ECONOMICS AND ETHICS.

Waikato Times, Volume 116, Issue 19457, 22 December 1934, Page 9

ECONOMICS AND ETHICS.

(To the Editor.) Sir .—Towards Mr Sykes .in his capacity as a citizen I can heartily reciprocate his good Wishes. In the capacity, however, in wliioh I have been dealing with himI—that 1 —that of a “protectionist” —I cannot honestly wish, him otherwise than that the full consequences of his noxious gospel should recoil upon his own head rather than upon those unfortunates who the “protectionist" is careful to see have to stand the racket while he picks the plums. . Some day the unemployed will wake iup to the fact that they are unemployed because the “protectionists” have created the conditions which make —and keep—them unemployed. But I will take an instance of “protection" in a typical aotion which is as recent as it is glaring. Last year two vessels —under arrangement with the Government of this country —visited Tlmaru and loaded 2,000,000 bushels of wheat. This is sufficient to keep the whole of New Zealand In bread for three months. They left for a secret destination. No Information was available as to price. It subsequently transpired that they “dumped” the wheat into China at 2s 8d per bushel. Why? Simply to compel the poor of New Zealand to pay 5s 6d per bushel for what was left I

This iniquity was perpetrated by the "protectionists" in New Zealand, who pull the legislative wires and to whom Mr Sykes boasts his adherence. The same thing is in prospect for the coming season. Now, it may be a highly “ethical” action to feed the poor of China at bedrock prices; but does not Mr Sykes number among his ethical precepts one to the effect that "charity begins at home”? And when I hear the clamant complaints by the protectionist of the unethical action called “dumping,", it oocurs to -my mind that there is something called “the Golden Rule." I should have supposed that, as perhaps it is the foundation principle of the “ethics" that Mr Sykes mentions so frequently, it might properly have been found in his ethical locker.- B.ut perhaps it got mislaid — for the time being. If it is a wicked thing to "dump" into New Zealand, why is it so meritorious to dump out of New Zealand? A correspondent recently asked “Can a protectionist be a Christian?" The answer seems to be “Yes, but you have got to do a powerful amount of chatter about ethics." In his letter of December 4 Mr Sykes attributes to me certain views relating to free trade and to supply and demand. 1 do not subscribe, and never have subscribed, to these views in the form in which he attributes them to me. I do not mean that Mr Sykes deliberately misrepresents me—• I mean that his ruling consideration is to impose on me such issues as he thinks lie can win on. They are part of liis “straw man" tactics, to. which ] previously referred. His retirement is of course designed to obviate awkward questions in justification. The subject matter of his challenge —from which lie retired as soon as 1 accepted it —will need to be dealt with elsewhere. Tile earlier part ol this letter will I think guarantee that lie will not again advance to the footlights on any subject associated with "protection." v He is really in nearly as unhappy a position on supply ami demand, but he does not yet realise it so clearly.'—l am, etc., DOUGLAS SEYMOUR. Hamilton, December 4, 1934.