The Rangitikei Advocate. TWO EDITIONS DAILY. MONDAY. MARCH 8. 1920. OUR COUNTRY’S TRADE.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XLV, Issue 12018, 8 March 1920, Page 4

The Rangitikei Advocate. TWO EDITIONS DAILY. MONDAY. MARCH 8. 1920. OUR COUNTRY’S TRADE.

THE recently published figures of New Zealand trade show that there was what some people call “a favourable balance” of over £23,000,000 for the eleven last months of the past year. We sent out value to the amount of about 58% millions and imported to the value of ov’er 30% millions. Our exports always must exceed our imports so long as a large proportion of our profits from the outside world has to go towards payment of interest on borrowed money and the repayment of the loans. Not until our indebtedness has been cleared off! will the balance of trade bo truly in our favour. The detailed table showing the values of produce exported is of some interest. It discloses the fact rhat out of the total of 53% millions sent out to the markets of the world, all, except anout half a million, was deriyed from the produce of the land, clearly indicating that the interests of the producers are those most worthy of consideration, and the desirabiilty of increasing production by bringing more land into use and inducing more people to leave the crowded cities for the waiting country areas. Our principal export of course was wool" valued at 19% millions, mutton, lamb and beef coming next v ith a total of 9% millions, about one-half of which was for mutton, then cheese 7% butter 3 millions. Tallow, preserved meats, hides and sheepskins represented a total of 6% millions, while phormium yielded over three-quarters of a million. Our coal, silver and gold export amounted to leas than half a million The figures not only show the directions in which the energies of the people should be exerted, and the desirabiilty of removing all handicaps on progress in those directions, but disclose very remarkable results from operations in a country with only a little over a million of people, only about onefourth of whom are engaged in the actual work of production. These also have been working under heavy burdens of taxation, both direct and indirect. The industries they have been engaged in have developed enormously, and this development has taken place against world-wide competition, for it is impossible to “protect” the man on the land, who also has no means of “passing it on” when an extra burden is imposed on him, for his produce hastb come into competition with that of others from all parts of the world, The figures show what it has been possible to do in JNew Zealand even under adverse conditions; what might be possible under proper or natural conditions must be left to the imagination. A WELLINGTON boot manufacturer Mr Charles Ward, has published Uie lollowiug, addressed to Mr E.-New-man ‘I noticed in the Evening Post of March 4th that you had repeated Mr Massey’s statement ‘that raw material was seat across to Australia, and came back in the form of boots which were sold cheaper than the Dominion-manufactured article. That huge profiteering hact been done was unquestioned.’ I have questioned tnis statement previously, and I do so now. To bring the" matter to a head, I have placed .my chqeue for £250 in the hands of the Editor of the Post, and challenge you to cover it with a like amount. If you prove your ausertion, or I fail to prove* yott are wrong, the winner to hand the loser’s cheque to a Returned Soldiers’ Fund. I take the liberty of asking Sir James Wilson, the president o

the Farmers’ ’ Union, to act as umpire. ” It is not likely that Mr Newman will fall Into this trap. That it is a difficult matter to establish a charge of profiteering has been shown not only in this country, but in England, where even those making many millions are still pursuing their practices. The devices for camouflaging profits are skilful, and usually defy detection. If there really is no profiteering in footwear, let the bootmakers agree to the abolition of the restrictive duties on imported boots, so that there may be free competition. The issue of so-called “challenges” proves nothing, and does not deserve serious attention, The public will not be deceived, because they “know that if profiteering was not going on, then footwear would be less than half the price it is at present.