TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXII, Issue 55, 6 March 1901, Page 5

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

Tbe Federation Commission resumed its work at ten o'clock this morning, at the Municipal buildings. Colonel' Pitt presiding.

A WAITING POLICY.

J. H. Upton, stationer, stated that he had been thirty-five years in the colony, and had filled the office of Mayor and other public positions. He had no positive opinions on federation, but he thought on the whole he would vote for federation if it came to a vote. It was a great movement, and if we stood out we must suffer, like a poor, relation. The tendency of national life in New Zealand was towards parochialism; and that tendency would be increased by standing out of the federation. But before we federated it would be a, "very good thing if the question of coloured, labour in Queensland and the tariff ■ questions were settled. He was in favour of waiting a few "years, to watch results in Australia.

In answer to questions,. Mr. Upton said he did not think the fact of the central Government being 1200 miles ' away would militate against local administration. The loss of revenue in customs and excise was a detail in the question of federation, and not .-.seritial.. He had no fear of the Stafe Government being merged in the •entral Government.' The main argument for federation was that __ would •rtlarge our ideas—lift us out of "Liti!e Peddlington." He had jiot made up his mind how he would * vote in a ;• referendum to-day; he would i delay. • He was satisfied the. broad liuanrial effect of federation woukl be bt--Wi.ci.-_l. He -did not admit that j there had been any material change in j'New Zealand securities during.tlie Ja^t j three months. Industrially, if we shut ourselves, in from the world hy j a high protective tarif., we would in ! tlie long run.do no better than if we .competed against the world. The agricultural part of the country was suffering at present from a want of labour. The real -industry of New Zealand was agriculture,- and it" snOuld be* fostered as much as possible. Even if direct taxation were required, to double the land tax would, be rather a clumsy1 way of proceeding. There was more scope to increase the income tax if additional taxation were required consequent on federation. ••:• * INDUSTRIAL CONSIDERATIONS. J. H. Mackie, public accountant and secretary of the Auckland ers' Union, and Auckland Provincial Industrial Association, said he inclin-. Ed to the belief that we should wait and see what, the net result of.Australian, federation may be. The general opinion was that federatioh would kill' our vine-growing industry, and largely hinder the wine industry. Manufacturers here would at first be very seriously affected by federation, especially carriage building and engineering. Anadvantage accruing

from federation would be the broadening our ideas and improvement in the status of our statesmen. On principle lie favoured federation, but he [preferred to wait and watch results* in Australia. v THE BOOT TRADE. •

James Aggers, secretary;. pf the Bootmakers'* .Union, representingr:qyer 200 workmen;.' said the Union considered federation would be detrimental to the bootnialdng trade in New Zealand, and especially in Anclc'Tan'd, as the importations following oh free -trade wjould practically, kill the local manufacture, under "a 15/j>er cent*. Federal tariff the local m-ariuf-ctttring trade would probably be reduced by. hvp-f.hirds. ..;..,,■.,. -. ', ,j. '.■....„■ i'-. Geo. A.' Coles,' boot manufacturer,"

and President of the Auckland Boot Manufacturers' Association, sai4 Jiis association was against federation for the reasons expressed in Mr Deaxsley's evidence yesterday. A^>art frpni the boot industry he had studied the "question of federation. The competition in Australia was so keen that ajnan had no chance without a large "amount of capital behind him, and the condition of the workers there.^as in : . ferior to that of the New 7__e_'lai.rt workers. lie did not see .what we would have to gain by federating. We would lose our individuality M character. He thought we were, a different people from the Australians. ?He was disappointed in what he had seen of the latter. The position* of the worker in Sydney Was on n par with lhat of the worker in America. Owing to the smallness of our community we could not compete successfully, wjjtlAustralia. . ' . 7\

In answer to questions,, Mr Coles said the workmen he had .had -from Australia Were not up to the standard of New Zealanders. -..'■< i >

Thomas Hodgson, manager of the Northern Boot Factory, said there, were about 4000 operatives in the boot! trade in New Zealand. He believed i. was the largest industry in the colony. How far federation would affect it itj was hard to say. He believed , the competition from America was bring** ing with it its lessons, but at the same: time if we joined the Commonwealth he believed our boot . trade would suffer. It was true the wages both ir* Sydney and Melbourne were lower, than in New Zealand, and the AUstra-< Man manufacturers had a longer ex« perience and more capital. He believed! other industries would be affected pre« judicially. It was a question of tariff. The free importation of raw material would be against our boot manufac* * turers, because* Australia, being a larger consumer, would have the bene* fit of our.material free. ,7 SOCIAL REFORM. .' . j Michael Flurscbeim said he7*wa**i against federation with Australia* Currency reform and land, reform* would be entirely controlled by the Federal Government, and in these jdirections we would be thindened by t federation. If we were «onnected. with Australia by- land federation would be very different. One of th_ greatest benefits New Zealand derived from its present situation was that ii; had no very large cities., A sm*atf community was easier, to educate itt ■ social reform than a large one, ano* New Zealand had a much better, chance of prosperity by -standing alone, at any rate for the present.*. William J. Harker, retired merchant; read a paper on _ederation,which he. strenuously advocated.'• ,

(Proceeding.)