BOOT IMPORTERS DISSATISFIED.

Otago Witness, Issue 2785, 31 July 1907, Page 17

BOOT IMPORTERS DISSATISFIED.

A PETITION AGAINST A CHANGE. The following petition is to be forwarded to the Commissioner of Customs. It bears the signature of 16 Dunedin importers of j boots and shoes: — j To the Honourable the> Minister of Customs, : Wellington. j Sir.—"We, the signatories attached to this petition, honestly opine that we are expressing the opinions and desires of the rest of I the- boot and shoe importers of New Zea- . land, who number over 1000, holding their j owm. businesses a-nd employing some thouj sands of hands. Did time permit, it is beyond question that each and every one of , ; these importers together with the thousands , j of employees affiliated in the trade, would [ subscribe their names to this petition. : i s As importers, we wish to enter a- strong ' protest to any interference with the existing tariff on boots and shoes unless it be in the direction of a reduction of the present duty. , Although importers, we are thoroughly in •ympathy with the policy which grants a , fair measure of protection and assistance '• \ to all bona fide local industries, and, whilst ! conceding this, it must be remembered that i the object of a, tariff is. first, revenue, and. ! ! secondly, protective. Any competent and fair-minded person must agree that the pre- ■ sent tariff fills these two conditions as happily as any measure possibly could, in view of the difficult and divergent interests ' | of the trade; and the best proof of this is i to be found in the experience of many years past. The present tariff, viewed from the standpoint of Protection, is all that any reason- j able manufacturer cou"d demand, being nomi- | nally 22J per cent, ad valorem, which means j 24.75 per cent., or. say, 25 per cent, straight out; but practically the measure of Protec- , tion' -which the sho» manufacturer enjoys is I anything between 35 to 45 per cent., depending upon the value of the goods im- | ported, because the importer has to pay freight, insurance, exchange, casing, ana other incidental charges on top of the 25 per cent., which means quit© another 10 per cent, on medium to better-priced goods, and this extra charge increases in proportion as •'•.he price of the goods imported decreases. I The shoe manufacturer hae i further mes- j 1 sure of Protection in the fact that a large 1 proportion of the raw material in the manu- j facture of boots and shoes is admitted duty ' free—to wit, patent leather, grindery, mercery, etc.,—whilst a. very material portion of the -jDper leather -which he uses is subject only to a nominal duty—xo wit, glace kid, «tc- , „ ' i Again, in sole leather, sheep «nd ca.f ! leather, the manufacturer has the advantage ' of being able to get just what his business j needs first hand, as the whole of the trade I is centred m the colony. j The present tariff, as a- revenue producer, | has also proved itself pre-eminently satisfactory. A-ai is admitted by all fair-minded and just men in the trade 10 ba the mo?i happy medium for nil parties concerted, j whilst providing ito fair quota of revenue to I the co-zntry. I For these and many other equally strong j reasons the importers of footwear in New i Zealand earnestly solicit blfo a modest meai sure of Protection for their vested interests , and their rights a.s citizens of New Zealand. i "We view with gi£at concern -the action cf 1 a small body of operatives in the trade, ar.d | also many members of the much stronger organisation of shoe manufaciurers, who a^e always worrying and seeking to add to the duty, and who aim only at prohibition. It is to be earnestly hoped that wiser counsel will prevail, and that these malcontents trill not be allowed things all their own 1 way, which would be seriously detrimental to every man, woman, and child ih i\«w

Zealand, besides throwing overboard a sub-" siantial amount of -file country's revenue. The manufacturers have no just_ cause of . complaint against the present tariff. The up-to-date shoe manufacturer in New Zealand was n«ver 6© prosperous as to-day, andwould be infinitely worse off under * prohibitive tariff. The operative in ti&e ahoe trade was never so well off as he is to-day. There is plenty of work and: steady .employment for a.ll comp&tent labour, together with a teininram wage of £2 5s per week, whilst any manufacturer will readily admit thait it is the men earning £2 15s and upwards per week whom h« appreciates most and is anxious to retain. The statement which appeared in public print quite recently (Auckland Star, 29/6/07), ! which emanated from a section of the Ghrisrtohuroh boot factory employee®, stating th-st th* average earnings _ier anum »f the men waa only £90, is not only misleading, but far ! from the actttal state of things. j We" are credibly informed thai -there is a movement afoot to establish a trusi amongst *<few-of:tho largest shoe m&nnfaoturers in New Zealand, together with'one^of-flifc largest tanners and leather manufacturers, for the, purpose of controlling the market and fixing prises. Any increase in the tariff will cer- i tainly tend to strengthen such, a combination. ' We understand that a deputation' waited! upon the department to urge the advisability,, of'importing machinists, as the supply was totally -inadequate to The requirements of the trade, and factories frequently at a,* gtan&till" owing to lack of labour offering in this department. As a matter of fact the boot and shoo factories in New Zealand have the entire control of all strong work sold in the colony, , and for some considerable time past have been unable to cope with the orders received for lines similar to. those imported. The boot and" shoe importers and' tiheir dependents, although representing a large section of 'the industrial community of New Zealand, *r© not an organised body; but if they were this would be the petition for fair play which the ex-ecurtive of such a.n organisation would solicit, and which we, t.he signatories, would now aek for your consideration and assistance.