BEET-ROOT SUGAR.

Waikato Times, Volume XV, Issue 1276, 2 September 1880, Page 3

BEET-ROOT SUGAR.

The following letter has been addressed by Sir Julius Vogel to the Premier :—: — "7, Westminster Chambers, " London, June 14, 1880. " Sir, — The remarks which I am about to have the honour to submit io you are not made in my character of AgentGeneral, but rather in that of a colonist taking- great interest in New Zealand, and believing that it is a duty as well as a privilege to contribute, in however humble a degree, to its well-being. I feel also that there id the less cause to apologise for the observations lam about to volunteer, since were I in the Colony I think I might fittingly submit them to the Royal Commission, which I believe has been appointed to consider the question of promoting Native Industries. "My object is to urge the desirability of promoting the manufacture of beetsugar. I believe that beet sugar would do for New Zealand what is has done for France and other countries, namely, prove to be an industry of priceless value. ' All efforts to establish beet-sugar manufacture by bonuses have failed, .arid I venture to say hvre naturally and fortunately failed. There are two great objections to bonuses such as thoBe which were proposed; they would have worked for too limited a time, and would have created monopolis. What is required is, a substantial road, to the progressive development of the industry, till without any aid it is capable of depending on itself. In the papers whicK I prepared for Parliment in 1876, I pointed out the way this result could be attained, and long reflection since has 1 made me see no reason for altering my opinon. The assurance that import duty on sugar will be continued, and that there will be no excise duty on it for areasonable number of years, wonid suffice to' set this industry on its legs, to the incalculable benefit of the Colony. An import duty of Id per lb for aeven or ten years, and after that a difference of £d per lb betweeii the import and excise duty, .if any, or £d per lb import duty aloue for five years, would in my opinon, suffice to induce beet susrarto be made in half a dozen different parts of the Colony. Let me point out to you that the principle of this proposal is one that is constantly adopted in the Colonies including New Zealand,, the only difference being that the encouragement, or protection, if you like to call it so, is given without the specific assurances required in this ca^e. Take beer, for example. It is through the import duty and freedom f torn excise duty that beer making has become so established and successful an industry in New Zealand. The otbe" oolonio-*. however, present more notable in-tince*. I am mistaken if in any of the Colonies there is an excise duty on tobacco, whioh mcaus, if you like to put it so, a protection of a very large amount to tobacco growers. The cast* of wine is yet more remarkable. The protection enjoyed by tho manulrjcturers of wine in the Australian Colonies is enormous, and haa lasted over many yaars. lam much in error if any one will propose to abate it for a long period to come. The result will justify the coime taken. The wine industry of Australia bids fair to become a gigantic one. Yet another Instanoe, and one io entirely similar that I do not see how its lesson can be overlooked. lam informed en unquestionable authority, that sugarproducing is certain to become a most valuable and important interest in New South Wales and Queensland. But its establishment entirely depends, in the first instance, on its freedom from excise penalties, Beet mgar, in the absence of slave-labour, can favourably compete wish cane-sugar. Why t-houid New Zealand see its neighbours prospering with sugar-making, and itself' losing all the advantages it might dei'ive therefrom? The difference between the two cases is that in i>he other Colonies the manufacturers and producers are content to depend on the discretion of the Government wblilat in Now Zealand' the beet sugai vmakers would require nn assurance of a positive nature. There are several reasons to account for this. The principal one. probably, is tn at so much has been said of the reluctance of the Government to give any assurance against an exoise' duty, or tba,t the import duty will be continued, that persons who contemplate entering into the business, naturally suppose there will be one, whilst ( the producers of wine and eugar in Australia know they need riot fear the contingency. " Every part of the Country and every -class of the population in New Zealand' would beriefit by the beet industry. Large tracts' of land would be devoted to its cultivation. The farmer and farm labourer, the artizan and town labourer, the railways and the shipping, would each in turn benefit; The refuse of the beet would be valuable for cattle-feeding, and the time is coming when there will be a demand in this country for Colonial meat. Perhaps one of, the largest advantages will be that, like beer, Colonial .sugar will gradually

-become cheaper than-theimported article. Cheap sugar will mean other industries. For example, with chefes :sug_ar, look at the enormous work open to New Zealand in the way of preserving fruits in tins — an industry which, in the United States has grown to colossal proportions. It is true that as the beet sugar comes into use, the revenue from imported sugar will be less ; but you will have built up wealth in other directions from which taxes can be raised. Laud cultivated and a population employed, are a sufficient guarantee for revenue to enable you to look without dread upon the possible consequences oJL diminished .receipts from j&ni 1 import} tax bn feugafc ", !J! J ',' [ £ " I have noticed o! late sucK a disposition to misconstrue the motives of those who Aspire to be; useful, that it it perhaps necessary I should add 'that I am writing' these remarks without concert with any one. desiring to embark in the industry to whi'ch' they refer} and wTtfti' no present thought of doing so myself."