The Timaru Herald. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1907. THE FLOUR DUTY.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIC, Issue 13393, 17 September 1907, Page 4

The Timaru Herald. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1907. THE FLOUR DUTY.

As the Tariff Bill has practically run tin 1 gauntlet of Parliament:—its third reading being due in thu House of Representatives to-day—there- is not much reason to ap-p.ne-hend a renewal of the attack upon the protection which has bam enjoyed by the flour-milling and grain-growing industries. Nevertheless it is just as well that no opportunity should be lost of puking the .position in regard to -tha iioiir and wheat duties ck-arly before the public, so that at least bare justice may be done ao abody of men who, as Mr Evans caustically 'remarks in the interview which appears clsewhtao in this issue, " are good game to ba shot at by carpet-bag politicians, labour agitators, and irresponsible scribblers." ThLs evil trinity -would doubtless havo had to seek elsewhere for a battle-cry, had it not b:en for the widespread and deeply-rooted belief that the Millers' Association was responsible for forcing the price of bread up to a fictitious level. How far this is from being the case can 1)3 seen from the table iii which Mr Evans gives the quotations for flour in tho month of May during the last eighteen years. It will bo seen that during th* live years which havia elapsed since the- establishment of ths Millets' Association, Hour has averaged £8 12s per ton, or considerably less than the prices ruling during the. first three- y«irs of the period dealt with in Mr Evanc' table, when such a thing an a " Flourmillers' Trust" was not even thought of. Mr Hogg, and the other enemies of the Millers' Association, will find it difficult to derive from an analysis of the figures in this ta.bh.l any support for the contention that the agreement among the milk has been used to exploit the consumer, who even now, with wheat, at a high level, is paying kes for liir-i Hour than he has had to pay on several occasions when there was unbridled competition among tliie* mills. There is no question, however, thai wo should have heard :>. giwi.t deal less of Mr Hogg and his attack upon the flour dutv if it had not ber-n for the

popular opinion about the effect, of the millers' agreement upon the deanwes of Ilia loaf, and it is theicfore dcsirablo that iha consumer idionld investigate the facts for himself, and not accept as gosp.il Hie wild denunciations of the demagogue who finds in ilm cry of a cheap loaf an easy passport to popularity. It is very 'instructive to contrast the attitude of Parliament towards ihu Jlour millers, with its treatment of other indiiKtriii'i employing a much .smaller number of hands, and involving ii much i-maller amount of capital. Striking an average, it appears that the duty of £1 a (on,on flour is equal to about 12-i per cent, on an ad valorem basis, which is very modest "in comparison with several of tha dutks assentrd to by the House since .Mr Millai'a highly protective tariff haii been under consideration. As lata, as Friday last, members by a substantial majority agreed to thj imposition of a tax equal to no less than 100 per cent, ad valorem on raw cotton, in order to protect the proprietors of six woollen mills against the' competition of fabrics in which the pure wool i.s adulterated with tlia cheaper material. W;s are not -arguing now the soundness of a highly protective tariff—personally wo believe that in time the wage-earner in every country where protection ruiia riot will bo compelled to kick against it just, as tihe Americans are doing at the present turn?. We are accepting the fact that v with the object of building up its industries, New Zealand has deliberately adopted a protective policy, and we are only asking for the flourmiller a measure of the protection which ho is compelled to give to every other manufacturer in the colony.