PROTECTION v. FREE TRADE.

Evening Post, Volume XXII, Issue 89, 13 October 1881, Page 3

PROTECTION v. FREE TRADE.

TO THE KDITOR OF THE EVENING POST. Sib — R. E. Evenden does not appear to understand the value of language I showed that protection had nothing to do with the excellence of American edge tools ; but R.E.E., like the Yorkshire groom, sticks to his text. Again, R E.E. talks of our " underselling the produce produced by the heathen Chinese, negro, and coolie." What is this but " senseless twaddle ?" The only products of those threo races that we cnsume are tea, coffee, sugar, and rice, and they cannot bo grown in oar temperate climate. Then whore does the "timber, corn, fruit, and jams," come from that " R.E.E." says are " produced by men, women, and children, working at starvation wasres ?" If this is not " arrant nonsense." what is it? Imports of timber come from America, British Columbia, and Tasmania. Wages in America and British Columbia are better than they are in New Zealand. What women and children do or are paid in Tasmania, I will leave for those to decide who know better than I do. They do not work for starvation wages, however. I must tell " R.E.E." that I am a working man (a 8 you know, sir), that I do look at the wages question, and that my experience gained by 30 years' travel through most of the English colonies has convinced me that free trade is best for not only the working man, but for all classes, and that for a country to be prosperous it must be an agricultural country before it becomes a manufacturing one. Cannot " R.K.E." see that tho reason our sawmillers for instance want protection is because they are eaten up by landlordism, and because the price they have to pay for an acre of timbered land is about .£26, the original price received by the State being perhaps 10s to £2 per acre. Hence, the cry not ooly for protection (for which the people have to pay), but the demand that out lumber shall bo carried by Government railroads for less than cost or thereabouts. Why not have taken tho duty off fruit and sugar, instead of putting a duty on jam. Is this too muoh for "RE.E."? Then "R.E.E." talks very glibly about other oountries " taking our oats and butter depend upon it." He does not appear to know that trade between two oountries must bo carried on by "barter" principally, or it will soon cease. If we sell oats or butter, we must take something else than money in return. What will it be if everything is protected ? I am, &o , Traveller.

When the good folks of the Church of England, at Wanganui, went on Sunday morning to Church, th<*y found staring them in the face a hideous board bearing the gratifying announcement that poisoned wheat was laid on the prea.ises. Tho Herald finds on enquiry that this cheerful kind of food was intended, not for the congregation, nor for rats or rabbits, but for a neighbour's ohickens who make sad inroads into the churchyard. Those unlucky roosters will have either to avoid the premises, or take a scientific analyst round with their next excursion into ecolesiaetical territory.