THE New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.) MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1898. THE TRADE OF BRITAIN AND HER COLONIES.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 3328, 10 January 1898, Page 2

THE New Zealand Times. (PUBLISHED DAILY.)

MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 1898. THE TRADE OF BRITAIN AND HER COLONIES.

With which are incorporated the Wellington Independent , established 1845 , and the New Zealander*

Not long since, when the announcement was made that Britain had denounced the Treaty of 1865 with Germany, an outcry was raised by the German merchants that after all these Colonies had little to lose and much to gain by the continuation of existing arrangements. Figures were quoted to prove that the returns from Germany ■to Australasia were somewhat in the relation of 5 to 1 of the amount paid .by these Colonies to German merchants. In reply to that contention the question was JAlt: If it were to make so little difference to Germany, why was she in such dread of tho new treaty which would follow that of 1865 on the expiry of the usual twelve months from tho date of denunciation ? The fact is Germany goes into tho markets of the world prepared to take Whatever she may stand in need of, so long fto there is no other country producing similar articles that can say to her : “ Buy from us instead of buying from the English, and by-and-bye we will buy from you such and such articles which wo have hitherto bought in England.” “An Englishman iU Germany,” writing to the Lotrdota Times says :—" We are not in A position to offer Germany anything which we withhold from other countries, or to withhold anything from her which we grant to others. . . ,

But, however muoh;or however little it will serve her purpose to go on dealing in our markets, as they are open to all Vobiets, she will have no inducement to refrain from closing her O'Wn markets against us wherever tt may seem. to her advantage to do so. Whiohevercheekshesmitesuson,we can but turn the other cheek to the smiter. Is this a condition of things really calculated to promote, I will not s Ay the interests of our industry, but the Cause ot economic peace in th'O shape of international Freetrade ? Does it not, on the contrary, invite hostile combinations against us by assuring in advance their absolute impunity ? A political league of the Continental Powers against Great Britain may be out of the question, for we are fortunately still in a position to command respect for our political interests and to make terms with one or other of the rival groups into which the Continent is divided. But can we afford to disregard the danger of economic combinations, to be formed at our expense and against which we have voluntarily surrendered every weapon of defence ? ”

We have seen that Germany has already begun her “ forward policy ” in the Far East. For. some years past tho German Government has been expending large sums of money in subsidising fleets of steamers trading to the Far East. She has sent her Commissioners into China and Japan, and their visits have nearly always been productive of huge contracts entered into between the Governments of China, Japan and the Fatherland. Apparently, however, the rate of progress was not deemed to be sufficient. Germany only just began to realise the extent of Britain’s trade, and it Was then determined that in conjunction with Russia, and possibly Prance, a bold effort should be made to set up a rival port, or ports, to cope with that of Hongkong, Unlike America, Germany was not satis, fled with the trading facilities afforded by Britain to every other nation that chose to send its merchantmen into the Par East; William 11., failing in his efforts to promote a European political coalition against Britain, Is now deternlined to strike At her trade supremacy in' the hope that what hatred of British prestige has failed to bring About, love of gain will accomplish. That the British people Will quietly acquiesce in what is How going on in China we cannot and will not believe. We know that Lord Salisbury is wedded to the Concert ; that he dare not for his very life do anything to pull down the man ot > straw he has so laboriously set up. It possesses for him a peculiar fascination, for we find him telling the merchants of London in wellrounded periods that unless the Concert is upheld the peace of Europe cannot he maintained. That line of argument wii) suit the British merchant Just so long as he finds that by the maintenance of the policy enumerated by the British Foreign Minister there is no interference with the profits of his trade, but not one minute longer. Apropos of this same question, we have before us the condensation by the London Times of the full text of the Vety important return relating to Britain’s naval expenditure and mercantile marine. Therein we have the maritime trade of the United Kingdom estimated at ■£823,158,000; that of India at .£116,451,095 ; that of the self-governing colonies at X 194,195,168; and that of other colonies at .£175,000,000. Bat in order to arrive at the total value of British maritime inter? ests we must still add some very large sums of which no account is taken either in the present return or in any of its predecessors. Thus .£100,000,000 at least must be added for the value of the shipping, estimated at over 10,000,000 tons. Again, it is well known that a large portion of the maritime commerce of other nations is carried in British ships, and is to a large extent owned by British merchants in transit. The value of this item was estimated in 1894 at not less than .£350,000,000, and tho value of securities and other marketable documents annually carried to and fro in British ships at not less than J 5250,000,000. Adding all these items together we find that the total value ot British maritime interests must, on the basis adopted in the present return, be estimated at not less than .£2,000,000,000. We have now to compare this stupendous figure with those relating to other countries as given in the return. We find that the aggregate value of the imports and exports by sea of the principal maritime Powers of Europe and of the greatest maritime Power ot the New World amounts to less than £1,000,000,000; and even if we add 50 psr oaat. to this total in respect ot .the elements of value corresponding to those which, as we have shown, are neglected in the returns for the British Empire, we still get a figure less by over 25 per cent, than that which represents the maritime interests of the latter. It need surprise no one in these circumstances that the naval expenditure of the British Empire is more than double that of any other country; hut, even so, the insurance of our stupendous maritime interests does not amount to very much more than 1 per cent, of the interests insured, though it amounts to more than 20 per cent, of the aggregate revenue of the United Kingdom, which bears very nearly the whole of the burden. Thus New South Wales contributes £47,000 to the cost of naval defence out of an aggregate revenue of over £9,000,000, Victoria £70.000 out of a revenue of over £6,500,000, New Zealand £20,000 out of a revenue of nearly £4,500,000, tho South African colonies, nothing shown in tbo return, and the Dominion of Canada nothing; vhile out of an aggregate revenue of a little less than £102,000,000 the United Kingdom spends no less than £21,250,000 ' on the naval defence of the Empire. This is where the British taxpayer comes into the argument. He may grnmble at, but after all not really grudge, what he pays to protect the trade of the selfgoverning colonies; but that Lord Salisbury can persuade him it is a good thing to maintain such a Navy while peimittiug other nations to grab that which the Navy • has built np and noiy maintains is to expect too much. <•

While it is quite impossible to grant the justice' of all the demands made in the Master and Apprentice Bill of last session, still it must bo said that there are good grounds for the application of the principle of compulsory apprenticeship. We are astonished to find Sir Robert Stout —who has been mentioned as a possible leader of the Liberal party ! —talking about the injury that would be done to a large number of young persons if the Master and Apprentice Law were brought into operation. If that be so, why is it that Germany has not suffered, but rather profited, by the same law; and how has it happened that Belgium and France arenot injured by it ? further, it was proved by the Royal Commission set up by the House of Lords to enquire into the Labour conditions of Europe that Switzerland, in defence of her industries, had to re-enact the Master aud Apprentice Law—that had previously been done away with on the plea that it reduced the young people of the country to a condition of serfdom. The Switzers found that an inferior class of workmen had arisen, in all trades, and sd as to make up for the injury done, not only was the Master and Apprentice Law reenacted, but large technical colleges were erected in various centres of population. We mention these facts to show that in the countries where technical training is carried to the highest pitch, there the apprentice law is strictly carried out. What, let us ask, has made the British mechanic so superior to any other ? Because for centuries it has been the practice to apprentice youths to thoir trades add it has been a matter of pride, as well as duty , to turn out from the workshops of the United Kingdom the very best tradesmen, in the world.

lit thiS colony of ours, we regret to say, the idea of teaching a lad his trade in a thorough-going manner has fallen somewhat into desuetude, and for this the masters are not wholly to blame. The parents are either careless. Or they prefer that their lads should get to work in such fashion as they may earn 'A higher wage than would be obtainable under a law which shoVdd apply with equal justice to master and apprentice. And what is the result? That the trades of this colony are flooded with young men who are absolutely incompetent. In busy times the employer has to suffer. He is compelled to take what he Caught, and the best is very often bad Indeed. The Trades and Labour Council may be asking for too much, blit when Sir Robert Stout takes np the attitude of bigoted opposition aud endeavours to enforce his contentions with the assistance of bad logic, wo are inclined to the opinion that many will sympathise with the Trades and Labour Council in the expression of its regtet that the Sir Robert of to-day is of a different mould to the Robert Stout of the past.

On the subject of technical instruction in the course ot our educational system, as bearing on the future and improv ed state and prosperity of our manufacturing and commercial industries, it may Hot be out of place to recall a recent utteranoe.by the Duke of Devonshire in an address on the ot a new technical college at Darlington. Although tho legislative efforts of the New Zealand Parliament to establish this system on a broad basis have not proved successful, there can he no question that the cause of technical education will ultimately triumph as a prime necessity in our national system. Weighty arguments wore offered by the Duke to prove that if adequate provision wore not made for the better technical instruction of the people of England the industries of the country could not enjoy prosperity, nor could the people continue to do well ot to exist, and therefore, said His Grace, there was urgent need tor action.

“ SCienCe attd art,” ho said, “ now enter to largely into the practical conduct and management of every one of our industries that a knowledge of the principles of science and art is as indispensable to their successful conduct as the possession of bodily strength is necessary for the working ot the raw materials. 1. The Duke does not contend that the theoretical knowledge of the principles of science is indispensable to every manual worker, but he maintains that it cannot be denied or doubted—aud the argument, in our opinion, is cogent and irrefragable—that “ the higher tho average intelligence of the manual worker the more valuable are his labours." Every employer and every worker in all classes and characters of trades and professions should lay this sound maxim to heart, for both must benefit the more widely it spreads into practical life.

ditiOKBT in New Zealand, it is said, has suffered and is suffering from the popularity of football. Scientifically, there is no comparison between the games; hut the crowd can “take a hand” during a football season, can abuse the refereie, fling insults at the players, and yell them? selves hoarse in th'e use of coarse and Vulgar epithets. In cricket. All these “ fascinations ” for the crowd are an unknown quantity, and hence we are driven to the conclusion that the quieter, more scientific and difflofilt game is voted “ slow ” by the majority. Whatever the cane o , the fact stares us in the face that hut for the devotion of a few enthusiasts cricket would die out in a season or two. Canterbury—once looked upon as the home of cricket, and a place which produced some really fine players—has to be assisted in the making up of its teams by the veterans of the willow, and few indeed of the younger men seem qualified to take the places of the older players. Here in Wellington we are somewhat more fortunate ; but even here the number of “ colts ”is not what it should be. The fact that cricket does not now hold pride of place as the “ best game in the field ” is largely owing to the attitude of the schools. These ilje now ardent supporters of football, eVefi with all its coarseness and its dangers. Then, there is the trouble As to grounds. Take our own Basin Reserve. The Cricket Association has spent hundreds of pounds in the up-keep of the ground, and players have taxed themselves in the way of contributions, until to be a cricketer in Wellington is a somewhat expensive luxury. The Association has often to lobk on quietly while the ground it has gone to much expense and trouble to keep in good condition is cut up in the, to them, most disheartening fashion. In Christchurch better conditions prevail, but there the grand old game has gone down tremendously. Let us hope that their second object-lesson gained in Wellington will serve to waken up the Southern players. That the great victory scored by our own players will be an encouragement to them we verily believe. There is no reason why some of our present young players should not be chosen, ere many years are over, in an Australasian eleven against the cracks of England.

It is to be hoped that the decision of the Russian Government, made known by cablegram last week, to assume control of the drink traffic means that steps are to be taken to control in some measure the evil of intemperance in the Empire of the Czar. Some years have elapsed since a commission reported in favour of increasing the duty on vodki (corn brandy), and of restricting the number ot places at which it could be sold. The action now taken may be the outcome of the Commission’s recommendations. The Government alone is able to do anything effective in the way of reformation, seeing that the Or! hodox Church is somewhat indifferent to the disgraceful condition in which the peasantry find themselves ss a consequence of their addiction to drink. Everybody in Russia, it has been said, demands or receives drink money. The lower orders are brutalised by their constant habit of intemperance. Almost every village festival ends in the intoxication of most of those who take part in it. Drunkenness amongst the peasantry is much increased by the idleness enforced by church festivals, which reduce the year to 130 working days. Reformers who have sought to lessen the number of these festivals have been punished for their temerity in various ways. A Russian popular story well satirises the national failing. It runs thus; “When God had created the world and wanted to people it. He created the different nations and bestowed rich gifts on them all; amongst the rest the Russians, to whom He gave vast lands and everything else in superfluity. Then He asked each nation if it was satisfied. All the others said they had enough; but when God asked the Russian he took off his cap and simpered, ‘Na vodki, Lord.’" A point that must not be overlooked is that the excise duties on spirits are one of tho largest sources, if not the largest, of Imperial revenue. The loss of the duties may be counterbalanced by the profits to be derived from a Government monopoly, but tho message gives no information on this head.