THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION. TO THE EDITOR.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 5556, 9 December 1879, Page 3

THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION. TO THE EDITOR.

Sin, —No amount of verbosity in which " Omega" revela can blind any practical and disinterested man to the truth of my first and second propositions—that the imposition of protective or prohibitive duties (which are substantially tho same) deprives the Government of re venus, and causes the public to pay additional taxation. One or two illustrations will place this beyond cavil. If I pay L 3 for an imported coat while the duty ia 10 per cent., Government receives 03 out of this pries. If the duty is made protect! fa or prohibitive, and fixod at 25 per cent, I cannot buy the imported article for leas than L 3 10s, But the local manufacturer offers me the same kind of article for L 3 s<, aod it ii my interest to purchase it instrai of paying L 3 10j for the other. Government has consequently lost the 6a which I formerly paid, and I mast pay that Bum to Government in noms tax imposed to meet such deficiency. Practically, therefore, instead oE paying L 3 which procured me a coat, and also paid Government (J3 of revenue, I must pay L 35a for my coat, and Gi in addition—in other words, L 3 Hi instead of L 3. Or even if it be asserted that the local article was formerly nold,| and after the imp aition of the 25 per cent, duty, continued to he sold at L 3,1 must now pay in all L 3 6a instead of L 3. As six shillings of duty, which before went into the Government coffers, now goes into the pockets of the manufacturers, six shillings of additional taxation must now ba paid to meet the deficiency.

But on the principles of snpply and demand which rule the market, I maintain that if local manufacturers offered the coat at L 3 while the 10 per cent, duty on the imported article was levied, they will raise the price to not less than L 3 53, bo that my loss on this article amounts to eleven shillings. Again, if I buy imported candles at ninepence, when a duty is levied of one permy — Government receives that psrny. If threepence a pound of duty is demanded, I buy instead the local article and pay ninepence as before, but I must still pay t) Government the penny which it ia thereby deprived of, in some additional tax. lam therefore required to pay tenpencs on account of each pound of candles I require, instead of nineponce a3 formerly. Am a matter of fact, however, tho local manufacturers, finding that imported candleß cannot bo sold under elevenpsnee, will raise their price to tenpence, and still retain command of the market, so that paying this price to the manufacturer, and the same Bum as before to the Government (which is demanded by some additional tax), I lose twopence for each pound of candles which I use. This I must do for the benefit of one patriotic and disinterested local manufacturer. "■' The fog iv which " Omega" losss h)B head, or else tries to blind his readers, ia easily blown away. Ha gays: " The aggregate taxation may remain at the same level. It will not be something additional over and above what they paid before." I have assumed all along that the aggregate amount which Governtnsnt must have (whether received as duties or taxation) remains at the same level. My complaint is that the part of what Ipaid as the prica of imported goods, which Government received as duties, goes now into the pockets of loojl manufactur n from whom I purchased articles of tbefcsme kind, while I hare to pay tha same taxation which Government levied before, and in addition an amount equal to what tlio Government rec ived from mew duties. : He says :"' Inquired has lost eight of the fact that if the Government lose revenue, the people gain to tha sam 9 extent." If, instead of people, ha said the local manufacturers, he would be coireos, and tha .people who are purchasers from the loci manufacturers ara left to pay tha amount of lost revenue, in the shape of an equil amount of additional taxation. " Omega's " persistent efforts to blind his readers on this point compel me to quote another sentencs from his letter in case any should be still in the fog. Ha says: "Does 'Inquirer' really wish ma to believe that if from a given sum of revenue you take off certain Cnstoms duties, then add the same amount of taxation in another form, that the result' will be an addition upon the amount of taxation over and above what they paid before ?" Another question supplies the correct answer. " If the amount of certain Cuitoma duties ba paid to local manufacturer* insteal of to Government, must not Government increase the taxation by that amount to obtain the original ' given sum of revenuo' ? " I pause for a reply. When " Omega " admits the correct-' ness of my first and second propositions, or succeed* ia refutiag them, I may deal further with the rest. —I am, &c, Inqijiber. ;