SUGGESTED RETALIATION.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11097, 16 October 1901, Page 7

SUGGESTED RETALIATION.

T t INTERVIEWS WITH LOCAL BUSINESS 1 :■/;.,.-■ .- • . , ■■ '.. " ■ .:.'./: ■ p TLe Prepoier'a hints in, the House last tt week respecting the possibiKty of a Tariff ! Bill being introduced this session, with the I object of putting heavy duties oa thow wti-

cles we at present import from Australia, as retaliation for the. proposals in the Federal tariff, do not appear to be viewed with much favour by tjiose local business men who htfve been interviewed .by a representative o! "The Press" on the subject. The chief objections to the proposal to retaliate are that if New Zealand placed heavy duties on her imports from Australia, the consumer, and not the producer, would be hit, and that to place heavy export duties on goods imported by Australia from this colony would simply mean tie closing of the Australian market for such, goods. Generally, it is anticipated that the Federal tariff will be greatly modified before it finally becomes law", end that, therefore, ifc is too early to talk of retaliation.

Mr E-. W. Ropers opinion on the subject was that practically the only effective method of retaliation by New Zealand was by the imposition of a heavier tax on Australian commercial travellers, and of a heavy duty on Australian wines. He was, however, far from being enthusiastic on the subject, and was inclined to think that retaliation of any sort would not serve the purpose intended. Mr A. Kaye felt that it would be far better to wait until the Federal tariff had been finally adopted before talking about retaliation or reprisal. The tariff, in his opinion, will be very much modified before it Is adopted, and it may.happen that New Zealand will have nothing to justify her in adopting a system of retaliation. Mr W. Wood's opinion was that we could not well retaliate without interfering with our free breakfast taMe, or with the supply' of raw products for our manufactures. If we intend building up industries here—such as the growing of lemons and of mimosa bark —we would have to protect them, but with a system, and a well-thought out policy, but to put on a duty to retaliate would merely interfere with our manufactures here, and for the small quantity we use it would not be worth while for Australia to take it into consideration. After the tariff has been at work we might be able to make some reciproca. treaty, but the difficulty in that matter is that Canada and other countries will probably demand the "most favoured nations" clause, and if the Commonwealth commences to give way to one, she will have to give way to so many, that the whole life of her policy will be tak'en out of it. If New Zealand suffers under the Federal tariff Australia will also suffer. Sydney has been a large receiving port for many lines, and it has been cheaper for New Zealanders to buy certain American goods in Sydney, than anywhere else. -This has been chiefly owing to the freight arrangements to and from Sydney. If, However, .there is to be no back loading from New Zealand to Australia, we shall not be able to import Newcastle coal so cheaply, and Sydney will not be able to send down the many lines* that Sydney merchants' travellers have been able to sell throughout New Zealand. Many lines have been treated as re- ■ exports from"Australia to New Zealand, but, in a greati many instances they have been on a through bill of lading; although in many other instances they have been stored in Sydney or Melbourne, and have been sold here, and the Australian merchants have had their. profit on them. The tariff, in Mr Wood's opinion., has come down at a most opportune time for New Zealand. The South African demand for our oats wall probably last through another season, and by that time New Zealand, will be in a position to see how; the Federal tariff has. worked. Then diplomacy would come to our aid, and, if it is possible to enter into a reciprocal treaty with Australia, the present Government, he was sure, will do their very utmost to bring it about.

Mr G. H. Whitcombe, of Whitcombe and Tombs, stated that the new tariff -does not affect thte trade in (books and stationery at all. In 1899 we imported from Australia printed books to the value of. £29,292, aod stationery to tbte value of JSIO. Books, however, -are free, and the Federal tariff , on stationery will probably be about 20 per cent, ad valorem, as against a 25 per cent. tariff in New.Zealand, A leading boot manufacturer expressed the opinion that the question of retaliation was out of the question as regards the boot and leather trades. Our imports of boots from Australia, compared with the total consumption, were so small that anything we could doTn the matter would be ineffective ;and our exports to Australia were also hardly worthy of notice. The only effective method of retaliating, and one that would apply to all manufactures and trades, would be by putting on a heavy tax oil Australian commercial travellers.