THE FALLACY OF SUPPORTING COLONIAL INDUSTRIES.

Temuka Leader, Issue 5418, 24 July 1906, Page 4

THE FALLACY OF SUPPORTING COLONIAL INDUSTRIES.

t (By “ Free-trade ”). Tire following article 'is one that was read at the Tcuiuka Aleohanie.Y Imtilult) at a recent meeting, when it created a great deal of interest and some spirited debate. Though wi do not identify 'ourselves with tin statements made by the author, wi luive no doubt it will bo perused will interest by a largo circle of readers. At the present time various at tempts arc being made fo foster co hniial indußtries. .'That these attempts are being made in n truly patriotic spirit there can ■ bo no possible doubt. “S-clfi preservation is the liralaw of nature,” and the protcctioi and fostering of our own Industrie seems, according to some advocate* to be the most pressing need in New Zealand. 'Thero are of times man, 1 roads to the same place, but we wait the best road in any case. Let u look' at this question from quite an other standpoint. 1 contend that b; leltiag our present industries, and fu lure industries for that matter, tub care of themselves. Wo would oven tually be as well, if not better ol Thai* we are now. The chief reasoi urged for supporting colonial Indus tries is that it gives employment t our own people. That is only a hal truth. Not only is it not ■altogethv true, but it is narrow inview and cor wrvulivoin spirit. W? speak glowing ly id the ‘‘Federation of the world/ and “The Parliament of man,’ 1 ’ etc, etc., but in reality those sentiment are not strong enough to travel be yond our can borders. 'The people o the British Empire are sometimes call id inrn 1' XTS of one huge family. 1 that is so. have we no right to helj to support the.members of our'fundi; who live in the Old Land ■? Have no sonic of us brothers and rasters n Homo who still need employment And of what good to the Molhc Country are we, if we cannot k*l| her to employ her people ? Surel; this is as little us "c can do. Othei wise rile may as well let others tab \m the eiilouisation, while she devote ln.-r energies to commercial exploits Hun, exactly as we arc now beini treated in South Africa by the Van ke.-s anil the Germans. Uncle San ami the. Emperor William . are bavin the best of the bargain in that cl is 1 ressful eottnlry. New Zealand is es pi.vially adapted for /agricultural am kindred pursuits, which arc infinite! l better for tire health -of the peopl than factory life can ever lie. Then is siillieient laud in Now Zealand It eiiiploy the whole ]>opulaLion, withou indulging in industrial pursuits. Thi ‘Xti'a amount of shipping and special ly adjusted Custom house duties b* luxuries would provide siillieient re venue to materially reduce the priei of living, which nt present is abnor nmlly high. Take the woollen Indus try. for instance. Unr growers cm eel as much here in New Zealand fo their wool from English buyers a; they can from Colonial manufacturer.' That being so. why should w r c tax tin whole people, in lire effort to support the particular few who are now on 'gaged in this particular industry? A,< a matter of fact, the raw materia ean be 'nought here, shipped Horn# made up into either garments or pieci goods, and landed into New Zealatw with a An per cent duty on it, am still come out la fraction cheaper that the colonial article. Why should wi be taxed to keep up (his -farce■? Sub i'sidies 'to any industries is a mile form of robbery. By the .consequent cheapening of living we could mab( hi'tlw use of the pro (Its wc now get on our exports, such as fruit, poul try, cheese limiter, eggs, frozen meat 'etc., ele. Not only that, but wi eould belter enter into competition with foreigners in the English markets. Canada is said to bo the granary of the world, why eaiT’t wo com pete with her? T -strongly believe by the system which J advocate wo could help the Mother Land, 'and at tin same time make a “good deal” for ourselves. This system would 1 enaPde England to depend upon us for her food supply, instead of upon foreigners, which may be all right in a time of peace, imt a very serious matter in a time oif war. Why should our soldiers and sailors have to tackle Yankee vile-smelling tinned beef, when we have lons of the very best ourselves ? Were this policy of mine carried into •IToct it would n can that our exchanges of goods would be to 'the lirne/lt of both parties. This would be reciprocity in its truest sense. The present so-called “preference” is only a means directly of getting revenue, and incidentally increasing the cost of -living.