MORE PROTECTIONIST FALLACIES.

Evening Star, Issue 7385, 3 December 1887, Page 1 (Supplement)

MORE PROTECTIONIST FALLACIES.

TO the editor. . Sib,—A letter appeared in your issue of Saturday evening over the signature J. Neil.

It consisted of twelve lines of printing, and in those twelve lines there were five outrageous mis-statements. On my pointing out their abmirdity, ho makes no attempt to show that I am wrong, boyoud stating that he waa speaking in hia letter of Melbourne at present, not two or three years ago—that is, in 1883-84 85. Wi" Mr Neil be surprised to learn that this doea not help him in the least; that be is atill as far out as ever? At the end of 1886 New South Wahs’s trade per head wasl37 5a and Victoria’s L3014a. Th’s effectually disposes of two of Mr Neil s mis-statements— (1) that Victoria’s commerce was greater than that of any other Colony, ard 2) that it amounted to L2O per head. _ Mr Neil still persists in stating that Victoria is absorbing our mechanics. I commend the following figures to his careful attention: —Increase of population during year ended 31st December, 188G : Now South Wales, 44,003 Queensland, 27.000; New Zealand, 14,000; Victoria, 12,000. Two things may be learned '.om the above figures: (1) If our mechanics go to Victoria by the boat-load every week, they certainly do not stay there. (2) The two colonies with the highest tariffs show the least increase in population. Rather a failure for Protection, Mr Neil! Mr Neil in his last letter makes much or Victoria having gained the one million «t population first. I will concede that she di and I have never denied it or been ignorant of fact, as he insinuates. Why, however, does si e not hold the supremacy? On the 30th Ju . 1887, New South Wales was 4,oooahead of b ; and I will back this statement of Mr Hay'. against that of the gentleman who told Neil that it was estimated that Victoria la i 1,250,000 Inhabitants. Mr Haytor is the recognised authority in these matters—there is no higher—and 1 trust Mr Neil will not he annoyed if I tell him that I prefer his statements to that of a writer who makes five glaring errors in twelve lines of print. _ . In conclusion, I would point out that it is absurd to talk of a colony “winning a neck-ac’-neck race” for 3,000,000 inhabitants, unless it is shown where they started from. Did they start together? I submit that twenty yeais growth is a fair test, and I submit the following figures for Mr Neil’s perusal: — Victoria. N.S. Wales. Deficiency Population, 1300 .. 000,032 431,412 203 WO. 1880 .. 1.000,000 1,000,000 Ail Effective male population (iges 26 to 45), 1871 .. 130,413 83,276 1881 .. 09,497 115,931 These figures show that in twenty years New South Wales pulled up a deficiency as aga’nst Victoria of 205,570 souls; aud they further show that Victoria, with Protection, during ten years lost 52,138 men in the prime of life, whilst New South Wales, without this panacea for all human ills, gamed during the same period 16,494. Very strange, but very true I I refuse to answer Mr Neil’s question in his last for two reasons: (l)His figures aie wrong. (2) Because he has not admitted that the statements in his letter on Saturday evening had no foundation in fact. I believe in settling one thing at a time.—l am, etc., AUSTBALIAN. Dunedin, December 2.