THE COASTWISE TRADE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIV, Issue 228, 24 September 1903, Page 3

THE COASTWISE TRADE.

DEBATE ON THE BILL

ITS APPLICATION TO THE

'FRISCO SERVICE

(By Telegraph.—Parliamentary Reporter.)

WELLINGTON, Wednesday,

The debate on the second reading of the Coastwise Trade Bill, which was adjourned on July 31st, was resumed in the House this evening. The bill was discussed at some length, and during the evening several references were made to the 'Frisco service. The Hon. Hall-Jones took up the debate. There might, he said, be some Who thought that the bill was brought on too early, that trade should expand more before it was considered. He did not think so, believing that if New Zealand was going to reserve her trade to the British Empire, the matter should be dealt with while the amount of trade was small. The supremacy of the Empire must be- maintained, and to this effect the constituent parts of the Empire must each do all in their power to assist British trade aud exports. New Zealand's trade was largely carried on with foreign nations, and, added to this, the proportion of foreigners in British ships was very considerable. The foreigner was gradually creeping into our trade, both in the matter of vessels and sailors. The danger of this was apparent, for in the event of war, men trained in the British mercantile marine, admittedly the best training ground in tbs world, would go to the assistance of their own country. The decrease of the number of Britishers going to sea was no doubt due to the many other avenues of employment, and to the dislike for the hardships of a sea life, while the foreign sailor, however, got far more pay in British vessels than in those of his own country, hence the attraction of the British mercantile vessel. The bill before the House helped to conserve the British ship for the Britisher. There was grave doubt as to whether the provisions of the Shipping and Seamen's Bill relating to the pay, etc., of sailors on foreign vessels could be enforced, and an injustice would thus be done to the Home-registered vessel. But the Coastwise Bill would prevent this. It had been said by some that the bill would affect the San Francisco service, but he found that for the last twelve trips the 'Frisco steamers had not taken one ounce of cargo to Sydney. They made it a rule not to take cargo from Sydney to Auckland, and had never done so.

Mr Duthie: What about passengers? Hon. Hall-Jones: "The bill does not affect passengers, and the paasenger trade will go on just as at present." The 'Frisco steamers, not being in the cargo trade, were, he said, not affected by the bill. It was true that prior t*» the time he had mentioned small quantities of meat and maize had been carried by the steamers, ranging from five tons up to 75 tons in one trip. He did not think, therefore, that there was any danger to be apprehended that the bill would block the 'Frisco service as it was conducted at present. He thought the House would be wise in passing the bill, in order to further control the shipping on our coasts and assist the Empire as far ns possible. If New Zealand did what she could in the ma>tter, then other portions of the Empire might follow suit. Mr Duthie felt that the bill was one of the most important measures that had been before the House this session, inasmuch as it was the first instalment of that Imperial policy as devised by the Premier at the conference. As a unit, the first instalment was very modest indeed. In fact, he did not think it would have any effect. Jt was especially gratifying to him, he said sarcastically, to know that Russia, America, aud France were not disposed to regard it with any disapproval, but he asked why Germany was not mentioned.

The Premier said that Germany applied uo coastwise laws against Britain. Mr Duthie contended that the only vessels trading to New Zealand which would be affected by the bill were the 'Frisco mailboats. The Premier: There are the New York steamers. Mr Duthie said that these vessels carried on no trade between New Zealand ports. If, as the Minister for Marine said, tho 'Frisco steamers carried no cargo, he did not see the use of the bill. The only thing those, vessels did was to run against the local companies in the passenger traffic, and that was excluded from the bill. Why did the Premier introduce the bill? Mr Scddon: It was brought down at your recommendation. Mr Duthie: What! The Premier: When you were a passenger on a British steamer you protested very strongly against the prohibition put on that steamer by the American shippiag laws.

Mr Duthie: Oh, no! I was a passenger on the steamer, and a telegram protesting against British steamers not being allowed to carry passengers between San Frauciseo and Honolulu was sent to you. but by common consent it was decided that my name would be so irritating to you thai I had better abstain from signing it.

The Premier: I was led to believe that you inspired it» You see, I have a good memory. Mr Duthie: A good memory and a healthy imagination! You are. not short of either. The bill, continued Mr Duthie, would not by any stretch of the imagination be supposed to increase the number of British seamen. Hon. Hall-Jones: Undoubtedly it would. Mr Duthie denied this, and went on to say that the bill would be a dead letter on the Statute Book, for, although it would pass the. House, it would never receive the assent of the Imperial Government. He. fell foul of the forfeiture clause, and said that this was never put into operation by any of the countries which had the same clause. The whole measure was useless, and it was time that real business was proceeded with, and such trumpery matters cast aside.

The Premier: It is brought up in accordance with a promise made by all the Prime Ministers. Mr Duthie: The Chamberlain resignation alters all that. Why don't you go Home and help Chamberlain. He wants your help. " The Premier: You wouldn't be happy without me. Mr Duthie: You can upset the British Empire before the end of the session, and then come baok to us. Mr. Bedford hoped that the House would not pass the bill, to which there were many grave objections, while no

arguments worthy of the name had been introduced. The colony was in no way embarrassed by the small amount of shipping done on our coasts by foreign shipping. The bill was introduced to assist in the maintenance of British supremacy at sea, which, it had been contended, was on the down grade. Statistics proved that the reverse was the case, that British tonnage was nearly 50 per cent, of the tonnage of the world, while the trade was one-third of the world. Her shipping, therefore, was greater .than her trade. He believed that the motive of the bill was that of the Imperial policy of which the Premier was so renowned an exponent. The initiative in a matter of this kind should be left to the British Empire. The principle involved was a very important one, and owing to the exuberance of our patriotism we seemed to be ready for it, or for any folly at all.

The Premier concluded that Mr. Bedford, being so strongly opposed to restricting trade of foreign vessels, would support the 'Frisco service, and asked if that were the case. 'To that I might retort in this way," said Mr. Bedford. "It is a strange thing that, a Government so patriotic as the preseut should, while endeavouring to exclude foreign vessels from New Zealand trade, subsidisei an American line, of steamers. This bill is introduced by the Premier, >vho says we are going to subsidise the 'Frisco service to the extent of £20,000 a year. We are going to pay them to carry our mails, and at the same time to inflict penalties. on them for carrying cargo between one British port and another. The thing was so absolutely absurd that he could not understand how a Government, subsidising the 'Frisco steamers could bring down a bill of the kind."

The Premier: Are you going to vote for the service? Mr. Bedford: You will know that ' later on, when we come to the proposals. Mr. Millar, another Dunedin member, took an entirely opposite view, contending that the measure was a very important one, and one which should be dealt with. He believed in New Zealand for the New Zealanders, not that the country should be the dumping ground of the world. He asked if the colony was never to take the initiative in' any important measure? __ust we wait till our trade had vanished, and then cry out? Already the foreign vessel was trading on our coasts. Ships were running out of Kalpara competing with Bri.ish-owned vessels. There was now an American schooner trading out of the port mentioned, which carried half a million feet of timber, to 250,000 feet by the ordinary vessel at half the cost. Mr. Millar referred to the importance of training the youth of New Zealand to sea life, which would he promoted by the bill under review.

Mr. Willis, in supporting the bill, urged that it did not go far enough, that passengers should also be included. Mr Hogg, in a jingoistic speech, stoutly opposed the bill, declaring that Britain's greatness had been made, through tbe freedom of trade which she allowed. Mi- T. Mackenzie remarked that the first operation of the American shipping law, after the annexaton of Hawaii, was the exclusion of the Union Company's steamers from the 'Frisco ti*ade. That company had established the service, and carried it on amid groat diirlculties, but had been forced out of the trade by the operation of the maritime laws. They had a great deal of sympathy with the Premier in the matter, and deplored the fact that the Vancouver service was never given a fair trial. That service was not maintained, because the conditions were not such as would permit of it being carried out properly. With a subsidy grunted year by year, the company was required to provide vessels of a 'class which would be required in a permanent contract. Mr Mackenzie went on to assure the House that with two cables connecting the colony with the older countries the matter of saving a few days in the mails' service was not a very important affair. He urgrd a reduction of cable rates, with uniform charges, so that the distant part-s of the. Empire would not be penalised.

Mr Taylor, in opposing the bill, said New Zealand was going to be compelled to assume all the ills which the older countries had acquired. He declared that the restrictions placed on American shipping by Congress had practically, strangled the shipping trade of the country. The bill was aimed at American shipping, and -would prevent an American ship from trading from New Zealand to any other port in the British Empire. Knowing this, American ship-owners would raise freights to New Zealand, because they would have to leave in ballast, and New Zcalanders would sutler. Mr Taylor hoped that the bill would be carried to its logical conclusion, aud passengers included within its scope. Its absurdity would soon be shown then. "While asked to support such a bill as this," said Mr Taylor, "we shall be whipped very strongly in view of the vote for the 'Frisco service." What, he asked, would happonrif American vessels were confiscated, and then, he suggested, the whole three steamers of the Spreckels Company could be confiscated if each of them carried a single case of fish from Auckland to Sydney. Thai was according to the bill.

Mr Wilford: Then pass the bill, and we will have them to stop the service Mr Taylor continued that the very line, the colony subsidised might be confiscated, and sold under the Act. In the face, of a non-buoyant mining market this might prove very useful, and make up the deficiency. Mr Wilford, in supporting the bill, took the apportunity to have his fling at the much-maligned mail-route. The very navigation la'tfs, he said, under which America controlled her shipping and commercial interests, had enabled an American company to obtain from this Government a subsidy of £20,000 for carrying the mails of the colony. But for these laws New Zealand would never be in a position of being dictated to by America in regard to the service through San Francisco. It was a curious thing to him that members who were prepared to support this bill would also vote for the 'Frisco service. It was impossible for any man to be logical and to vote for hoth. The Premier: What about a man who votes against both? Mr Wilford: Oh, he's in the soup, and I'll leave him there. I hope that those who vote for this bill will be consistent when the 'Frisco siervice proposals come down, and vote absolutely for the wiping out of th ese Yankee "exploiters." He said he used the word because Mr Spreokles 'had urged the Government to enter into a contract with him, while be had never signed one 'himi-df. Thus the New Zealand Government 'had absolutely no penalty clause, so for *3

the service- was concerned, for nonfulfillment of any obligation which the colony considered the company tbad been placed under. He hoped that tibe Auckland liienibers who voted for the bill would be consistent when the mail proposals were before the House.

Mr Witheford felt that the Premier was always -doing his utmost for the best interests of the colony, but he beeped that lie would not allow Mr Joseph Ohaniberlain to "pull 'his leg." Coming to the .shipping question, Mr Wifchiosford said it was an undoubted fact that British shipping was increasing under the present Shipping Act; pie pointed out that the good feeling between England and America was daily growing warmer, as tibe difficulty grew more ominous, and the 'Frisco service would assist in that entente cordialeThe 'Frisco service landed the English and American mails in the colony very promptly and punctually. As to the boats, Mr Witheford pointed out that they had been built under Lloyd's supervision. The, service did not cost New Zealand a single penny, but it benefited the colony to the extent of thousands of pounds every year, because food and coal were bought in the colony, and passengers spent money in the port- Added to this, the steamers provided an outlet for a large amount of New Zealand produce. Mr Massey: This bill stops the service. The American people were very kindly disposed towards us. Mr Wilford: Why don't they alter their shipping laws, then? Mr Wi-tlheford: The navigation laws were in existence years before you were born. Mr Laurenson spoke strongly in support of the bill, while Mr Herdman opposed it on the ground tHiat it was unnecessary and uncalled for.

Mr Buddo said Mi- Bedford's .speech had convinced him of the necessity for the bill. He opposed tihe 'Frisco service, and thought that if any subsidy was to be given it should be witlh boats which carried the export trade. The service was of very little value -to New Zealand, and he believed to Auckland, but it haid become almost worshipped there as a thing necessary to the province. They secmied to hang on to it as a forlorn hope, but if they did they would never feel it, for they would get a service equally aa good. The cable was nowadays taking the place of the mail steamer in commercial circles, where j orders were required at short date, and; the matter of a few days in a mail ste-r-j vice was not a very important one. If j there was any ring in the matter, and j the colony was one of the ring, tJhen he would further it; but as it wa.s, it seemed to him that we (had everything to lose and nothing to gain.

Mr Major, in supporting the bill, concluded that the 'Frisco service had earned the £20,000 it had received. The service had bulked largely in the speeches that ni»ht, but, for himself, when the proposals enrne down he would approach the question with an open mind, and if he found that the colony got a quid pro quo he would support the line until such time, in the not far distant future, he hoped, when an all-red route would be established.

Mr Lewis was opposed In the bill, on the ground that it savoured of reprisals. Mr MoNab supported the measure, believing that the Mother Country would shortly extend its provisions to all the divisions of the Empire. He believed that the clause seeking to prohibit merchandise being carried from one colony to another should be amended, as he was of opinion that this colony had no ricrht to interfere with I lie trade of other colonies. Mr M. Kirkbride thought that the bill wa.s entirely too drastic, being even more drastic than the American law. He did not sec. any need for the bill, which simply seemed a continuation of the cry for a tariff wall round the colony. He was a fair trader, since New Zealand could not be a free trade country. He of the cry of ''New Zekuind 'for the New Zealaniers," and combated tho statement that the trade of Great Britain wa.s declining. Mr. F. E. Baume supported the principle of the bill, relying on the promise of .Sir Joseph Ward that the clause relating to the. carriage of merchandise from New Zealand to other colonies would bo amended, lie believed that the colony had not the power to make the provision referred to, and that the bill should be confined entirely to coastwise trade.

Replying, the Premier declared that an amazing ignorance of the. shipping laws of this and other countries had been shown by members. Mr. Bedford had accused the Premier of ''dropsical patriotism." and, in replying, the Premier likened the senior member for Dunedin to an "inflated bladder of aerated water, which was bound to go off pop at the next election." The Premier went on to deprecate the manner in which so important a bill had been treated, every subject under the sun having been debated at length. The resolution on which the bill was founded was discussed carefully at the Imperial Conference before being agreed to, and surely the men who composed that conference were more worthy of being followed in matters of Empire, than Messrs. Ell, Bedford and others. He characterised the debate as a dispracc to the records of Parliament, saying this advisedly. That there was necessity for the bill was evident from the number of foreign vessels which traded in New Zealand. Some years ago, while British ships in New Zealand were laid up, an American schooner was trading out of Mongomii and Kaipara.

Mr. Mancler: That is correct. The Premier went on to declare, that the. senior member for Dunedin had endeavoured to strike a severe blow to the Union Shipping Company. Some of the opposition to the Dill came from the fact that it was thought to be an attack on the 'Frisco service. Mr Massey thought this, and opposed it; so did Mr Fowlds. and, that member having done so, Mr Bedford had to also. He would say to that member, "Beware of your company." Mr Fowlds opposed it, and Mr Bedford said '•'Amen." A fair reading the. bill showed that the 'Frisco service, was not affected, and until Australia placed itself in the same position as New Zealand the bill could have no effect on the service. He was prepared to support, in Committee, the striking out of the inter-colonial phrase in the bill. There was no trade by the 'Frisco steamers between Sydney and Auckland, and, this being so, there was no force in the contention of Messrs Massey and Fowlds that that service would be injured by the bill.

The Premier further reminded the House that the s.s. Gothic, now in port, was not really a British ship, having been "Morganised," and should be flying the Stars and Stripes. The bill would preclude such vessels from taking the whole of the trade of the coasts of the colony, '•

The bill wa3 read a second time on a division by 31 to 10, and the House adjourned at 1.35 a.m. The division list was as follows:— Ayes (31): E. G. Allen, Barber, Bennett, Buddo, Carroll, Colvin, Davey, Duncan, Flatman, Hall-Jones, Heke, Houston, Kidd, La-wry. Major, MeGowan, MeLachlan. McNab, Mills, Parata, Remington. Seddon. Smith, Steward, Symes, Tanner, Wilford, Willis, Witty, Wood. Noes (16).: Bedford, Ell, Fisher, W. Eraser. Hardy, Hemes, Kirkbride, Lang, Lethbridge, Lewis, Mander. Massey, Rhodes, .1. W. Thomson, Vile, Witheford. Pairs.—For the Bill: Field, Ward, J. C. Thomson, A. L. D. Fraser, Hanan, Graham, Reid, Laurenson, Baume, >Sidey, Millar, Arnold, Hall. Against the* Bill: Aitken, Jas. Alien, Moss, Bollard, Taylor, Russell, Fowlds, Harding, Herdman, Duthie, Buchanan, Hogg.