Protection and the Fanners.

Evening Star, Issue 7449, 18 February 1888, Page 2 (Supplement)

Protection and the Fanners.

The state of aflairs in Victoria should act as a warning to the New Zealand House of Representatives when it comes to deal with the question of reforming the Tariff. Signs and symptoms are not wanting (says the * Argus ) that the farmers of Victoria will this year bring about a new division of political parties. The idea is fermenting in the Victorian agricultural mind that “ Protection does nothing for the wheat-growers.” They are now asking for such rates on the railways as will to some extent compensate them for the loss they suffer from the operations of the Tariff. In other words, they desire to be relieved of some of their present burdens by having their grain carried at a loss to the State. Another proposal also strongly urged is that the State should pay a bonus on the export of wheat, such a bonus being, it is contended, an equivalent for the protective duties levied for the benefit of the manufacturers. The manufacturing interests are taking alarm at the new policy now being advocated, and propose an increase of the stock tax as a sop to the farmers. It is pointed out, however, that this would not meet the case at all. The Stock-grower might gain something by such an impost, but the meat consumers would have to pay in the shape of increased prices. The grain-grower would be no gainer unless he abandoned wheat-growing. If sheep and cattle were to take the place of wheat small holdings would be diminished, and cattle and sheep would take the place of the crops that now employ 120,000 people. The position is one of considerable interest at the present moment. What the result will be it is difficult to predict. To all appearance, how’ever, the farmers of Victoria are about to take the matter up with vigor, and insist upon their interests having some consideration at the hands of the Legislature. The state of things in Victoria, we repeat, deserves to be carefully watched by us in New Zealand. If any attempt is made in this country to increase the burdens of the people in the name of Protection, we may expect to find the agricultural community asserting themselves with even greater energy in the future than they have ever ventured to do in the past. As we are large exporters of wheat, frozen mutton, and dairy produce, it requires very little argument to prove that Protection can do nothing for the agricultural community.— ‘ Press. ’