The Weekly Times. “Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri.” MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1867. TAXATION AND PROTECTION.

Hawke's Bay Weekly Times, Volume 1, Issue 47, 25 November 1867, Page 292

The Weekly Times. “ Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri .” MONDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 1867. TAXATION AND PROTECTION.

A perusai* of 'the papers occasionally received from the mother country often affords evidence that colonial politics are regarded with much interest by the thoughtful there, and that ■ the doings of our infantile legislatures are not considered unworthy of criticism. As an instance in point, we to-day reproduce a valuable essay from the Edinburgh Scotsman on the taxation and protective policy of the sister Colony of Victoria, which contains some striking, not to say startling, conclusions; and. which, in a great measure, concerns our own Colony quite as much as that to which it more directiy alludes. In former articles we have shown that New Zealand is the most heavily taxed of all the Australian Colonies, Victoria hot excepted,—our taxation being about £6 per head, as against £5 10s there, and £2 6s at homeso that the argument is at least as applicable to us. But there is this distinction between the two cases: ours is in part owing to the Native difficulty, and not to the same causes as exist in Victoria. The most striking part, of the argument is that which excludes ;(and justly) ftioin the comparative burdens of England and the Colonies that, portion of. the former which has relation, to the National Debt? incurred by s our; common but which: does not affect

us; and also; that for * the English army and .navy;; y minated .from the wbolei- reduces .the burdens on the home population i< to than per head for the;actual cqsl? of;. ■* Vproper; ?I' aind yofs£f>j shb]Sßs;ithat fire- timesrfthe:

amount for legitimate government, notwithstanding our freedom from the accumulations of past ages. What .-is: als» said ? concerning the inequitable distribution of the burdens in Victoria *is likewise equally applicable to, us: **everything is taxed without which the poorest man cannot live; ” and the taxation proceeds much on tbe principle of a poll-tax—-so much per head —without regard to very different capabilities of bearing; in fact, in many cases with us it is the articles consumed by the poor that is most heavily taxed, as they are more bulky and of less value than those consumed by the rich, while the bulk OF THE IMPORTED ARTICLES is that which is taxed,—the tariff being charged at per cubic foot, without any relation to the value of the goods. The bulky clothing of cord and fustian, cotton and woollen, the heavy boots and shoes of the humble being taxed at tbe same rates as the silks and satins, and lighter shoes of the lofty —which, hulk for bulk, may he of ten, twenty, or fifty times the value of the other.

In one point only does the argument not apply to New Zealand. As yet the “fallacy of protection” has not found footing amongst us; but we must give equal heed to the argument notwithstanding, for there has been — and is still in some quarters—a demand for the introduction of the false and pernicious principle. A cry has been raised amongst us for “ protection to native industry,” and unless proper measures are taken by political economists to diffuse sound views on the question, it is to be feared even that evil may become a reality here as in Victoria. It is so easy to dress up a fallacy,—“to make a doctrine such as that of protection appear sound (at least'lor a “young community,” for such is the cant expression used,) and so difficult to distinguish between the seeming and the real, the empty shell and the egg,—that it is no wonder people are misled. Handicraftsmen easily believe that it is best for them that what they produce should not be imported ; manufacturers the same ; agriculturists ditto—until all are protected, and all have to pay for the protection afforded to all, so- that no one is benefitted, but all are made poorer by a taxation that does not go to the Government, but is as entirely wasted—so far as results go—as if it were cast into the sea,, and the amount of which it is impossible to estimate, as it is all swallowed up by artificial interests, and though it be taxation of theheaviest kind it is not at all applicable to any of the legitimate purposes for which taxation should be imposed—to wit, the necessary expenses of the good government of & people.