FREE TRADE.

Press, Volume XXXI, Issue 4299, 10 May 1879, Page 2

FREE TRADE.

TO THB BDITOB O* THK PBBBS. Sib,—The stir which a few of those shortsighted people hare lately set going in some quarters respecting the proposal to re-impose the grain and timber duties repealed last session seems to have met with no encouragement. It is true the usual way of inducing members of the Assembly to more in this matter outside the walls of Parliament has been freely exercised. If one may judge from, the wise action taken recently.by an important body in support of the principles of tree trade, in direct opposition to this selfish cry for protection on grain and timber (although. this body were asked through a member of Parliament to support protection), it is not likely that this retrogressive movement will be broached again. For the credit of a rising and intelligent people, it is to be hoped not. Praiseworthy arguments hare been used through the Press of the world, showing the utter absurdity of protection as the means of bringing about the wealth of nations, and as being contrary to all the principles of political economy. It v only an echo of such clear views, when one has to reiterate that the tactics and ingenuity so eagerly shown by many ofithose who believe in protection, in using the members of Parliament with all the Influence* possible to bring to bear to attempt to pass laws to benefit the few at the cost of the many, is in itself distressing. One can scarcely imagine how these members should be so blindly used as a> medium by those who are mere adventurers, and by those who are co doubt open to play the basest possible game to gain the ends of purely interested motives, in endeavoring to use legislation to suit their own individual profit. This is protection. Some put forth with the'greatest rashness (who seem to be thoroughly hardened to all sense of reason and common decency) that the requirements of protected manufactories have an effect on the value of the raw material in thu colony, once successfully started by an Act of Parliament. The raw material of -wool hat been given as an instance. There is no doubt this has been thrown out as a lure to the small sheep farmers; endfirmsof

tanling h»ve been referred to here in Christhurch to bear testimony to such nonsense, n fact it has been stated, in plain terms, that iad Bit the Kaiapoi flannel factory operated his year, wool would have fetched a poor »rice in this city. What next is to happen ? t has been stated, with the same amount of jsurance—" If revenue must be derived to so arge an extent from Customs, then why act mpose the tax on such articles of daily use is can be manufactured in the colony?" Phis, again, is only another of the ahurdities the selfish protectionist puts urwsucd it has in fact the very >pposite result. Por the benefit of tho larrow mind, it is necessary to tell him ;hat all revenue derivable from protection is sxtremely fallacious, and no person would ittempt to adduce such utter trash who really understood its effects. Por instance, by placing a prohibitory duty upon flannel and blankets, for the sake of fostering the Kaiapoi industry until its producing machinery equalled the consuming power of New Zealand, while this was being brought about, the revenue would be gradually falling off, until it had dwindled away effectually. To mc I can only make one thing out of protection. Prom the viaw of the protectionist, who I designate as an obstructionist, and one who seeks to make articles mora costly and destroys competition by legislation, it is to consider the manufacturer, and not the oonsumer. The consumers have no right to pay any auch penalty to induce men who are void of fairness to urge upon the weak minded would-be statesmen to paes any such unjust enactments. They all should be educated and made understand that fair competition dots compel improvement. Therefore it is an advantage to the consumer and to the public interest generally that artioles of every day use should ba made cheap, and not cosUy. Trade in a depressed state v a most unassailable reason in. favor of free trade, because it gives the consumer more for his shilling. Protection, on the contrary, undoubtedly makes dear and expensive every article it attempts to foster. To the reasonable thinker, if the Government of any colony neglects to carry on the management of its functions upon any other than free trade principles, it is a transgression against the kindness of Providence. To protect is to strangle, and not develop, the natural producing power of a country. _ I would strongly urge upon our political friends who aim al something useful, to solve the following it Parliament instead of bothering their braini about protection. It is easily worked out and it is this. I will put it briefly. Then aire some 1115 miles of railway open in New Zealand for trafiic to the end of the Govern ment year, Bth February last. The cost maj be put down at £6000 per mi1e=£6,690,000 from a recently published record. The tota receipts for the year from all sources from thi railways appear to be £424,812 ; the total ex penditure for the same time £302,889; balanoi in favor working the New Zealand Bailways £121,923. This, according to rule of threi sum give! a yearly interest return upon thi outlay of Only 182 per cent, say under 2 pel cent.. The money borrowed on debenturei cost say 4 per cent., and is supposed to be ex pended only upon reproductive works. Thi shows a yearly loss of £145,677. When is this difference to come from ? This resuli is enough to make one tremble with alarm Matters are still made worse, as our railway rates are most outrageous ; for instance, ont ton of produce grown at Sprirgstos, thfcee iniie»-frdm Port Lyttelton, and put oi board ship at Port Lyttelton for an intercolonial fjort, costs 9s 4d. This is the cos l for carrying one ton of produce in a sistei colony 100 miles, including landing it free oi board ship. No wonder the producers are ii a state of collapse here. It is to be hopec the directors of the Corn Exchange will ac with firm determination in this matter o railway reform. The cost of the working ex penses on tbe whole of the New Zetuan Bailways is 714 per cent, of the gross w ceipts. In the sister oolony I believe it i only 521 per cent, while the railway rate there are only about one-half those charge in New Zealand. Yoxat, &C., Pbaotioai. Nbw Chttic.