RECIPROCITY IN TRADE

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1362, 5 October 1886, Page 2

RECIPROCITY IN TRADE

ADMISSION OF WOOL INTO AMERICAChkistchdrch, October 4. Sir Julius Vogel has written jto the Woolgrowers’ Association here, in reply to a letter embodying a suggestion of the Woolgrowers’ Association of Viotoriaito remit the Customs duties on certain American productions in return for the admission of Aus tralian wool Into the United States, and urging the benefit of a similar arrangement in reference to this colony. Sir Julius doubts if Parliament would agree to repeal the duty on kerosene, especially as there seems to be a fair probability of its being obtained in large quantities in New Zealand, and considers that this remission would not be of any use unless the duty on wool in the United States were to be simultaneously reduced It would be extreme weakness to make the remission here unless under specific agree-' ment that such action would lead to the remission of the wool duty. He concludes : “ The position then comes to this, that if the United States Government were empowered to enter into arrangements for reducing the rates of duty on Australian wools, would the colonies combined be prepared to consider the question on the basis of mutual concessions. To this I have no hesitation in replying that I consider the importance of obtaining a market for colonial wools, unrestricted by the present heavy duties, ia such that the colonies would readily endeavor to meet the views of the Government of the United States upon any proposal of a mutually fair nature. An attached memorandum from the Secretary of the Department of Trade and Customs states thatthe duty collected on kerosene for 1885 was £26,301, and for the six years preceding it averaged £19,097 per year.