'age to the British workman. 1 am in favor of Freetrade if it were on equal terms all round, hut as it is one-sided tho foreigner gets the best part of the bargain, simply because he shuts ns out of his market by putting a heavy duty on our good-, and we allow him to send bis into our market free of all duty, Belgium is sending manufactured iron to this country £1 per ton less than we can make it. Spain is sending lead at £2 and £3 per ton less than we can produce it, and the Spaniards are working at Is 2d per day, in consequence ot this there are 170 lend mines closed in Wales, and the men are starving. Now, if we send our goods to other countries they charge ub 25 to 60 per cent, duty, and so keep us out of their markets. It simply amounts to this, that we me paying the foreigner to manufacture our goods and starving our own men. lam Fold that there are at the present lime some five million people in this country on the brink of starvation. The Radicals tell us the cause is over-production. 1 admit it is, but not English overproduction. Our market is filled with low-priced foreign goods. The foreign workman gets less wages and works more hours than we do ; and, having shut us out of his market, he gels higher prices for his goods, and, therefore, he is able to send his surplus stock to this country and undersell ns in our own market What is the result? Why, the ruin of many an English manufacturer, and thousands of men out of employment. No doubt our so-called freetrade is a good thing for the rich, but not for the workingclasses. The rich can go into the market and buy their goods as cheap as we can, and when trade is depressed they don’t feel the p<nch, but we do who have to depend on our weekly wages and live from hand to mouth. Would it not be better if we had to pay, say, 5s more for a suit of clothes nod get a full week’s wages than to get our goods a little cheaper and get about half a week’s wages ? Freetrade has been tried for forty years, and has been found wanting. Do tbs working men know that several of our freetrade manufacturers have works in other countries, and get foreigners to do them work and send their goods to this country ? No wonder they preach one-sided freetrade. Now, the Radicals are parading before the electors as the friends of the working men, and at the same time they are doing all they can to rob us of our labor by upholding our system of one-sided freetrade, simply to put a few pounds into their own pockets at our expense. Perhaps the following may be of some use as showing Hie small increase of prosperity in England as compared with other nations from 1865 to 1883 ; —Austria increased in prosperity 116 per cent. ; Belgium, 123 ; Holland, 103 ; Italy, 113 ; Russia, 206 ; United Slates, 496; England, 44. During the reign of Her Majesty there have been eighteen Liberal wars and six Conservative wars. —I am, etc., R. Woodhall (a working man).” That is the opinion of an artizan of England on Freetrade. It is simply ruinous.