CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXV, Issue 5024, 23 July 1903, Page 7

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

| TilK QUESTION OF PREFKHKX- | TIA L TRADE. Last jiight an informal mo-uiu.; of the; CiuiiaOcr of Count.crte was keld for rhe puri>c;-j: ox thy qtu*sviep. of pretcroiuial trade within tne Empire. Air I). J. JN'athuu u* resident) occupied tho chair, and there were about twenty members in attendance. Tho president explained that although their ordinary meeting had been adjourned for six weeks, the members of the chamber had realised the importance of the question to the Empire, and had resolved to hold a series of in- | formal meetings, so that the question might be discussed to its fullest extent. Since their last meeting the Horne paper’s had come to hand, and contained the full text of Mr Chamberhums speech and Lord Salisbury’s in They also had the criticism from : the English, French and American press. There was a. mass of iuformation available for those who had not had an opportunity of locking into tire matter, and hro was willing to place the clippings and other information in Ids possession at the disposal of the members of the chamber. lie reiterated that ho was only animated by a clesjre to promote the progress of the British Empire. (Applause.) Mr J, Duncan considered. after what tho president had said, as to the information. received from the last Homo mail, that wo were getting nearer tho point of looking at the matter from tho point of view connected with the colony—that was, that wo might now stato what wo thought wo should got, and what wo thought ,wo should give, Ti>;o papers that came to hand °had shown that the matter bad not been treated as we would like to see it done. Tho statesmen at Homo had seized on it more as an object for party warfare. Ho deprecated that spirit altogether, because our object sb rail cl be to see if. ifc was possible to bring about an arrangement for the benefit of the -Empire—quite apart from what effect it might have in put Hug Dick or Tom in office. It was a mistake to expect the colonics to be the givers: there should bo reciprocity. He thought one point, should bo bomo strongly in view, and that was—■that preference should bogiven to the colonies—not only New Zealand, but all the colonics—in the matter of supplying the Mother Country with fond. Tins proposal brought an outory from the supporters of freetrade. Many of the supporters of fm> trade did not know what it meant: many thought it was associated with cheap Ho had figures to show that any claim of tho kind was absoillusory. The speaker proceeded to_ point out that between the years 1700 and 1800 the importation of wheat was very largely prohibited. The reason was' that tine Mother Country was self-supporting as regarded the grain required by tho people but- after the great wars at the beginning of the nineteenth ‘century—from 1800 to 1820 —the population of Great Britain and many other countries went on increasing n-fca very rapid rate, and it was found impossible to do without tho importation of grain; but even at that time it was found necessary to protect the producers by putting a duty on the importation of wheat. w There was a sliding scale in existence from 1822, and in 1842 a second sliding scale was adopted, which imido tho duty £1 per qua-r----tor oh wheat at any time ~ that tho price was below £ls per quarter, and tho duty was reduced Is per quarter a * s price of wheat increased until . at 73s imported wheat boro only a duty of Is. Whon tho Com haw’ was passed in 1846, the Government of the day retained the duty of Is per quarter on imported wheat, and that was not taken off until 1869. Looking back at tho prices, it would bo found that in, 1835, when (he duty was £1 p o r quarter, the prico of wheat was 39s 4d, in 1840 it had risen to C6s 4d,, and in 1845—just before the Corn Law was passed—the price was 50s lOd. After that, owing to the famine in Ireland, it rose exceptionally, and in 1850 it had got down again, to 40s 3d. Naturally it would bo supposed that free importation would have led to a, decrease in price. However,_ the figuras showed that in 1855 tho price had risen to 74s Bd, and it continued 1 high from 1855 to 1860, when ° it fed to 53s 3d. Those figures clearly allowed that ifc w«og not tho abrogation of the com duties that had tho effect on tho price, hut. the opening up of now wheat lands in foreign countries and excessive-supply. In 1874 tho price was 5 c s 6d, and it continued to roue tee until between the years 1890 and 1807 ifc was only 27s (id per quarter. Tipis ho attributed to tho supply being greater than the world could consume and had nothing to do with the removal of tho corn duties. Tho natural result had been tho absolute destruction of the agricultural interests iu Great Britain, and the passing of tho food supply to foreign countries. Wo were now in a position to meet the.demands of Groat Britain with wheat raised in tho colonics, and thts was • tho time when, if wo could induce the Homo Government to allow in com from the colonics free of duty and to impose a duty on foreign wheat, we would bo benefiting our own colonies and inflicting no hardship on Great Britain. ’ Lord Sbrathcona, had predicted that in two years Canada alone would bo able to supply Great Britain with all tho foodstuffs she required, and tho speaker had had an opportunity of seeing tho possibilities of Canada in that respect on passing through it a couple of years ago. One hundred thousand farmers had gone there during tho past eighteen months, and it was a rich roiling country which only required tho plough to make it a marvellous country for producing grain. If, then, the colonies could ho benefited without any serious less to the consumer iu Groat Britain, he saw no reason why wo in the colonics should not put our heads together to bring about such a state of affairs. Ho suggested the imposition, of os, a quarter on foreign wheat—which would bo infinitesmal to the consumer-—id per lb on foreign meat, Id per lb on butter and 4d per lb on cheese. In return wo should allow 25 per cent, ftt favour of English manufactured goods as against foreign manufacturers, and that would be sufli- ’ cient to turn tho tide entirely in favour of English production. Since Canada had raised the duty on foreign goods the trade hotwr n England and Canaria had risen from £4,500,000 to £9,000,000 n year. If tho samo thing took place in regard to tho other colonies, it might reasonably bo assumed that in a very short time instead of threat Britain sending onc-third of her exports to her dependencies, as at present, tho quantity would he increased to two-thirds. (Applause.) It was said that wo would lose our foreign markets by adopting such a policy, but ho denied that entirely. It should bo, remembered that at tho present time England was disposing of two-thirds of her exports against tho highest protective walls that could bo raised against, her. It wo were able to add materially to Groat Britain’s manufacturing trade she would ho able

to force her goods into other countries. That was olio ui the reasons cf America's sncct?ss.. If wo were content to allow o L «r country to be the dnuipingground for every foreigner, the end could not be far. Our desire should be to bring about a closer bond between the colonies and tho Mother Country, and that could only be brought about by such reciprocal trade ms he hud indicated. CApphu’.(sc). Mr A. do D. Brandon considered there there was very little doubt that the real foundation of the question lay in tho difference between fico-tiado and protection. Free-trade demanded equality of treatment of products from all countries. Tho opposition to Mr Chamberlain's proposals was that if the thin end of the wedge was introduced, there was no knowing where it would end. It was rather difficult to 10Ilow Mr Duncan when ho said the abolition of the duties had no effect on tho price of wheat. Tho speaker suggested that the abolition of tho duties led to the increase of cultivation of wheat in foreign countries, such a.s America, and the effect was not felt for some years after tho duties had' been abolished. Ho need scarcely say tho price of wheat to-day would bo 2as or 30s per quarter if there was to be a duty on all imported wheat. A groat part of tho wheat supply of Great Britain came from the United States, and that was in competition with the wheat from the colonies. If the American wheat was to have a duty imposed, as. Air Duncan iiad advocated, the speaker believed tho prico to the consumer would be higher than now. At tho present time England could not afford to grow wheat ovring to the cost of production and that must bo considered, If Canada, Australia and Now Zealand could supply all that was required that consideration fell to tho ground. (Applause.) The president corrected what lie understood to bo Mr Brandon’s miscon.coption of his definition of free-trade a.nd pointed out fallacies in tho prophecies of Cobdeu and Bright on tho subject. He referred to the statement of the London ‘Times” that although England had raised a revenue of nearly .£7,000,000 last year by a, duty of nearly Ml per lb on- sugar, that commodity was -never cheaper and tho consumer had not suffered. The price or wheat was not ruled so much by tho imposition of a nominrjl duty as r.r T™^ uc{;ion flnd other circumstances. Ho pointed out that it cost no moro to run wheat from Minnesota to Liverpool, with three transhipments than from Liverpool to Leicester. Ho quoted figures to show that it was the highest price wages that turned out tho choaT)est goods.

traversed tlio statements or the president and Mr Dini--01111 ’ 3,1(1 predicted .that in another ton years wo would find a very K rc:,t change in the nscal policy of the United States. Ko save the Into Mi- Gladstone credit lor doing more to form and lay down tho lines of British financial policy tinMl any Other statesman who had held held° r th V , l t h f n t!l ° p ? st sftys fty y®ars. Ho held that farmers in Now Zealand oThh rVf* «P the land laws 01 .England tor one minute. In the Gdng' tS‘gfim al ir proforentiaT treatment" sought to reduce the,Customs 5, English--.-..nufacturcd goods, and that wfs 'a pioposnl Hint tho other speakers ]>nrl studiously avoided. Great BritMn od C «ate : ’; C ve t,,0 l COIO T’ OS and * he T7ll'trolatirolv hn7f ar 7 E ° ly ’ a,,d 11 '‘.hoiigh, actaanv J ’it wJ rad ° "T goi,, S bohiSd over. J ’jTo HdL£ r l ,7 fc °' cU,y t hlui offering til th ,° P ro Posal of BB^fVSrjart much more in « C U V d ftP° lld Mr P it ™ w I W!U ,’- Wpphmse.) Of Commer^),'pf ti f; ,^" d nienk nnf f® ClC, ni Up^orted tllo argu5 a f ell ’ materials importK^ trnis , )y the manufacturers 0 f G,^i Bntaun, which, ho coneidored, essential to them being ’able to hold their" Gndor tho proposed preferential t°cat' ment, Canada would get 42 per cent per H fc " S f “ Ud Xow Zcaland 8 0(1 eosfof looult. the British manufacturer would "other t ICaPPed ° Ut ° f t!l ° n,arl£ot a1t0e,,5?! e,, 5 ?! G ' G , rapcs voad 3 short- paper that fhn'f bj r fc ’ 1U "’ hicl ‘ ile ,aid ( I°'™ that tho first move must bo made hv tlio majority of too people of Great Britain. He advocated the development of England* mercantile maitmo and the establishment of a system of bonuses for articles earned in British ships within the Empire. Taxing food products or Imperial preferential tariff arrangements were but tinkering pin-pricks. Mr G. SlurtclifCe rcgarded.it as out nt place for a little country like Now Zealand to say what Groat Britain’s fiscal policy should ho. We should try and work omt some scheme hy which wo could increase the export trade of Great Britain—not what New Zealand could make out of it.

Mr F. Shaw considered that as soon as England came to seek selfish ends she would decay. At the same time' she was in a position to declare freotrade amongst her own dependencies. Wc should pass laws giving preferential treatment to British goods carried in British bottoms.

The further consideration of tho matter was adjourned until August sth.