The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, MAY 13, 1887.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 4913, 13 May 1887, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, MAY 13, 1887.

Sik Jtoius Yooel once boldly hoisted the Protection flag , , but it was ignominiously hauled down, and the sense of the House and the country declared that they would hayo nothing to do with the unclean thing in"' any. shape or form. : ' Parliament—the same as "is sitting now—protested that retrenchment -must first be - given effect to before extra should be -imposed, and when increased' taxation- .would be necessary, it ; was urged .that-it jsliould not .fall on itjie working classes, but should bo borne. ;by property,, We. opine that the . view then held will, bo that adhered to now, as the circumstancefl of the colony have only altered in i one respect, namely, that owing' to Ministerial. blundering—-iii re? ducing tho property;tax and mismanagement of railways— •we now.have.to face a deficit.. "Wehopeandbelieve that ;Sir. Julius Vogel's- proposed increases in the Customs duties wifi be and that;the industriesof. the colony. : Avill not/have their wheels dogged by increased burdens. { If we take the value of our yearly imports and place against, that revenue derived from the Customs, we .find that oiu , imports are : taxed:.qn ■; an average fifteen per cerit-y , which while sufficient aid to' any industry .worthy of_ support—leaving out $11 ofter coats of -."fimporting 'goods;-^r.is ■■ '.quite .-ef' hea,vy a .burden onltioe producing.. classes as they i oug , be caUed <W;to;.pay. Y-Lqt-it be ;borne in. mind' that .New Zealand, through duties;: already-raises fifirjr per cent, per,'jiead njpr? I than ;i pro-' :

tectionist Victoria or depressed New South Wales, and it is proposed to still further increase that burden by £200,000. We do not for a moment believe the House will assent to tho Treasurer's proposals. The new tariff is simply a bid for the Protectionist vote. It will not be forgotten that some time ago certain representatives of the boot trade modestly asked that the duties on imported boots and shoes should be raised to 30 per cent., and the Treasurer has given them 20 per cent. Now, how will that work ? The consumer will have to pay on certain goods an enhanced price, as.tho representatives, we have before re-, f erred to, said they could not compete with the importer at present, but tho revenue of the countiy will not get that benefit. For every pair of shoes those factories can produce the consumer will bo taxed, and in certain lines colonially made will replace the imported article, so that the taxpayer contributes nothing to wipe off the present deficit, but simply gives a very substantial bonus to the maker of his boots. We have taken that one item as a fair sample of the new tariff, and let tho consumer—who is everybody—bear in mind that on the imports of 1886 if this tariff had been in force the duties on boots would have been more than doubled, would have meant £20,000 more than was actually paid iv that year. How the tariff has been thrown together may be seen from what follows. Let us take a few of the minor aitides. Formerly maccaroni, vermicelli, sago, tapioca, and maizena wore free. In 1886 if the new tariff had been in force and the consumption remained tho same, the duties on those articles would have amounted to £11,370.' The average value of tho sago and tapioca imported last year was £1 and 17s per cwt. respectively, and now they are to be subjected to a'duty of 18s 8d per cwt or 100 per cent. We are a progressive people it will bo seen from such a duty. The common calicoes &c, are to contribute £10,000, fresh fruit £3500, boots an additional £20,000, rice an additional £10,1-16, preserved fish an additional £2,200. The few articles we have named, which are used by everybody, aro to pay nearly £60,000 additional duties. Then let it be borne in mind that more than 60 per cent, of our Customs revenue is derived from some half-dozen heads such as spirits, tea, sugar, and tobacco, and as these are untouched, the additional £200,000 to bo raised means that fifty per cent on an average is to be added to tho already existing duties on all articles, except the halfdozen we have named. This is the treatment accorded by a Ministry that pose as the friend of the working^men._ . The itC-HIS-" IVStneci" above aro certainly not luxuries but necessaries, and the prices of some of them will be more than doubled in price to the consumer for in addition to the Government charging a duty of 100 per cent, the profits of the wholesale and retail dealers on. the duty a swell as on the articles themselves will have to be added. We have always objected to Protection in any. shape or form and will continue to do so, therefore the new tariff will hare our strenuous opposition. We say emphatically if increased taxation is necessary it ought to fall on those best able to bear it, and it ought to be in proportion to a man's wealth, while the increases as proposed are mostly on necessaries, while luxuries escape much easier. We say more that the taxes will [ not go into the coffers of the Treasury, colonial goods of inferior quality will replace imported, but the consumer will be taxed all the same. If the tariff were agreed to the revenue would consequently gain but little, and we know from the experience of the past that if fresh taxes be imposed on the community they will not add to the revenue, because of the diminished spending , power. Apparently our rulers fail to recognise that notwithstanding we have gained in population largely during the last three years, our Customs revenue has been actually diminishing, and that from no other cause, than our burdens are such that we cannot respond to them, and to increase those burders, would only still further reduce the spending power of ijhe population. The limit of the responding power of taxation has long ago been reached.