THE GUM DUTY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 54, 5 March 1898, Page 2

THE GUM DUTY.

' Mr H. P. Barber, who may be' described, as the " father " of the gum trade between j here and New York, was to-day inter-1 viewed by a Star representative respecting the imposition by the United States of an import duty on' New Zealand gum. Mr Barber is in communication with several j firms in the States. He was in the gum ■ trade in New York for three years, and in j Auckland since 1869. He has been back- j ward and forward several times in the in- j terest of this trade, and is also personally i acquainted with the New York men in j this trade. Mr Barber received informa- j tion by cable of the imposition of the duty j on Monday. Asked as to whether there has ever been j a duty' levied on kauri before in the j United States, Mr Barber replied :— " Yes, in 1802, during war time a duty of j 10 cents a pound was levied for the sole j purpose of revenue to help meet the extra- j ordinary demands on the Government for war expenses ; besides the 10 cents per | pound an additional duty of 10 per cent. was levied on kauri gum shipped by way J of London. This was done to encourage. \ direct shipment. This clause in the tariff i was worded thus : 'All gum imported into j New York via London from any ports cast; of the Cape of Good Hope should be subject j to this duty.' This did not affect gums j from the West Coast of Africa." \

What, in your opinion, is the reason for levying duty on kauri gum at the present time?

The last tariff Bill called the Dingley Tariff has not produced the amount of extra revenue expected. So this proposed duty, I take it, is only one of other duties, for the sole purpose of revenue, as it is a well known fact that the American Government are running behind some millions of dollars, the revenue not meeting the expenditure ? Do you think South American gum interest'are trying to oust kauri gum ? I do nob ; 'because ib is nob found in sufficient quantities to in any way compete againsb kauri gum, and as bins proposed duty in my opinion is for revenue only, all gums will be subject to the same duty. " Do you think that tlie rosin industry is trying to oust kauri gum ? •No; because only a very small portion of rosin can be used as a mixture with other gums for the manufacture of varnish, and that only for the very cheapest grades. What effect will this duly have bn the London kauri gum market '! Ib will place the English varnish makers in a belter position to the extent of the duty over American varnish makers, and might enable the former to exporb to America to advantage, and if so will' tend to keep the London markeb firm for kauri gum. Mr Barber says further that the new tax will come into operation bhe moment the President signs the Bill. The duty will amounb to £6 to £1/5 per ton on gum according to quality, and will provide a substantial amount of revenue, bub the Sum tax is no -doubt part of a number of tariff amendments, others of which are of less interest to New Zealand and consequently have not been cabled here. The duty would benefit buyers of gum and varnish manufacturers in America who hold any stocks to the extent of the duty.

Our reporter looked up the American consul, Mr Prank Dillingham, on the matter this morning, but he hail received no message concerning it. If such a duty passes Congress of course he will have word at once.

Up to tlie presenb kauri gum has been on the free list. Some traders here think it likely that the Collector of Customs now claims that gum is a "manufactured" article, instead of " raw material," hence the proposed import tax.