THE FLOUR AND GRAIN DUTY QUESTION.

Otago Witness, Issue 1395, 24 August 1878, Page 10

THE FLOUR AND GRAIN DUTY QUESTION.

On Saturday last the following telegram was forwarded to the Hon. E. Stout by the Committee of the Dunedin Chamber of Commerce :—: — Dunedin, 17th August, 1878. Hon. Robert Stout, Wellington. Committee of Chamber of Commerce ask your consideration of, and hope f oryour ul timate acquiescence in, in contents of following telegram ju»t sent to Treasurer: —Committee respectfully urge that remission flour and grain duties will prove injurious policy, no sufficient benefit to any class being shown to compensate serious effects to trade and to producers, which must, especially at present time, follow irom change. Committee especially urge unfairness sudden and unexpected alteration of national policy to numerous and struggling class of deferred-payment settlors.' B T. S. Gramaii, Chairman. The following reply was received yesterday bytelegraph:- WeUingtoHj Augußt 19*. T. S. Graham, E«q., Chamber of Commerce,' Dunedin. Government is in receipt of your telegram in which the Chamber of Commerce finds fault with one out of the many proposals of the Government, namely, that by whioh the dues on those necessaries of life— g*ain and flour— were removed. • It is pleasing to learn that only in this one instance does the Chamber have any objection to offer ; this is a gratifying proof that the Government proposals are f ir. The representations of the Chamber are entitled, and will, I believe, receive careflal consideration from the Government. The Government believe that where a system of indirect dues exists, and whereby the imposition of Ciistoms duties commerce not free, it is the duty of Parliament to »o arrange the tariff that new industries are encouraged, and it will be the effort of the Government, when the tariff comes to be rev sed next year, to see that the rising manufactures are protected. The representations of the Chamber are especially entitled to weight, as merchants do not usually favour restrictions on commerce, and therefore it is not necessary to cite to merchants the arguments that may be used for abolishing the duty on food. It may be pointed out, however, that New Zealand is a grain-producing country, and is a large exporter of grain— successfully competing in the market of the world with countries nearer England than this Colony, such as America, Eussia, etc. If New Zealand can compete in England and in Australia, paying freight, etc., if necessary, to prohibit the importation of foreign-grown food. There is no duty in New South "Wales, and our exports to Sydney are larjie, even though we have America to compete against us. ° Robert Stout.