JAM INDUSTRY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIV, Issue 7921, 13 April 1887, Page 3

JAM INDUSTRY.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—Mr. Hartooll doubtless expects from me a reply to his letter containing a criticism on my paper on the jam industry. I may remark that in writing these articles I do not undertake to maintain a controversy on them. The first thing that strikes one in reading his letter is that ho does not " value my reply," as I was led to expect from one seeking information and " open to conviction." It may be I am to blame for the manner I stated my facts and drew my conclusions ; 1 think, however, some blame attaches to Mr. Hartnoll for the want of care in reading my article, judging from the inaccuracy of every quotation he makes from me. He makes me say things I never presumed to say, and thus he gets a distorted impression of my meaning. -He was anxionß the question should be confined to the business done between Auckland province and Tasmania. I gave him the figures, but he does not condescend to notice them, but falls back on those for the whole colony for two and a half years. What the object is of thus narrowing the question 1 cannot tell, it might puzzle him to adjust the difference between imports and exports to and from our province for the last five years, showing an excess of imports of £4.005,000, whilst for the whole colony the difference is but £5,457,000. If he will look up the tables he will find we send far more to Australia than we receive back.' Now it would not matter a brass farthing if we sent the whole of our produce to Sydney, and received in return shipments from Melbourne, Adelaide, and Tasmania, so long as we sent sufficient to pay the whole. It is a fallacy to assert that if we pay Tasmania by bills on London it will leave us less wherewith to pay our China, India, and New York bills. Our exports are sufficient to pay for all our Imports not included in our borrowing. Let us suppose I put £1000 into Mr. ECartnoll's hands, which he is to distribute by paying Smith £500, Jones £300, Brown £200. He first pays Jones ; does that leave him anything less wherewith to pay Smith and Brown ? I trow not, * He does not express himself even yet as comprehending the nature of international trade, but introduces confusion into the discussion by speculating as to what my views may be about a pound note. I would observe that coined money (which I understand him to mean in his reference to paying thousands of pounds a year) is one thing; produce is another thing, and pound notes are still another; and those have certain relations to each other. Of gold only can it be said that it has a fixed specific value, A bale of wool worth to-day £15 might only be worth £10 twelve months ago, and may be worth £20 twelve months hence. Now, what I have been writing about is the exchanging the commodities of this colony the produce of the labour of its people, with the produce of Tasmania, the results of the labour of its people. This has been accomplished without any money passing, and has been to the mutual advantage and profit of both colonies. iV I agree with Mr. Hartnoll for the reasons I specified, and which he emphasizes and elaborates that the manufacture of jam ought to be a natural product Of this colony. Natural productions of any country need no bolstering up with protective duties.. He may take it as a settled axiom that when a government meddles with a trade natural to a country, it ia only to impede and injure it, It may be that since Major Atkinson (not Sir J. Vogel) raised the duty in 1881 jam is cheaper, but that cannot be a result of raising the duty. Produoe of nearly all kinds has fallen in price. Wheat in 1881 averaged 45s 4d the quarter, and was only 35s 8d in 1884. Wool has fluctuated in about equal proportion. I cannot close without noticing that he says I state " that there is no jam to equal Johnson's Hobart make." I never presumed to say anything of the sort. As a matter of fact there are other Tasmanian jams preferred to theirs, but I wished to avoid names. The only great truth he can grasp is, " that New Zealand is bleeding to death." Let me assure him that this is not to be charged at the door of freetrade, because we are a protectionist country, and have a protectionist -tariff. I am anxious freetrade should be tried, to see if a new face could not be put on things. If he thinks it is owing to " the wretched system of railway mismanagement," he may not be far wrong as to one cause, but I must hand him on to Mr, Yaile to get that altered.—l am, &c,, , Enlim.