MORE POPULATION.

NZ Truth, Issue 119, 28 September 1907, Page 4

MORE POPULATION.

Apropos of 91,263 British and Irish emigrants going m 1908 to Canada, 85,941 to the United States, and only 9920 to Australasia, the Daily News vehemently •assails Australia, and urges her to make the increase of her population the basic note of e;rcat. endurinp; States. — "Evening Post' 1 cable.

That Canp.da should li'avc attracted 91,283 emigrants against Australasia's 9,920 is truly. tm*&9toto and

looking at the matter superficially, is certainly good reason for the "Daily Mail's" outburst, but the cases are not parallel by any means and the comparison is not so disastrious as it looks. Canada has the advantage of Australasia m the matter of distance — a very big factor m immigration. Again, Canada is a neighbor to the United States, and ge.ts much advertisement from the fact. These two factors alone exercises an enormous influence on the immigrant's choice of a new home. Moreover Canada lias a greater area than Australasia by some 700,000 square miles, and has nearly 1,000, 000 greater population. Population attracts population, and as communication between friends m Canada with friends m England is easier than with friends m Australasia, and because there are more of those friends it is not at all surprising that Canada should appeal to the emigrant as the handiest and best field for him to exploit. But let us look at Canada, and see bow much better she stands for all her greatly increasing population. Her yearly imports on the latest figures stand at £49,000,000, whereas the Australasian import?, with nearly 1 000, 000 less people to provide for, amount to £80,000,000. Now, Canada absorb:; £43,000,000, but only exports £40,000,000. notwithstanding her 3,700,000 square miles of territory. Australasia exports £'BS,OOO, 000 with 700,000 square miles less territory. The Australasian citizen, therefore, not only export individually twice as much as the Candaian, but imports twice as much also, and is, therefore, a very much higher liver. The prosperity of Canada, from a population point of view, has most undoubtedly been enormous, but m so far as individual prosperity is concerned the great northern Dominion is not , iii it with these Southern Seas colonies. Only recently a writer describing the poorer classes m Montreal, m one of the English dailies, said, "It is incredible that, m a country like this there could be so much poverty. It is pitiable, indeed, to see the new arrivals, without means, without resource, and without friends, flocking into the city m the hope of getting something to do to provide food and shelter. Their numbers are augmented daily by other immigrants who have been into the country looking m vain for work there. Nine out of every ten of the immigrants that land here are absolutely unfitted for the life, and should never have been permitted to leave their homes. They are much worse off here than they were ; ' home, and are not an asset to the, country, as the politicians proclaim, but a burden." Other pressmen have, to a large extent, borne this statement out, and have proved beyond question of ' doubt that immigration cannot be forced. Population cannot make prosperity unless such conditions prevail t^at that population can be kept busy. If they are a drug upon the labor market they are •not a blessing, but a curse. Coming to our own shores, New Zealand could, without much trouble carry another million or so of people, and there, would still be plenty of wool and mutton to export," but it is very questionable whether we want a big influx of English, Scotch and .Irish laborers just at present. This particular class are not productive. They have to have billets created for them, and those billets are nob much m evidence just. now. The . only person who wouFd benefit would be the capitalist, and he always loves to see a big unemployed list, as that means cheap labor. Had New Zealand had Canada's' share of the British emigrants the capitalist would have reaped a rich harvest, but individually the masses would have been poorer m pocket and their standard of living lowered considerably. The "News" needn't waste its sympathy after all.