PROTECTION V. FREE TRADE.

Waikato Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2032, 16 July 1885, Page 3

PROTECTION Y. FREE TRADE.

ro run i iuiok. Hut, — A lottoi signed "Nil l)osperandum," appeared m y»in Satm day's issue, in nply to one from MrFoiiot on the above subject, and with your permission, I .shall briefly comment thereon. To l\,u thread baro stock arguments ho met, 1 shall not attempt toreplj. I will not insult youi readers' intelligence by assuming that they know ho little of tho pros and cons of the subject as not to sco the utter fallacy of his reasoning. I shall simply confine my helf to refuting the soundness of tho de ductiuiw lie arrives at. Briefly stated, the conclusion ho draws is this : — " Tliat n balance must bo vtiuck for or against the lelativo monetary advantages of free tiadc find protection, just rid merchant «tnkes a balance in his ledger on the lesult of anj ordinary trading transaction." Tersely put, thin is tho sum and substance, the Alpha and Omega of "N. D.V cieed, and, let me add, of, freetraders generally. The argument is a very plausible one, and to give it force thewiitci illustrates its truth by copious quotations, th.it, however, seem to me rather to subieit his theory than to stiengthen it. Assuming, however, that the appaient monctaiy advantage lies on the side of free trade. What shall be s-iid of the ultimate, enchu ing and substantial benelits that flow fiom :v wiso and judicious protective policy that builds up national industries, by which alone men and nations acquire skill in all the art-< and resources of civilised life V Who shall measure the value to :v fttato of vast hives of manufacturing industry tilled with all that may eniichj ennoble or elevate a nation and mako it truly gieat ? Do tho tall chimneys of Massachusetts, of IJuiningliani, of Manchester, of tho Clyde, possess no monetary value to the nations they belong to, apart from their estimated valuo in dollais and pounds to the merchants who own them In discussing the iclatne merits of fiee trade nnd protection the nation. il value of industries fostcicd nnd brought to life by a protective policy seem in my opinion to be valued far too liglatly. Of cuirso I shall bo told by "Nil l)esperanduin " that arts and manufacturers will rise and flout ish oqiial'y well— nay bettor— under a free trade than under a piotuctive policy, but here I at once join Hsim with him. What, undri free trade, would be the fate of all new and sparsely settled cmintnes— of our own New Zealand for example? Why, simply this, that since wo cannot manufacture our law products as cheap! > heie as we can purchase them fiom foieign manufacturers, we must, accoiding to free trade formula, 1 , continue to impoit, sending 0111 wool, our gums<, our timber, our ores, and other pioducts away in exchange. Thus wo continue to be meie raisen of law products, "plantation hands," in fact, pure and simple, to the cndjif the chapter. "Oh, but," says "Nil Dcspciandum" (what nil bl lino faith we should require to mo such a motto as a watchword), "Fiee tiade would soon restore tho commercial equilibrium. Through the profits acciuing to tin by the sale of our law pioducts a balance would bo struck, and wo should be placed on an equal footing with the manufacturing countiicH." Such a deduction would Hinely be delusive, since no monctaiy consideration could compensate us pom shepheids and plantation hands for the lack of ull incentive to national life and progress. The present position of the United States of Ameiica— which " N.D." lathei unhappily quotes to tllustiatc his theory— had juotection not been accoided to its struggling industries at the outset — would undoubtedly be that of a ineic plantation for the supply of raw products to Untain. Any intelligent citizen of that countiy, who i« not a non-pioducer, will tell you so. Tho icmark that tjie f.uiner-i of the Western States are in a bnd way by le.ison of piotection lacks foice, since the fanner of freo trade I'littun is in a state infinitely worse than his western bi other. The f.ict is, the depression affecting farmers at the present time is not nteiely local, but general, fiee trade and piotectivo faimers •nifleiirig alike. " Ovet.pioductioii of the neccssai les of life throughout tho woild" is the only explanation of tliin. To asenbo it to piotection is simply childish. " Fieo tiade," bawls the conuueicul and manufacturing giants, and under the guise of " fiee tiado tho life blood h duiucd fiom all weaker rivals. " Freo tiade," echoes the middleman -- or, us he giandiloquently tomw himself, " merchant, — nnd the cry is taken up by his boon companion, a non descript who on clcctoial lolls dubs him self " gontloman," and theso woitlnes, the drones of the social liivo, ciy themselves hoarse with the everlasting chorus. Reasoning, reflective men, however, especially in a. country such as this, so singularly adapted for tho establishment of gieat industries, will weigh well tho advantages to \w derived from either Hystem, and will, [ feel sure, like, mo, decide lather in favoni of that which will infuse life and vieoni throughout tho commonwealth, tap the perennial streams of national piospcntv, and make tboir country truly groat, than of one which would infallibly rulegato us to the position of heueis of wood and drawers of water for more enterpiiring pnoples. Kieo tiade as an alwtmcfc pimciplo may be pei faction itself. To apply it to nations langing from tho most mature, to those of tendeiest years is about as sensible, in my opinion, as to expect an infant in arms to take the part of mature manhood.— l urn., &c, Wm. Johns. To Awamutu, July l.'ith.

1O IHK KllllOlt. SlK,— Perhaps tho unclosed petition, written by M. disti.it, m.iy bt- of umie uho to Mr Fonust and his bi other protectioninto, and also noive to aimiHoyimrre.iderH. — I uin, &.C., ir. J. I'atonHaiitapu, July 14th. [Kmclosuhk.l The OAndlemnkorH 1 Petitioti. " Petition of the raunufwturors of Caudles,

&c, and generally of everything connected with lighting.— To Moslems tho members of the Ch.'imlinr of Deputies, (lentlemcn,— We tiic suffoiiug from tiie intolerable competition of a foieign nval, placed, it would seem, in a condition ho f.ir •mpenor to huh foi the jiioductum of light, th.it ho absolutely inundates our national market with it at a juico fabulously ieduced. Tim rival is no other than tho sun. What wo pay foi is that it may please you to pass a l.tw ordeiing tho shutting up of all windows, wkyligbts, Ac.,— in a word, of all opening-, hole-, &c , by or through which the light of the sun has been allowed to enter houses, to tho prejudice of the met itoi ions in.inufactuics with which we fl.itter ourselves we havo accommodated our countiv. We uitfe tho following le.nons in support of out lequest :— First, if you shut up as much .is possible all acces-, to n.itui.il light, and cieate a dem md foi aitificial light, winch of our iii.inuf.ictuiei will not bo encouraged by it V [f moro tillow is consumed, then theie must be moie o\en md sheep, and consequently an increase of me.wlows, meat, wool and hides; if more oil is consumed, then we shall ha\e an increaso in the cultivation of tlie poppy, Sic, our heaths will thon bo covered w ith resinous ticcs. No branch of agi ieultme but will then oxhibit a cheeiing development. It you urge the light of the sun is .i giatuitoiis gift of n.ttme, and to leject such gifts is to t eject wealth itself, under pretence of encouraging the means of .icCMiiung it, we would c.iution yon against gnmg a death blow to your own policy. Kemumber yon ha\o hitlieito always repelled foreign products, because they approximate more neaily than home products to tho character of erratnitous gifts. To comply with tho exactions of other monopolists, you havo only half a motive ; and to refuse us, simply becamo wo utand on .1 stronger vantage ground than others, would bo to adopt tho equation, + v -.—. — ;in other words it would be to heap absurdity upon absuidity. If n Lisbon orango soils for half price of a Paris orange, it isbcciu-o untinal, and therefore gratuitous heat docs for tho one what artificial, and consequently <'\pension he.it must do for the othei. Now, it is precisely the giatuitoiis half which we contend should be excluded. You say, "Howcan national labour sust.un competition with foreign labour, when tho foimer has all the work to do, and the Utter only does one half, tho sun supplying the remainder." lint if this half, being gratuitous, determines you to eKcludo competition, how should the whole, being gratuitous, induce you to admit competition. Tho question is this, Do you desire for our country the benefit of gratuitous consumption, or the pretended advantages of onerous production ? Make your choice, but be logical ; for ai long an you exclude foreign falr.cs 111 pmportion as theii price apinoximatcs to zero, what inconsistency would it be to admit the light of tho sun, the pi ice of which in already at zero duung the entire day."