FEDERATION COMMISSION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11597, 11 March 1901, Page 6

FEDERATION COMMISSION.

SIXTH DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. CLOSE Oi THE AUCKLAND SITTINGS. The Federation Commission sat on Saturday, and completed the hearing of the Auckland evidence. Lieutenant-Colonel Pitt (chairman of the Commission) presided, and there were also present: The Hon. Captain "Russell, tho Hon. CO. Bowen, the Hon. Major Steward, ; Messrs. Roberts, Millar, Beau champ, ■ Luke, Reid, and Leys. A CLOTHING MANUFACTURER. Mr. J. M. Morran, clothing manufacturer, said he considered federation would be a retrograde step. New Zealand had nothing to gain by federating with Australia, and everything to lose. The position of NewZealand to Australia was similar to that of Great Britain t6 the continent of Europe, and Great Britain." helped by'her insular situation, had warded off all enemies. From the point of view of his own trade, he was satisfied that under federation the. trade would go to the larger Australian centres. In Sydney his trade .was not in such a. prosperous condition as in New Zealand, on account ;; of low prices. Federation would simpb- annihilate the clothing factories of New Zealand, and the tendency would be to depopulate New Zealand. Even at present it, was cheaper to import some classes of plowing f rom England than to manufacture in No"- Zealand. By Mr. Roberts: Even if an arrangement were made similar to that made with West Australia, by which New Zealand could get five vears to adiust her tariff to the Federal tariff, that, would only nut off the collapse of the New Zealand industries for five years.' MR. A. J. ENTRICAN.

Mr. A. J. Fntrican. wholesale merchant, said he thought the New Zealand Government made a great mistake in not allowing the colony to be represented at the shaping of the Commonwealth Bill. He was in favour of federation, but he thought since tho opportunity of shaping the CommonwcaHh Bill to .tho advantage of New Zealand bad been lost, wo would not be able to come in on so good terms as might have boon the case. New Zealand was essentially an , agricultural and -pastoral country, and an open door to all the different colonies was about the best thing that could happen in the interests of New Zealand. There could be no question that, .the federation of New Zealand to Australia would load to a largo increase in oxnorts of New Zealand produce to Australia. From its proximity Australia was a. much better market for New Zealand than the Old Country. Their experience with free trade New South Wales had. he thought, proved that. As the two countries developed it would more and more tho case that Australia would not. be able to keep pace with New Zealand in agricultural products. The interior of Australia would never be. able to compote with the interior of New Zealand. Climatic conditions had given assistance to settlement on the coasts of Australia which would not apply in the interior. He did not think tho manufacturing interests of New Zealand had anvthing to fear from competition with Australia. There were in New, Zealand a certain number of unnatural industries which were bolstered up by protection, but ho did not think such industries should be encouraged, as they were really a . t»:c on th© consumers. Starch . making, for instance, he regarded as an unnatural industry. He thought New Zealand would retain her independence and individuality unde>r federation. There were some disadvantages in connection with, federation. The wine industry, .for.instance. , would be ruined, but he did not think New Zealand should stand out for the sake of a small industrv like that.

By Mr. Reid: Ho was of opinion that Now Zealand would not now be admitted as an original State, . but he thought tie sooner they federated the better term* they would get. He could not understand the advocacy of a reciprocal treaty, because that was an admission that free trade with Australia would bo an advantage to New Zealand. It meant, so far as he could sw?, tlst Now Zealand wanted to secure ill the advantages of federation without any cost to the State,' and he did not think it pcsr.iblo to secure that. ..';"..".

By Mr. Leys: Australia had always teen a splendid market for New Zealand baron and hams and for butter and cheese. He thought they might cxnect a large increase in the raisin" of agricultural produce in Australia, but New Zealand had natural advantages. and would boit any of them in the rncr>. He believed a small " : quantity of South Australian wheat would come to New Zealand, because the blend of New Zealand and South Australian wheat made a superior ouality of flour. Even if Now Zealand failed to raise the £160,000 now raised in sugar duties, the money would riot be lost--, because the consumer would benefit exactly t" the extent that the duty was abolished. The consumers would have a reduction on the cost of sugar of -Jd per lb, and even admitting that the £160,000 had to be made tip in some other form, the people would not bo worse off. > He believed New Zealand's trade with the Pacific, islands would be very seriously affected if New . Zealand stood out of the Federation. V Looking at the matter from an island point of view, he thought Fiji would have everything to by iomin? t*o Commonwealth, instead .if mining with New Zealand, and if- It did join the Federation it would be cood-bvo to' the bulk of the business New Zealand is now doing with Fiji. In manufacturing New Zealand would have the advantage" under federation of tradinsr with four millions of peonle instead of with three-quarters of a million. From Auckland goooVoould be sent to Sydney cheaper than +* Nelson. At the close of his evidence Sir. Entrican handed in the following as . the opinion of Sir George dvev in favour of the federation -of New Zealand with Australia:—" To federate with Australia would hold out manv advantages. In the first rjlace, free trade between New Zealand and the Australian colonies would give to the whole of this part of the world a commercial lift which you ean_ hardly conceive the value of. I firmly beliovo that both colonies would go fast ahead. Just remember our isolated position in the world. We have no nations" to the south of us; the whole of that immense part of the globe is unoccupied : we have no one to trade with in our immediate vicinity. But each of these two countries produces exactly what the other requires, and the populations are increasing rapidly; and I say that the traffic of four millions of people—of four millions of people with one anotherwould produce mercantile wealth, p the importance of which you hardly estimate. . . . These facts all furnish strong arguments in my mind of union upon proper terms." Mr. Entrican said he extracted the above from the Review of Reviews for September, 1899. He was not able to give the context. . FEDERATION AND MONOPOLY. Mr. F. M. King, factory manager, spoke against federation. He believed the time was not far distant when the masses of the people of New Zealand would be strong advocates of a free trade policy, while the natural trend of Australian legislation would be toward protection. In a large country like Australia it paid the monopolists to band together to. control legislation for the purpose of fostering their monoplies. Perhaps the best example of this was seen in America, where large sums, money were spent at election times for the purpose of returning to power men nledptcd to support a policy which would enable 'he monopolists to get an undue amount of profit out of the consumer. By a combined effort they could sway the whole legislature in their own interests, while in a small country like New Zealand the monopoly, of supplying any given commodity was not inducement enough to warrant such expenditure. Then came I ho question of laboui legislation, r Now Zealand had recognised the fact that labour should gel a greater share of the product, of labour than it, had done in the past. Let those who advocated federation show, how federation could benefit labour. Suppose that the trade of New Zealand increased tenfold. For every shilling that labour got the labourer would have, to do a shilling's worth of work, but the result of 'ncreascd prosperity would bo increased land values and increased land values would mean the increased rents drawn from labour; therefore, tlio benefits of increased trade which might crime from 1 federation would pass into the pockets of the landowners and speculators. Another instance might be taken. If federation caused an increased demand for New Zealand coal, it would only have the effect of increasing the value of the shares in the mines; thai is to say. the monopoly value would be increased. The same could be said of any of the other New Zealand products, viz., wheat, oats, wool, kauri gum, and timber, for if tlio demand for these products were increased, the .value of the land upon which they could be produced would also be increased, therefore the owners cf the land would got whatever benefit might come to New Zealand through federation, while the return to labour would be a bare subsistence, the, rate of wages being Regulated by competition among the labourers themselves, which competition would not ho decreased by federation. Then there was the question of future reforms. A demand might arise among the people of New Zealand for an alteration in the Commonwealth law, for which the advanced people of New Zealand might see the necessity, • but before

its adoption it would be necessary to cdveate 5,000,000 people at a distance of more than a thousand miles before any alteration could be made. ■. A COACHBUILDER'S EVIDENCE. , : Mr. William Atkin,icoachbuilder,: said as a broad principle; he was.- in favour of federation, but at present he was opposed to New Zealand federating, with Australia, -because New Zealand's manufacturing - industries . would be swamped. A tariff of 10 per cent, or 15 per cent., which was likely under federation, would be of no assistance to carriagebuilders in New Zealand against American competition. .;■; He thought other manufactories'would be in the same position. There were certain labour restrictions in New Zealand, and factories in New Zealand ; could not compete' with the cheap labour and the immense, production of other countries. lie thought local manufacturers could compote at present with America in the manufacture of railway cars, but when the New Zealand Government recently ordered cars from America his firm was not supplied with, the details, and therefore had not an opportunity to tender. _ , THE GRAIN AND PRODUCE TRADE. Mr. T. M. Quinn,'grain and produce agent, said he was a New Zealander, but had been in business both in Australia and New Zealand. He believed it would be to the best interests of New Zealand to federate. New Zealand would secure a better market for her products. Under federation the grain and produce trade in New- Zealand would bo steadier than at present. He believed if that trade had been less speculative in the past the imports to Australia would havo probably been 50 per cent, greater. If the Commonwealth found new markets in Africa or elsewhere, New Zealand, under federation, would share in the increased shipping facilities. AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, j" - Mr. T. B. Dinneen, electrical engineer, said he had considered the question more from a sentimental point of view, and he favoured federation. Ho read a leaflet embodying tho views of the Federation League. He thought if New Zealand joined she would become the most prosperous State of the Commonwealth. By Captain Russell: He was quite satisfied that New Zealand could compete more than favourably with Australia in manufactures, because of the great power available in New Zealand for generating electricity for manufacturing purposes. He had been in Queensland, and he thought if a white population continued to inhabit Northern Queensland for generations without the infusion of new blood it would mean a deterioration of the race, but ho did not think it would be serious, because there would always be a large nomadic population in Australia infusing new blood into that area. By Mr. Roberts: He thought the cost of electric power, as it could be produced in New Zealand by water, would be about onefourth the cost of steam power, eay, in Australia, and as wo fret more experience of electric power it would become cheaper. By Mr. Beaucharnp: He saw far greater advantages to New Zealand by joining the Commonwealth than to Australia through New Zealand joining. ' A SOLICITOR'S VIEW. Mr. E. W. Burton, solicitor, favoured New Zealand federating. He did not see that there would be any loss of liberty to New Zealand, and with regard to distance, the arguments that were made to tell against New Zealand federating would tell with a hundredfold more force against any federation of the Empire to which they all looked forward. As to the argument that there was a difference of nationality, the difference between the people of the Old Country and the people of these colonics was far greater than any difference between the people of Australia and of Now Zealand, and again, the argument told a hundredfold more against a federation with Great Britain than against the federation of New Zealand and Australia. With regard to the suggestion thai New Zealand's interests would be neglected by Australian statesmen, he might quote what Mr. Barton said to him on that question: "I am delighted to be assured that we are at last united; I should have valued the assurance more had it come from an Australian source, but do you really think that under ■ the system of party government a. Government would set about wrecking itself by making an enemy of a whole country." On the question of defence, he thought in time to come it would be necessary for these colonies to take up tho question of the maintenance of a naval power in these waters, As to our industries there were 282,000 breadwinners in New Zealand, of which he calculated 214,876 could not possibly lie affected by federation. Of the remaining 68.000 breadwinners ho found by the official Year Book that 27,389 were employed in manufacturing works, and of these lie calculated that only 11,199 could by the nature of their employment be prejudicially affected by federation. On the question of finance he found that the Customs revenue of 1898 was £2,041,000, but they might calculate on the tariff on spirits and tobacco being continued, which left the sum that could vary by the alteration of the tariff at £1,190,000. They might take the average tariff at present a3 22£ per cent., and if they supposed the Federal, tariff would average 15 per cent., that would mean a reduction of £324,618. To that they had to add New Zealand's share of the cost of the Federal Government, and he calculated that the total reduction of revenue would be £460,000. but they must allow that there would bo a slight increase in New Zealand's imports, and setting that down at £100,000, that left the figure at £360,000. That was called a loss, but it was really only a shifting of the burden, and in the face of the growing agricultural element in Now Zealand, he thought the colony would soon have to face that question of shifting the burden, whether federated with Australia or not. He was in favour of federation, but he was not in favour of joining in haste. By Mr. Roberts: He had not calculated on a loss of £150,000 in sugar duties, nor on the possibility of the duty on tobacco being reduced from 3s 6d to Is 6d, as in Victoria. MR. J. M. McLACHLAN. ' • Mi. J. M. McLachlan spoke as a native of New Zealand, and said he generally supported the arguments against federation. Ho thought it would be unwise to join the Australian Commonwealth, but lie favoured closer union with the Mother' Country. He thought-the use of the name "Australasian," was injurious to New Zealand. Ho thought New Zealand more resembled Great Britain than any other dependency of the Empire, and as years went on tho Canadian was likely to become more and more American and the Australian would develop a type that would differentiate him more and more from the inhabitants of Great Britain. The Commission then adjourned to sit again in Sydney, at a date to be afterwards fixed.