Untitled

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIX, Issue 3122, 19 July 1892, Page 2

That the Hon. Mr Ballance is a.n ardent Protectionist is a fact which should nover be absent from the minds of members representing country constituencies, who if loyal to their constituents, regardless "ol party consideration, will offer the most strenuous opposition to the first and every attempt to insert the thin end of the wedge, no matter how specious the reasons ottered for their consideration. There is no getting over the fact that every protective duty means additional taxation to the rural population. To urge on the New Zealand farmer that the consequent increase of population will lead to his securing a higher price for his produce is fudge. Protection, so far as it has gone, is proved by statistics not to have increased the number of hands employed in the industries protected. We restrict our statement to the increased taxation which Sir H. Atkinson imposed only too readily in ohedience to popular agitation. We do this because it is only the effect of these duties that can be clearly traced. Even supposing that the population of our towns were increased by a few thousands, the increase in value of the farmers' produce would be so small as to be unnoticeable. For a considerable number of years yet prices will be ruled by those which prevail outside the colony, and it is in the nature of things that increase of production will be much larger proportionately than that of population. The above remarks have been called forth by the attempt which was made the other day by Mr Reeves, a West Coast member, to get the House to pass a resolution thai: a duty of five shillings per ton should be imposed upon foreign coal. The motion was talked out, but it is open to Mr [Reeves to make another attempt. If the duty were imposed, it is only the coal produced in his district which would be | enhanced in value, as it is only with that coal that the imported article comes into competition, as it is only to a very small extent used for any other purpose thau j those for which the bulk of the coal got in the colony is unsuited. This is more particularly the case with blacksmiths' work, which directly and indirectly is a considerable item in the expense of working a farm. The tax, if imposed, would be an additional burden on the farmer in order that the West Coast coal owners might make a larger profit than at present. It would also be a serious item to manufacturers to whose purpose the local coal is not suited. It is difficult to conceive the most rabid protectionist supporting such fj, measure. To tax a raw material necessary for the prosecution of an industry is Protection turned upside down. The proposal, however, brings the absurdity of the principle of Protection out in bold relief, and for that reason it is perhaps well that it has been made.