Agricultural. FARMERS AND FARMING. No. XXII.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2155, 1 May 1886, Page 2 (Supplement)

Agricultural. FARMERS AND FARMING. No. XXII.

I havk been debating in my own mind whether I should devote thii letter to the consideration of market* for our farmers' produce, or to competition, demand and supply. ° 8 »ff° ctsn X tne prioet of agrloultiiral produce. I have determined upon devoting it to markets partly m forming: a sequence to the letter* on Free Trade and Protection. At the end of letter No. 19 I quoted Sir R. Peel's opinion re a country being loft to itself in internal and external trading matters, instead of legislatures interfering therewith. I should like our farmers to impress it upon their minds for thin reason : that the present age is one of more sudden changes and trausiiionH in trade than anj previous one : a greater freedom from local, and even nationrtl trammels ; that a more enlarged perception of the necessity for buying in the cheapest markets must be an admitted axiom. Therefore the produce of New Zealand farmers being absolutely beyond the pale of protection, and beiny exposed in foreign market! to competition against the world, the farmer would "yet be compelled— by a prohibitive tariff on imported goods competing with our home manufacturer*, to bay his goods in-,the dearest market. This would result in hi* utter ruin. But out friend (P} the protectionist, holds the view that our markets bfinjr now in foreign countries, would by Protection be brought to our very doors. No one that ia wine or honest can for one moment contend that such a desirable result as this can take place for very very many years to come. Yet for the sake of creating a very insignificant market here, and that at . the expense of the consumer, he would have us cripple ourselves for competing in the world's markoH We have only to look to America, with her vast population and territory, fifty millions of people or over, and 3,611,844 square miles, equal to about 46J; acres to every inhabitant, and yet her population, in spite of its vast development, has not overlapped her agricultural productions, in other words her population does not consume all that the land in cultivation and grasi produce*, but about 75 per cent of her entire exports consists of raw product* of the soil. Th e proportion of our land to population is equal to about 95 aore* per inhabitant. If America with her protection h«d been the same distance from her foreign markets we are, I sadly doubt that she would be occupying the name commercial position «s she does at the present time. We export about £5,000,000 worth of goods to England, while receiving from her goods to the same amount. By protection wo would try to stop our trade with England, by f ir the largest consumer of our wool, grain, mutton, tallow, etc, and not only tbi* but in a futile manner, endeavour to injure the very country who keeps us going with her money. Wo know it pays her to do this, but it will not if we try to cripple ourselves by protection. For, as I have said before, this country has in the past, does at tho present time, and must in the future for years to come, depend upon agriculture for her life's blood. Then do not let deluded and dishonest men fool you into the idea that protection will be of any benefit to this country, or to agriculture. Let us have perfectly free and unfettered trade with the world and with ourselves, and then we shall soon see whether or not we can hold our own in the markets of the world. And there is another fide to the question, which is hardly ever considered by unsentimental humanity, and beat stated in tho words of Keble :—: — No distance breaks the tie of blood, Brothers are brothers evermore." But even trade in this country is not free, as a discriminating railway tariff places one or more districts in far more favourable circumstances than other districts, not only in respect of internal but Of external mrrkets also. More hereafter on this head. I calculate that our home market absorbs about £5,000,000 worth of farm produce, taking the prices producers receive, probably the amount may be larger. Let us by every means, that .are. legitimate and honest increase our home market, but not by the viola, tion of sound commercial principles, the result of which would fall almost entirely on farmers. We have seen that we send rather over £5,000,000 worth of farm produce to other counties. The consideration of this item brines us to the direct investigation of, who are the consumers of this large amount of produce out of a total exportation of £7,091,670 in -1884; the United Kingdom receives £5,158,080, and Australia chiefly Now South Wales and Victoria £1,591,530 or nearly £6,750,000 between them, leaving a balance of £341,670 worth of our exports to be distributed between the United States (which receives the most) Europe, India, China, etc. Our chief market being the United Kingdom, we need not inquire very far as to the reason of her being so, her vast manufacturing population, combined with her land system and farming processes, make her dependent upon other countries for immense supplies of food. She, like all buyers (who are not compelled by dishonest tariffs to buy at home at greatly enhanced prices), goes to the cheapest market, and our only chance of securing a share of her trade and competing against the world lies in the excellence of the production which we can offer at a fair price. Our farmers should remember this special fact, that their productions of beef, mutton, grain) wool, dairy produoe, fee, must be of first-class quality, and this oan only be secured by an intelligent mind, combined with energy and industry. And we «houM seek to develope our Australian j market, particularly for dairy produce, by offering specially good artioles. and I hope tlie nay is not far distant when we may hope to establinh direct trading relations with Europe, where there is a large consuming market for farm produce. And have we not to the north of us an Asiatic population of more than 1000 million inhabitants, India, China. Japan, &c. These markets are worthy of our closest investigation and future development. At present the British market ia very greatly curtailed by several causes. The first, and probably not the least, came being the London monopoly rings. lam convinced that gross frauds have been perpetrated by these rinsrs upon the British consumer and Now Zealand producer. Our shipping companies are another cause that seriously interfere with the' expansion of our export and import trades, by their almost prohibitive tariff*, but here again is a ring. A third cause is our present Customs duties, which, are a great drain upon consumers, and by making things dearer curtail consumption, hence trade, and at the presents time there is a natural cause which operates, but I trust not for long, in curtailing a vastly enhanced consumption of meat, etc. ' I mean that large portion of the consuming population of England, who have the desire to consume, bnt lack the means of purchasing our productions. Finally I think the proper means are not taken for bringing our productions before the British public, — I mean the manufactming, the really working part— which I am sure is a fruitful cause of loss of trade, or to condense the obove causes into a sentence, it means that our exportation and importation of goods will always remain at a minimum of developement, unless these several causes are removed, and thereby bring about an enormous expansion in the British consumption of our mutton, wool, grain, etc., as in our consumption of British cottons, linens, and woollen goods, manures, seeds, wire, etc. My remarks, re the curtailment or our trade with England, are equally applicable to the Australian trade. Ut Prosih.

Whiw might tht moon be said to have over-indulged somewhat? When »he is on, her M<juarter, and i* «ljout fqll.