CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6995, 10 January 1901, Page 2

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

ANNUAL CONFERENCE. .- • f SECOND DAY. : " The Conference of Chambers ©fYCommerce met at 10 o'clock this morning. FEDERATION OF CHAMBERS. The. Chairman (Mr W. Wood) said that first of all the Conference would take the report of the Committee on. the question, of federation of the Chambers. • , Mr W. Chrysrtall (Canterbury) reported that the Committee had met the previous evening and recommended' — "That whereas en Association of New Zealand Chambers of Commerce which met in Wellington. in 1884 did not apparently adopt any formal resolution providing for their perfnaneht federation or prepare any formal constitution or by-laws, it is resolved' by this Con- V ference that there should now be a formal' federation of the New Zealand Chambers, and that the Wellington Chamber of Commerce be requested to draw up a constitution and by-laws Bnd! circulate the same among the Chambers for approval or alteration, each: Chamber to inform the Wellington Chamber whether it agrees to join.; Further, that there should be a permanent Executive Committee in Wellington .of which, the Chairman should be the Prg-, sid'ent for th© time being of the Wellington Chamber of Commerce and that the SecretaOT of the Federated' Chambers and also of" the Executive Committee be the Secretary for the time being of the Wellington Chamber." He moved that the report {should ibe adopted. : Mr Dennis ton (Dunedin) seconded the motion. ■ v. • Mr A. H. Turribull (Invercargill) said that he was not in accord with) the proposal ishati. there should be a permanent head centre at Wellington. The head centre should! meefc^ at the different centres of population in thai colony. He also objected to th» proposal; to practically make the President of the Wellington Chamber for the time being i archbishop of all Chambers in the colony.. • Mr Chrystall said that there was no rea-; son why the Executive Committee, if estab-;. lished in . Wellington,' should take action without consulting the Chambers. \ Mr A- H. Turnbull (Invercargill) said that* some time ago, some friction had occurred between the Wellington Chamber and the Hon J. G. Ward, and it was desirable to, avoid all approach to any form of party; politics. • ■ Mr Waymouth suggested that while Wellington was made the permanent centre, the annual meeting should be peripatetic. ■ Mr G. S. S. Griffiths {Wanganui) said that any friction that did occur in. Wellingtooi was in connection witb individual members of the Chamber, and not with iihe Chamber as a whole. \. .- ' . ■ Mr Caldwell said it was intended thaib the annual conferences should be held in various centres j it /was only the Executive liba*) would meet in Wellington. Mr'E. W. Roper (Canterbury) said thai representatives of all Chambers could have seats on the Executive. If any matter of great importance came forward, all''Chambers would feel that they had a say on the questions. Each president or chairman, for) instanpe, might be a member of the Executive ex officiq., . Mr G. T. Booth (Canterbury) agreed witfti this view. '■.:.-. Mr Waymouth said that if each Chamber' always had its representative in Wellington, 5 as might be arranged, all difficulties coulet be overcome. Mr E. O. Hurley (Palio&erston North) saicl he thought that Wellington was the proper 1 place for the headquarters of the Executive: Mr G. L. Denniston (Dunedin) said that it! was not for the Conference to go into details. In any case, the question would come before the individual chambers in due course. Mr Roper moved^— " That all presidents- of affiliated chambers be ex officiq members of the Executive ; that this be. a recommendation to t&e Wellington Chamber in drawing up ate schema. • , Mr Booth seconded the motion. The report of the committee was ttbea adopted, and Mr Roper's motion wascarried. INDEPENDENCE OF TRju JUDICIAIi BENCH. Discussion was then taken on Mr" Griffiths's paper on " The Independence o$ the Judicial Bench," read the previous day.; The motions moved; by Mr Griffiths, and published in another column, were support J ed by Messrs Denniston and G. HirschJ (Paimsrston North). Mr Hurley sa^l that the mover of theimotion was quite correct in saying that the! salaries of judges were nob adsquate. DJ was not right tha* anyone should be ahki to charge a Government with having increased the salary of a judge, as ibad been! done, with ulterior motives, and he there-; fore thought that all' salaries of judges should be fixed by Parliament. They knewof a case in this colony where a judge had! come into conflict with a Minister, of thei Crown, and it was not desirable that judges; should be placed in the position of being threatened with removal. ' Mr Griffiths, in reply, said tibe m/atte^ had been dealt wftih. in the Legislative; Council, and that body had' practically oar-' tied the motions he proposed. He Itopedi that if tihe motions w,ere .passed, Hx& different Chambers would take up the matter aod have them passed into law. COMMERCIAL RECIPROCITY. Discussion followed on Mr Roper's papa? on . " CoEimerical Reciprocity with Australia." Mr Denniston said that he thought tihe paper had put the position very clearly, and he supported' the motions. Mr Laurenson «aid that until the (report of th© Federation Commission was beipre the country they were in the dark, and it was difficult to come to a conclusion. At the same time there was never a country which federated and regretted 1 its action. He combated Mr Ropers statement with regard) to trade with Australia. " At -the same time he was glad to see that the Conference !had taken up th© subject, and! he was indebted to Mr Roper for his paper. He was in sympathy w#h Federa-' tion } but would not. like to express an opinion without further information. As to reciprocity, if they could irofc get it with Federation, they s&culd ' get it without. Mr Turnbull said that in. his . opinion Federation was practically impossible, on account of climatic, social, labour, and otiher conditions. With regard to a great Imperial Federation as one grand,- hannoblous whole, iihere could bs only one opinion, but' hs did I>y not think tihataa islacdt Federation would- be successful. As to re-j

|CJcable, and in Ms opinion, New Zealand. £houLd stand or fall alone. [. Mr G. T. Booth said that really Hhere [was not sufficient information before line people to discuss thaiiTport of Mr Roper's motion dealing -with New Zealand's autoxtomy. They should not commit themyfves in that direction. As to reciprocity, ifa did not think tihat New Zealand) had! touch chance of making 1 a safesfactory baxjgain in that direction. For one tSbing, fisjoal arrangements would have to be made with the Common-wealth, and! tihere were other matters to be considered. Mr N. 'Reid (Wellington) went into details ; fin connection with trade relations 'between jiNiew Zealand and Australia, and spoke 'jftgainst the motion. Mr Booth said that Federation amd! recijprocity were totally different matters, and jibe thought that they shouid be separated 5n the motion. He moved, as an amendmenit, that the wesrdis at the beginnSng of the •motion, " While deprecating any sacrifice of pew Zealand's autonomy," should be struck put, so that the motion should! read—" That fthis Conference is strongly of opinion that mi ttlliance with the Australian Commonwealth, {based on. the broad lines of legal, social, and commercial reciprocity, will be |©f advantage to 'both nations, and will be; % iiuiather step in' the direction of consolidating, our Empire." ■_ J Mr T. Bailie (Westport) seconded the ' IftniPTi^imipJlih, j Mr Hurley spoke against iihe amendment. • } Mr Roper said that he was in favour of •JPederaltion, but mot of joining the Australian OoanmoniwealtiL There should; be too mistake about the matter. His motion npet forth that New Zealand, while mainItaining her independence and individuality, 'Was willing to enter into reciprocity. There •fwas a great difference beltweeni Federation, fend ireciprocity. There were many who did jfcot believe in the farmer, but who thought ((that <tS»e latter would be for the goodi of both tike CommonweaTthi and the colony. There be an alliance, as long as it did not ifelaah wifch that which: ithe people of New feeaSand prized more than' anything else, her town independence and nationality. • i /Mr Denniston aaid that she wouldi vote '•Jar the amendment. • He had bought that 'Ithe motion was non-oommdlfctal, -but after Uwhat Mr Roper had said, he had -come to the 'conclusion that it waa committal. So far lihia views were ia the direction of antiThey had not sufficient infortoatdon as yet to deal with the matter proand they should not commit th«mJEelves. ' Mr Caldwell said tihat tttiey! were only and though they might express j " tfceir opinions, tihey should not pass a decided that would commit the bodies they Represented. He thought that Mr Roper jjphould withdraw his motion. The paper fvas an excellent ooe, but,, it was of too : committal at nature. j Mr Roper said' that it was absurd to think {that this colony would barter its liberty for (such a thing as a market. Personally he had no object .to gaio in cornectk)© with Federation, but would be willing to make • any sacrifice in the matter before he saw New Zealand surrendering her independence. He hoped in any case, that delegates would bring the question before their Chambers and have the matter threshed j out in the thorough manner it undoubtedly deserved. He objected to tihe proposed [amendment because it would appear that [the Conference was in favour of joining the Commonwealth. He certainly could not allow such a resolution to go forth as coming from him. He would rather withdraw the motion altogether. \ 'Both the motion and the amendment were then withdrawn, and, on the motion of Mr Booth, seconded by Mr Caldwell, it was decided tfiiat the Conference should heartily thank Mr Roper for his interesting address, which was praised iby both Ithe mover and the seconder of the motion. ■> BANK HOLIDAYS. : Mr A. B. Robertson (Auckland) brought lip the subject of Bank holidays, and said that in New Zealand there were about nine Bank holidays, observed each year, and the number seemed' to be irtcreised. 'The in-' convenience caused by the banks closing Sometimes for several days at a stretch twas very great. He moved— " That in the opinion of this Conference the practice of banks closing on certain days which are Dot public holidays is inconvenient to commercial circles and unnecessary,' and should be ' discontinued, and that representations lehould be made to the bank authorities in jtMs connection." } Mr Turnbull said; that hte did not think (banks should be closed on any day when {there was no public holiday.- It was aibwurd for the banks to close on saints' days, jfor instance. 1 1 Mr Waymouth eaid that the retail comjQunity, as well as the wholesale business, Vere inconvenienced by the present system vbf banik holidays. i Saveral other delegates supported the knotion, which was carried. RAILWAY CONNECTION WITH WESTPORT, AND DEFENCE. Mr A. D. Bayfield (Westport) read a 'paper on the subject of the connection of jWestport by railway with the main lines Hn the Middle Island. He dealt at length [with the extent of the coalfields at Westroort, and urged that all mines on the fields should be placed on the same footing with sregard to railway connection. He also dealt (with the defence of West-port, saying that jit, was a matter of great impprtance to the [colony. It would be suicidal not to give at(tention to the defence of the colony's coal■fields. For the Navy-, it (had been. stated, [supplies of coal could be stored at Auckland ; but was it not better to take care of jthe defence of the harbour of Westport, land, fthe connection of that district with the railway system of the South Islacd ? 1 Mr Bcoth seconded the motion. . Mr Griffiths said that he did not agree fwith the suggestion by Mr Bayfield, that fthe Imperial naval authorities should be aljlowed to work part of the coalfields for Itheir own uses. The colony itself should' imaintain full control of the workings on its jeoalfields. i Mr D^enniston said that it was very important that the coalfields should be placed fin a position, in which they could be adeajuately defended. He also objected to allowing the Imperial authorities to interfere ■in any way with the working of the coaljfields, though anything that the Government lor the Westport Coal Company could do, in assisting the Imperial authorities to obtain 'supplies from the colony should meet with their hearty support. * , x Mr Bayfield, in reply, said it was satisfactory to know that there had been rery I'ttle opposition to his paper. As to supplying Imperial naval authorities, they should be met in every, possible way. ' The motion was carried, and at 12.45, the Conference adjourned till 2.30 p.m.