TARIFF RETALIATION.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 4484, 11 October 1901, Page 4

TARIFF RETALIATION.

Stupid and deplorable though it all is, no other course seems open for New Zealand than to enter upon a tariff war with the Commonwealth of Australia. If hostile measures are adopted against an individual or a community, retaliation is the natural and inevitable result. If nations were governed according to the principles enunciated in the Sermon on the Mount, wars of all kinds would cease; but while selfishness rules,‘strife must prevail. Now Zealand has not invited war with Australia, but war hag been declared against her—war. as Tennyson says, “of a kind tho meaner as underhand, not openly bearing the sword.” Our statesmen have made every effort to maintain friendly relations with tho new-born Commonwealth, and have tried to conclude reciprocal arrangements; but tho Federal Ministry, having' laid down certain lines of policy, is not prepared to depart from these in favour of. a country which many Australians think ought to have joined its destiny with theirs. So reprisals are the order of the day, and it is' impossible to say where these will end, pronto what absurd and ruinous positions they may not lead us. The Premier has promptly sounded the' inevitable note of war, by hinting at retaliatory duties on Australian products, and from Auckland comes a demand for an export duty on baulk timbers, ag * sot off to tho Commonwealth import duty on sawn—the latter being designed to transfer tho employment of labour from this country to Australia,' As time goes on we shall have other demands for retaliation or self-defence; our Colonial Treasurer will doubtless bring down a Tariff Bill at once; and we shall be launched upon a conflict utterly irrational and unnecessary, but forced upon us by the insensate folly of Australian statesmen.

There is one aspect; of our commcrcjal relations with 'Australia that ought to command immediate consideration* For long it has been the complaint of merchants, and warehousemen in* this country that commission agents in Sydney or Melbourne have been able to detrimentally affect their trade. Eng* glish, American and German business houses are represented in Sydney or Melbourne by, gentlemen who make periodical visits to Now Zealand, where they dispose of their wares to the injury of those warehousemen who have built premises in our midst, and axe contributing ;in the way .of local; and general taxation to the; maintenance of the country. The cheap freights to Australia from European and American ports have facilitated this kind of business being done. It costs less to ship goods from' Hamburg to Sydney, and from Sydney to ' Wellington, than it does from Hamburg to Wellington direct, so that the German manufacturers’ agents who make periodical descents upon this country are able to compete successfully with those 1 merchants and importers who have built warehouses in New Zealand, employ labour, and pay local taxation, The gravamen of the complaint is that these travellers or ' commission agents from' Australia contribute nothing tp the revenue of this country. Indeed, in many cases they do not engage sample rooms; and the situation is aggravated, as far as the New Zealand warehouseman is concerned, when it is beyond his power to retaliate ' by sending travellers to Australia and shipping goods, manufactured or other* wise, to the Commonwealth. Now that Sydney as a free port is abolished, and the tariff is everywhere the same in all Australian ports, the restrictions upon our manufacturers trading with Australia will be increased; and whatever commodities wo have to send Australians must firgt of all reach so high a price ia Australia itself that our goods, with the tariff added to their cost, will be able to ho put on- the markets ot the Commonwealth at a less figure than that at whioh the Australian product can be sold. ’ , , While all these disadvantages are thrown in the way of New Zealanders trading with Australia, the warehouse* mail and importer in New. Zealand has to compete for the trade of hia own country ’ with "the visitor carrying a satchel” from, the Commonwealth. The New Zealand trader feels that lie is being handicapped in the race. When the fee of £SO wee charged for a travellet’s license' to representatives of Ant* tralian firms having so warehouse in this country, an impediment was placed in this way of an' organised system of commercial, raiding. ' To place restric, tions cn trade may not be always a wise course to pursue ; but there is no reason why this country should be thrown open to business men who have no abiding place in New Zealand, contribute no* thing to the taxation of the country, and take away a portion of the trade that would .under ordinary circumstances ' not pass the local warehousemen’s representatives- It is net com. plained that these wandering commercial travellers sell cheaper than the local importer * or manufacturer, but they doubtless do. much business that natur*

ally would revert to the New Zealand trader, whose business is established here. In all branches of trade, local merchants realise how mischievous this kind of business has been ; and act-ng on the principle of keeping “oor air, fish guts to our ain sea maws,” it would seem to bo necessary and advisable to rc-impose the charge for license fees to foreign commercial travellers. Th-s country generously repealed the law imposing the fee in deference to Australian wishes, and in earnest ot our desire for reciprocal trading relations. Our friendly concessions having gone tor nothing, wc have no choice but take up tho gage of battle s° defiantly thrown down. Ministers will doubtless show that their armoury is not empty, and that they are able and ready to defend this country’s interests against aggression.