DROUGHT IN AUSTRALIA

Lyttelton Times, Volume CVIII, Issue 12999, 15 December 1902, Page 8

DROUGHT IN AUSTRALIA

NEW ZEALAND’S OFFER,

APPRECIATED BUT DECLINED,

A BRIGHTER OUTLOOK. United Press As?o^« on _ IJy Electric Telegraph Copyright. sy DNEY, Dec. 13.

The State Premier, g; r JJdmnnd Barton, has received a copy <,f a telegram 1 wherein Mr Seddon refers to j-,p c . >j ew . Zealand proposal to send fodder nn( | see j s -f or tho assistance of sufferers by u, e drought. A hope is expressed that the oh er w jn be accepted in the spirit it is intended, -which is purely neighbourly. Sir John pc . bns sent the following reply:—“l eoi. (: b a p T thank you for your telegram, and i\^ ar£ ] your proposal as fresh evidence of goodwill existing between the people New Zealand and this State. There are.V however, such ample resources available, and the prospects for the future, in consequence of the recent rainfalls, are so satisfactory, that the Government anticipates no difficulty in meeting all requirements. Your generous offer is- much appreciated." Sir Edmund Barton regards Mr Sed-don's action as a kind and considerate one, and says that those movements tend to bind even more strongly the friendship between New Zealand and Australia. BRISBANE, Dec. 13.

Mr Philp has replied to Mr . Seddon’s offer as follows:—“Many thanks for your exceedingly kind offer, which is highly appreciated. Wo have had a splendid rain over the greater part of the State, and grass will soon be plentiful. ' We are also making arrangements for seed, wheat, and will, therefore, not require the assistance you so generously offer.”, A DUNEDIN OPINION. [From Our Correspondent.] DUNEDIN, Dec. 13. Mr Moriteson, a grain merchant, on being interviewed, expressed himself strongly opposed to tho idea of Now Zealand being called on to assist the sufferers from tho drought in Australia, because it was the people of Australia who were themselves blocking the drought sufferer's from relief. He had no desire to be thought uncharitable, and was well aware how readily the people of New Zealand were to respond to any appeal; but the present was essentially, in his opinion, a case where charity commenced at ' home. New Zealand had neither food nor seed grain to spare, and to export any considerable quantity of grain at the present time would mean raising the present prices to famine prices. It would, in other words, really mean taxing the workers of New Zealand to assist our neighbours. It was the producing States of Victoria, South Australia' and Tasmania who were blocking the proposal to suspend the tariff on breadstuffs and fodder in order to get as high a price as possible for their supplies, instead of rendering assistance to the drought-stricken districts.