Outside Opinion.

Southland Times, Issue 8056, 10 July 1885, Page 3

Outside Opinion.

(Sydney Morning Herald, Jane 25.) Although, as we learn by cablegram, the :New Zealand revenue for th« year, amount- . ing to L3,500,000, bas loft a surplus over expenditure of L22,000, tbe position is not apparently so encouraging as the mere figures might indicate. Oa the face of them fresh taxation would hardly appear to be required. Yet -the aspect of the political and economical conditions of the country is such as, in the opinion of Sir . Julius Vogel, to justify a large tariff. No man is bo responsible as he for the heavy weight of debt which rests upon New Zealand, and which undoubtedly to some extent now burdens the colony with heavy | taxation. And yet he thinks tbe colony j will bear something more. Without the j fall details of his budget before us, it wonld be premature to judge ; but it may eeem a hazardous policy, in the face of the falling off in business indicated by tbe decline in tbe revenue from stamp duties Bnd the growing unprofitableness of the raUway traffic, to enlarge taxation. Although the customs revenue appears to have been fairly maintained, the colony has evidently passed through another trying year, Much of the otherwise good wheat crop was destroyed by tho weather before it bould be garnered, and for the remainder very low prices had to be accepted. Wool and other produce shared in the depression common- to those and nearly all raw productions in the markets of the world. The earnings of thecolony must have been greatly diminished by the fall in prices. An increase in the tariff may be justified, but in tbe circumstances it seems a doubtful policy. But because a budget is .submitted it does not follow that it will be accepted, as Mr Gladstone's government have just found Out. It will not much surprise us to hear that the taxation proposals are 1 rejected or modified. Sir Julius Vogel contemplates a financial scheme of a comprehensive character. The tea-drinker andthe spirit-drinker are alike to bear a part of the increased burden. The pro perty tax is to be raised to fd in the £, and those who^bave property left to them are to contribute a larger share of it to the State. Whatever may be aaid in justification of these changes, the proposal to impose. a new import duty on foreign coal -' —that is, on Newcastle coal — is a measure of protection as much as a revenue moafiHre, The tax may, at the expense of the general consumers in New Zealand, help the colliery industry in th atcolony; but it may at the same time damage the colony's timber,' agricultural, and dairy-producing interests. -New South Wales receives a good deal of New Zealand produce, which can be sent bere, in competition with tbat from other colonies, through the cheap freights which returning coal ships can afford to offer. Anything whioh wonld damage that trade might be more prejudicial to New Zealand than to New South Wales. Last year we exported to- New Zealand produce to the value of L506,714, and New Zealand sent us goods to the amount of L881,530. She has the larger interest" in the trade, and may be the greater sufferer by a restrictive policy, ,