SATURDAY, JUNE 10, 1897. MAIL SUBSIDIES.

Hastings Standard, Issue 369, 10 July 1897, Page 2

SATURDAY, JUNE 10, 1897. MAIL SUBSIDIES.

The promoters of the Vancouver mail service are determined to exploit the colonies for subsidies. New South Wales has already conceded the point, and now their objective is New Zealand. Mr Seddon was approached by Mr James Huddart very soon after his arrival in London, when ous Premier stipulated for a quicker service than was proposed by the shipping company, and from latest accounts his request has been granted upon his conceding a higher rate of subsidy. This makes the preliminary stage of the negotiations complete, and Mr Seddon has promised to refer the matter to Cabinet, and if it meets with the approval of his colleagues it will come before Parliament. We are totally opposed to subsidising this service, for we maintain that for receiving and forwarding mail matter this colony is now served efficiently, and at best this new mail route will but shorten the mail time by about three days compared with the 'Frisco route. Is this gain in time of any vital importance to the colony ? Is it of any importance whatever ? Surely it makes not the slighest difference to the colonists whether they get their English letters to day instead of next Wednesday ? Then what is the use of paying for what is not wanted ? The whole system of subsidy-pay-ing needs revision, because our system is obsolete. The trend now is to subsidise ostensibly for mail transit but in reality to provide for the export trade. This is the principle adopted by Germany and France and Japan and successfully imitated by Victoria. Our export trade is of more importance to rs than receiving our London letters in 72 hours less time than we do now. That the German system is effective is evidently the opinion of Mr Seddon, who pressed upon the British Government the desirability of subsidising British tonnage as a set off to continental competition ; and yet Mr Seddon seems disposed to pay for a practically worthless steam service so far as our trade requirements are concerned. The interests — the vital trade interests of the colonies —lie in the direct trading vessels, and it is these steamers that should be helped. We have argued this point out again and again, and we are quite certain that ultimately this view will be taken that the direct traders are of greater value than the mere passenger and mail carrying steamers. If the direct service had been subsidised there can be no doubt that the vessels of the fleet would have been kept up to date, that the steaming powers would have been improved, and, above all, the rates of freight, which in these times of falling prices is of supreme importance to our produce shippers, would have been very greatly reduced. Now the settlers and exporters have to enter into hostilities, in fact press for freight reductions at the point of the bayonet. If we helped the direct traders with subsidies we could reasonable expect to receive benefits in return ; but 110, the cargo steamers must carry produce at minimum, almost unremuneratrve, rates, and the plums of subsidy must be given to passenger boats and mail-carriers. We hope Mr Seddon will not succeed in obtaining from Parliament a subsidy for this Vancouver service.