TAXATION-INCREASE OF SUGAR DUTY.

Press, Volume XLI, Issue 6142, 27 May 1885, Page 3

TAXATION-INCREASE OF SUGAR DUTY.

'- 4- TO THB EDITOB Off THE FBXSB. —"Inquirer" wants to know how am correct in my estimate of the it I pay through the tea, sugar, &c., My object in my first letter was to ttention to the fact that sugar was fy overloaded with tax, and out of tion to other sources of revenue, he individual tax is far in excess of ir proportion between property and dividual; consequently, to increase gar duty would be a great injustice, 'or my estimate. I find from the ns returns (i.e., the individual tax) iie amount is £1,453,703. The population about 500,000, gives a fraction lees than ij£B per head of individual tax per annum. [jMy family of ten would be equal to £30. Ev stated £25 in my previous letter, bnt la'one of my family smoke, so I allowed for ■this and some other minor items, and the Bum is quite sufficient to prove the tpresent unfairness of taxation. It may be Ivery debateable what are luxuries. If Jauch be specially taxed, why tax the poor man's tobacco np to 400 per cent, and yet the gentleman's carriage goes comparatively free? Haberdashery (ribbons and all the little fancy nick-nacs) used principally by the rich is charged 15 per cent, duty; dried currants, an article of food used equally by rich and poor, is charged 80 per cent. Is this fair taxation? I could point out other inconsistenciee, bnt my object is not (now) to disturb the tariff rate; but if it is necessary to increase taxation, let it be fairly adjusted- X fail to see where the question of protection tariff comes into this argument as I am not aware of any article that is as heavily taxed on protective principles as those I have referred to, none of which are produced in the colony (except tobacco, which is manufactured in bond). I trust "Inquirer" will see the justice of my argument, and assist in doing justice to ourselves. Yours, Ac, Faie Plat.

Among the appUcations fer relief at tbe bands of the Auckland helieving Officer ia Mrs Shteban, the wife of the mas now on his way Home in charge o! Sergeant Bunny and Detective Walker, to answer a charge' of murder at the Cork Assize?. Aa Sheehan had, in property or money, on h» arrest, some £300 to bis credit, it is tolerably evident somebody must have profited by his misfortune.

i__™ Bad amd Wo-TH-Mslare never imitated or counterfeited. This is ea» peaaUy true of a family medicine, and ft that the remedy imitated ja of Uie highest value. Aa soon as it had «?*? _ JBt __ ttd Proved by the whole world toatHop Bitters was the purest, best and m J^^S-L B3 —* hegan to steal the notices m whioh the press and the EffJiS £t _H ,oinfa T had expressed th« merits of H.B. «ndra wery way trying to induce suffering invaUds touretheii-etui instead, expoctang to make money on the credit and good name of H. B. Man* I others started nostrums put up in nimflat style to H. 8., with variously devised names, in which the word * 7 Hop** or "Hops" were used in a way to uduoe people to beUeve they were the same ac Hop Bitters, All such pretended remediec or cures, ne matter what their style oi name is, aud especially those with the word "Hop" or "Hops" in their name, or in any way connected with them or theii name, are imitations aud counterfeitsBeware of them. Touch none of them. Uee nothing but genuine American Hop Bitters, with a cluster of green Hops on the white label, and Dr. Soulee name blown in the glass. Trust nothing else. Druggist- and Chemists are warned against dealing iv imitations or counter I feats.—rAnvr.l