THE NECESSITY OF ESTABLISHING FREE TRADE IN NEW ZEALAND.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume III, Issue 105, 9 March 1844, Page 3

THE NECESSITY OF ESTABLISHING FREE TRADE IN NEW ZEALAND.

[From the Southern Cross, January 27.]

Were Governments, as they ought to be, established for the good of the people, it would merely require to be shown that a public measure was in itself advantageous to the community, in order to its being adopted ; but, unhappily, Governments have interests apart from those of the people they rule, and it becomes, therefore, absolutely necessary that the advocate of any change should not only prove that that change or measure is calculated to promote the general good, but he must also prove that the Government are in that position, in which they cannot help themselves, that their very existence in fact depends upon their yielding or conceding the point at issue. Catholic Emancipation and the Reform Bill are two notable instances of the truth of this. Governments and all public bodies are always behind the people in the march of improvement ; instead of leading and guiding the people, they must invariably be driven on by the people. This is a fact that may be relied upon as truth, and it is a fact well worthy of the consideration of the people of this colony. A fact that they should never forget or lose sight of. A colonist need never expect good from any Government so long as they can withhold it. The old American colonies, and Port Natal at the present time, are striking illustrations. In both cases the Government would concede nothing until they were forcibly compelled, and then they gave up everything, as our contemporary would say, gracefully. But it was in truth nothing more or less than the good grace of a dire necessity. Judging by the conduct of the Home Government towards the settlers of Canada and the boers at Port Natal, open rebellion is the most certain road to favour and preferment. It is melancholy to think that a subject can only win the kindness of his Government by such unnatural means, but it is, nevertheless, true. We have been too quiet in New Zealand, — we have suffered ourselves to be led like sheep to the slaughter;— we permitted our lands to be taken from us without a struggle — we allowed heavy taxes to be placed upon every article of consumption without a murmur — we have allowed foolish and silly men to legislate for us and to expend our money without saying that it was even wrong — much less asserting and maintaining our own natural and national right to do so. We are exceedingly to blame in this respect, — we have not grumbled half enough. We ought to have followed the advice of one of our late senators, or rather to have verified his prophecy, when he eloquently stated that if a certain measure were passed "there would be nothing but grumbling and growling" until it was repealed. This remark contained much more of sagacity and wisdom in it than we thought at the time. We 6hould have growled like wild tigers at every unjust measure of the Government from that time until now; had we done so, our position would have been very different from what it is. The boers of Port Natal have, by the last accounts, obtained every thing they wanted from the British Government, for no other reason than because they first grumbled, then growled, and, in the end, actually fought like the bears, tigers, and hyenas of their adopted deserts. If we expect any good, we must more or less follow their example, grumbling and growling alone will do us any good.

Believing that our late senator has evolved a true political axiom, and believing also that, although we have clearly shown that free trade would be highly beneficial to this colony, and the only means of saving it from absolute ruin, this would not be sufficient to induce our Government to grant the highly prized boon, we shall now endeavour to show that the Government cannot help itself, that it is, in truth, in the power of the settlers to peaceably force the Government into free trade. If we choose, we can have free trade in spite of the Government. Our country is so happily circumstanced, that we can, with little difficulty and without any privation, bring about this desirable object. It is true that we are not represented in the Legislative Council, and that we cannot (as the people of Canada did) refuse to grant the supplies ; but we can still actually and effectually stop them. We can, legitimately, put an end to revenue from customs in a great measure by the exercise of industry in making the resources of our own country available, so as to grow, at least, the necessaries of life, such as wheat, barley, &c. ; and if we cannot use the wines, spirits, and malt liquors of other countries, many of us can do without them altogether, and those who cannot may still from their own barley produce good malt liquors to supply their place : there is no law in the colony to prevent the brewing of ale and porter. Tobacco may also be abundantly produced in our own country. Tea and sugar are luxuries that we nught, if necessity required, dispense with the use of for a year or two at least. The Americans have done so on a similar occasion, and why might not the inhabitants of New Zealand follow their example when "it would be the means of conferring such a benefit upon their country ? This would be the legitimate method of abolishing customs and establishing free trade ; but we are well aware that in this country there are many who will pursue a very different course (and we can scarcely blame them) ; there are many who will systematically smuggle as much tea, tobacco, and spirits, as will, together with the illicit distillation (for the safe practice of which this country is so admirably adapted), more than supply all the wants of the colony. If now, when people are not quite alive to the injury inflicted on the colony by customs dues, smuggling is so extensively carried oa, what shall it be when every man who wishes well to

the colony will deem it his interest and his duty to protect the" smuggler, under the conviction that nothing but his art will bring about that freedom of trade upon which he feels the salvation of his country must depend ? It is quite impossible for the Government to afford protection to the honest dealer in such a country as this, where smuggling can be so securely practised. The honest dealer must therefore either abandon the country altogether or betake himself to the trade of the smuggler ; in either case the result will be precisely the same — the revenue from the customs will be effectually destroyed. If, on the other hand, the Government should attempt to protect the revenue by establishing a coast guard along the winding shores and deep bays of New Zealand, what are they the gainers ? The establishment of customs with its preventative service will cost the colony infinitely more than all the duties collected. * Viewing the subject in every possible light, the conclusion must inevitably be arrived at that it is the duty of the people to use every legitimate effort to put an end to the revenue, and that their own necessities will very shortly compel the Government to abandon customs and to establish free trade. We do not ask the Government to do this for the good of the colony; this would, perhaps, be useless, for it is a reason to which they might not feel disposed to listen ; but we take the higher ground with them, and we tell them that they must, on their own account, abandon the customs, on the score of economy and necessity : this, and this only, is the argument by means of which we would bring the matter home to them. This is a species of argument to which we know they are in general disposed to listen, and for their own advantage we would recommend to them to abolish customs while the people are willing to substitute direct taxation for them. They may delay the time too long, and the people may, perhaps, refuse to be taxed, after it shall have been too late discovered that customs impositions and restrictions have ceased to be a profitable source of revenue. The people may become wise enough to refuse (as is their right) to submit to all or any taxes which are imposed without their consent. An Englishman even in New Zealand may sooner or later maintain the doctrine that taxation and representation must go together ; even the very Maories may, by necessity, be taught this English political lesson. The Maories may begin to think by what right the Government of England should take upon itself to impose an additional shilling upon every pound of tobacco which they consume. They may, perhaps, ask if this be in accordance with the famous treaty of Waitangi, and they may discover that they never bargained for such unjust terms. Some persons are shallow enough to look upon this as the strongest argument in favour of indirect taxation, that it is certain to reach the natives. Such persons never take into account that it is possible for a thing to be in itself either just or unjust. Could they apprehend such a principle as that, they would at once see that the very argument they made use of in favour of indirect taxation, was that which was the most powerfully opposed to it.

When the British Government (or rather when Captain Hobson decoyed the natives of New Zealand and) made them sign the treaty of Waitangi, did they ever tell the natives that they should tax, them and compel them to pay a shilling a pound more for their tobacco, and something extra for their guns> powder, tomahawks, and blankets ? Had they done so, it would have been nothing more than common honesty required, if they had intended that it should have been the case ; but we know for a fact that they never Said one word about the matter, and we know, still further, that if they had, the natives never would have signed the treaty of Waitangi. And if the natives were, by chance, even now to know that the Government were the cause of their paying double the price for their tobacco, and of the great difficulty of obtaining it, we are quite certain they would " grumble and growl" to the heart's content of our late wise Senator.