DEAR WHEAT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20620, 19 July 1930, Page 14

DEAR WHEAT.

Sir, —"No Tax" suggests that, the tariff on wheat should come oil because w® take from the poor to feed the rich wheatgrower. It should be aelf-isvident that if we take off the tariff on wheat then the rich wheat-grower cannot grow wheat, especially at a time -when Canadian farmers are selling wheat under cost. It is just a little difficult to fully understand the agitation against the tariff, unless it be with the idea of assisting the poultry men, in particular of the. North Island. While sympathising with poultry men, one cannot overlook the fact that some years ago they were successful in obtaining a tariff on imported egg pulp, etc. One might well ask, would Canterbury benefit if the butter industry in Auckland were to ceasts ? Placed as we are to-dav, with a shrinkage of exports, what benefit would be gained, in particular by the Auckland Province, if New Zealand sent two arid a-half millions of money annually to Australia in order to purchase wheat ? "No Tax" should remember that when we make up our exports and imports balance-sheet Auckland snd Canterbury are taken together. One would also like to auk what commodity is it suggested Australia would take from us in return ? 'Unfortunately, in ail these discussions the tendency is for self-interest to come first. If one is to carry "No Tax's" argument to its logical conclusion, then he will equally object to innumerable other tariffs on the ground that they take from the poor to feed the rich manufacturers. Personally, it appears to me that the man who is producing is the man who ia entitled to every consideration, and if the Government are of opinion that the wheatgrowers are growing unduly rich as the result of their labours the;,' have ample powers to deal with them tinder the present, Board of Trade Act. J. Heaton Barker.