DANGEROUS AGITATION.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13657, 28 July 1908, Page 7

DANGEROUS AGITATION.

To tli6 Editor of (lie -'Tirnarti Herald." ,Sir, —No doubt you are aware the agitation l:wr year for the removal of dmi<i ; . on flour and potatoes caused 18,430 acres 1.1 wheat and 4500 acres or potatoes Ires tu I*: sown than the preceding ypar, arid the serious southern drought considerably reduced the yield. The lant two yeaus hav<- been abnormal on«>, and thr-ic is not, JiU-ely to be a recurrence for some tinie to come, at* least we hope ho. Wo know thaL a farmer would much prefer 35 bushels of wheat per acre at 3s 6d yielding £6 2* 6d to 20 bushels at 4s 9d yielding £4 15s. If any particular Statu "in the Australian Commonwealth should have a drought and New Zealand a surplus, we aze debarred from supplying owing to the Commonwealth's heavy duty i/f £2 lC's per ton or. flour. Yet- when | New /.eai.iim ' ~.7.Kri£

damaged crops, anil want more to save (h<-in from lorti, out- small duty of £1 per ton makes Kc-w Zealand tiie dumping ground for Australian surplus, and seriously interferes with the N<-w Zealand wheat grower and miller, and is io not reasonable to tsiiggtßt that our duty on flour ought (o be tue same as Australia's, ai> die Couintonvrealt])'s lugli price ruling for offal, i.e., bran and sharpes, and the cheapness of wheat production, augmented i.i-ith the railage rates on wheat-, etc., being quito 40 per cent. below ours, precludes New Zealand from competing. We hear the Australian millers are advising New Zealand merchants that it *is the New Zealand Government's intention t° abolish die duty on Hour this year, so you can see at a glance the danger of such agitation, which if allowed will ultimately put us at the mercy of foreign powers in times of trouble (and is not this England's present weakness?) besides crippling numerous allied industries, and our railways, also reducing land values. The farmers of New Zealand, want to be encouraged, not discouraged, as their protective duties on produce are infinitesinal compared with Australia's, though a "few" in New Zealand think that the farmer should be heavily taxed for boots, clothing, etc., yet supply produce on free trade basis. A few butter districts with its heavy protective duty of 22£ per cent, caddled and catered for by every conceivable manner bv our Government, care little about the wheat grower and the miller. Just remove the duty on butter -when there is a slump on it in Australia, and how would the New Zealand industry fare? The price of butter has advanced throughout the Dominion, owing to our recent droughts, quite l£d per lb equal to £l4 per ton, and not a murmur, c-ven though the Government renewed the pastures by giving over £70,000 in grass seed. Did the suffering wheat growers Teceive similar treatment ? The cry is, open up fresh agricultural lands, but what is the use of doing so, unless the .products of the soil are protected to compete wilih greedy Australia? You will notice the Wellington wharf and timber workers want mere duty put on foreign timber, to keep them fully employed, even though New Zealand timber is a vanishing aeset. Yet these people forget how their agricultural and railway brethren, would fare with duty-" free flour. In fact it would cripple all agricultural labour and the railways, also seriously interfere with our coastal steamers in the carriage of the raw material, and what would New Zealand stock do without! bran and sharps, because Australia has seldom , any to export. It has often been stated by a "few" that if the New Zealand wheat growens and millers cannot compete with Australia, America, ! and Canada, without, protection, they are not worth considering. This argument should also apply to the boot, clothing, butter and numerous other industries with their heavy protective duties. If they cannot compete with the sweated surplusages of Europe, America, India and Canada, without protection, they are not worth considering.—l am,.etc.; | , FAIR PLAY.