THE TARIFF QUESTION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13959, 19 July 1907, Page 3

THE TARIFF QUESTION.

A GLISse OF THE NEAR FUTURE.

By P. J. 0' Regan'.

In my h article I staled that if there was any trh.-m tho protective theory at all it shoil be peculiarly applicable lo Groat Brita on account of her contiguity to 'tho grei land masses of the earth. Aocording isolation, from the outsido irld is a thing to lie desired, and, as if Nyrc has not placed obstacles enough in fluvay of exchange, tariffs arc required to hor defieienoies. Hence Protection sh(d bo particularly expedient .n a country :o Great Britain. For tho samo reason, owever, it should not be applicable to.i isolated' country such as ours. Compatl with the great continents of 'the world, ; an; really little moro than a lighthouse . tho midst of tho lonely 'South Tacifio. I'rotcctiomsts are wont to dilate on thouccew.of their theory in the United Stas of America, and Cana<la; lmt they forgctliat each country is moro than 30 times h sizo of Now Zealand, and that, as bctwci tho component States or provinces thenis tho fullest freedom of trade. Regar.d internally, either of theso great ccntrica may lw considered objcot-lessons irFrcotrado. Moreover, it is .generally foottcn that, though there is .not Tree trad between America and Canada, yet, bj'virtuo of tho Treaty of Washington, ' iifotiated between Great Britain and Aijrieo. in 1871, thero is a great and far-rlching mitigation of protective principle During a considerable portion of the ;ar, when tho Gulf of St. Lawrence is frcn, Canada is permitted, undo.' that grea international compact, to import and orart her goods via New York frco of diy. On tlio great inland lakes oaoh courcy enjoys reciprocal rights, and, as Sir I;nry Compbell-Bannerman recently pomtcumt in his great speech at Manchester, noia warship floats on thoso splendid comm-fcial highways. Anyone capable of thoßlightcst reflection, _ therefore,. must seo £ once that there is a wide difforenco betwen what ia called Protection in AmoriV and Canada and that ■which has beonidopfed in our sea-bound end reinoto 1 itti country. Surely our prition in the South Pacifio makes our isolatm a Buffioiont impediment to our dovolopiint without tho additional disadvantage oj a dariff. Protectionist

manufacturers jofcas to bo eorely afraid / about the "duroing" of American goods, and they toll us that a tariff is necessary -to shut out imortations from a country ■which docs its est to ponaliso our trado. 'Without oonsidrihg tho merits of our American trade, however—and assuredly it Is most useful to us,—no person in . his senses can 6oriasly pretend thai it is possible to put ai end to it by any tariff. I ask tho rcadc if ho has ever considered ■ what' tho efleef,of iho Panama Canal must lie on tho comievoial development of tliie country and Autralia. Let him glance at a map of Iho TDrld on, Mercator's projection, and ho ml Tiotico that, with (lie exception of San j'raiieiscD and, Vancouver, ell tho great Areriean towns aro situated 011 tho AtJiintio :oast —tOiat is to ray, that part of tho grew Airiorican coast-line most remote from us. Let him next follow the lino of vessels from, say, Wellington or Auckland across tho Pacifio to San Francisco. Then Id; hia oyo follow tho great transcontinental railway to Now York, and thcnco -across Iht Atlantio to London, from London to Capo Horn, and thenco back to "Wellington or Auckland. His cyo will now have described approximately a parallelogram, (homines containing which represent existing trade l-outee. Next, let tho ireador draw 1 a lino from Wellington or Auckland to Panama; thcnco to New York, and from thoro -to London. Ho will now have: traced tho bisection or diagonal of the parallelogram, or, in other words, ho will havo divided the parallelogram into two, triangles, and, ai any two sides of a triangle aro together greater than tlio' third, it,follows tliit the routo from Now Zealand to New York or London, via Panama, must bo considerably shorter. I find on reference to-Parliamentary Papor H—4o,' 1905, that tho following aro tho respect ivo distances by the routes mentioned ili'.cs. .Wellington to Plymouth, via Caps Horn ~ .. .. .. 11^93 Auckland to Plymouth, via Oape Horn 12,075 Wellington to Plymouth, via Panama 10,600 Auckland'to Plymouth, via Panama .. 10,800 Wellington or Auckland to Hew York, • via Cape Horn .. .. 11,750 Wellington or Auckland to How York, via Panama • .. 8,150 Alius wo 6ce thai when the Panama Canal iis opened—and Iho Amorican Government is now carrying on tho work with feverish activity—tho saving of distance as between this country and tho Atlantio porta of America will be shortened by 3300 miles, while tile route Homo will be lessened by 1000 or 1300 miles. If wo import goods from New York at present \vo must either rail them across the American continent a distonco or 3000 miles, or wo must ship them' via Cap Horn. Tho overland routo is much tho shorter, but that advantago is nioro than coimtcr-balaaocd by the' repeated handling of tho goods and the general expenso of land carriage, for nohighway is as ohcap as tho sea. When the canal shall liavo been opened, howovur, till this will bo changed, for -vessels will load at New York, or indeed at any other Atlantio port from tho Gulf of St. Lawrence to Panama, ajid travel through tho new waterway, thus combining the advantage of sea carriage with a saving of • 3300 miles. This is not mere speculation, but solid fact which any roador who cares to do so may verify; and in tho face of Biicn faot can anyono protend that it is possible for us by any tariff whatever to check tho importation of American goods?

Amorica's ostensible policy Is Protection;

but in digging tho canal through tho Isthmus of Panama she is in reality doing a great, but silent, service to, Frcetradc. For tho'oanal will revolutionise the commerce of the world. It will, in effect, carry America's great river systems round kith her coasts. It will more than anything so far acomplislied bring Japan and the countries of tho East into closer touch with Europe. It will givo America, a permanent advantage in competing for tho trade of New Zealand and Australia, of which American enterprise may bo relied on to make tho fullest use. Yet wo arc seriously asked to legislate against the importation of American goods! Even now wo cannot prevent i|ie importation of. American boots, though wo liave imposed a duly on them of per cent. llow then can wo hope to Keep them out when the distance has been shortened by 3300 miles? Ot course tho argument holds good in tho caso of all commodities.

In reality the oponing of Hie canal will be an incalculable benefit to us. Not only will our farmers and miners bo üblo lo import American implements at. much lower prices, but'our export, trade must gain by anything that will lesson our handicap in competing in the markets of tho world. Wo are now doing great things in competing with the Argentine Republic in the English wool aJid meat market. Will not our position bo improved by a route that, will enablo our goods to reach England in a Ghorter time? Our farmers will find their position muoh better when the tortuous and stormy journey | round "tho Horn": has bccome a thing of history when vessels will bear their produce twross the calm Pacifio by a routo 1300 milc.s shorter. Yet, according to Protectionist principles, tho completion of the canal should fill us with anxiety. 'Cute Americans will "diflnp" goods all over our shores, and we shall have such a plethora of cheap goods that local industries cannot exist. But is anyone really deceived by such claptrap? ■ Have' tho -people who talk like this ever thought that if goods are sent to us our own goods must bo sent in oxohaaige? Does anyone believe that Amerioana, or anyono else, will givo us their goods for nothing? Let tho people .who indulge in such foolish pretence hark back t-o elementary principles,and rocollect that all trade consists in the exchange of goods for goods, and they will perhaps understand that any agency that will promote closer commercial interCourse is a blessing to the human raec. Protectionists tell its that the tariff ia necessary to maintain certain manufactures. Not even Protectionists pretend that farmers or miners, flaxmillere or timborgctters, can derive any advantage from the tariff. Yet it is on tihoso -primary industries that the country really depends. Wlioeovcr stands to gain by tho tariff, tho farmer and tho minor must suffer thereby. Tho farmer has to compete in the world's markets, chiefly in tho great Frcetradc market of Britain. Wo are .apt to forget tho itcrni3 "raw products" and "finished products" are merely relative. A pitchfork or a plough arc finished produets from the standpoint of the man who makes them; but from tho standpoint of the man who uses them to produoe ot-hor wealth they are raw products. As wo are ncocssarily large exporters of wool, meat, butter, flax, etc., it follows that we must import manufactured goods. For our purposes t-hoso manufactured goods aro our raw products. Tho goods we export, though termed "raw," are really finished products (from our point of view. To realise tho truth of this is-to seo tho utter impolicy of our existing tariff. : Surely in our bost interests wo should strive to obtain our manufactured goods as cheaply as possible. Under no oircumstanccs can our producers hope to dispose of more than a fraction of their produce locally, llicy aro bound to export much more than vtlioy can liopo to dispose of in the local market. Our very isolation, combined with our capacity, compels us to seek markets in the great outside world. Now, tho market oulsido is quite beyond our control. We arc, oa it wore, entirely at its mercy, oven as a.rudderless ship is at tho mercy of the wind. We must, in other words, sell our goods in a market fully exposed to the rigours of competition. Yet we persist in loading our producers with, artificially dear goods. I am not surprised that tho farmers aro beginning to resent such an intolerable position, but I. am surprised that thoy havo so long allowed t|heir highest interests 'to bo foiled by a mere handful of Protectionists, whose pretensions, when analysed, aro seen to bo utterly untenable and in tho highest dcgrco absurd.

To probo deeply into the ecience ofpolitical, coonomy is not the purport of theeo articles, tut I would point out- that the protective spirit is at variance with the pnnoiplo of human progress. Association is one of tbo indispensable conditions, of civilisation, and for that reason everything that brings men into closcr relations with caoh other roust make for good. Trade is tho greatest ngenoy towards that end, and honce it is also the greatest agency for the promotion of peace and goodwill, a-nd tho spirit that promotes hindrances to it is tho 6amo as that, which finds expression in warfare and standing armies. Tho Panama Canal is a great.and bcnoficont undertaking, because it must promote human intercourse; but every agency towards the same end is in prinoiplo equally beneficent. Why do wo approve the efforts of our own Primo Minister to scoure a reduction in the Suez' Canal dues?- Is it not bccanse wo lecogniso tho desirability of quickening and fostering commercial intercourse? The spirit of Protection must assume, however, that such intercourse is prejudicial. Tho Simplon tunnel is one of the triumphs of modern engineering, for tho season that it facilitates commerco and travel. Yot to-day, though tho primary object of tho tunnel is to save time, a. full half-hour is lost in searching at each end thereof to detect smuggling. I might' easily multiply instances to show tlio utter barbarism of tariff restrictions, but I must utilise tho remaining spco allotted mo i,i making something like a detailed examination of our New Zealand tariff.