FREE-TRADE AND PROTECTION.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17225, 16 August 1921, Page 8

FREE-TRADE AND PROTECTION.

to THE IDITOR OJ "THi PHKIS." Sir, —The spirited correspondence that is now gou*g on in "Tue Press" on the question ci. Free>-trade and Protection, ia injsome danger of losing its identity. Nothing can be gained by administering homeopathic doses of either' Free-trade or Protection as a means of encouraging local industries; we must %ccept one or tne other without reservation,, ''The Press," I understand,, is in favour of a bonus or subsidy guaranteed by the Government ror undeveloped or struggling industries. This system is entirely opposed to the ethics of Free-trade, and cannot even be accepted as a subsidiary or alternative to Protection. Wo must admit the fact that all out industries have had to be protected, otherwise we should have had none at all. In the early days many of our settlers were convinced that New Zealand was only suitable for pastoral and agricultural purposes, owing to its long ..distance from the markets of the world. Many of the Free-trade newspapers published in England would tell us exactly the same thing.- Take the "Manchester Guardian," the "Sheffield and Rotherham Independent," the "Leeds Mercury," and the "Dewsbury Reporter"; all these papers are strong supporters of Free-trade. They would tefi us without the least delicacy that our boasted wealth was purely fictitious and imaginary, and that manufactured goods supported by artificial barriers are unsound, and would undoubtedly disappear under keen competition. As a remedy for this, they would tell us to throw open our ports to the markets of the world, discontinue your sickly industries—they cannot possibly succeed. English manufacturers will supply you with everything you require much cheaper than you can ; manufacture for youipelvc-s. Our merchants will guarantee to take every j pound of raw material, you can pro- j duce. If you can stand this test, ycur i future as a manufacturing country, is assured. This is the stick argument j of .every Free-trade newspaper .in Eng- I land. The question is: What would our position to-day have been Bad we followed this method? Would we have stood higher in the estimation of the world? Would we have been able to float our loans on the London market at a cheaper rate Would our Prime Minister nave met with the same reception that he is having in England at the present time? Personally, I don't believe he would have been invited at all had New Zealand been foolish enough to adopt the fetish of Free-trade. The wax has taught the people of Great Britain more political economy than can be found m the writingß of John Stewart Mill or Adam Smith. They discovered,-by a system

lof intense culture, that the produc- . tivity of the soil was capable of supplying 80 per oent. of her people with food. Had the late John Bright taken as keen an interest in the reform of the_ land laws and the development of agricultural pursuits instead of giving his whole attention to the repeal of the Corn Laws, much better results would have occurred. The repeal of the Corn Laws gave the people cheap broad without the means of buying it. ; Agricultural reform would have Bup- ■ plied both, and kept the people at home as well. What was the resultP In a very short time people were .leaving the British Isles in thousands for the U.S.A., to avoid an existence of hopeless poverty, where not" to be at all was better than t 0 be . I In my own native land whole families left for America, and those who were not able to go in a body, gener- ' allv managed to get one or two in the family away. The money from this ' source, with, the help of the pig, was ' sufficient to supply the grasping avidity ■of the landlord. Why did our own old 1 pioneers leave Free-trad© England aiiu | risk a long and dangerous voyage in j old dilapidated 'sailing ships to a. couni try situated a'most on the brim of the universe, and. practically unknownr They left the Old Coiintry fully convinced that no' hardships in the new country could be worse than what they had already endured in the old. Under | the blighting influence _of Free-trade I mai.y fiour;6h'ng industries disappeared completely. The Nottingham lace trade no longer exists in England. This clean and genial occupation gave employment to many women and girls. When their trade disappeared, these women were obliged to work on the coal pit bank for a living, and yet the English Government looked on with its usual characteristic placidity. I am not prepared to dispute anything that Mr Saxby may say about England's prosperity since 1846. It is perfectly correct that .she accumulated colossal wealth during that period. Very little of it was devoted to improving the general wolfn re of her peasantry. I have nit muoh sympathy with, nor do I support organised Lnbour in this country. But I have seen too much wretched poverty in Great Britain to easily forget it. There is no getting away from the fact that England can count her unemployed by millions. The other day Lord Haig mode a passiojwvte appeal for help on behalf of a million exservice men who were on the verge of starvation. If. we turn to Germany we ifind no industrial trouble, little or no unemployed, her ex-service men fully provided for, her indiwtres in an active and flourishing condition. France oan easily manage, and successfully overcome" her labour troubles, and w gradually returning to her former mod* of life. The war Tiid no deterrent effect on America. Th« r e no change In. her social life. Nothing seems to unt'aet her commercial activity. She seem* to hnve no trouß'e whatever m Pttbiafyinff the claims of her Yours, eto., ' ' W -T MILLER. Fend al ton, August 14£E.-