THE RECIPROCAL TREATY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13273, 4 September 1906, Page 6

THE RECIPROCAL TREATY.

' MEETING OF THE CHAMBER OF

COMMERCE.

A VIGOROUS PROTEST.

A meeting of the Auckland Chamber of Commerce was convened for yesterday afternon, for the purpose of considering matters in connection with the reciprocal treaty with Australia. The president of the Chamber (Mr. J. B. Macfarlane) presided, and there was a good attendance.

In; opening the proceedings, Mr. Macfarlane referred to "the meeting of grain merchants, on Friday, the deputation which waited on 'the "Chamber committee, and the decision to call a special < meeting of the Chamber. He read the following telegram from Sir J. G. Ward: —" Am obliged to you for your telegram re tariffs. The whole matter will be investigated, and your representations given the fullest consideration." Mr. Macfarlane went on to state that although they might think there was little chance of the treaty being passed, yet it would be shortsighted policy to let it go at that. He had not yet heard a word said in favour of the treaty.

Mr. A. J. Entrican moved : — .' % r. '-' .■;; :':■ . ; -.-'r

That while supporting the principle of reciprocity, we protest against bringing , into force the proposed treaty. It fails, to open the doors of the , Australian States to our natural products; it will . ruin our wheatgrowing and milling industries; it increases taxation by unnecessarily raising the duties on many articles of every day consumption: it fails to exempt the Mother Country and sister colonies from its provisions, and it proposes to remit duties on sugar to the extent of £200,000 in favour of Australia, without any guarantee of our people being relieved of taxation adequate to this loss of revenue. > > \ f'■

Mr. Entrican thought the Chamber was practically committed to reciprocity, and to a. more generally easy trade within the Empire. He felt that everyone had been disappointed, and if there had been anything in the shape of genuine reciprocity it would have been met with the unanimous approval of the people of this country. The treaty failed to open the doors of Australia to New Zealand products at all, and no concession whatever in favour of New Zealand had been made. There was no concession on butter, cheese, bacon or hams. The present duty on bacon and hams and butter was 2d per lb, and it had been so effective that last year the only revenue collected was £6 2s 7d for hams and bacon, and £1 8s on butter, while that on. cheese /was £43 12s, and that was largely for fancy cheeses such as were not made here. He also referred to no concession being made on candles, which New Zealand could produce in large quantities, and for which Australia was a natural market. There appeared to be a concession on dried fruits, but it was really no concession at all, as Australia practically used all it could grow. Then there might have been concessions on peas and beans from New Zealand, but there was none at all, and, instead, there was an advance. He did not know any country better fitted for the manufacture of preserved milk than New Zealand, which had some of the finest pastures in the world, and there was no reason why, with cheap sugar, New Zealand should not be sending out preserved milk in large quantities, but the tariff in Australia in this respect remained the same against New Zealand as against the rest of the world. In eucalyptus it was proposed to give Australia, about £2000 a year by letting this article in free. The bulk of perfumed soaps was imported from America, the"Continent, and England, and yet, while the tariff remained the same as it wag between Australia and l New Zealand, it had actually been raised to outsiders by 6d per lb. This would mean a 200 per cent, on a great bulk of the soaps. Mr. Gunson seconded the motion. He referred to the impossibility of New Zealand farmers competing against Australian chaff under the new tariff, and the reduction on New Zealamd oats was worth nothing; as the tariff was practically as prohibitive as before. Three weeks ago a sample ton of Australian flour was received here for distribution in samples to bakers; quite evidently the provisions of the tariff had leaked out over there, amd the Australian merchant was determined to" lose no time.

' Mr. P. Virtue said the abolition of the duty on flour would allow the Australian surplus of 3,000,000 quarters of wheat to he poured in here as flour, and thereby cripple both farmer and miller. Australia produced flour from 20s to 25s per ton cheaper than New Zealand, but, notwithstanding this, the 41b.loaf, in New Zeailand was lees than in Australia. He referred to the loss to the wheat-growing industries that would accrue, the decrease in the coal trade, and the shrinkage in railway freights. An increased railway tariff would have to be imposed to make up the difficulty, and there would he a slump in land values. Waik'ato could grow wheat equal to any in New Zealand, and his company always gave a, higher price than Southern companies by 2d or 3d per bushel, but the wheat-growing area did not increase, as farmers complained of the prohibitive railage. If the Government desired to assist farmers and settlers, it could do it better by reducing the railway rates than by killing farming industries. The motion was then carried unanimously. Mr. A. B. Roberton moved that copies of the resolution should be telegraphed to the Premier and Auckland members, and this was agreed to. ,•■.",■ , .; >-..■:■■.■ FRUIT INDUSTRY. , . On Friday last the Auckland Fruitgrowers' Union sent the following telegram to the Premier: — The Auckland Fruitgrowers' Union respectfully protests against the proposed concessions in the reciprocal tariff re grapes and other fruits, also the extension period re apples and pears." The following reply was received yesterday from Sir J. Ward: —" Am obliged to you for your telegram. The whole matter will be investigated, and your representations given the fullest consideration." , '

WHOLESALE MERCHANTS' PROTEST.

A meeting of wholesale merchants was held yesterday at the Chamber of Commerce rooms to consider the tariff proposed under the reciprocal treaty, and the following resolution was passed: —

We protest against the ratification by Parliament of the proposed reciprocal tariff between the Commonwealth of Australia and New Zealand. In our opinion the proposed reduction on sugar would be a huge mistake, in that we should be. at the mercy of the sugar refiners of, Australia; that while the revenue would lose £200.000 a year, the consumer would not derive any corresponding benefit from the concession, and our local works would :be 'closed down, and many hands thrown out of employment. That in raising the tariff on many lines to countries outside Australia and New Zealand, the Mother Country , and sister colonies should have been exempted. AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF THE FARMERS. . * [BY TELEGRAPH.— ASSOCIATION..! '~ Oamaru, Monday. The Chamber of Commerce passed a resolution today strongly condemnatory of' the reciprocal tariff, stating that it is 'entirely against the interests of the farming community. » ' - VIEWS OF WELLINGTON CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. [BY TELEGRAPH PRESS ASSOCIATION.] Wkllixgton, Monday. The Council of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce to-day poseed a resolution expressing the opinion that the proposed reciprocal treaty between. New Zealand and Australia should not be confirmed, as the suggested alterations in the tariff are in the interests neither of the producers nor conBurners,' New Zealand being asked '- to pay an enormous price for very small and uncertain benefits.