THE SAWMILLERS'PETITION

Evening Post, Volume LXVIII, Issue 127, 25 November 1904, Page 2

THE SAWMILLERS'PETITION

TO THE EDITqR. Sir — In writing to you on the 12th under the above heading we Lad no desire to make you tremble, neither did we wish to be discourteous. Our complaint was that you had wrongly quoted a whole paragraph of our petition making nonsense of it. It was not a question merely of one figure,. As this particular paragraph was made the text of your article, we think you might have taken care to have it correct, .especially as you had our circular, and Avere not dependent on jour own report. You state that the error crept into your r6port of the petition three weeks ago. We did not notice this at the time, or we should have drawn your attention to ifc. For this omission on our part we cry peccavi. You state there is nothing in the difference to affect your argument one iota. Perhaps so. However, we are anxious to have it correct, for we are of opinion .that this bare statement of fact will in itself largely influence your readers ki favour of the petition. In our last letter wt endeavoured to show that, indepen-i dently of the mis-quotation, you had argued from imperfect data, which we" thought you • would acknowledge. You 1 have not done so. We, therefore, ask that you will allow us space to criticise your argument in detail. We' have shown the very large amount of employment given to labour and railways t by the conversion of native bush into timber, and we have claimed in our petition that the industry should be protected against foreign competition. Your argument, as we understand it, is that the loss of labour and railage is of no economic importance to the colony if timber can be imported from abroad cheaper than the local production, and further, that it is advisable to import timber for the reasons that (a) the local bush may be kept until lequired, as "twenty years .is nothing in the life of a tree" ; (b) that "cheap timber means that more houses will be built, more work Avill be found for carpenters, and more workmen can be their own landlords," and rents will come down ; (c) that sawmillers' profits should be reduced, as "it is notorious that they (rents) have risen in part through the greatly increased cost of timber, and that this increase has been the outcome of artificial , combination as much as of general forces." Now, sir, each million feet imported reduces the local production by an equal quantity, for we shall show presently that any cheapening which might follow thb importation of foreign timber will not be sufficient to cause any increase in donsumptidn. Consequently ' £2500 le&s wages are paid and .31500 less railage by the local sawmillers for every million feet imported. You have not attempted to explain how the Government is to compensate itself for this shrinkage in railage. As for the loss of wages, you write : "Some immediate shortage in the amount of employment affordnd by the trade there might be at first, but timber men are j handy men, and would soon find other work." To find other work it is first necessary to create fresh industries or to extend those now existing. T,his is not a -particularly easy matter. On referring to the New Zealand Official Year Book, 1904, page 245, we find that the principal industries employ altogether 41,726 hands, "sawmills, sash and door factories" being easily at the head with 6812 hands, or 16 1-3 per cent, of the whole. These figures are made up to the end of 1901. Since then the increase in sawmills has been very great. From this you will see that it will cause more than a temporary dislocation of the labour market if, through the importation of foreign timbers, any sensible proportion of existing sawmills have to close down. However, we do not wish to use this as our chief argument in favour of restricting foreign competition. " We trust that our subsequent remarks will prove that it is for the benefit of the country that sawmill hands shall be kept employed at their own industry. Your first articie states that timber is not perishable, and your second article endeavours to support this opinion. We think you might justly allow we know ' something about this matter, and that any deliberate statement we make thereon should be entitled to "serious" consideration. Your little pleasantry about the shark and the lady is very amusing, no doubt, but the argument it serves to illustrate is so puerile and the fallacy of it so palpable that it nesds no comment. We assert that a huge area of bush which is at present available for fsawmilling purposes cannot possibly be preserved for any considerable period. In the first place most of it is opened for settlement, and the bush has to come down to enable the settler to grow grass. In the second place accidental fires will destroy it by millions of feet each year. * As the bush must go, we claim that it should ■be converted into sawn timber while it i& still available. The settler benefits in that he gets payment for the milling timber on his land. If any section is so far back, or of such a rough nature that it will not pay the sawmiller to work it at any considerable reduction under present rate*, then it is manifest that tile holder of that particidar section will be the poorer by the amount of royalty he would otherwise receive. We know that very many bush settlers are dependent on these royalties to carry out the conditions of their leases. The State, as a landowner, is very much interested in this- '-Clie value of bush lands for sale or lease is to a large extent determined by the timber thereon. If timber is reduced in price the land must fall correspondingly in value. The average crop of rimu per acre is about 12,000 ft. This, at" 6d per 100 ft, represents £3, so it will be clear that a drop of 6d per 100 ft reduces the selling price of rimu bush land by £3 per acre. We have mentioned rimu specially, as is the timber which will -be mostly ;>nected by the introduction of American timbers. It is, however, not? tlio only timber that will be affected. The main central line is now beginning to tap large tracts of totara bush. Now, first-class heart of totara has nothing to fear from American timbers, but first-class heart is only about 50 per ceift. of the log. The balance of the log serves the same purposes as rimu, and consequently the value of totara land miu>t be depreciated by the introduction of American timber. As we have already said, the question of conserving forests is a matter for experts We presume the officers of the Government Forestry Department will be called upon to give evidence on this point when our petition comes up for consideration, and we are perfectly satisfied to abide by their opinion. We will now consider the effect that the importation of American timbers may have on the cost of buildings in Wtllington. In our last letter we stated that it is unlikely it will reduce the present selling prices by more than 7£ per cent. You have not contradicted this, so presumably you allow it to be substantially correct. Take our four-roomed cottage, costing, with the land it stands upon, £450, of which £90 represents timber. Assume that £70 of this is timber that will be affected by American timbers. Then the saving by using the latter would be 1_ per cent, of £70— i.e., £5 ss, and the difference in rent, allowing 10 per cent, on capital, 2£d per week. Now we claim, Sir, that so trifling a difference will not affect building in Wellington one iota. It certainly will not mean "that more houses will be built, more work will be found for carpenters, and more woi'kmen can be their own landlords." Before closing this part of the subject we wish to take the opportunity fo remark that the figures , given in the sawmillers' petition are pur-

possly stated in proportions that are least Advantageous to the petition, so they shall be beyond cavil. This is particularly bo in the figures giving the relative cost of ■timber in a four-roomed house. .With regard to 'eawmiilers' profits: In reply to our letter you state "We made no. charge of "exorbitant profits." We' certainly construed your remarks re "artificial combination" to mean that sawmillers are reaping undue profits. However, wo are pleased to accept your assertion that this is not so. Now, to sum up. We have shown that tne reduction in price of timber likely to result from the importation of American timbers will be very small, and that the difference in the cost it will make in a building will be inappreciable. On the other side we have shown what a large amount of employment sawmills give to workmen and railways. We have further made it clear that the industry is making . use of a natural product of the country which would otherwise be destroyed, and generally, M r e trust we have made out a good case in favour of protecting the sawmillere. — I am, etc., H. B. COUPE, Manager Hawkes Bay Sawmillers' v Co-operative Association, Ltd. Dannevirke, 21st November, 1904.