AMERICAN VIEW OF EUROPEAN TARIFFS AND COMMERCIAL TREATIES.

New Zealand Mail, 22 April 1887, Page 19

AMERICAN VIEW OF EUROPEAN TARIFFS AND COMMERCIAL TREATIES.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW ZEALAND MAIL. Sir,— -By the following review of European tariffs extracted from a late American paper, it would appear that almost every State contemplates revising its tariff laws for the encouragement of its own domestic industries. And this i 3 the outcome of Cobden’s prophecy in 1843 “ that in ten years all civilised nations would have adopted a Freetrade policy,” that other countries have not only refused to listen to the Freetrader, but set to work to more effectually protect their own small but growing industries, taking advantage of all open markets, and giving nothing in return. In time they were able to manufacture enough to supply the Home markets ; and having these practically safe turned their attention abroad, and in seeking an outlet for their surplus production came into competition with England; hence the cry against Freetrade, under the several names of fair trade, reciprocity, and protection—terms synonymous. But listen to America. In nearly all the principal European countries there is a strong tendency just now to revise tariffs and renew commercial treaties (where they have expired) on a protective basis. Roumania seeks to protect her home industries against competition from AustroHungary ; Greece is raising its tariff ; Switzerland proposes to increase the duties on German goods crossing its frontier ; AustroHungary is going to revise its commercial treaties on the German protection basis; Italy has denounced its treaty of commerce with France and Austro-Hun-gary, and will seek to reserve its markets more for home productions ; Norway and Sweden wish to tax imports of agricultural produce ; Russia is projecting an augmented tariff on imported luxuries ; Belgium wants high duties to protect its cattle and live stock interests; in fact almost every country contemplates some improvements in its tariff laws for the encouragement of its domestic industries. Only the United States and Great Britain have no definite plans .in this respect for the future. Our British cousins are too much taken up with the chimerical advantages they hope to reap from Imperial Federation, and too hopelessly committed to a Freetrade policy to move in the matter, while our poli-tico-national statesmen are too busy with local patronage, pension steals, and river and harbor grabs, to give us even decent foreign mail facilities or adequate protection for our defenceless ports, let alone to consider the advisableness of removing the taxes on raw material we cannot produce and are constrained to import in manufactured form, to the detriment of home industries. From Canada Mr Samuel Pace, United States Consul at Port Sarnia, Ontario, writes to the department at Washington : I have watched with much interest during the past few years .what is known in this country as the national policy, being the system of Protection tariff inaugurated by Sir John McDonald. The watchword of the Conservative party was Protection to Canadian industries. The result was a sweeping victory for the party. It was, however, confidently . predicted that this party could not long exist in Britain’s chief colonial dependency, and that the policy of Sir John would surely be defeated when it again sought the suffrage of the electors. But in this the advocates of Freetrade were mistaken. It was found that the system had given new life to Canadian industries ; and the new election for members of Parliament only expressed again the confidence of the people in the policy of Protection to domestic industries. To say that Canada has not been benefited by the policy of Protection would be to ignore tacts in the outset. I am, &c., J. Dransfield.