THE The New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 4, 1882.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XIX, Issue 6281, 4 January 1882, Page 4

THE The New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 4, 1882.

The Victorian Government lias refused to join the other Australasian colonies in appointing Sir Henry Parkes a delegate to treat with the Cabinet of Washington for a reduction of the American duties on wools, giving as its reason that the time is inopportune. If the Premier of Victoria means that as regards his colony the time is inopportune, he is certainly right, and until it alters its fiscal policy, no time can be opportune. Sir Bryan O'Loghlen is quite consistent in refusing to give Sir Henry Parkes the credentials he sought, because it would have been ridiculous for a colony whose woollen manufacturers are at this moment agitating for a large increase of the duties on woollen goods, to urge on the United States a reduction of its duties on the raw material. We are not aware that the American manufacturers have any trade with Australasia in woollen products, but even so, the proposal of Victorian manufacturers would be a good handle for a country extremely tenacious with regard to its fiscal policy. As the American Cabinet is kept fully informed by its Consular - Agents of any trade matter of importance occurring in the colonies it will not be surprising if Sir Henry Parkes should find the proceedings in Victoria a stumbling-block. Provided that the United States be disposed, however, to make concessions it need not be a serious one, because it might be possible to make Victoria au exception to any agreement. The difficulty would be to prevent Victorian wools being shipped from Sydney, but it would probably not be insuperable. What have been the instructions given to Sir Henry Parkes by the various colonial Governments has not been made public ; but we think Ave shall be correct in saying that they are confined to obtaining a reduction j of the American duty on their wools. The Government of the United States will be little disposed to vary its tariff in favour of Australasia, and it will do so only on one of three grounds — that the American manufacturers are favourable to the change, that there be a desire to assist the Pacific Mail ComCompany and promote trade with these colonies, or that a reduction be based i on reciprocity. The last would be the best weapon that Sir Henry Parkes could wield ; but we apprehend he has received no discretion from the Government of this colony on that point. It should, however, have received some attention, because, as matters stand, New Zealand is placed at a disadvantage with respect to New South Wales. This last is a free-trade colony, imposing duties simply for the purposes of revenue. That can hardly be said of this colony. It is true that its import duties are not so high as to exclude foreign products, as is the aim of the fiscal policy of the United States, but some of them are designed to encourage local production, and in that sense are meant to be protective. Mr. Gladstone, in a speech made by him recently at Leeds, annihilated the proposal which has been mooted in England to coerce the United States by retaliatory fiscal regulations. But it is something very different to offer a quid pro quo. This was the basis of the treaty which Mr. Cobden made with the French Government, . and the expiration of which has led to negotiations, hitherto unsuccessful, for the substitution of another of a more extended kind. If we should be mistaken in our belief that Sir Henry Parkes has received no authority to offer to the United States reciprocity there is nothing more to be said, but if wc are right, then an important point has been o\erlooked, avid one to which the Government can yet give its attention. It certainly cannot be affirmed that the Government of the United States would lend a favourable ear to reciprocal proposals, but it may be said with confidence that a proposition of this kind would be likely to receive more attention than any other. Tariff concessions appear necessary if this colony is to stand on an equal footing with New South Wales. In their absence a reduction of the wool duties might be granted to that colony, although it may be admitted as probable that the United States would be disinclined to allow a preferential duty of the kind. In that case it would be only the more important that New Zealand should make some concessions, that that might be granted to both which would be withheld from one alone. However desirous to discharge his duty fairly to all the colonies which he represents, Sir Henry Parkes will hardly have thought it incumbent on him to point out the special strength of the position of his own colony, and hence it may have escaped the attention of Mr. Hall and his colleagues. Recurring to the clamour by the woollen manufacturers of Victoria for the increase of the duties on manufactured woollens, it may be useful to point out one of the many lament-

t,ble effects of protection. The "Vic- ] orian manufacturers have been ex- j ;rouiely successful. All those who are veil established, and whose affairs lave been conducted with prudence, lave done a profitable trade, and found i market here and elsewhere. Some lave increased their capital, and laid tside considerable reserves, whilst also providing for wear and tear. And yet, ,iot content with their prosperity, .hey are displaying the rapaeity which ilie protected manufacturers always evince, a desire for a further increase of duties. They are usually successful in obtaining the assistance of their operatives by assuring them that they will share the gain, whereas so far is this from being true, that their wages are not increased one penny, the whole of the increased profits going into the pockets of the capitalists whose money is invested. Thus in the United States, as now in A' ietoria, it is the manufacturers who are the most vehement protectionists, and whose interest it is to lavish the wealth they possess in promoting and supporting an agitation for increased duties.